An a lysing S ocio-Economic I mp ct of th e N D P -
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I The National Dairy Plan of India
Report February 20200202 2020
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
b 1
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I The National Dairy Plan of India Impact Evaluation of the Maharashtra CAIM Programme The Convergence of Agricultural Interventions in Maharashtra
FStudyebruary sponsored 2020 by Project Monitoring Unit of CAIM, Amravati and The International Fund for Agricultural Development
December 2019
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF APPLIED ECONOMIC RESEARCH NCAER India Centre, 11 Indraprastha Estate, New Delhi 110 002, India www.ncaer.org
NCAER QUALITY RELEVANCE IMPACT
b 1
I Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
NCAER is grateful to the National Dairy Development Board, Anand, for financial support for this research.
©National Council of Applied Economic Research, 2020
All rights reserved. The material in this publication is copyrighted. NCAER encourages the dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission to reproduce portions of the work promptly. For permission to reprint any part of this work, please send a request with complete information to the publisher below.
Published by Professor Anil K. Sharma Secretary and Operations Director The National Council of Applied Economic Research NCAER India Centre 11, Indraprastha Estate, New Delhi–110 002 Tel: +91-11-2345 2657, 6120 2698 Email: [email protected] www.ncaer.org
Publications Coordinator Jagbir Singh Punia
The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Governing Body or Management of NCAER.
2 3 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
foreword
As shown by the 2011 Census, India has around advisory services for their 2.87 million milch animals 640,000 villages in which around 69 percent of in 33,320 villages as of March 2019. These measures India’s population lives. Some 70 million of our rural significantly promoted dairy activities undertaken by households are engaged in milk production, a large poor cattle farmers by enhancing both their awareness proportion of them landless, marginal, and small levels and participation in the programme. farmers. Indeed, a key feature of India’s dairy sector is the predominance of small producers. In 2017, the The NCAER study found that of the recent average herd size on a dairy farm was 191 in the US, prominent changes introduced by NDDB, the use of 355 in Oceania, 148 in the UK, 160 in Denmark, and ‘breeding values’ of young, high genetic-merit bulls just 2 in India. has facilitated the use of more reliable criteria at the semen stations set up for boosting the fertility of milch To augment the milk productivity and incomes cattle. This is a change from the prevalent criterion of these poor farmers, the Government of India of the quantum of mother’s milk for the selection implemented the National Dairy Programme (NDP) of bulls. The implementation of the Information in 2012-13 as a Central Sector Scheme. This was Network for Animal Productivity and Health under done with World Bank support and through the NDP-I has intensified interest among the States in aegis of the National Dairy Development Board more rigorous identification of their dairy bovines, (NDDB). The scheme is a multi-state initiative to an essential step for achieving genetic improvement. improve animal productivity, strengthen and expand the infrastructure for milk procurement in villages, The NCAER study reports a noticeable and and enhance processing and marketing capacities, sustainable enhancement of the living conditions of all backed by appropriate policy and regulatory households and villages post implementation of NDP-I, measures. NDDB’s active involvement and support, with a large number of households benefiting from as a part of the NDP, is widely believed to have enabled the programme. One of the most significant outcomes smallholders to make a significant contribution to the of NDP-I was a rise in gender empowerment. There spectacular growth of India’s dairy sector. India today were tangible, long-term benefits for women, shown is the world’s largest producer of milk. in their greater mobility, recognition, participation in social enterprises, and asset ownership. The NCAER NCAER was requested by NDDB in 2019 to team also assessed the UN’s Sustainable Development conduct a socio-economic survey (SES) to assess the Goals and their convergence with NDP-I, which was beneficiary impact of NDP, and an economic and most prominent in relation to women’s empowerment. financial analysis (EFA) to ascertain the economic and financial rate of returns during the NDP investment The findings of this NCAER study have been horizon. The NCAER team has carried out an extensive presented to NDDB and World Bank staff and to other primary level enumeration of the beneficiaries in both stakeholders. I join the NCAER team in expressing programme and the non-programme (or control) our appreciation for the insights, guidance, and villages to compare indicators of project performance contributions from NDDB officers while doing this and to assess the success of the NDP in the target areas. study. The SES, conducted during the September–October I would like to thank the NCAER team led by Dr 2019, highlighted the impact of dairy activities on the Saurabh Bandyopadhyay and Dr Laxmi Joshi and livelihoods and incomes of smallholders and on the including Mr Devender Pratap, Mr Prabir Kumar level of women’s participation. The NCAER survey Chaudhuri, Dr Tarujyoti Buragohain, Ms Gargi Pal, found that the Village-based Milk Procurement Mr Mohit Pandey, and Mr K. S. Urs, for carrying out System (VBMPS), one of the major components of this important study. I am grateful to Dr Shashanka the National Dairy Plan Phase-I (NDP-I), designed to Bhide, NCAER’s Research Director, for ensuring promote the transparency of operations and enhance quality control and providing overall supervision. the quality of milk, was largely successful in achieving its targets. The VBMPS helped build and strengthen I hope this NCAER report detailing the findings of capacity in 52,461 villages, covered 22,005 new villages, our assessment of NDP-I will be a useful guide for the and enrolled 1.68 million additional milk producers. dairy industry and for planning future government programmes to help accelerate rural development and One of the key findings of the NCAER study is ensure the welfare of poor farmers across the country. that balanced feeding plays a major role in unlocking the genetic potential of dairy animals. The provision of balanced ration advisory services, delivered to farmers’ doorsteps through local resource persons, continued to expand its reach under NDP-I: some 2.14 New Delhi Dr Shekhar Shah million milk producers had received balanced ration February 17, 2020 Director General, NCAER
2 3 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
4 5 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Acknowledgements
This study is the outcome of the primary survey conducted across 14 major states in India. The insights developed through discussions held with NDDB officials at various stages in particularly for economic and financial analysis based on in-house (both published and unpublished) data provided by different divisions at NDDB is greatly acknowledged. NCAER places on record its deep sense of appreciation for the cooperation extended by the following NDDB officials: Mr G Chokkalingam, Mr Subir Mitra, Mr Jignesh G Shah, Mr G G Shah, and Mr Darsh K Worah of the Sectoral Analysis and Studies Division; Dr K R Trivedi, Mr R O Gupta, Mr G Kishore, Dr Sujit Saha, Mr N G Nayee, and Mr Santosh K Sharma of the Animal Breeding Division; Mr V Sridhar, Dr Rajesh Sharma, Dr Mayank Tandon, and Dr Bhupendra T Phondba of the Animal Nutrition Division; Mr Rajesh Gupta, Dr Jayakrishna, and Mr Denzil J Dias of the Cooperative Services Division; Mr V K Ladhani, Mr Arvind Kumar, and Mr Rajesh Singh of the Coordination and Monitoring Cell. NCAER is also thankful to all the EIA officials and the Networking Agencies, who supported the field team during the course of the primary survey. At the end, NCAER study team gratefully acknowledges guidance and support received from Dr Shekhar Shah, Director General of NCAER, Dr Anil Kumar Sharma, Secretary and Operations Director of NCAER, Professor Rajesh Chadha (former SRC, NCAER) and Professor Pratap Singh Birthal ICAR National Professor, National Institute of Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, Delhi. The Study Team also thanks Dr Palash Baruah for his support at the initial stage of this Report.
Study Team
Project Leaders Dr Saurabh Bandyopadhyay and Dr Laxmi Joshi
Domain Expert and Senior Advisor Dr Shashanka Bhide
Chief Statistician and Senior Advisor Dr Gurucharan Manna
Economic and Financial Analysis Mr Devender Pratap and Mr Prabir Kumar Chaudhuri
Editor Ms Anupma Mehta
Team Members Dr Tarujyoti Buragohain, Mr K.S Urs, Ms Gargi Pal Mr Mohit Pandey, Mr S.K. Mondal, and Mr L. Sreekanth
Secretarial Assistance Ms Shikha
4 5 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
6 7 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Content
Foreword 3 Acknowledgements 5 Study Team 5 List of Abbreviations 17 Executive Summary 19 Summary of Major Findings of the NCAER Study 22 Impact Assessment of the NDP-I Villages 22 Impact on Production, Availability and Consumption of Milk 23 Impact on Women’s Empowerment 24 Impact on Income and Remunerative Engagement 24 Supplementary Impact 24 Economic and Financial Analysis 25 NDP-I and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 25 Conclusion 26
Chapter 1 : Context, Background and Methodology 27 1.1. Introduction 27 1.2. Components of the NDP-I Plan 30 1.3. Objectives of the Study 30 1.4. Methodology 31 1.5. Addressing the Study Objectives: Summary of the Approaches 32 1.5.1. Design of the Sample Survey 33 1.5.2. Field-level Interactions 33 1.5.3. Sample Selection 33 1.6. Sample Weight (Multiplier) Calculations 36 1.6.1. First Stage Multiplier 36 1.6.2. Second Stage Multiplier 36 1.6.3. Third Stage Multiplier 36 1.7. Way forward 37
Chapter 2: Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages 39 2.1. General Information about the Villages 39 2.1.1. Land-owning Characteristics 39 2.1.2. Source of Drinking Water 39 2.1.3. Availability of Electricity, Health and Education Infrastructure in the Selected Project and Control Villages 39 2.1.4. Main Approach Road to the Village 40 2.1.5. Status of Transport Facilities 41 2.1.6. Availability of Village Information System and Banking Facilities 42 2.2. The Village Level Dairying Scenario 42 2.2.1. Dairy Herd Composition 42 2.2.2. Season-wise Average Milk Production per Day per Animal in the Selected Project and Control Villages 44 2.2.3. Households with Milch Animals 44 2.2.4. Changes in the Share of Households Engaged in Dairy Activities 45
6 7 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
2.2.5. Contribution of Dairy Milk Production to Household Income in the Selected Project and Control Villages 46 2.2.6. Availability of Milk for Consumption in the Project and Control Villages 46 2.3 Dairy-related Programmes and Their Coverage in the Villages 46 2.3.1. Coverage of the Village-based Milk Procurement System (VBMPS) 46 2.3.2. Availability of New Generation Cooperatives (NGCs), Bulk Milk Coolers (BMCs) and Gensets for Running BMCs in the Selected Project and Control Villages 47 2.3.3. Milk Testing Facilities in the Project and Control Villages 49 2.3.4. Major Sources of Green and Dry Fodder in the Villages 50 2.3.5. Coverage of the Ration Balancing Programme 50 2.3.6. Coverage of Artificial Insemination 52 2.3.7. AI Service Providers in the Project and Control Villages 54 2.3.8. Availability of AI Technicians/Gopalaks for Dairy Animals in the Project and Control Villages 54 2.3.9. Availability of Para Vets in the Project and Control Villages 55 2.3.10. Health Status of Dairy Animals in the Project and Control Villages 55 2.3.11. Other NDP Components in the Project and Control Villages 56 2.4. Other Factors Influencing the Dairy Sector 58 2.4.1. Availability of Common Grazing Land Area in the Project and Control Villages 58 2.4.2. Shifting of Milch Animals from the Village due to Lack of Water during Summer 59 2.4.3. Other Government Programmes 59 2.4.4. Subsidies for Dairy Activities 59
Chapter 3: Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas 63 3.1. Brief Description of Project Area Coverage 63 3.1.1. Spread of the Sample 63 3.2. Household Characteristics 64 3.2.1. Demography 64 3.3. The Milk Producers 68 3.3.1. Landholdings 68 3.3.2. Economic Status of Households and Their Milch Animal Holdings 69 3.4. Income Trends, Dairying Activities, and Participation of Women 71 3.5. Ownership of Basic Amenities and Assets in the Project and Control Villages 73 3.5.1. Household Assets 75 3.6. Milk Production and Income from Milk Production 76 3.6.1. Earnings from Dairy Activities: A Closer Look 76 3.6.2. Average monthly out-of-pocket incurred on rearing milch animals: Inter-period changes 77 3.7. Milk Consumption 78 3.7.1. Milk Consumption over the Duration of NDP-I 78 3.8. Milk Productivity and Growth in Different Seasons 79 3.9. Selected Farm Level Practices Related to Dairying 80 3.9.1. Dung Management 80 3.9.2. Use of Water in Dairying by Households 82 3.10. Women in the Dairy Sector 85 3.10.1. Women’s Participation: A Closer Look 85 3.11. Knowledge Support to the Dairying Sector 89
8 9 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
3.11.1. Training of the Dairy Farmers 89 3.11.2. Participation in Various NDP Programmes 92 3.12. Overall Economic Impact of the Programme 94 3.12.1. NDP-I and Its Impact on Overall Dairy Income at the Household Level 94 3.13. Assessment of Interventions in the Exclusive RBP Villages 96 3.13.1. Impact of RBP on Improvement on Yield and Reduction in Feeding Cost 96 3.14. Assessment of Implementations in the Exclusive VBMPS Villages 98
Chapter 4: IMPact of NDP-I on dairy Activites in India’s Rural Economy 107 4.1. Introduction 107 4.2. Impact of NDP Intervention in Augmenting the Incomes of the Poor 107
Chapter 5: Qualitative Assessment of the Local Informal Marketing Outlets for Milk 115 5.1. Reflection on the Project Villages 115 5.1.1. Milk Procurement System and Purchase Price 115 5.1.2. System of Milk Sale and Sale Price Realisation 116 5.1.3. Milk Cooling Facilities and Transportation 117 5.1.4. The Milk Production Scenario 118 5.1.5. Business of Milk Collection 118 5.1.6. Role of Women in Dairy Activities 119 5.2. Status of the Control Villages 120 5.2.1. Milk Procurement System and Purchase Price 120 5.2.2. System of Milk Sale and Sale Price Realization 121 5.2.3 Milk Cooling Facilities and Transportation 121 5.2.4. The Milk Production Scenario 121 5.2.5. The Business of Milk Collection 122 5.2.6. Role of Women in Dairy Activities 122 5.3. Summary and Conclusion of the FGD Section 122
Chapter 6: Economic and Financial Analysis of NDP-I 125 6.1. Ex-Post Economic and Financial Analysis 125 6.2. Project Components 125 6.3. Details of Project Intervention and Outcomes 126 6.3.1. Component A: Productivity Enhancement 126 6.3.2. Animal Breed Improvement and AI Services 127 6.3.3. Animal Nutrition 128 6.4. Component B—Milk Collection and Bulking 131 6.4.1. Reduced Transaction Costs 131 6.5. Methodology for Conducting the Economic and Financial Analysis 132 6.6. Results of the Economic and Financial Analysis 132 6.6.1. The Financial Analysis 132 6.6.2. The Economic Analysis 133 6.7. Indirect Project Benefits Not Accounted for EFA 135 6.7.1. Qualitative Impact of Animal Breeding Projects Implemented under NDP-I 135 6.7.2. Non-tangible Benefits of Flexi Biogas 136 6.7.3. Non-tangible Benefits of Implementation of VBMPS 136
8 9 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
6.8. Qualitative Parameters to Gauge the Effectiveness of Training and Capacity Building in NDP-I 137 6.8.1. Key factors in Implementation of the Activity 137 6.8.2. Training and Knowledge Sharing on a digital Platform to Increase Outreach through an E-learning Module 138 6.8.3. Digitalisation of the Training Process through ICT Tools 138 6.8.4. Social Media Platforms—Key for Disseminating Knowledge 138 6.8.5. Extending Support to EIAs 139 6.8.6. Lessons Learned for Future Operations 141 6.8.7. Spin-off of the NDP Trainings Micro Training Centre 142 6.9. Conclusion 142
Chapter 7: Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Impact of NDP-I on the Rural Economy 147 7.1. Background and the Context 147 7.2. Goals 1, 5, and 8: Reducing Poverty, Improving Gender Equality, and Ensuring Inclusive Economic Growth 151 7.3. Goal 10: Preventing Rising Inequality 154 7.4. Goal 13: Lowering Methane Emissions 155 7.5. Goal 15: Sustainable Use of Terrestrial Ecosystems and Land 156 7.6. Goal 16: Promoting Inclusive Societies and Institutions 158 7.7. Conclusion 161
Chapter 8: Concluding Reflections 163
10 11 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
List of Tables
Table 1.1: Share of Agriculture and Allied and Livestock Sector in GVA (Rs crore) 27 Table 1.2: Component- wise Key Targets of NDP-I 30 Table 1.3: Objectives and Approaches of the NCAER Study 32 Table 1.4: Count of the Total Number of Tehsils Based on NDP-I Intervention: Step 1 34 Table 1.5: Distribution of ni within States among the Three Categories of Intervention: Step 2 34 Table 1.6: Stratification of Sample Households in a Village 35 Table 1.7: Calculation of the Second Stage Multiplier 36 Table 1.8: Calculation of the Third Stage Multiplier 36 Table 2.1: Season-wise and Breed-wise Average Milk Production per Day per Animal in Selected Project and Control Villages 44 Table 2.2: Contribution of Dairy Milk Production to Income of Households in the Project and Control Villages 46 Table 2.3: Major Sources of Green and Dry Fodder 50 Table 2.4: Extent of AI Service Providers in the Project and the Control Villages 54 Table 2.5: Availability of AI Technicians/Gopalaks for Dairy Animals in the Project and Control Villages 55 Table 2.6: Availability of Bull/NS Service Providers for Dairy Animals in the Project and Control Villages 55 Table 2.7: Availability of Para Vets in the Project and Control Villages 55 Table 2.8: Subsidies Available from the Government for Dairying Activities 60 Table 3.1: State-wise Cross-distribution of Sample Households from the Control Villages and Scheme-wises Share from the Project Villages (%) 64 Table 3.2: Distribution of Educational Achievements of Households by Categories of Farmers and Landless Labourers 67 Table 3.3: Distribution of the Chief Earners of the Family by Gender and Involvement in Dairy Activities (%) 72 Table 3.4: Distribution of the Earning Members (next in line to Chief Earners) in the Family by Gender and Involvement in Dairy Activities (%) 72 Table A1: Dependent Variable: Average Consumption of Milk (Litres/Day) (log) 101 Table A2: Dependent Variable: Average Production of Milk (Litres/Day/HH) (log) 102 Table A3: Dependent Variable: Average Sale of Milk (per Day/HH) (log) 102 Table A4: Dependent Variable: Average Expenditure (Cow+Buffalo) (log) 103 Table A5: Dependent Variable: Average Hours per Animal Spent by Women in Different Dairy Activities (log) 104 Table A6: Average Production of Milk (litre/day) 104 Table A7: Average Sale of Milk (litre/day) 104 Table A8: Average Milk Consumption (litre/day) 104 Table A9: State-wise Impact of RBP on Yield 105 Table A10: State-wise Impact of RBP on Feeding Cost 106
10 11 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Table 4.1: Distribution of Dairy Income by Gender among Landless Labourers and Farmers (%) 107 Table 4.2: Contribution of Dairy-based Income to the Total Household Income by Land Categories (%) 108 Table 4.3: Contribution of Dairy-based Income to Total Household Income by Social Categories (%) 109 Table 4.4: Distribution of Respondents Who Perceived an Increase in Income after Implementation of NDP-I (%) 109 Table 4.5: Reasons for Increase in Income: Percentage Distribution across Dairy Income Group and Gender 109 Table 4.3: SWOT Analysis of the Performance Drivers 113 Table 5.1: Names of Selected Districts and Villages Visited for the FGDs 123 Table 6.1: Activities and Key Outputs of NDP-I 126 Table 6.2: Total Coverage of Dairy Cooperatives and Producer Companies 128 Table 6.3: Contribution of Fodder Production and Fodder Seed Sale under NDP-I 130 Table 6.4: Economics of Fodder Seed Production under NDP-1 131 Table 6.5: Cost of Production, Net Income and Productivity of Green Fodder Production on Farmers Field under NDP-I 131 Table 6.6: Major Assumption for the EFA Analysis 133 Table 6.7: Built-up BMC Capacity and Benefits 134 Table 6.8: Stream of Benefits under the Ration Balancing Programme 134 Table 6.9: Summary of Financial and Economic Analysis (Rs Billion) 134 Table 6.8: Number of Producers and Women Trained in Best Practices 139 Table 7.1: Identification of the Related Areas of SDGs with NDP 148 Table 7.2: Indicators Impacting SDGs 1, 5, and 8 151
12 13 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
List of Figures
Figure 1.1: Cows and Buffaloes as per the Various Livestock Censuses (Million) 28 Figure 1.2: Trend in Milk Production and Foodgrain Production 28 Figure 2.1: Electricity, Health and Education Infrastructure in the Selected Project and Control Villages 40 Figure 2.2: Main Approach Road to the Village 41 Figure 2.3: Adequate Availability of Transport Facilities in the Project and Control Villages 41 Figure 2.4: Availability of Village Information Centres and Banking Facilities 42 Figure 2.5: Percentage Shares of Indigenous and Crossbred Cows and Buffaloes in the Project and Control Villages 43 Picture 2.1: Cattle shed (pucca) in a Village in Haryana 43 Picture 2.2: Cattle shed (semi-pucca) in a Village in Gujarat 43 Picture 2.3: Cattle shed (kutcha) in a Village in Maharashtra 43 Figure 2.6: Season-wise Average Milk Production per Day per Animal in the Selected Project and Control Villages 44 Figure 2.7: Milch Animal-owning Households in the Project and Control Villages 45 Figure 2.8: Percentage Share of Households Engaged in Dairy Activities in the Project and Control Villages 45 Figure 2.9: Availability of Milk for Consumption in the Project and Control Villages 46 Figure 2.10: Coverage of Village-based Milk Procurement System 47 Figure 2.11: Coverage of Village-based Milk Procurement System in Selected Project Villages 47 Figure 2.12: New Generation Cooperatives (NGCs), Bulk Milk Coolers (BMCs) and Gensets for Running BMCs 48 Picture 2.5: Genset for Operating BMCs in a Village in Madhya Pradesh 48 Figure 2.13: Availability of Adequate Genset Facilities for Running BMCs in the Project and Control Villages 48 Figure 2.14: Percentage Share of Milk Testing Facilities in the Project and Control Villages 49 Figure 2.15: Coverage of the Ration Balancing Programme 51 Figure 2.16: Villages Where RBP Is Still Operational (%) 52 Figure 2.17: Extent of Coverage of AI in the Project and Control Villages 53 Figure 2.18: Availability of AI Services in the Selected Project and Control Villages 53 Figure 2.19: Type of Breeding Resulting in Present Calving 53 Figure 2.20: Application of AI (%) on Various Types of Dairy Animals 54 Figure 2.21: Health Status of Dairy Animals in the Project and Control Villages 56 Figure 2.22: NDP Component in the Project Villages vis-à-vis the Control Villages 57 Figure 2.23: Percentage Share of Common Grazing Land in the Project and Control Villages 58 Figure 2.24: Re-vegetation in the Selected Project and Control Villages 58 Figure 2.25: Achievement of Re-vegetation Effort in the Selected Project and Control Villages 58 Figure 2.26: Milch Animals Shifted from Villages because of Lack of Water in Summer 59 Figure 2.27: Other Government Programmes Related to the Dairy Sector in Operation in the Project and Control Villages 59 Figure 2.28: Types of Subsidies Available in the Selected Project and Control Villages 60 Figure 2.29: Response Received on Recognition or Prize for Dairy Animals in the Project and the Control Villages 61 Figure 3.1: Distribution (%) of total sample households among States (in descending order) 63 Figure 3.2: Distribution of gender of respondents among the Project and Control Villages (%) 65
12 13 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Figure 3.3: Distribution of women respondents in the Project and Control Villages across States (%) 65 Figure 3.4: Distribution of age group of the respondents among the Project and Control Villages (%) 66 Figure 3.5: Distribution of household sizes among the Project and Control Villages (%) 66 Figure 3.6: Distribution of educational status among respondents in the Project and Control Villages (%) 66 Figure 3.7: Distribution of the family structure among households in the Project and Control Villages 67 Figure 3.8: Distribution of household sizes among the Project and Control Villages relative to sizes of their landholdings (%) 68 Figure 3.9: Milch animals reared by type of farmers’ categories in the Project and Control Villages 68 Figure 3.10: Distribution of landless labourers and farmers with separate cattle sheds by type of flooring (%) 69 Figure 3.11: Reach and coverage of the NDP-I among Economic Classes (%) 70 Figure 3.12: Rearing of milch animals by households from different economic classes in the Project and Control Villages (%) 70 Figure 3.13: Rearing of milch animals by households from different Social Classes in the Project and Control Villages (%) 71 Figure 3.14: Occupational profiles of Chief Earners’ (Member 1) in the Project and Control Villages 71 Figure 3.15: Distribution of the households by the type of dwelling unit (%) 73 Figure 3.16: Distribution of households having solar power in their homes in the Project and Control Villages 73 Figure 3.17: Distribution of households by access to water in the Project and Control Villages (%) 74 Figure 3.18: Distribution of households by access to various water sources in the Project and Control Villages (%) 74 Figure 3.19: Distribution of households by access to Toilets inside the household premises in the Project and Control Villages (%) 74 Figure 3.20: Distribution of households by ownership of LPG Connections, Mobile Phones, and Refrigerators in the Project and Control Villages (%) 75 Figure 3.21: Distribution of households by ownership of Radio, TV, and Dish Connection in the Project and Control Villages 75 Figure 3.22: Distribution of households by levels of dairy-related incomes in the Project and Control Villages (%) (Range in Rs ’000) 76 Figure 3.23: Distribution of households by dairy income levels across various scheme interventions in the Project Villages (%) (Range in Rs ’000) 76 Figure 3.24: Average annual income (aggregated in rupee terms) linked to Dairy Activities in the Control and Scheme-related Villages 77 Figure 3.25: Average out-of-pocket expenses incurred per month on milch animals 77 Figure 3.26: Growth (%) in average monthly out-of-pocket expenses on milch animals 78 Figure 3.27: Average milk consumption (litres) per day per household in the Project and Control Villages 78 Figure 3.28: Availability of milk as perceived by respondents from the Project and the Control Villages during NDP-I (% Distribution of Households) 79 Figure 3.29: Milch cattle as a ratio of adult female cattle in the Project and Control Villages 79 Figure 3.30: Milk production (litres) per milch animal in the RBP, VBMPS and RBP+VBMPS Villages 80 Figure 3.31: Scheme-wise seasonal growth of milk production per milch animal in the RBP, VBMPS and RBP+VBMPS Villages (%) 80 Figure 3.32: Dung Management (%) trends during the Project Period (%) 81
14 15 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Figure 3.33: Purpose of Dung Management during the Project Period (%) 82 Figure 3.34: Sourced drinking water for bovine animals: An Inter-period reading 82 Figure 3.35: Sources of water for Dairying: Assessment over the Project Period 83 Figure 3.36: Washing practices for the milch animals: Assessment over the Project Period 83 Figure 3.37: Washing practices for the cattle sheds: Assessment over the Project Period 84 Figure 3.38: Sources of water for washing animals: Assessment over the Project Period 84 Figure 3.39: Sources of water for washing animals: Assessment over the Project Period 85 Figure 3.40: Sources of water for washing animals: Assessment over the Project Period 85 Figure 3.41: Change in the overall remunerative work among Women 86 Picture 3.3: Women came out in the open to have a greater say in remunerative income and access (Karnataka) 86 Figure 3.42: Change in Women’s position in Decision-making at the household level 86 Figure 3.43: Change in Women’s position with respect to Mobility 87 Picture 3.4: Women’s position about their status and participation in the dairy activities is re- affirmed in the NDP-I villages 87 Picture 3.5: Women in the NDP-I villages have better access to facilities and ownership of assets to enhance the quality of their life 88 Figure 3.44: Change in Women’s position with respect to Ownership of Assets 88 Figure 3.45: Change in Women’s position with respect to Social Status 88 Figure 3.46: Change in Women’s position with respect to Income 89 Figure 3.47: Distribution of responses about the Training Programmes imparted by various Agencies in the Project Villages (%) 89 Figure 3.48: Distribution (%) of responses pertaining to usefulness of Training imparted to the Dairy Farmers in the Project Villages 90 Figure 3.49: Distribution of responses pertaining to the need for imparting Training to Dairy Farmers in the Project and Control Villages (%) 90 Figure 3.50: Distribution of the areas where Training is most needed (%) 90 Figure 3.51: Distribution (%) of responses about the Demonstration Programmes held by Agencies in the Project Villages 91 Figure 3.52: Distribution of responses about the types of Demonstration Programmes held by Agencies in the Project Villages during the Project Period (%) 91 Figure 3.53: Distribution of responses about the usefulness of Demonstration Programmes held by Agencies in the Project Villages during the Project Period (%) 92 Figure 3.54: Distribution of responses about the need for Demonstration Programmes in the Project Villages (%) 92 Figure 3.55: Percentage share of positive responses about Field Demonstrations 93 Figure 3.56: Percentage shares of Scheme-wise responses on Field Demonstrations 93 Figure 3.57: Percentage share of Households availing of Scheme-wise Assistance 94 Figure 3.58: Percentage shares of benefits from RBP, VBMPS, and Both 94 Figure 3.59: Distribution of responses about change in Household Income (%) 95 Figure 3.60: Distribution of responses about reasons for change in Household Income (%) 95 Figure 3.61: Distribution of responses about reasons for decrease in Household Income (%) 95 Figure 3.62: Types of animals covered under RBP (% Share) 96 Figure 3.63: Impact of RBP programme on improvement in Yield (Litres/Day) 96 Figure 3.64: Impact of RBP programme on reduction in Feeding Cost (Rs/Day) per Household 97 Figure 3.65: Responses on improvements resulting from RBP 97 Figure 3.66: Benefits of RBP 97 Figure 3.67: Response about Non-adoption/Discontinuation of RBP 98 Figure 3.68: VBMPS components implemented under NDP-I 98
14 15 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Figure 3.69: Price of milk before and after opening of New DCSes/Strengthening of Existing DCSes (Rs/litre) 99 Figure 3.70: Points for selling milk before opening of New DCSes/Strengthening of Existing DCSes99 Figure 3.71: Benefits of VBMPS for various components 99 Figure 3.72: Responses on increase in animals due to opening of New DCSes/ Strengthening of Existing DCSes 100 Figure 3.73: Future plans to increase milch animals in households after setting up of New DCSes 100 Figure 3.74: Major reasons for increase in Income from milk production 100 Picture 3.6: Milk collection centre in an NDP-I village 101 Figure 4.1: Average Annual Household Net Income (Rs) from Dairy 108 Figure 4.2: Major Reasons for Increase in Income from Dairy Activities 111 Figure 4.3: Households of Various Categories of Farmers That Intend to Increase Production of Milk 111 Figure 4.4: Distribution of the Breeding Techniques Adopted by the Dairy Farmers in the Project as well as Control villages (%) 113 Figure 7.1: Share of Households and Incomes among Land Categories in the Project and Control Villages 154 Figure 7.2: Percentage Share of Common Grazing Land in the Project and Control Villages 157 Figure 7.3: Re-vegetation in Selected Project and Control Villages 157 Figure 7.4: Achievement of Re-vegetation Efforts in Selected Project and Control Villages 157
16 17 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
List of Abbreviations
AGM Annual General Meeting AI Artificial Insemination AMCU Automatic Milk Collection Unit APL Above the Poverty Line ATM Automated Teller Machine BAP Business Appreciation Programme BDO Block Development Officer BETP Before the Project BLDA Bihar Livestock Development Agency BMC Bulk Milk Cooler BMS Basic Minimum Services BPL Below the Poverty Line BQ Black Quarter CAPI Computer Assisted Personal Interview CASA Computer Assisted Semen Analysis CER Carbon Emission Rate CHG Greenhouse Gas CMP Clean Milk Production CSF Classical Swine Fever CT Communication Technology DAHD Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying DBT Direct Benefit Transfer DCS Dairy Cooperative Society DMI Dry Matter Intake DPMCU Data Processor-based Milk Collection Unit EBV Estimated Breeding Value EFA Economic & Financial Analysis EIA End Implementing Agency ERP Enterprise Resource Planning ERR Economic Rate of Return FGD Focus Group Discussion FIP Fertility Improvement Programmes FMD Foot and Mouth Disease FOP Farmers Orientation Programmes FRR Financial Rate of Return GEBV Genomic Estimated Breeding Value GIS Geographic Information System GoI Government of India GVA Gross Value Added HFCB Holstein Friesian Crossbred HGM High Genetic Merit HH Household HS Haemorrhagic Septicaemia ICT Information and Communications Technology IDA International Development Association IDF International Dairy Federation INAPH Information Network for Animal Productivity and Health INCCA Indian Network for Climate Change Assessment IPCC International Panel for Climate Change IRR Internal Rate of Return JCB Jersey Crossbred LN Liquid Nitrogen
16 17 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
List of Abbreviations (Contd.) LPD Litre per Day LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas LRP Local Resource Person MAIT Mobile Artificial Insemination Technician MCM Management Committee Members MIDP Middle of the Project MNP Minimum Needs Programme MPI Milk Producers’ Institution MT Metric Tonnes MTC Micro Training Centre MU Milk Union NCAER National Council of Applied Economic Research NDDB National Dairy Development Board NDP-I National Dairy Plan-I NDRI National Dairy Research Institute NDSP National Dairy Sub Project NGC New Generation Cooperative NPV Net Present Value NS Natural Service NSSO National Sample Survey Organisation OBC Other Backward Class PC Producer’s Company PHC Primary Health Centre PPR Peste des Petits Ruminants PPSWR Probability Proportional to Size and With Replacement PRES Presently PS Pedigree Selection PT Progeny Testing PVB Present Value of Benefit PVC Present Value of Cost RBP Ration Balancing Programme RD Ranikhet Disease SC Scheduled Caste SDG Sustainable Development Goal SES Socio-Economic Survey SF State Federation SHG Self-help Group Solids-Not-Fat SNF SOP Standard Operating Procedure SRS Simple Random Sampling SS Semen Station SSMS Semen Station Management System ST Scheduled Tribe SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats SWS Smart Weighing Scale TDN Total Digestible Nutrient TOT Training of Trainers UHT Ultra-high-temperature UNGA United Nations General Assembly USDA United States Department of Agriculture VBMPS Village Based Milk Procurement System VIC Village Information Centre WOP Without Project
18 19 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Executive Summary
Introduction
Livestock-rearing is an important economic activity for generating income and creating employment in the rural areas in India. Besides complementing and supplementing agriculture, the rearing of dairy animals offers farmers security of livelihood, especially in a situation when agriculture under-performs or fails to meet their subsistence needs. Further, dairy activities do not only constitute a source of income for millions of poor households across the country but also supplement their dietary sources of protein and nutrition, thereby playing a key role in meeting the security needs of the country.
During the last seven decades, the introduction of new technologies under various dairy development programmes has facilitated a major expansion and modernisation of the dairy sector. The livestock sector contributes more than 28 per cent of the total agricultural GVA and 4.9 per cent of the total GVA, and the livestock sector accounts for a significant contribution to these figures. Recognising the need for sustaining this effort and helping livestock farmers and producers to enhance their productivity and incomes, the Government of India implemented a project titled the ‘National Dairy Plan-I (NDP-I)’ during the period April 2012 to March 2019, with major financial assistance from the International Development Association (IDA) of the World Bank. Part of the project cost was met by the End Implementing Agencies (EIAs)1 as also supplemented by subsidies from the National Dairy Development Board (NDDB) and its subsidiaries (Project Management and Learning).
On conclusion of the project, NDDB entrusted the National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER), New Delhi, with the task of assessing the socio-economic impact of NDP-I, based on a sample survey of dairy households spread across the country and an economic and financial assessment of the overall project. The NCAER study has been particularly important in view of recent developments and growth of the livestock sector.
According to the 20th Livestock Census, the cattle population in 2019 was 192.49 million, signifying a rise of about 0.8 per cent from 190.9 million in the 19th Livestock Census in 2012. This increase was mainly driven by an increase in cross-bred cattle leading to a higher milk yield and also by a higher share of cows in the indigenous cattle population. While the overall number of milch animals increased by 6 per cent, female cross-bred cattle accounted for a major share of this rise, going up by 39 per cent, from 33.76 million in 2012 to 46.95 million in 2019. The indigenous female cattle population also rose by 10 per cent from 89.22 million in 2012 to 98.17 million in 2019, whereas the buffalo population increased by 1.06 per cent, from 108.7 million in 2012 to 109.85 million in 2019. Cross-bred milch animals contributed around 28 per cent to India’s total milk production of 188 million tonnes in 2019.
Milk production in India too grew at more than 4 per cent compounded annually during 1991-2011, surpassing the growth rates in the global dairy output and India’s own foodgrain
1 The EIAs include State Livestock Boards, State Cooperative Dairy Federations, District Cooperative Milk Producer Unions, cooperative forms of enterprises such as producer companies, Trusts (NGOs, Section 25 companies), subsid- iaries of statutory bodies, ICAR institutes and veterinary/dairy institutes/universities, and any other entity decided by the National Steering Committee for NDP-I.
18 19 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
production (Birthal and Negi, 2012).2 This phenomenal success is attributed to a Government initiative, Operation Flood (1970–1996) and its intense focus on dairy development activities. As part of that initiative, rural milk shed areas were linked to urban markets through the development of network village cooperatives for procuring and marketing milk. Aggregate milk production and productivity were also enhanced by ensuring the availability of veterinary services, artificial insemination (AI), feed, and farmer education.
At the national level, income from livestock accounts for an average of about 12 per cent of the income earned by agricultural households from farm and off-farm activities, viz., the cultivation of crops and livestock.3 In fact, marginal and small farmers with landholdings of up to 5 acres, who together constitute about 87 per cent of all farmer households in the country, derive as much as 29 per cent of their total income from livestock as compared to a corresponding figure of only 7.5 per cent for large farmers with landholdings of above 10 acres.
In view of these developments in the livestock sector, NDP-I was a highly critical and timely project, planned as a multi-state initiative with the following objectives:
1. To help increase the productivity of milch animals and thereby milk production to meet the rapidly growing demand for milk; and 2. To help provide rural milk producers greater access to the organised marketing and milk processing sector. These objectives were sought to be fulfilled through the adoption of focused scientific and systematic processes and provision of technical inputs supported by enabling policy and regulatory measures. The project focused on 14 major milk-producing states of the country as on 2011, namely, Andhra Pradesh (undivided) , Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal, which together account for over 90 per cent of the country’s milk production.
Components of the NDP-I Plan
The major components of NDP-I were as follows: i. Component 1—Breed Improvement and Animal Nutrition; ii. Component 2—Ration Balancing Programme (RBP); iii. Component 3—Fodder Development Programme; iv. Component 4—Strengthening Village-based Milk Procurement Systems (VBMPS); and v. Component 5—Project Management and Learning.
Objectives of the Study
The main objectives of the NCAER study were to: • Identify and measure indicators demonstrating the impact of dairy involvement in socio- economic development, family welfare, and income generation; • Assess the social impact of the project in terms of provision of livelihoods, especially for vulnerable groups, and empowerment of women;
2 Birthal, Pratap S. and Digvijay S. Negi (2012). “Livestock for Higher, Sustainable and Inclusive Agricultural Growth”, Economic & Political Weekly Supplement, June 30, XLVII (26 and 27). 3 Source: “Status of Farmers’ Income: Strategies for Accelerated Growth”, (2017), Report of Committee for ‘Doubling Farmers’ Income (DFI)’, Vol. II, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, GoI.
20 21 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Executive Summary
• Carry out an ex-post economic and financial evaluation of the design and delivery of the project with a focus on the two main components of NDP-I viz.: (a) Productivity Enhancement, which would increase milk productivity through improved animal breeding, nutrition, and delivery of Artificial Insemination services, and (b) Milk Collection and Bulking, which would provide access to markets through investment in village level milk collection and bulking facilities, and formation of producer companies and dairy cooperative societies.
Design of the Sample Survey
The NCAER study also took into account the potential for overlapping influences of the previous and other ongoing development programmes in the sample areas, while specifically examining the outcomes of NDP-I. The primary survey in the study was based on the Recall Method, deriving from active consultation with the NDDB officials. Since the Recall Method does not preclude beneficiaries of the countervailing units, a set of representative sample villages was chosen as control ones based on the Similarity Index.
The NCAER team devised comprehensive survey questionnaires after discussion with the NDDB officials. The survey instruments used for the study included:
1. Listing questionnaire for collecting data on dairying and marketing of milk from a sample frame of select households; 2. Household questionnaire; and 3. Village questionnaire. The survey was conducted by NCAER during the period September-October 2019 using computer assisted personal interviewing (CAPI). The questionnaires were programmed in accordance with the field experience during the pilot surveys.
20 21 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Summary of Major Findings of the NCAER Study Impact Assessment of the NDP-I Villages
The Socio-Economic Survey (SES) by NCAER revealed that the proportion of total landless households in the project villages was 25.9 per cent, as compared to a corresponding figure of 24.5 per cent in the control villages. The proportion of small and marginal farmers was 61.8 per cent in the project villages’ vis-à-vis 60.6 per cent in the control villages. The corresponding figures were 10.5 per cent and 12.4 per cent for semi-medium and medium (medium+) farmers, and 1.7 per cent and 2.5 per cent for large farmers, in the project and control villages, respectively.
The Village-Based Milk Procurement System (VBMPS) under NDP-I aims at providing rural milk producers greater access to organised milk-processing activities by forming and strengthening Dairy Cooperatives Societies (DCSes) and producer companies. Meanwhile, existing societies/pooling points are also being strengthened through provision of village- level capital items like Bulk Milk Coolers (BMCs) and milk cans, and setting up of Data Processor-based Milk Collection Units (DPMCUs) and Automatic Milk Collection Units (AMCUs). These efforts have resulted in greater transparency and fairness in milk procurement operations while offering farmers increased flexibility to augment both the quantity as well as quality of milk. The NCAER study found that around 66 per cent of the project villages have DCSes within the village and 10 per cent have societies in adjoining villages. The scheme-wise disaggregation shows that around 60 per cent of the respondents belonging to the RBP villages, 71 per cent from villages having both RBP and VBMPS, and 76 per cent from villages with only VBMPS reported the presence of DCSes within the village.
NDDB also envisaged mobilisation and institution building through the promotion of new Milk Producers’ Institutions (MPIs), otherwise known as New Generation Cooperatives (NGCs), in order to set up producer companies in areas where cooperatives were either not present or had low coverage and procurement.
Fodder constitutes a major cost element in the production of milk. The objective of RBP was to optimise the yield from milch animals by balancing the proportions of locally available green fodder and other dietary feed ingredients for the milch animals. NDDB developed a user- friendly software for ration balancing to be used by dedicated Local Resource Persons (LRPs), who were being trained by EIA officials to use the software in the local language for assessing the: (a) nutrient status of animals; (b) chemical composition of locally available feed resources; (c) nutrient requirement of animals; and (d) least cost balanced ration.
The study also found that the expenses on feed and fodder for the milch animals had, in fact, declined in the RBP villages during the NDP-I period. The expenses incurred on milch animals per month in the project villages decreased from 18.4 per cent during the Middle of the Project (MIDP) to 15.5 per cent on conclusion of the project, whereas the corresponding figures rose from 12 per cent to over 27 per cent during the corresponding period in the control villages. This clearly demonstrates the positive intervention of NDP-I in economising the feed and fodder cost through optimal and balanced utilisation of nutrients for the milch animals.
Among various dairy innovations, artificial insemination (AI) is one of the most efficient techniques available to dairy farmers to improve the long-term productivity and profitability of their enterprise. As part of this technique, a few bulls of superior quality are efficiently used
22 23 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Executive Summary
to expand the breeding coverage for a large number of dairy cows regardless of their location. The availability of AI services in the project villages stood at around 59 per cent vis-à-vis 26.3 per cent in the control villages before the advent of NDP-I, with the figures going up to 67 per cent in the project villages and 33 per cent in the control villages after the NDP intervention.
Five major service providers were providing AI services to the dairy farmers in the study area. Nearly 22 per cent of the project villages had availed of the services of milk cooperative workers and government veterinary doctors followed by private veterinary doctors (21.2 per cent) and mobile AI technicians (18.2 per cent). In the control villages, on the other hand, the main AI service providers were found to be private veterinary doctors (38.2 per cent) followed by government veterinary doctors (23.5 per cent) and milk cooperative workers (19.1 per cent), respectively.
Among the States surveyed, Madhya Pradesh (64.1 per cent) accounted for the largest share of RBP, while Odisha had the highest share of VBMPS (57.3 per cent). Rajasthan had the highest share of villages where RBP and VBMPS were implemented together, followed by Gujarat at 27.3 per cent.
The demographies of both the project and control villages were quite varied. In general, the share of women’s representation was higher in all the Southern States and West Bengal, while it was much lower in the States of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh. Further, except for Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh, the share of women respondents was low in the control villages in all the States. Female members also showed greater involvement in dairy activities in the households of the Project villages (60.2 per cent) as compared to their control counterparts (45.7 per cent).
The outreach of NDP-I was basically aimed at catering to the needs of Below the Poverty Line (BPL) households. The SES by NCAER revealed that over 62 per cent and 60 per cent of the households in the NDP-I and control villages, respectively, were BPL households. These figures point to better targeting of the interventions in terms of the selection of villages for implementing NDP-I programmes.
The laborers and farmers who rear dairy animal require separate cattle sheds for ensuring optimal productivity. The NCAER survey found a higher number of cattle sheds with mud flooring as compared to those with cemented flooring, especially in the project villages as compared to the control ones across all categories of respondents.
Impact on Production, Availability and Consumption of Milk
The study noted the positive growth in milk production for all the schemes. The highest productivity growth of over 67 per cent in milk production during the winter season was observed in the RBP villages, moderate productivity growth of 21.1 and 24.4 per cent, respectively, recorded during the summer and rainy seasons, respectively. The production growth was 26–27 per cent in areas where both the programmes (RBP + VBMPS) were running.
The availability of milk during the NDP-I period had perceptibly increased considerably in the project villages (55.9 per cent) as compared to their control counterparts (33.7 per cent).
Milk consumption in the project villages also showed a steady increase from 1.5 litres per day per household to 1.7 litres per day per household over the NDP-I period while in the control villages, the average milk consumption remained almost constant during this period.
22 23 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Impact on Women’s Empowerment
The overall workload of women for remunerative income was observed to have increased significantly in the project villages (reported by 66 per cent) as compared to the control ones (reported by 49.6 per cent). Further, about 77 per cent of the women reported an improvement in their status with respect to decision-making in the household.
Women’s position with respect to mobility too has improved. Overall, 74 per cent of the women from the project villages reported an improvement in their mobility, while 24 per cent reported that the position had remained unchanged.
As regards the ownership of assets, about 72 per cent of the women respondents reported an improvement in the project villages whereas the corresponding figure in the control villages was 63.5 per cent.
Impact on Income and Remunerative Engagement
Post the NDP-I intervention, the household incomes registered an increase of over 68 per cent for landless labourers, 73 per cent for small and marginal farmers, and 77 per cent for medium+ (medium and semi-medium) farmers in the project villages, which were comparatively higher than those in the control villages.
The main reason for enhance income for farmers in both the project as well as the control villages was improved dairy income, followed by income from milk-related products. On the other hand, the high cost of dairy inputs led to lower price realisations. More than 16 per cent of the households with reduced incomes in the control villages reported the death of a dairy animal as the reason, whereas fewer such cases were reported in the project villages. The other reasons for an increase in income after the starting of new DCSes included transparency in payment systems and flexibility in milk pouring timings, with the main contributing factors being better quality of milk (24 per cent), higher volume of milk (18.4 per cent), and more collection points (12.9 per cent).
It is pertinent to note that the incomes of landless labourers along with those of small and marginal farmers had increased perceptibly, and by the end of the NDP-I interventions, female members accounted for a higher percentage share of income from dairy activities as compared to their counterparts. About 28 per cent of the overall net income of landless labourers came from dairy/dairy-related activities.
Across social groups, the impact of NDP-I interventions was more pronounced among the Scheduled Tribe (ST) community, for which the contribution of dairy-based activities in the total net income was 36 per cent, followed by that for OBCs (32 per cent).
Supplementary Impact
The NDP-I project also motivated more efficient dung management and water use among dairy farmers, which was expected to have a long-lasting impact in terms of alignment with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This was reflected in lower use of manure/ compost pits and open dung storage and increased use of biogas and slurry pits in the project villages in line with the processes recommended under the SDGs.
As regards water usage, piped water followed by water from hand pumps and bore wells were
24 25 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Executive Summary
found to be the dominant sources of drinking water for bovine animals as well as for dairying activities. Further, the use of open drainage for dispoal of used water had fallen considerably from 49 per cent to 30 per cent in households in the project villages during the course of the project.
Economic and Financial Analysis
The economic and financial analysis for the project was conducted separately for major investment activities, namely, breed improvement and AI service delivery, animal nutrition management, and milk collection and bulking investments; which together accounted for 96 per cent of the project costs compared to 93.6 per cent estimated in the ex-ante analysis. Next, the benefits were aggregated and compared with the entire project costs, including costs like project management and learning. The costs and benefits were estimated at 2012-13 prices over 20 years with a 12 per cent opportunity cost of capital vis-à-vis 2011-12 prices taken originally. The total project costs were estimated at Rs 24 billion, of which Rs 22 billion had been actually utilised up to December 31, 2019. The economic project costs were estimated after adjusting for transfers, taxes, and subsidies, and converting financial prices to economic prices.
The undiscounted annual incremental economic net benefits from project investments were worth Rs 16.1 billion, out of which breed improvement contributed Rs 4 billion, nutrition management, Rs 8.4 billion, and milk collection and bulking accounted for Rs 3.7 billion. The Financial Rate of Return (FRR) for the project came to 50.4 per cent and the Economic Rate of Return (ERR) was 65.5 per cent.
NDP-I and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
Dairy activities play a key role in improving the lives of millions in rural India by providing sufficient and reliable supplies and consumption of milk and dairy products; They also help generate income and employment, and strengthen the ownership of assets used by rural households use to achieve their livelihood objectives. Further, they empower rural women by facilitating higher mobility and participation; improving natural resource-use efficiency, broadening access to clean and renewable energy and supporting sustainable economic growth, especially for smallholder entrepreneurship, they also increase the resilience of households to climate shocks, while many of the positive interventions in the sector create employment opportunities for youth and women.
The interventions under NDP-I focused on several areas like fodder management, re- vegetation of degraded land due to over-grazing and over-exploitation, and setting up of semen stations for genetically high variety of milch animals including bulls, all of which contributed in achieving the UNDP’s SDGs. The specific SDGs that were addressed by NDP-I were Goal 1 in reducing poverty, Goal 5 in improving gender equality, Goal 8 in ensuring inclusive economic growth, Goal 10 in preventing rising inequality, Goal 13 in releasing lower average per unit methane emissions as compared to the regional average, Goal 15 in the sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems and conservation of biodiversity, and Goal 16 in creating inclusive societies and institutions.
24 25 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Conclusion
The SES by NCAER observed that a large number of landless, marginal and small farmers involved in dairying activity drew remunerative returns for their subsistence. Dairy, an off-farm activity, provides them an effective opportunity to supplement uncertainty in their income due to variations in crop output. The vulnerable rural sections also exhibit continual and long-term commitment to dairy activity. The creation of an effective marketing channel under NDP-I offered a much-needed fillip to these sections enabling them to market their incremental milk production as also to meet the growing demands of the urban consumer. The thrust on balanced feed for the milch animals also helped rationalise input costs and yield improvements. Moreover, the role of the project in promoting general awareness about treating dairy activities in an integrated framework for ushering in overall development of the sector helped both the producers and consumers.
26 27 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Context, Background Chapter 1and Methodology
1.1. Introduction
Livestock-rearing is an important draught power while the livestock supply economic activity for generating income manure for farming and fuel for domestic and creating employment in rural areas. use. Besides complementing and supplementing agriculture, rearing of dairy animals provides In the last seven decades, the Indian scope for offering subsistence security to dairy sector has undergone major farmers, especially in situations of under- transformations due to the introduction performance of agriculture. Dairy activities of new technologies under various dairy not only constitute a source of income for development programmes, leading to millions of poor households across the expansion and modernisation of the sector. country but also supplement the diets of Dairying contributes significantly to the these households by ensuring that they livestock sector in terms of its share in Gross receive adequate nutrition and protein intake. Value Added (GVA) and animal population. Livestock animals also provide other services. The livestock sector contributes more than 28 For instance, bullocks and buffaloes provide per cent of the total agricultural GVA and 4.9 per cent of the total GVA (Table 1.1).
Table 1.1: Share of Agriculture and Allied and Livestock Sector in GVA (Rs crore) At Current Prices Year GVA (Total) GVA (Agriculture GVA (Livestock Sector) and Allied) Amount % Share to Amount % Share to % Share Total GVA Total GVA to Total Agricultural and Allied 2011-12 81,06,946 15,01,947 18.5 3,27,334 4 21.8 2012-13 92,02,692 16,75,107 18.2 3,68,823 4 22.0 2013-14 1,03,63,153 19,26,372 18.6 4,22,733 4.1 21.9 2014-15 1,15,04,279 20,93,612 18.2 5,10,411 4.4 24.4 2015-16 1,25,66,646 22,25,368 17.7 5,84,070 4.6 26.2 2016-17 1,38,41,591 24,84,005 17.9 6,39,912 4.6 25.8 2017-18 1,54,82,715 26,70,147 17.2 7,58,417 4.9 28.4
Source: National Accounts Statistics-2019, Central Statistical Organisation, Government of India (GoI); Economic Outlook, Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE).
According to the 20th Livestock Census, the that recorded in the 19th Livestock Census in total cattle population in the country has 2012, when it had dropped to 190.9 million risen marginally, after a decline in previous from 199.07 million as per the previous 18th years. The cattle population in 2019 was Livestock Census in 2007. This increase in 192.49 million, about 0.8 per cent more than the 20th Census has been mainly due to a
26 27 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
sharp increase in cross-bred cattle that give of milch animals went up by 6 per cent. The higher milk yield, and also on account of a buffalo population also increased by 1.06 per higher share of cows in the indigenous cattle cent from 108.7 million in 2012 to 109.85 population. The number of female cross-bred million in 2019 (Figure 1.1). However, the cattle rose from 33.76 million in 2012 to overall number of indigenous cattle went 46.95 million in 2019, an increase of 39 per down from 2012 to 2019. Cross-bred milch cent. The indigenous female cattle population animals contributed around 28 per cent to also rose by 10 per cent from 89.22 million in India’s total milk production of 188 million 2012 to 98.17 million in 2019. The number tonnes in 2019.
Figure 1.1: Cows and Buffaloes as per the Various Livestock Censuses (Million)
250
199.07 200 190.09 192.49
150 105.34 108.7 109.85 100
50
0 Cattle Buffaloes 2007 2012 2019 Source: Livestock Census, 18th, 19th and 20th
Milk production in India grew at more on dairy development activities. In that than 4 per cent compounded annually initiative, rural milk shed areas were linked during the period 1991-2011, surpassing to urban markets through the development the growth rates in the global dairy output of network village cooperatives for procuring and India’s own foodgrain production as and marketing milk. The aggregate milk seen in Figure 1.2 (Birthal and Negi, 2012).4 production and productivity were enhanced This phenomenal success is attributed to a by ensuring the availability of veterinary Government initiative known as Operation services, artificial insemination (AI), feed, Flood (1970–1996) and its intense focus and farmer education.
Figure 1.2: Trend in Milk Production and Foodgrain Production
250 300 180 160 250 140 200 120 100 150 80 60 100 40 50 20 Milk Production Milk (Million Tonnes) (Million (Million Tonnes) (Million 0 0 Food grain Food production 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 1999-2000 Years Food grain production (Million Tonnes) Milk Production (Million Tonnes)
Source: Agriculture at a Glance, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperation, various issues.
4 Birthal, Pratap S. and Digvijay S. Negi (2012). “Livestock for Higher, Sustainable and Inclusive Agricultural Growth”, Economic & Political Weekly Supplement, June 30, XLVII(26 and 27).
28 29 Context, Background and Methodology
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Context, Background and Methodology
At the national level, income from livestock overcome the challenges that such farmers accounts for an average of about 12 per cent face in livestock farming. of the income earned by an agricultural household from farm and off-farm activities, Since its products are also sources of viz., the cultivation of crops and livestock.5 nutrition, the livestock sector plays a crucial In fact, the marginal and small farmers role in meeting the food security needs of with landholdings of up to 5 acres, who the country. The role of dairying in securing together constitute about 87 per cent of all income for the farmers and meeting the farmer households in the country, have a nutritional requirements of the population high dependence on income from livestock, has long been recognised in the plans for as the corresponding share of income from agricultural development. Realising the need livestock in the total income from farming for sustaining this effort to expand market activities is 29 per cent against only 7.5 per opportunities for the small producers and cent for large farmers with landholdings improving the productivity of milch animals, above 10 acres. the Government of India implemented the programme called National Dairy Plan 1 For small farmers with irrigated land, the (NDP-I) with major financial assistance activities of dairying and crop production from International Development Association together are more profitable than crop (IDA) of the World Bank. The project farming alone. Over the years, dairying has was implemented during the period April also become a full-fledged occupation by 2012 to November 2019. The Government itself for many and has both directly and of India also allocated outlays for NDP-I. indirectly improved the life of those engaged The project cost was partly met by the End in this business, bringing about significant Implementing Agencies (EIAs),6 and partly socio-economic changes. Dairying is also a supplemented by subsidies from the National proven effective instrument for alleviating Dairy Development Board (NDDB) and poverty in the country. its subsidiaries (Project Management and Learning). Given such a high importance of livestock as a source of income for marginal and NDP-I was planned as a multi-state initiative small farmers, it is important to enhance with the following project development livestock productivity and realise adequate objectives: monetisation of the produce for increasing 1. To help increase the productivity of the income of a vast majority of farmers in milch animals, and thereby increase milk the country. Increased market opportunities production to meet the rapidly growing emanating from the anticipated rise demand for milk; and in demand for livestock products will enable resource-poor farmers to increase 2. To help provide rural milk producers with production, improve their livelihoods, reduce greater access to the organised marketing malnutrition, and thereby contribute to the and milk processing sector. goal of overall poverty alleviation. In the These objectives were pursued through the context of these changes, there is a need to adoption of focused scientific and systematic provide an enabling environment in which processes in the provision of technical small producers are able to take advantage inputs, and supported by enabling policy and of the increased opportunities available and regulatory measures. The project focused on
5 Source: “Status of Farmers’ Income: Strategies for Accelerated Growth”, (2017), Report of Committee for ‘Doubling Farmers’ Income (DFI)’, Vol. II, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, GoI. 6 The End Implementing Agencies (EIAs) comprise State Livestock Boards, State Cooperative Dairy Federations, District Cooperative Milk Producer Unions, cooperative forms of enterprises such as Producer Companies, Trusts (NGOs, Section 25 companies), subsidiaries of statutory bodies, ICAR institutes and veterinary/dairy institutes/universities and any other entity decided by the National Steering Committee for NDP I.
28 29 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
14 major milk-producing states as on 2011, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, and namely, Andhra Pradesh (undivided), Bihar, West Bengal, which together account for over Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya 90 per cent of the country’s milk production. Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Punjab,
1.2. Components of the NDP-I Plan
The major components of the NDP-I plan are as follows (Table 1.2): i) Component 1: Breed Improvement and Animal Nutrition; ii) Component 2: Ration Balancing Programme (RBP); iii) Component 3: Fodder Development Programme; iv) Component 4: Strengthening Village-based Milk Procurement Systems (VBMPS); and v) Component 5: Project Management and Learning.
Table 1.2: Component- wise Key Targets of NDP-I Major Components Targets Breed Improvement and Animal • Production of 2,500 High Genetic Merit (HGM) cattle and buffalo bulls. Nutrition • Import of 400 exotic bulls/equivalent embryos. • Production of 100 million semen doses annually in the terminal year. • 3000 MAITs carrying out annual 4 million doorstep AIs by the terminal year Ration Balancing Programme (RBP) • Coverage of 2.7 million milch animals in 40,000 villages. Fodder Development Programme • Production of 7,500 tonnes of certified/truthfully labelled fodder seed. • 1350 silage making/fodder conservation demonstrations Strengthening Village-based Milk • 23,800 additional villages to be covered. Procurement Systems (VBMPS) • 1.2 million additional milk producers to be enrolled Project Management and Learning • Effective monitoring and coordination of project activities. • Timely preparation and implementation of annual plans. • Regular review and reporting of project progress and results.
Source: NDDB data.
NDDB has entrusted NCAER with the task survey of dairy households spread across of undertaking a study to assess the socio- the country and an economic and financial economic impact of NDP-I at the conclusion assessment of the overall project. of the programme, based on a sample
1.3. Objectives of the Study
The main objectives of the study are: improvement in milk consumption 1. To identify and measure indicators and nutrition, change in household that demonstrate the impact of dairy income and expenditure patterns, and involvement in socio-economic employment generation at the farm level development, family welfare, and income to foster an improvement in the quality of generation—the direct impact of dairying life; on producer households includes 2. To assess the social impact of the
30 31 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Context, Background and Methodology
programme in terms of providing (c) To conduct an ex-post evaluation of the livelihoods, including the impact on benefits and cost using as a reference vulnerable groups and the status of study the ex-ante Economic & Financial women’s empowerment; and Analysis (EFA), done by World Bank at 3. To carry out an ex-post economic and the appraisal stage of the project in 2012; financial evaluation for assessing the the ex-post evaluation analysis entails design and delivery of the project with calculation of an ex-post Economic Rate a focus on the two main components of of Return (ERR) and NPV (Net Present NDP-I: (a) “Productivity Enhancement”, Value) and the Financial Rate of Return which is expected to increase milk (FRR). productivity through improved animal The present study follows various baseline breeding, nutrition, and delivery of and intermediate assessments of the artificial insemination services, and (b) programme carried out by the National “Milk Collection and Bulking”, which is Dairy Development Board (NDDB). The expected to provide access to markets by study focuses on the impact of NDP-I investing in village level milk collection at the ground level, centred around the and bulking facilities, and the formation of dairy farmers and the market outlets for producer companies and dairy cooperative their produce. The study focuses on the societies. The sub-objectives under the production and marketing of liquid milk third objective may be detailed as follows: at the local level. The emphasis is on the (a) To evaluate the strategic relevance of milk producers, production aspects, and the the programme: how it relates to the immediate market outlets for the produce, conditions on the ground, the level including those facilitated by NDP-I. The of commitment to key clients of the pattern that emerges from the analysis of the programme, and the coordination performance indicators of the dairy sector at between the key partners to the the farm level is the basis for an assessment programme; of the impact of the programme. The ex-post analysis of the benefits and costs is based (b) To assess whether the programme on data at the macro level using parameters has achieved the intended results affecting the performance of the dairy sector and impacts, the sustainability after through the selected interventions of the the programme has ended, and programme. the lessons learned from the Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and other interactions; and
1.4. Methodology
A comprehensive assessment of a the recommended practices and their impact development programme would include on the outputs and incomes of the targeted an analysis of its design, processes, households. Hence, the study is based on an implementation, output, and outcomes. analysis of primary data collected through However, given the limitations of time, a sample survey of the beneficiary milk- this study mainly focuses on the output producing households at NDP-I vis-à-vis and outcomes of the programme being the control group, along with a review of studied rather than an analysis of its other research literature on the issues relevant to dimensions. Such a focus allows for a detailed policy interventions for dairy development in examination of the pattern of adoption of the country as a whole.
30 31 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
1.5. Addressing the Study Objectives: Summary of the Approaches
The objectives and approaches of the study have been delineated in Table 1.3.
Table 1.3: Objectives and Approaches of the NCAER Study Objectives Approach of the Study Identify and measure indicators that * Estimating the proportion of households rearing milch demonstrate the impact of dairy animals in the project villages in comparison to the control development in socio-economic ones and within the project villages over the project duration; development, family welfare, and income * Milk consumption per family and how it has changed in the generation. The direct impact of dairying on project and control villages; producer households includes improvement * Estimating differences in the number of households for in milk consumption and nutrition, change various income groups in the project and control villages; and in household income and expenditure patterns, and employment generation at the * Estimating differences in the number of households for farm level to foster an improvement in the various expenditure groups in the project and control villages. quality of life. Social impact in terms of providing * Estimating the involvement of different economic and social livelihoods including the impact on classes in its dependence on livestock earnings; vulnerable groups and the status of women’s * How women members’ engagement in rearing milch animals empowerment. varies between the project and control villages; and * Examining variations in women’s engagement in dairying activities and how it has impacted: • Decision-making within the household with respect to day- to-day affairs; • Mobility with respect social groupings [e.g. Self-help Groups (SHGs)]; • Ownership of assets; and • Status outside the home. Assessing the strategic relevance of the * A total of 28 Focused Group Discussions (FGDs) were carried programme: how it relates to the conditions out by the NCAER team across States in both the project on the ground, the level of commitment and control villages that qualitatively identifies the strategic to key clients of the programme, and the relevance of NDP-I at the ground level. coordination between the key partners to the programme. The evaluation will also assess whether the programme has achieved intended results and impacts, the sustainability of the programme after it has ended, and the lessons learned. Ex-post economic and financial evaluation. * An assessment of the project with a focus on the two main components of NDP-I: (a) “Productivity enhancement”, which is expected to increase milk productivity through improved animal breeding, nutrition, and delivery of artificial insemination services, and (b) “Milk collection and bulking”, which is expected to provide access to markets by investing in village level milk collection and bulking facilities, and formation of producer companies and dairy cooperative societies through secondary data provided to the NCAER team by the NDDB. Conducting an ex-post evaluation of the * The EFA analysis for the NDP-I project is under finalisation benefits and cost, using as a reference study at this stage. In the sub-section of the first component of EFA, = the ex-ante Economic & Financial Analysis that is, Animal Breed Improvement, the expected streams of (EFA), done by World Bank at the appraisal benefits are to be accrued under the following three different stage of the project in 2012; the ex-post scenarios: evaluation analysis entails calculation of • Scenario I: NDSP-Bulls, NDSP-SS (Semen Station), NDSP- an ex-post Economic Rate of Return (ERR) AI: and NPV (Net Present Value) and also the • Scenario II: NDSP-Bulls, NDSP-SS, non- NDSP-AI; and Financial Rate of Return. • Scenario III: NDSP-Bulls, Non-NDSP-SS, Non- NDSP-AI.
Source: NDDB and NCAER.
32 33 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Context, Background and Methodology
1.5.1. Design of the Sample Survey
In recognition of the potential for overlapping influences of the previous and other ongoing development programmes in the sample areas, an effort has been made to delineate the impact of these programmes on the outcomes of NDP-I. Accordingly, the primary survey has been based on the Recall Method as it has evolved through mutual and active consultation with the NDDB officials. Since the Recall Method does not preclude the beneficiaries of the countervailing units, a set of representative sample villages were chosen as the control ones based on the Similarity Index.7
The NCAER team discussed the comprehensive survey questionnaires with the NDDB officials before finalising them. The following survey instruments were used to obtain data from the field survey for the present study:
1. Listing questionnaire to develop a sample frame to select households for detailed data on the dairying and marketing of milk; 2. Household questionnaire; and 3. Village questionnaire. The survey was conducted using mobile applications, that is computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) and the questionnaires were appropriately programmed taking into account the field experience of the investigators noted during the pilot surveys.
1.5.2. Field-level Interactions
For carrying out the primary level field analysis, NCAER maintains a list of eligible survey agencies with adequately qualified manpower. In this particular case, apart from a general aptitude in statistical and subject matter among the investigators, there was a specific need for knowledge of the local language, since the respondents are predominantly from rural and agricultural backgrounds. Accordingly, suitable agencies with requisite experience were selected to conduct the fieldwork. NCAER also imparted extensive training including field exposure (through the pilot survey). A requisite number of team leaders and supervisors were also deployed to ensure the quality of the data collected.
The structured questionnaires provided quantitative information. To assess the qualitative aspects, FGDs were conducted in all the 14 states for both the project and the control villages. The FGDs were undertaken to complement the quantitative data analysis for deciphering the lessons learnt from the implementation of the NDP-I programme.
1.5.3. Sample Selection
The study utilised the framework of multi-stage stratified random sampling design for collection of primary data through the field survey. For sample selection, the primary sampling units, that is, tehsils, were classified into three groups based on the coverage of NDP-I with respect to the following three components: (1) villages with only the RBP programme, (2) villages with only the VBMPS programme, and (3) villages where both the programmes (RBP+VBMPS) are running.
For conducting the survey of beneficiary households, the NCAER team selected 15,000 sample households from a total of 420 tehsils and 1260 project villages. In addition, 3,000 households from 252 selected control villages were also surveyed to obtain a comparative insight of the
7 Discussed in detail in Section 1.5.3.
32 33 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
impact. The sample villages were drawn from the sample design. The tehsils were selected the comprehensive list of the project villages with NDP intervention in all the States as per provided to NCAER by NDDB from 420 the procedure (Steps 1 and 2) delineated in tehsils spread across 14 major states, as per Tables 1.4 and 1.5.
Table 1.4: Count of the Total Number of Tehsils Based on NDP-I Intervention: Step 1 States RBP (A) VBMPS (B) Both (C) Total Distribution of Proposed
(ai+bi+ci) (420) Tehsils (ni>=10) 1 a1 b1 c1 X1 X1/∑Xi*420=n1 2 a2 b2 c2 X2 X2/∑Xi*420=n2 3 a3 b3 c3 X3 X3/∑Xi*420=n3 4 a4 b4 c4 X4 X4/∑Xi*420=n4 5 a5 b5 c5 X5 X5/∑Xi*420=n5 6 a6 b6 c6 X6 X6/∑Xi*420=n6 7 a7 b7 c7 X7 X7/∑Xi*420=n7 8 a8 b8 c8 X8 X8/∑Xi*420=n8 9 a9 b9 c9 X9 X9/∑Xi*420=n9 10 a10 b10 c10 X10 X10/∑Xi*420=n10 11 a11 b11 c11 X11 X11/∑Xi*420=n11 12 a12 b12 c12 X12 X12/∑Xi*420=n12 13 a13 b13 c13 X13 X13/∑Xi*420=n13 14 a14 b14 c14 X14 X14/∑Xi*420=n14
Grand Total ∑ai ∑bi ∑ci ∑Xi 420 Source: NCAER field data.
Table 1.5: Distribution of ni within States among the Three Categories of Intervention: Step 2 States Selection of Total Tehsils Based on NDP-I Intervention RBP (A) VBMPS (B) Both (C) Total 1 (n1/X1)*a1 (n1/X1)*b1 (n1/X1)*c1 n1 2 (n2/X1)*a2 (n2/X1)*b2 (n2/X1)*c2 n2 3 (n3/X1)*a3 (n3/X1)*b3 (n3/X1)*c3 n3 4 (n4/X1)*a4 (n4/X1)*b4 (n4/X1)*c4 n4 5 (n5/X1)*a5 (n5/X1)*b5 (n5/X1)*c5 n5 6 (n6/X1)*a6 (n6/X1)*b6 (n6/X1)*c6 n6 7 (n7/X1)*a7 (n7/X1)*b7 (n7/X1)*c7 n7 8 (n8/X1)*a8 (n8/X1)*b8 (n8/X1)*c8 n8 9 (n9/X1)*a9 (n9/X1)*b9 (n9/X1)*c9 n9 10 (n10/X1)*a10 (n10/X1)*b10 (n10/X1)*c10 n10 11 (n11/X1)*a11 (n11/X1)*b11 (n11/X1)*c11 n11 12 (n12/X1)*a12 (n12/X1)*b12 (n12/X1)*c12 n12 13 (n13/X1)*a13 (n13/X1)*b13 (n13/X1)*c13 n13 14 (n14/X1)*a14 (n14/X1)*b14 (n14/X1)*c14 n14
Grand Total ∑Xi Source: NCAER field data.
Step 3: Selection of the Project Villages The sample villages were selected from the tehsil-wise percentage villages covered under the particular NDP intervention. The basis of the selection was division of the NDP intervention
34 35 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Context, Background and Methodology
villages by the total Census villages belonging control villages is given in Annexure A. to the particular tehsil. The sample villages have been arranged in descending order and Comprehensive questionnaires have been the three sample villages were selected for prepared for: a) Listing, b) Village schedule; the following three strata: upper 25 per cent; and c) Household level that generates middle 50 per cent; and lower 25 per cent. appropriate feedbacks related to the major objectives of the NDP-I project (the Step 4: Selection of the Control questionnaires are attached in Annexure Villages B). The questionnaires for the project and the control villages took cognisance of the For selection of the control villages, a following aspects that emerged during Similarity Index was developed based on the discussions with the NDDB officials: following indicators: • Productivity and income; 1. Number of milch animals (50 per cent); • Access to input resources; 2. Net sown area (20 per cent); • Access to the market; 3. Household number (15 per cent); and • Information and relationships; 4. Distance to the nearest town (15 per cent). • Gender (to focus on the role of women It may be noted that due to non-availability as milk producers); of data of the 1st indicator of the Livestock
Census of 2012, NCAER has not considered • Training/capacity building; the same for Kerala. The weights assigned • Knowledge about the NDP-I project; for each of the indicators are given in and parentheses beside all the indicators. • Impact, relevance, effectiveness, sustainability and scale-up of NDP-I. One crucial criterion for selection of the The questionnaires were finalised after being control villages is that the village should subjected to a pilot survey, which took note not have any Dairy Cooperative Societies of the response rate of the questions for (DCS). Initially, a total of 4277 villages were each of the sections, ease in explaining and chosen as they fulfilled the requirements of getting responses for each of the questions, the Similarity Index. A total of 252 villages and the overall time taken to canvas each were chosen for canvassing the primary of the questionnaires. Moreover, in each of survey using a GIS mapping system along the villages, listing of at least 50 villagers with Simple Random Sampling (SRS) from was carried out to ensure appropriate the districts, with two villages selected per stratification of the sample households, as district. A list of the selected project and detailed in Table 1.6.
Table 1.6: Stratification of Sample Households in a Village Household Characteristics Number of Selected Households SCs/STs with milch animals 2 Out of 12 households, 10 with Landless with milch animals 2 milch animals were distributed proportionately. (Small + Marginal) with milch animals 4 Others with milch animals 2 Households without milch animals 2 Total Households 12
Source: NCAER field data. Note: The same stratification as shown in Table 1.6 was followed for the control villages.
34 35 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
1.6. Sample Weight (Multiplier) Calculations
1.6.1. First Stage Multiplier to that stratum. The ratio of sample tehsils in each stratum to the total number of tehsils in For calculating the first stage multiplier, the that stratum was the first stage multiplier. state-wise tehsils were arranged into three groups based on the coverage of NDP-I with 1.6.2. Second Stage Multiplier respect to the following three components: (1) villages with only the RBP programme, For calculating the second stage multiplier, (2) villages with only the VBMPS the tehsil-wise percentage of villages covered programme; and (3) villages where both the under the particular intervention was chosen. programmes (RBP+VBMPS) are running. The second stage multiplier was arrived at by The list of 420 tehsils was allocated over states dividing the NDP intervention villages by the in proportion to the total number of tehsils, total number of Census villages belonging with a minimum allocation of 10 tehsils to to the particular tehsil. For achieving this, a state. This sample size was further spread first for a given sample of tehsils, the total over three strata within a state in proportion number of villages as per the Census and as to the total number of tehsils in the respective per the NDP interventions (RBP, VBMPS, strata with a minimum allocation of two and both RBP and VBMPS) were arranged. tehsils to a stratum within a state. The Then the ratio of the total number of NDP required number of tehsils from a stratum intervention villages and total number of were selected by probability proportional to villages as per the Census were taken as size and with replacement (PPSWR) with the second stage multiplier. The same procedure size being the total number of villages in the was followed for all the states (Table 1.7). tehsil covered under the intervention related Table 1.7: Calculation of the Second Stage Multiplier Particulars RBP Tehsils VBMPS Tehsils RBP+VBMPS Tehsils Number of villages as per the Census N1 N2 N3 Number of sample villages n1 n2 n3 Second stage multiplier n1/N1 n2/N2 n3/N3 Source: NCAER field data.
1.6.3. Third Stage Multiplier of the total number of listed households and the total number of surveyed households in For calculating the third stage multiplier for each category was computed to find the third a given village, first the grouping of the total stage multiplier. The same procedure was number of listed households and the total followed for computing the weights for all number of surveyed households was done as the villages (Table 1.8). per the stratification criteria. Then the ratio Table 1.8: Calculation of the Third Stage Multiplier Village SCs/STs with Landless with (Small + Others with HH without Milch Animals Milch Animals Marginal) Milch Animals Milch Animals with Milch Animals For Village 1: H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 Total listed households Total surveyed households h1 h2 h3 h4 h5 Third stage multiplier h1/H1 h2/H2 h3/H3 h4/H4 h5/H5
Source: NCAER field data.
36 37 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Context, Background and Methodology
1.7. Way forward
The next section provides a discussion on the characteristics of the project and control villages based on the socio-economic survey carried out by NCAER during September-October (stretched to early November), 2019. This would be followed by a detailed description of the impact of the NDP-I at the household level in Chapters 3 and 4. In Chapter 5, a qualitative assessment has been attempted, mostly from the perspective of the unorganised section related to dairy activities in the hinterland. Chapter 6 is presents the economic and financial analysis of the NDP-I, while Chapter 7 dwells on the convergence of the NDP-I project with the relevant sustainable development goals (SDGs), mandated by the UN Charter on 2015. The report concludes with Chapter 8.
36 37 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
38 39 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Characteristcs of the Project and Chapter 2Control Villages
Chapter 1 detailed the sample selection infrastructure and broad status of milk method and procedure followed for production activities of the smallholders. conducting the field survey, and assimilation The operational aspects of dairying as of primary data and its analysis. In this well as the opportunities, strengths, and chapter, the status of the dairy production constraints of the sector became apparent sector, as it emerged from village level to provide an insight into the extent to information collected during the field which the interventions under NDP-I have survey, covering both the project villages actually helped enhance the production and and control villages has been discussed. The marketing of milk across various regions of patterns evolving from the village level data the .country. highlight the socio-economic environment,
2.1. General Information about the Villages
2.1.1. Land-owning Characteristics and medium (medium+) farmers were 10.5 per cent and 12.4 per cent, and for large Dairying has become an important farmers were 1.7 per cent and 2.5 per cent, secondary source of income for millions of respectively. rural families and has assumed an important role in providing employment and income- 2.1.2. Source of Drinking Water generating opportunities, particularly to marginal farmers and rural women. Most India has for long faced the challenge of of the milk is produced by animals reared inadequate availability of safe drinking water by small, marginal farmers, and landless to over 700 million people in more than 1.5 labourers. As per the Base Line Report,8 million villages. In 1972, the government the shares of landless households, marginal took steps to improve rural water supply, and landowners, and small landowners owning in the mid-1980s, the issue was declared a milch animals were 23 per cent, 43 per cent, national priority. As a result, by 2011, 95 per and 16 per cent, respectively, with these three cent of India’s rural population had access categories aggregating to a whopping 82 per to some form of water supply infrastructure. cent vis-à-vis 18 per cent owned by large The details about access to water at the farmers. The Socio-Economic Survey (SES) household level are provided in Chapter 3. by NCAER reveals that the proportions of total landless households in the project and 2.1.3. Availability of Electricity, control villages were 25.9 per cent and 24.5 Health and Education Infrastructure per cent, respectively. The corresponding in the Selected Project and Control figures in the project and control villages for Villages small and marginal farmers were 61.8 per cent and 60.6 per cent, for semi-medium The government considers a village to be electrified if the proportion of households 8 Development and Research Services (2013). “External Monitoring and Evaluation of NDP Phase I”, Baseline Study (Final Report).
38 39 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
having electricity connections in the village is the availability of secondary schools (Figure at least 10 per cent and electricity is provided 2.1). to public buildings including schools, primary health centres (PHCs), dispensaries, The PHCs were envisaged to provide community centres, and village councils. integrated curative and preventive health Reaching the remote and inaccessible villages care facilities to the rural population with an has always proved to be a major challenge emphasis on the preventive and promotive in the country’s electrification drive. The aspects of health care. The PHCs have been present study shows that 99 per cent of established and maintained by the State the Project villages and 96 per cent of the governments under the Minimum Needs Control villages have been electrified (Figure Programme (MNP) and Basic Minimum 2.1). Services (BMS) Programme. The activities of the PHC involve curative, preventive, Data from the Union Rural Development promotive, and family welfare services. Ministry indicates that access to the highest level of school education is an issue of Although a lot of policies and programmes concern, as only 6.57 per cent of the villages are being run by the Government, the success have senior secondary schools. The findings and effectiveness of these programmes of the National Sample Survey Organisation are questionable due to gaps in their (NSSO), 2014, reveal that 94 per cent of implementation. In rural India, where the the households in rural areas reported the number of PHCs is already limited, 8 per cent availability of a primary school within a of the centres do not have doctors or medical distance of one km from the house. A similar staff, 39 per cent do not have laboratory pattern was observed in both the project and technicians and 18 per cent of the PHCs do 9 control villages. As regards the availability not even have pharmacists. of primary schools, there was not much The present study found that only 30.6 per difference between the project and control cent and 26.8 per cent of the beneficiaries villages but the project villages were slightly had access to PHCs within the project and better off than the control villages in terms of control villages, respectively (Figure 2.1).
Figure 2.1: Electricity, Health and Education Infrastructure in the Selected Project and Control Villages
120
100 99.2 96.2 95.6 94.4 80
60 56.5 Per cent 45.1 40 30.6 26.8 20
0 Electricity Connection PHC Primary School Secondary School Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
2.1.4. Main Approach Road to the access to amenities like education, health, Village and marketing of dairying and agricultural produce, among other things. It has been Rural connectivity is a critical component established that investments in rural roads for facilitating socio-economic development lift rural people above the poverty line. The of the rural people through provision of available evidence also indicates that as rural 9 https://gramvaani.org/?p=1629.
40 41 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages
connectivity improves, rural poverty levels of the selected existing roads to acceptable come down. The study finds an imbalance quality standards. in development of the rural road network in the country. While some states have provided There was not much difference between the 100 per cent connectivity, others do not have project and control villages with regard to the enough financial resources at their disposal availability of pucca roads, with 77 per cent and consequently, connectivity in the and 76.3 per cent of the project and control latter states has remained at low levels. The villages, respectively, having main approach Government of India launched the Pradhan roads (Figure 2.2). The status of transport Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana in the year 2000 facilities was, however, slightly better in the 90 project villages as compared to the control for ensuring connectivity77.0 to 7the6.3 unconnected 80 villages. eligible habitations70 and for upgradation 60 Figure 2.2: Main Approach Road to the Village
cent 50 9040 77.0 76.3 Per 8300 70 13.4 13.4 20 9.7 10.4 6010
cent 500 40 Pucca Road Kutcha Road Both Per 30 Project Villages Control Villages 13.4 13.4 20 9.7 10.4 10 0 Pucca Road Kutcha Road Both Project Villages Control Villages
Source: NCAER field data.
2.1.5. Status of Transport Facilities corresponding figure was 10 percentage points less, at 26.4 per cent for the control As a corollary to the road network, the villages. It may be noted that 70 per cent adequate availability of transportation of the respondents in the project villages facilities is an important reflection of (Just Adequate plus Adequate combined) market accessibility. More than 36 per were contented with the availability of cent of the respondents from the project transportation facilities in their villages villages reported the adequate availability (Figure 2.3). of transport facilities, whereas the
Figure 2.3: Adequate Availability of Transport Facilities in the Project and Control Villages 40 36.3 36.2 35 33.8 30.2 30 26.4 24.4 25
cent 4200 36.3 36.2 Per 3155 33.8 30.2 9.2 3100 26.4 24.4 3.5 255 0 cent 20 Very inadequate Just adequate Adequate None
Per 15 10 Project Villages Control Villages 9.2 Source5: NCAER field data. 3.5 0 40 Very inadequate Just a41d eq uate Adequate None
Project Villages Control Villages
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
2.1.6. Availability of Village despite impressive growth of the economy, Information System and Banking nearly 40 per cent of the households in the Facilities country— many of them rural—still do not have access to the banking network with the One of the more striking aspects of India’s excluded segment mostly comprising landless growth story relates to the expansion of labourers, and small and marginal farmers.10. the banking infrastructure. Between 1969 It was observed that the project villages were and the present, the banking network has better off in terms of the availability of post grown ten-fold—from 8,000 branches to offices, and Village Information Centres 80,000. The number of rural branches has (VICs), and slightly better off in terms of increased phenomenally, from 1,443 to banking facilities. The number of ATM 32,000. This expansion was triggered first by facilities was however, higher in the control the nationalisation of the banking system villages as compared to the project villages in 1969 and thereafter by its expansion (Figure 2.4). in 1980. However, it is a sad reality that
Figure 2.4: Availability of Village Information Centres and Banking Facilities
80 70.7 70 62.4 57.1 60 50 45.5 44.8
cent 35.6 40 35.1 32.2
Per 30 20 10 0 Post Office Village Information Banking Facilities ATM Centre
Project Villages Control Villages Source: NCAER field data.
2.2. The Village Level Dairying Scenario
2.2.1. Dairy Herd Composition Further, the share of crossbred cows in the milch animal population had increased more It was observed that the share of crossbred sharply in the project villages as compared cows was higher in the project villages to the control villages during the period of whereas the share of indigenous cows and the study (Figure 2.5). Pictures 2.1, 2.2, and buffaloes was higher in the control villages. 2.3 depict one pucca, semi-pucca and kutcha cattle shed each in villages in different states.
10 https://www.thehindu.com/books/banking-access-to-rural-poor/article2339950.ece. 42 43 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages
Figure 2.5: Percentage Shares of Indigenous and Crossbred Cows and Buffaloes in the Project and Control Villages
60 52.6 46.5 48.6 50 43.0 41.8 41.9 35.6 40 33.7 33.4 33.3 32.9 32.6 23.3 22.6 24.7 30 20.1 18.5 20 14.8 cent 10
Per 0 DP DP DP tly tly tly n n n BET P BET P BET P M I M I M I Pres e Pres e Pres e
Indigenous Cow Cross-bred Cow Buffalo
Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
Picture 2.1: Cattle shed (pucca) in a village in Haryana Picture 2.2: Cattle shed (semi-pucca) in a village in Gujarat
Picture 2.3: Cattle shed (kutcha) in a village in Maharashtra
42 43 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
2.2.2. Season-wise Average Milk over the periods in all the seasons in both Production per Day per Animal in the the project and control villages (Figure Selected Project and Control Villages 2.6). However, the season-wise average milk production per day per animal was It has been observed that the average milk comparatively higher in the project villages as production per day per animal increased compared to the control ones (Table 2.1).
Figure 2.6: Season-wise Average Milk Production per Day per Animal in the Selected Project and Control Villages
9.0 8.01 7.68 7.64 7.69 8.0 7.24 7.19 7.02 7.26 6.64 6.68 7.0 5.92 5.96 5.42 6.0 4.89 5.16 5.0 4.60 4.0 3.18 2.84 3.0 2.0
Litre/day/animal 1.0 0.0 Project Control Project Project Control Project
Summer Rainy Winter Axis Title Overall Overall Overall
Source: NCAER field data.
Table 2.1: Season-wise and Breed-wise Average Milk Production per Day per Animal in Selected Project and Control Villages Particulars Period Summer Rainy Winter Project Control Project Control Project Control Overall BETP 7.24 5.42 6.68 5.92 4.89 2.84 MIDP 7.68 6.64 7.64 7.02 5.16 3.18 PRES 8.01 7.19 7.69 7.26 5.96 4.60 Indigenous Cow BETP 4.15 4.29 4.36 4.30 2.73 1.88 MIDP 4.80 4.94 5.15 5.25 3.19 2.39 PRES 5.39 4.86 5.20 5.18 3.45 3.02 Cross-bred BETP 7.12 6.41 7.41 6.87 5.34 2.68 MIDP 7.80 6.70 8.05 7.25 5.70 3.06 PRES 7.92 6.95 8.28 7.67 6.36 3.98 Buffalo BETP 5.34 5.88 3.22 2.48 3.35 2.96 MIDP 5.87 6.16 3.38 2.62 3.40 2.81 PRES 5.93 5.88 4.04 3.30 4.06 3.42
Source: NCAER field data.
2.2.3. Households with Milch Animals was a slight increase in the ownership of milch animals in the project villages to 49.6 Before implementation of the project, the per cent. Thereafter, there has been a marked proportion of total households owning milch increase in the total percentage of households animals stood at 49.4 per cent in the project owning milch animals, which currently villages and 38.5 per cent in the control stands at 52.6 per cent in the project villages villages. During the middle of NDP-I, there (Figure 2.7).
44 45 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages
Figure 2.7: Milch Animal-owning Households in the Project and Control Villages
60 52.6 49.4 49.6 50 43.9 38.5 40 33.5 cen t 30 Pe r 20 10 0 BETP MIDP Presently
Project Villages Control Villages
Source: NCAER field data. Note: BETP: Before the project; MIDP: Middle of the Project.
2.2.4. Changes in the Share of project villages and around 47 per cent in the Households Engaged in Dairy control villages. During the implementation Activities of NDP-I, there was an increase in dairy activities in the project villages to 80.4 per It would be interesting to ascertain the cent in the middle of the period, while the
share of households engaged in any of the corresponding figure was 55.9 per cent in the dairy-related activities in the project and the control villages. Currently, there has been a control villages. Figure 2.8 depicts that before significant increase in the total percentage of the implementation of NDP-I, the percentage households engaged in dairy activities in the of total households engaged in dairy project villages, standing at 81 per cent, but a activities was a little over 77 per cent in the corresponding decline has been observed in the control villages, standing at 54 per cent.
Figure 2.8: Percentage Share of Households Engaged in Dairy Activities in the Project and Control Villages
100 77.1 80.4 81.0 80 55.9 54.0 60 47.2
centage 40 Pe r
Distribution 20 0 BETP MIDP Presently
Project Villages Control Villages
Source: NCAER field data.
44 45 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
2.2.5. Contribution of Dairy Milk dairy milk production to household income Production to Household Income to be ‘very significant’, 34.2 per cent reported in the Selected Project and Control it to be ‘somewhat significant’, and the Villages remaining 6.3 per cent reported it to be ‘non- significant’. The corresponding figures in the Among the households in the project villages, control villages were 36.9 per cent, 39.2 per 59.4 per cent reported the contribution of cent, and 23.8 per cent, respectively.
Table 2.2: Contribution of Dairy Milk Production to Income of Households in the Project and Control Villages Particulars Project Villages Control Villages BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently Very significant 43.7 46.0 59.4 30.0 32.7 36.9 Somewhat significant 41.3 46.9 34.2 44.2 44.6 39.2 Not significant 15.0 7.1 6.3 25.8 22.7 23.8 Source: NCAER field data.
2.2.6. Availability of Milk for increase in the availability of milk for Consumption in the Project and household consumption during the period Control Villages under study, whereas the corresponding figure in the control villages was about 31 per About 50 per cent of the respondents from cent (Figure 2.9). the project villages reported a significant Figure 2.9: Availability of Milk for Consumption in the Project and Control Villages
60.0
n 49.7
ti o 50.0 40.0 37.1 i strib u 30.9 D
27.6
e 30.0
ta g 16.9 n 20.0 13.3 15.2 9.3 rc e
e 10.0 P 0.0 Significantly Moderate Increase or no Declined Significantly Varies from time to time change
Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
2.3 Dairy-related Programmes and Their Coverage in the Villages
2.3.1. Coverage of the Village-based companies. Apart from the formation of Milk Procurement System (VBMPS) new societies/pooling points, the existing societies/pooling points are also being The Village-based Milk Procurement strengthened by being provided village-level System (VBMPS) under NDP-I aims at capital items like Bulk Milk Coolers (BMCs), providing rural milk producers greater and milk cans, among other things. The access to organised milk-processing activities Strengthening of the DCS and producer by forming and strengthening Dairy companies though Data Processor-based Cooperatives Societies (DCSes) and producer Milk Collection Units (DPMCUs) and
46 47 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages
Automatic Milk Collection Units (AMCUs) village whereas 9.6 villages have societies in has resulted in greater transparency and adjoining villages. Further, Figure 2.11 shows fairness in milk procurement operations that 55.9 per cent of the respondents from while the installation of BMCs has given the RBP villages, 70.8 per cent from both farmers more flexibility in terms of both the the RBP plus VBMPS villages, and 76 per quantity as well as quality of milk produced. cent from the VBMPS villages reported the Figure 2.10 shows that 65.6 per cent of existence of DCS within their villages. the project villages have DCS within the
Figure 2.10: Coverage of Village-based Milk Procurement System
n 80 ti o 65.6 n 80 60ti o 65.6 i strib u D
60 e 40i strib u D
ta g 24.7 e n 40
20ta g 24.7 rc e 9.6 n e
P 20 rc e 9.6 0e P 0 Yes, society within village Yes, society in an adjoining or Not covered at all Yes, society within village Yes,n societyearby v inill aagne adjoining or Not covered at all nearby village
Source: NCAER field data.
Figure 2.11: Coverage of Village-based Milk Procurement System in Selected Project Villages
n 80 70.8 76.0 ti o
n 80 55.9 70.8 76.0
60 ti o
i strib u 55.9
D 60
e 40 i strib u 31.9 D
ta g e 40 n 31.9 17.4 19.5 20 12.1 ta g 11.9 rc e
n 19.5
e 17.4 4.5
P 20 12.1 11.9 rc e
0 e 4.5 P 0 RBP RBP_VBMPS VBMPS RBP RBP_VBMPS VBMPS Yes, society within village Yes, society in an adjoining or nearby village Not covered at all Yes, society within village Yes, society in an adjoining or nearby village Not covered at all Source: NCAER field data.
2.3.2. Availability of New Generation Institutions (MPIs) and New Generation Cooperatives (NGCs), Bulk Milk Cooperatives (NGCs), which would have Coolers (BMCs) and Gensets for to be registered subsequently as producer Running BMCs in the Selected Project companies under the Companies Act. It may and Control Villages be observed that 20 per cent of the project villages and 6.6 per cent of the control With the aim of setting up producer villages have NGCs (Figure 2.12). companies in areas where cooperatives are not formed or have low coverage and The creation of BMCs has fostered the entry procurement, NDDB envisaged mobilisation of new companies into the value chain. A and institution building through the better alternative to the present collection promotion of new Milk Producers’ system is the cooling of milk immediately
46 47 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
after milking in Bulk Milk Chilling Units Picture 2.4: Bulk Milk Coolers (BMCs) in a (BMCUs). The usage of such storage systems village in Andhra Pradesh has recently become popular because it not only helps in increasing the shelf life of milk but also provides a systematic and simple way of procuring milk. It also ensures increase in procurement of milk by covering untapped remote areas for milk collection. Figure 2.13 indicates that the project villages are better off than the control villages in terms of the availability of BMC and genset facilities for ensuring uninterrupted operations of BMCs.
Figure 2.12: New Generation Cooperatives (NGCs), Bulk Milk Coolers (BMCs) and gensets for running BMCs 30 27.5 23.0 20.1 20 10.8 9.9 centage 10 6.6 Pe r Distribution 0 NGC BMC Gencet Facility for BMC
Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
Picture 2.5: Genset for Operating BMCs in a Village in Madhya Pradesh
Figure 2.13: Availability of Adequate Genset Facilities for Running BMCs in the Project and Control Villages
70 59 60 ution 50
Distri b 40 34 32 35 33 30
20 50 10 6 Percentage 0 Very inadequate Just adequate Adequate Project Control Source: NCAER field data.
48 49
50 42 38 40 30 23 18 17 20 16 10 12 10 10 7 4 4 0 Percentage Distribution Lactometer Clot and Gerber Organoleptic Others None Boiling
Project Control
70 59 60 ution 50
Distri b 40 34 32 35 33 30 20 10 6 Percentage 0 Very inadequate Just adequate Adequate Project Control
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages
2.3.3. Milk Testing Facilities in the provide a viable solution to this problem. Project and Control Villages Dairy cooperatives not only serve as a channel for marketing of milk but also buy Milk is one of the most important items milk from producers at a price objectively of nutrition in the human diet as also an based on the quality of milk as determined important source of income for a large by various testing facilities available in the number of people, including poor farmers. societies. Figure 2.14 shows that the project Since these farmers produce milk in very villages are better equipped with milk testing small quantities, they face problems in selling facilities as compared to the control villages. it at a remunerative price. However, DCSes
Figure 2.14: Percentage Share of Milk Testing Facilities in the Project and Control Villages
50 42 38 40 30 23 18 17 20 16 10 12 10 10 7 4 4 0 Percentage Distribution Lactometer Clot and Gerber Organoleptic Others None Boiling
Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
Picture 2.6: Milk testing facilities in a village in Karnataka
48 49 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
2.3.4. Major Sources of Green and the control villages, fodder is mostly supplied Dry Fodder in the Villages from outside the village. Table 2.3 highlights the comparative status of fodder supply in The major sources of green and dry fodder the project and control villages. in the project villages are farmers whereas in
Table 2.3: Major Sources of Green and Dry Fodder Source Green Fodder Dry Fodder Project Villages Control Villages Project Villages Control Villages Other farmers 54 56 47 44 Dairy Cooperative Societies 20 9 20 12 New Generation Cooperatives 2 2 2 2 Supplied from outside the village 24 33 31 43
Source: NCAER field data.
Picture 2.7: Fodder supply unit in a village in Tamil Nadu
2.3.5. Coverage of the Ration in the local language by implementing the Balancing Programme following steps:
Fodder constitutes a major cost element in 1. Assessing the nutrient status of animals: the production of milk. The objective of the This is done on the basis of the prevalent Ration Balancing Programme (RBP) is to feeding practices as well as various enhance the yield from milch animals at an other factors such as the level of milk optimum cost by balancing the proportion production, percentage of milk fat, body of locally available green fodder and other weight, lactation stage, and pregnancy dietary feed ingredients so as to provide status. them both adequate proteins, minerals, 2. Assessing the chemical composition and vitamins as well as energy. NDDB has of locally available feed resources: developed a user-friendly software for ration The software used for this contains a balancing that can be used by dedicated database of the analyses of the chemical Local Resource Persons (LRPs). The LRPs composition of feeds and fodders are trained by the End Implementing Agency available in various parts of the country. (EIA) officials to effectively use the software It thus helps in assessing the chemical
50 51 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages
composition of different grains, oil cakes/ nutritional and available resource meals, brans, chunnies, agro-industrial by- constraints based on the chemical products, cultivated green fodders, grasses, composition of the available feed crop residues, tree leaves, and mineral resources and in accordance with the supplements. nutrient requirement of the animal/s 3. Assessing the nutrient requirements of concerned. The LRP advises the milk animals: The software used for this has a producer to prepare the least cost ration database of the nutrient requirements of using feed ingredients in the proportions the various types of animals based on the indicated by the software. In case there feeding standards commonly followed in is a change in feed resources, the LRP re- India. The total nutrient requirement of formulates the least cost ration through an animal is assessed for dry matter, crude the software. protein, total digestible nutrients (TDNs), It may be pointed out that 61.6 per cent calcium, and phosphorus. of the selected sample villages have been 4. Formulating the least cost balanced covered under the RBP (Figure 2.15). ration using locally available resources: Out of which, 79.3 per cent of villages the The software used for this computes programme is still operational (Figure 2.16). the least cost ration within the given
Figure 2.15: Coverage of the Ration Balancing Programme Figure 2.15: Coverage of the Ration Balancing Programme
n 80 o i 61.6 u t b
i 60 r t s
i 38.4
D 40 e g a t 20 ce n e r
P 0 Yes No
S Sourceourc:e NCAER: NCAE fieldR fi edata.ld d ata.
Picture 2.8: Advertisement for spreading awareness about RBP in a village in Uttar Pradesh
50 51
52 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Picture 2.9: Ear-tagging of animals under RBP
Figure 2.16: Villages Where RBP Is Still Operational (%) Figure 2.16: Villages Where RBP Is Still Operational (%) 100 79.3
n 80 o ge t a
ut i 60 n b i e r c t r 40 s e i 20.7 P D 20 0 Yes No
Source: NCAER field data.
2.3.6. Coverage of Artificial Insemination used to expand breeding coverage for a large Among the various dairy innovations, number of dairy cows regardless of their artificial insemination (AI) is considered as location. Recognising the importance of one of the most important advances with the livestock for the rural poor and their limited potential for far- reaching socio-economic financial access to livestock support, the impact in the lives of dairy farmers and Central and State governments have been the Indian dairy sector as a whole (Rathod extending these services by offering a huge and Chander, 2014).11 AI is one of the subsidy.12 Figure 2.18 illustrates that the most efficient techniques available to dairy coverage of AI in the total project area is farmers for improving the productivity and 53 per cent. It has been observed that prior profitability of their enterprises, as in it, to the commencement of NDP-I (that is, fewer bulls of superior quality are efficiently 2012–13 in the case of the control villages),
11 Rathod, P. and M. Chander (2014). “Identification of Socioeconomically Important Dairy Innovations in India: A Perspective of Scientists”, in Esmail Karamidehkordi (ed.), Proceedings of the First International Conference of the Asia and Pacific Islands Rural Advisory Services (APIRAS) and the Fifth Congress of Extension and Education in Agriculture and Natural Resources Management: Facilitating Information and Innovations for Empowering Family Farmers, Iran: University of Zanjan, p. 101.
52 53
53 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages
AI services were available in 58.7 per cent went up correspondingly to 66.7 per cent in of the project villages and 26.3 per cent of the project villages and 33.3 per cent in the the controlFig uvillages,re 2.1 7village: Exte andnt o thesef Co vfigureserage of AIcontrol in the villages Projec postt an thed C implementationontrol Villages of Figure 2.17: Extent of Coverage of AI inNDP-I the P (Figureroject 2.18).and C ontrol Villages Figure 2.17: Extent of Coverage of AI in the Project and Control Villages n 60 o i t
n 58 60 u o 58 i b
t 58 i u r 5856 t b s i i r 56 t 54 53 D s 52 i e 54 53 g
D 52 51
52 a e t
g 52 51
n 50 a e t c
n 50
r 48 e e c P r 4846 e
P 46 RBP RBP_VBMPS VBMPS Total RBP RBP_VBMPS VBMPS Total
Source Sour:c NCAERe: NCA fieldER fidata.eld data. Source: NCAER field data. Figure 2Figure.18: 2.18:Avai lAvailabilityability of ofA IAI S Serviceservices in i nthe th Selectede Sele cProjectted P randoje Controlct and Villages Control Villages Figure 2.18: Availability of AI Services in the Selected Project and Control Villages 70 64.3 66.7
n 58.7 66.7
7o 060 64.3 t i
n 58.7 u o 60 b t i i 50 u t r b s
i 50 i 40 33.3 t r D s i 40 26.3 27.1 33.3
ge 30 D
t a 26.3 27.1 ge 30n 20 e t a c r n 20 e e 10 c P r
e 10
P 0 0 BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently Project Control Project Control Source : NCAER Sou rfieldce: Ndata.CA ER field data. Source: NCAER field data. It may be observed from Figure 2.19 that per cent of the project villages, as per the in the present calving, breeding is mostly responses received at the household level. carried out mostly through AI in 58.3 Figure 2.19: Type of Breeding Resulting in Present Calving Figure 2.19: Type of Breeding Resulting in Present Calving
100 7.5 9.0 7.7 n o i 80 u t b i
r 48.9 t 60 58.3 56.9 s i D
e 40 g a t 20 34.2 42.1 35.3 ce n
e r 0 P Project Control Total
Natural AI Not aware Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. 54 54 12 Yadav, Pushpa, B.S. Chandel and Smita Arohi (2014). “Infrastructure Disparities in Rural India: With Special Reference to Livestock Services and Veterinary Infrastructure”, International Journal of Livestock Production, 6(8): 147–154, August.
52 53
Figure 2.20: Application of AI (%) on Various Types of Dairy Animals
Source: NCAER field data.
55 Figure 2.19: Type of Breeding Resulting in Present Calving
100 7.5 9.0 7.7 n o i 80 u t b i
r 48.9 t 60 58.3 56.9 s i D
e 40 g a t 20 34.2 42.1 35.3 ce n
e r 0 P Project Control Total
Natural AI Not aware
Analysing Socio-EconomicSource: NC ImpactAER offi theeld NDP-I: data. The National Dairy Plan of India
Figure 2.20 shows that AI constituted a major by that for buffaloes and indigenous cows, part of the application for cross-bred cows in while in the control villages, AI was mostly the project villages, at 45 per cent, followed done on buffaloes.
Figure 2.20: Application of AI (%) on Various Types of Dairy Animals Figure 2.20: Application of AI (%) on Various Types of Dairy Animals
Source So:u NCAERrce: N CfieldAE Rdata. fie ld data.
2.3.7. AI Service Providers in the Project and Control Villages
It may be observed from Table 2.4 that five and mobile AI technicians (18.2 per cent). major service providers have been providing In the control villages, on the other hand, artificial insemination service to the dairy the main AI service providers were private farmers in the study area. Nearly 22 per cent veterinary doctors (38.2 per cent) followed of the project villages had availed of the by government veterinary doctors (23.5 per service from milk cooperative workers and cent) and milk cooperative workers (19.1 per government veterinary doctors followed by cent), respectively. private veterinary doctors (21.2 per cent) Table 2.4: Extent of AI Service Providers in the Project and the Control Villages AI Service Providers Project Control BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently Milk cooperative workers 23.0 22.6 21.8 16.7 16.4 19.1 Mobile AI technicians 17.3 17.8 18.2 6.7 7.3 4.4 Government Veterinary Doctor 23.1 22.8 21.7 26.7 25.5 23.5 55 Livestock Inspector 8.5 9.0 9.3 5.0 7.3 7.4 Private Vet Doctors 20.2 20.4 21.2 36.7 40.0 38.2 Other Private AI Technicians 8.0 7.4 7.7 8.3 3.6 7.4
Source: NCAER field data.
2.3.8. Availability of AI Technicians/ Gopalaks for Dairy Animals in the Project and Control Villages
There was better availability of AI technicians animals in the project villages than in the and bull/NS service providers for dairy control villages (Tables 2.5 and 2.6).
54 55 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages
Table 2.5: Availability of AI Technicians/Gopalaks for Dairy Animals in the Project and Control Villages Items Project Control BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently Yes, located within the village 32.4 35.1 36.9 15.3 15.6 15.2 Yes, technician visiting the Village 36.7 40.6 40.6 30.1 32.8 34.3 Neither 30.9 24.3 22.5 54.6 51.7 50.5
Source: NCAER field data.
Table 2.6: Availability of Bull/NS Service Providers for Dairy Animals in the Project and Control Villages Items Project Control BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently Yes, located within the village 40.0 37.0 37.7 33.5 30.1 28.5 Yes, technician visiting the village 19.6 21.3 21.0 14.8 21.4 17.5 Neither 40.5 41.7 41.3 51.7 48.6 54.0
Source: NCAER field data.
2.3.9. Availability of Para Vets in the Project and Control Villages
Para-veterinarians are skilled professionals a few weeks duration to few years. It was who have undertaken training in artificial observed that before the commencement of insemination, first aid, administration NDP-I, para vets were available within the of medicines and vaccines, assisting village in only 27.8 per cent of the project veterinarians in surgical, medical and villages and 16.2 per cent of the control gynaecological treatments, among other villages. However, after implementation of things, for a maximum of ten months. Para the project, there was a marked improvement vets provide ‘minor veterinary services’ under in this situation in the project villages, with the existing law. This broad group of workers 31.4 per cent of the latter reporting the comprises any type of animal health worker availability of para vets, but no change was without a university veterinary degree, who observed in the control villages (Table 2.7). may have received training varying from
Table 2.7: Availability of Para Vets in the Project and Control Villages Items Project Control BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently Yes, located within the village 27.8 29.3 31.4 16.2 17.6 16.2 Yes, technician visiting the Village 25.3 27.7 29.2 26.6 25.3 24.2 Neither 46.9 43.0 39.4 57.2 57.1 59.6
Source: NCAER field data.
2.3.10. Health Status of Dairy Animals in the Project and Control Villages like Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD), Peste The major impediment to the growth of des Petits Ruminants (PPR), Brucellosis, livestock sector is the prevalence of diseases Anthrax, Haemorrhagic Septicaemia (HS),
54 55 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Black Quarter (BQ), Classical Swine Fever Figure 2.21 illustrates that during the pre- (CSF), Ranikhet Disease (RD), and Avian project period, serious diseases were common Influenza (AI), among others, which result in 51 per cent of the project villages and 53 in both morbidity and mortality, and per cent of the control villages. However, as a consequent production losses, thereby result of implementation of various animal adversely affecting animal productivity. The disease control related programmes and occurrence of diseases deters domestic and interventions, this figure fell to 46 per cent foreign investment in the livestock sector, as in the project villages and 42.1 per cent in these diseases not only wreak havoc on the the control villages. Similarly, the incidence existing stock but also limit international of serious illnesses among the animals was trade. found to be negligible in 54 per cent of the project villages and 58 per cent of the control villages.
Figure 2Figure.21: H2.21:ea l tHealthh Sta tStatusus of of Dai Dairyry AAnimalsnimal ins ithen t Projecthe Pro andjec Controlt and C Villagesontrol Villages 70 n 58.0
o 54.0 i 60 51.0 53.0 53.0 53.0 t 49.0 47.0 46.0 47.0 47.0 u 50 42.1 b i r
t 40 s i 30 D
e 20 g a t 10 n e
c 0 r
e BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently P Project Control
Serious diseases are common Incidence ofserious illness is negligible Source So:u NCAERrce: N CfieldAE Rdata. fie ld data.
2.3.11. Other NDP Components in the Project and Control Villages
Among the various components of NDP-I, periods of the project implementation farmers were asked about some of the (Figure 2.22). components which were in operation, viz. (i) Similarly, as regards pedigree selection fodder development, (ii) pedigree selection, activities, about 37 per cent, 42 per cent, and (iii) progeny testing in both the project and 45 per cent of the project villages, and control villages. It was found that a respectively, reported their implementation significant level of fodder development before the commencement of the project, activities were being implemented in during the middle of the project, and at the project villages as compared to the present. In the control villages, on the other control villages. About 45 per cent, 54 hand, the progress of pedigree selection was per cent, and 55 per cent, of the project very slow, with the proportion of villages villages, respectively, reported that fodder reporting this activity going up from 17 development activities were functional before per cent before the project to 19.6 per cent the project (BETP), during the middle of the during the middle of the project to less than project (MIDP), and at present. In contrast, 21 per cent at present. The functionality of only about 21 per cent of the farmers, on an “progeny testing” activities was significant in average, reported undertaking this activity the project villages, with 46 per cent, 52 per in the control villages, during all the three cent, and 54 per cent of them, respectively,
56 57
58 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages
reporting these activities before the project, of the control villages reporting achievement during the middle of the project, and at of these activities on completion of the present, as compared to around 27 per cent project. Figure 2.22: NDP Component in the Project Villages vis-à-vis the Control Villages Figure Figure2.22: 2.22:NDP NDP Com Componentponent i inn tthehe Project Proje Villagesct Villa vis-à-visges vis the-à- vControlis the VillagesControl Villages
FodFdoedr dDeerv Deleovpmeloepmnt ent Pedigree Selection Pedigree Selection 55.1 60 60 53.575.1 50 44.7 n 53.7 50n 42.445 .7 n n o o 42.5 i i o o t t i 50 44.9 i t 50 44.9 t 36.6 u u 4036.6 u u 40 b b i i b b r r i 40 i t t r 40 r s s t t 30 i i s s 30 i i D 30 D
20.4 D 30 D 19.6
e 20.5 20.7 21.4 e 17.109.6 20.4 e e g 20.5 20.7 21.4 g 20 17.0 g g a 20 20a t a 20 a t n n t n c n t
r 10 c 10 c e
r 10 e r 10 c e e r e P e P P
0 P 0 0 0 P P P P P P P P tly tly P P tly tly P P P P P P T T T T D D D D tly tly tly tly n n n n T T T T I I I I E E D D E E D D e e e e n n n n I I I I E E E E B B B B s s s s M M M M e e e e B B B B e e e e s s s s M M M M r r r r e e e e r r r r P P P P P P P P Project Control Project Control ProjPecrot ject ConCtroonl trol
Progeny Testing
n Progeny Testing
n o
i 54.0 o 52.4
t 60 i 52.4 54.0 t 60 45.7 u 45.7 u 50 b
5i 0 b r i 40 t r 40 26.9 s t 25.026.9 i 30 s 19.625.0 i 30 19.6 D 20 D
2e 0 e g 10 g a 10 t a 0 t n 0 P P P P n tly tly P P P P T T c e D D tly tly n n r T T I I c e E E D D e e n n r I I e E E B B s s M M e e e P B B e e s s M M P r r e e r r P P P P ProjPecrot ject ConCtroonl trol
Source: NCAER field data. It has also been observed that the available than 15 per cent were not aware of this grazing land has been declining over the years activity. In the control villages, only about in both the project and control villages. In the 24 per cent of the respondents responded project villages, the proportion of common positively about re-vegetation activity grazing land declined from 63 per cent before whereas about 26 per cent of them were not the commencement of the project to 60 per aware of it (Figure 2.24). The rate of success cent on completion of the project, while the of re-vegetation was seen to be very high in corresponding decline in the control villages the project villages with about 64 per cent of was from 60 per cent before the project to 55 the respondents in these villages reporting per cent on completion of the project (Figure them to be successful on completion of the 2.23). Efforts are thus being made to facilitate project as compared to 62 per cent before re-vegetation of grazing land, which is the project. The reported rate of success of imperative for the growth of cattle. However, re-vegetation was also encouraging in the only about 34 per cent of the respondents control villages, wherein about 40 per cent of in the project villages responded positively the respondents reported it to be successful about re-vegetation activity whereas more on completion of the project (Figure 2.26).
56 57
59 59 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
2.4. Other Factors Influencing the Dairy Sector
2.4.1. Availability of Common Grazing Land Area in the Project and Control Villages
The common land in the village is used major reason for this decline in common by the villagers for the purpose of grazing grazing land has been the allotment of for animals. A decline in the availability of common grazing lands by the government common grazing land was widely reported for various other activities. in both the project and control villages. The Figure 2.23: Percentage Share of Common Grazing Figure 2.23: PercentageLan Shared in ofth Commone Proje cGrazingt and C Landont rino lthe V iProjectllages and Control Villages Figure 2.23: Percentage Share of Common Grazing 64 63 Land in the Project and Control Villages n
o 61
i 62 60 u t 64 63 60 b n i 60 o r 61 i t 62 58 s 60 u t i 58 60 b i D 60 r t e 58 s g 56i 58 55 a D t e
54g 56 55 a ce n t
e r 52 54 ce n P
e r 52
50P 50 BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently Project Villages Control Villages Project Villages Control Villages
S Source o u r Sc:o eNCAERu: rNceC: AN ECfieldRAE fR iedata. flide ld a dtaat.a .
FigFuirgeu r2eFigure. 2.42:4 R: 2.24:Ree-v-ve Re-vegetationeggeettaationn iinn t inhth ethee S eS Selectedleelcetecdte P dProjectr oPjreoctj eandacntd a ControlCnodn tCro Villagesln Vtrilloalg Vesill ages RRee-veggeettaatitoionn E ffEoffrot rfot rf oGrr aGzrinagz iLnagn dLand
n 60 50.6 50.3 50.0 51.6 53.1 o n 60 49.5 53.1 i 50.6 50.3 50.0 51.6
o 49.5
i 50 u t
50b u t i 34.4 r 32.8 33.3 b 40 t i
s 34.4
r 33.3 40i 32.8 25.8 25.0 26.3 t 30 24.2 23.4 D s 20.6 i 25.8 25.0 26.3 30e 16.5 17.2 15.3 24.2 23.4 D g 20 20.6 a
e 17.2 t 16.5 15.3 g 20 10
a t ce n
10e r 0
P ce n BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently
e r 0
P BETP MPrIoDjePct Presently BETP ControMl IDP Presently
Project Yes No Not aware Control Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAERFig ufieldre 2data..2 5: Achievement of Re-vegetation Effort in the Selected Project Source: NCAER field data. Yes No Not aware Source: NCAER field data. and Control Villages Figure 2.25: Achievement of Re-vegetation Effort in the Selected Project and Control Villages Sour ce: NCAER field data. Re-vegetat ion successful
70 61.8 61.6 64.3 n
o i 60 u t
b 50 41.3 42.5 i 41.0 38.6 40.0
r 37.5 t
s 40 i D 30 22.5 21.6 21 .5 20.5 21.3 e 15.6 16.8 17.5 g 14.1
a 20
t 10 ce n 0 e r 60 P BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently Project Control
Yes N6o0 Not aware Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
58 59
Figure 2.26: Milch Animals Shifted from Villages because of Lack of Water in Summer 70 Project Control 61.4 n o
i 60
u t 51.4 b i
r 50 t s i D
e 40 34.2 g a t 30 25.2 ce n e r
P 20 14.4 13.4 10 0 Only some households Commonly seen Not taken
Source: NCAER field data.
61 Figure 2.25: Achievement of Re-vegetation Effort in the Selected Project and Control Villages
Re-vegetation successful
70 61.8 61.6 64.3 n
o i 60 u t
b 50 41.3 42.5 i 41.0 38.6 40.0
r 37.5 t
s 40 i
D 30 22.5 21.6 21.5 20.5 21.3 e 15.6 16.8 17.5 g 14.1
a 20
t 10 ce n 0 e r P BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently Project Control Yes No Not aware
Source: NCAER field data.
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages
2.4.2. Shifting of Milch Animals from cows and buffaloes to other places. However, the Village due to Lack of Water 51 per cent of the households in the project during Summer villages and 61 per cent of the households in the control villages reported that they did The availability of water in all seasons is not face such a problem, whereas about 14 an essential pre-requisite for ensuring the per cent and 13 per cent of the respondents, optimal milk productivity of cattle. Due to respectively, in the project and control the lack of availability of adequate water villages reported that the phenomenon of during summer, 34 per cent and 25 per cent shifting of cattle was a common occurrence of the households from the project and (Figure 2.26). control villages, respectively, shifted their
Figure 2Figure.26: M 2.26:ilch Milch Anim Animalsals Sh Shiftedifted f rfromom VVillagesillag ebecauses beca uof sLacke of ofL aWaterck o fin W Summerater in Summer 70 Project Control 61.4 n o
i 60
u t 51.4 b i
r 50 t s i D
e 40 34.2 g a t 30 25.2 ce n e r
P 20 14.4 13.4 10 0 Only some households Commonly seen Not taken
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
2.4.3. Other Government
Programmes 15 per cent of the respondents in the project Apart from NDP-I, the Government has villages and 4 per cent in the control villages been implementing various other schemes reported the prevalence of such programmes for development of the dairy sector. About (Figure 2.27). 61 FigureFig u2.27:re 2Other.27: OGovernmentther Gov eProgrammesrnment P Relatedrogram tom thee sDairy Rela Sectorted t oin t he Dairy SectoOperationr in Op iner theati oProjectn in t andhe PControlrojec tVillages and Control Villages
20 n o
i 15.3
u t 15 b i r t s i
D 10 e g a t 5 3.9 ce n e r P 0 Project Control
S o uSourcerce: :N NCAERCAER fieldfield data.dat a.
2.4.4. Subsidies for Dairy Activities
The Government has been providing forms through the following schemes: (i) subsidies for dairy activities in various low interest loans for purchase of milch
58 59
62 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
animals, (ii) subsidies for purchase of milch completion of the project, respectively. This animals, (iii) subsidised fodder seeds, and implies that the availability of subsidies for (iv) subsidised machinery for dairying. In the the promotion of dairy activities has been project villages, 31 per cent, 36 per cent, and increasing over the years. However, it may 38 per cent of the respondents reported the also be noted that more than two-thirds availability of subsidies before the project, of the households were not aware of the during the middle of the project, and on prevalence of such subsidies (Table 2.8).
Table 2.8: Subsidies Available from the Government for Dairying Activities Response Project Villages Control Villages BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently Yes 30.5 36.1 37.5 14.6 17.3 18.0 No 55.6 52.5 50.1 63.2 61.1 59.0 Not aware 13.9 11.5 12.4 22.2 21.6 23.0
Source: NCAER field data.
About 30 per cent of households in the per cent of households in the project and project villages and 20 per cent in the control the control villages, respectively, were aware villages reported the availability of “low of the availability of “subsidised fodder interest loans for the purchase of milch seeds”; whereas the corresponding figures animals”. Similarly, 32 per cent and 20 per for households reporting the availability of cent of the households in the project and “subsidised machinery for dairying” were 32 control villages, respectively, reported the per cent and 16 per cent, in the project and availability of “subsidies for purchase of control villages, respectively (Figure 2.28). milch animals”. About 34 per cent and 18
Figure 2.Figure28: T y2.28:pes Types of S uofb Subsidiessidies A Availablevailable in i nthe th Selectede Sele cProjectted P randoje Controlct and Villages Control Villages
Figu80re 2.28: Types of Subsidies Available in th8e0 Selected Project and Control Villages 57.960.6 60.0 e 57.3 e g 60 g a 60 a t 80 80 30.1 57.960.6 t 60.0 e 40 57.3 e 31.5 g 19.7 19.7 40
ce n 60 g a 11.9 ce n 60 a t 19.5 20.5 t e r 20 30.1 e r 11.2 P 40 20 31.5 19.7 19.7 P 40 ce n 0 11.9 ce n 19.5 20.5
e r 20
e r 0 11.2 P Yes No Not aware 20 0 P Yes No Not aware Low IntereYsest loan for purNchoase of miNlcoht aanwiamreal 0 Project SubsidiesY fesor purchase of Nmoilch animaNls oPtr aowjectare Low Interest loan for purchase of milch animal PLorowject Interest loan for purchase of milch animal Subsidies for purchase of milch animals PCroonjtectrol Control Low Interest loan for purchase of milch animal Subsidies for purchase of milch animals Control Control 80 62.6 80 63.5 e e 54.3 55.8 g g
a a 60 60 t t 80 34.5 62.6 80 32.0 63.5 e e 54.3 40 55.8 40 g g
ce n 20.2 ce n 19.2 18.2 a a 60 60 16.3 t 12.2 t 11.2 e r e r 20 34.5 20 32.0 P P 40 40
ce n 20.2 ce n 18.2 19.2 0 11.2 0 16.3 12.2
e r e r 20 20 P P Yes No Not aware Yes No Not aware 0 0 Yes No Not aware SubsidYiessed machinery fNoro dairying PNroojtect aware Subsidised fodder seeds Project Subsidised machinery for dairying Control Subsidiseded fodddder seeededs PCroonjtectrol Subsidised machinery for dairying Project Source: NCASuEbRsi fdiiesledd dfoaddta.e r seeds Control Subsidised machinery for dairying Control SoSourceurce: :NCAER NCAE Rfield fie ldata.d d ata.
60 61
Figure 2.29: Response Received on Recognition or Prize for Dairy Figure 2.2A9n: iRmeaslpso ins teh Re ePcreiojveecdt anond R tehceo Cgnointtiroonl oVri llParigzese for Dairy 25 Animals in the Project and the Control Villages
n 25 20.2 o i
t 20 n
u 20.2 o b i i
t 20 r t u
s 15 b i i r D t
s e 15 i g 8.5 D a 10
t e n g 8.5
a 10 c e t r
n 5 e P c e r 5 e
P 0 Project Control 0 Project Control Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
63 63 Figure 2.28: Types of Subsidies Available in the Selected Project and Control Villages
80 80 57.960.6 60.0 e 57.3 e g 60 g a 60 a t 40 30.1 t 19.7 19.7 40 31.5 ce n 11.9 ce n 19.5 20.5
e r 20
e r 11.2 P 20 0 P Yes No Not aware 0 Yes No Not aware Low Interest loan for purchase of milch animal Project Subsidies for purchase of milch animals Project Low Interest loan for purchase of milch animal Subsidies for purchase of milch animals Control Control
80 62.6 80 63.5 e e 54.3 55.8 g g a a 60 60 t t 34.5 32.0 40 40
ce n 20.2 ce n 18.2 19.2 11.2 16.3 12.2 e r e r 20 20 P P 0 0 Yes No Not aware Yes No Not aware
Subsidised fodder seeds Project Subsidised machinery for dairying Project Subsidised fodder seeds Control Subsidised machinery for dairying Control
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Source: NCAER field data. Characteristcs of the Project and Control Villages
The Government has been encouraging the dairy farmers in the project villages and dairy farmers to continue their hard work 9 per cent in the control villages received for producing the “highest milk yield”, “for recognition or prizes for their efforts in this producing better quality of milk” and “for context, as indicated in Figure 2.29. other achievements”. About 20 per cent of
Figure 2Figure.29: R2.29:esp Responseonse Re Receivedceived onon Recognition Recognit ioro nPrize or Pforri Dairyze fo r Dairy AnimAnimalsals in t hine the Pr Projectoject anandd the th eControl Cont rVillagesol Villages 25
n 20.2 o i
t 20 u b i r t
s 15 i D
e
g 8.5
a 10 t n c e r 5 e P 0 Project Control
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
63
60 61 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
62 63 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Chapter 3 Production Sector in the Project Areas
3.1. Brief Description of Project Area Coverage
3.1.1. Spread of the Sample to November 2019 due to disruption of the survey process caused by heavy and intense The Socio-Economic Survey (SES) of NDP-I rainfall in a number of States, including was carried out by NCAER in 14 major States Bihar, Kerala, Karnataka, West Bengal, of India, namely Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya and Uttar Pradesh. The total number of Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Punjab, sample households surveyed was 17,915, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, and which were distributed among the 14 States West Bengal during the period September– as shown in Figure 3.1. October 2019. It was further extended up Figure 3.1: Distribution (%) of total sample households among States (in descending order)
18.3
n 20 e o g i 12.1 t 15 11.1 t a
u 8.9
n 7.8 7.5 b 10 e i 5.6 5.0 4.9 4.8 4.4 4.2 c r 3.8 t r 5 1.8 s e i P
D 0 l t r a a a a a a b u h h h n a a l a a y s s s r k r h a n d t r r a g j a h e e e s a h a h a r i i h n t a n t h j a d d d y d e d t s d e a B s r u a a a u a N a n K l U r r r n B O P r i j a G r A M P P P t a H a a s m R K a ah a T W e M Source: NCAER field data.
As already noted, there are three broad and RBP, NCAER took all the talukas listed components constituting NDP-I, viz., (i) RBP, for this component and the balance talukas (ii) VBMPS, and (iii) both RBP and VBMPS. were distributed among the first of the two It was proposed to sample 420 talukas from components. NCAER worked out the taluka- the 14 States mentioned above. The scheme, wise percentage distribution of the villages in essence, does away with the state and covered under a particular intervention by district boundaries. Initially, a proposal to arranging them in descending order and undertake sampling of one-third of the 420 selecting villages through Systematic Random talukas, or 140 talukas in all, for each of the Sampling (SRS). The State- and Scheme-wise three components was initiated but since cross distribution along with the distribution getting 140 talukas was difficult in case of of households from the control villages in the the third component, that is, both VBMPS final sample of the SES by NCAER are shown in Table 3.1.
62 63 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Table 3.1: State-wise cross-distribution of sample households from the Control Villages and Scheme- wises share from the Project Villages (%) States Control Villages Project Villages RBP VBMPS RBP+VBMPS Andhra Pradesh 8.8 48.8 21.4 21.0 Bihar 19.5 42.7 26.6 11.2 Gujarat 14.0 37.3 21.4 27.3 Haryana 22.0 30.7 29.9 17.4 Karnataka 15.6 42.2 29.9 12.3 Kerala 19.7 58.9 12.7 8.6 Madhya Pradesh 16.5 64.1 15.8 3.6 Maharashtra 16.3 36.5 30.2 17.0 Odisha 15.3 21.0 57.3 6.4 Punjab 29.8 37.2 12.2 20.9 Rajasthan 20.2 25.6 25.5 28.6 Tamil Nadu 18.9 55.1 13.9 12.1 Uttar Pradesh 29.7 26.5 43.7 0.0 West Bengal 18.1 30.2 37.5 14.2 Total 16.9 39.7 26.9 16.5
Source: NCAER field data. Note: There were no RBP+VBMPS villages in Uttar Pradesh as per the sample identified.
Among the States surveyed, Madhya Pradesh 39.7 per cent were from RBP villages, 26.7 per accounted for the largest share of RBP, at cent from VBMPS villages, and 16.5 per cent 64.1 per cent, while Odisha had the highest from RBP+VBMPS villages. It may be noted share of VBMPS, at 57.3 per cent. Rajasthan that selection of the control villages was had the largest share of villages with a co- based on the Similarity Index for capturing existence of both components, RBP+VBMPS, the characteristics of all the control villages, at 28.6 per cent, followed by Gujarat, at 27.3 which have been described in detail in the per cent. Overall, 16.9 per cent of the sample section on Methodology. households belonged to the control villages,
3.2. Household Characteristics
3.2.1. Demography
The demographic characteristics of both the The gender distribution among the project project and control villages are quite varied. and control villages has been depicted in Fig- ure 3.2.
64 65 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
n 100 e o g t i t a
u 80 n
b 85.8 e i 80.4 c t r r
s 60 e
i Figure 3.2: Distribution of gender of respondents among the Project and Control Villages (%) P D
4n 100 0 e o g t i t a
2u 080 n
b 85.8 e i 80.4 19.6 14.2 c t r r
s 060 e i P D Male Project Control Female 40
20 19.6 14.2 0 Male Project Control Female
Source: NCAER field data.
The gender distribution shows male in Kerala, at 63.9 per cent, in the project domination among the respondents in both villages. In general, the representation of the project as well as control villages, but women was higher side in all the southern female representation was higher in the States and West Bengal, whereas it was much project villages, at 19.6 per cent, as compared lower in the States of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, to the control ones, at 14.2 per cent. Haryana, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh. Another interesting observation is that except The distribution of women respondents in Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh, the share of the project and control villages across States women respondents was lower for the control shows the highest representation of women villages in all the other States (Figure 3.3).
Figure 3.3: Distribution of women respondents in the Project and Control Villages across States (%)
n 70 63.9 61.9 o 60.4 i t 60 u
b 45.2 i 50 r 33.6 t 36.1 35.1 s 40 i 29.5 26.8 D
30 21.6
n 19.6 e 70 63.9 61.9 18.3 o g 60.4 13.4 14.2 2i 0 12.2 10.3
a 10.1 t 9.3 8.2 8.1 t 60 5.3 5.4 6.9 6.1 u 3.4 4.33.4 4.3 n 10 1.4 1.0 b 45.2 i e 50 r c 0 33.6 t 36.1 r l 35l .1 t r a a a a a s u h n h 40 h e l a a a i r a s s
k 29.5 h n a t d t a g 26.8 ja b P h e s s a a a o h D r i h t n
t ja r d e y d e 30 21.6 d s T d i e n 19.6 a B r e u
18.3 a a a N a K e l n r a
g 14.2 O P
13.4 r i B
12.2 G u 20 r P
t 10.3
a 10.1 a
9.3 aja s H P r P r
a 8.2 8.1
t 6.9 m 6.1
5.3 5.4 r a a 4.3 4.3 R
e s 3.4 3.4 K a n r 10 1.4 a
y 1.0 t T e W Ma h c 0 d h U t r l l t Project Control r a a a a a u h n h h e l a a a r a s s k h n a A n t d t a g ja b Ma d h P h e s s a a a o h r i h t n t ja r d e y d e d s T d i e n a B r u a a a N a K e l n r a O P r i B G u r P t a aja s H P r P r
Source: NCAER field data. a m r a a R e s K a r a y t T W Ma h d h
U t The age distribution showed little variationPr oject withCont r67.5ol per cent of the households in the A n Ma d h for the project and control villages for those project villages having members in this age
in the active younger age groups of up to 35 group in comparison to a corresponding years, but a noticeable variation was observed figure of 64.6 per cent for households in the for the middle-aged group of 36 to 60 years, control villages (Figure 3.4).
64 65 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
80 67.5 64.6
n e
Figure 3.4:o Distribution of age group of the respondents among the Project and Control Villages (%) g
i 60 t t a u n b e i 8400 67.5 c r 64.6
t r
n 19.1 19.9 e s e i o g
i 6200 10.1
P 8.8 t D 4.6 5.5 t a u n b e i 400 c r t r <25 192.51 to1 935.9 36 to 60 >60 s e i 20 10.1
P 8.8
D 4.6 5.5 Project Control 0 <25 25 to 35 36 to 60 >60
Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
The size of the household is an important had a family size of less than four members, indicator of demographic merit. It may be with the percentages of larger households noted that the household size in terms of declining progressively with an increase in the number of family members was lower the number of family members, while the in the project villages as compared to that reverse trend was observed for the control in the control villages. More than 44 per villages (Figure 3.5). cent of the households in the project villages
Figure 3.5: Distribution of household sizes among the Project and Control Villages (%) 50 44.2 41.2 38.5 n 36.3 o 40 i t u b i 5300 44.2 r
t 41.2 s
i 38.5 n 36.3 18.8 o
D 40 i 20 15.0 t e u g b a i t 30 r 10 n t 3.7 e s 2.2 i c 18.8 r D
e 200 15.0 e P g
a <4 4 to 6 7 to 10 >10 t 10 Project Control n 3.7 e 2.2 c r
e 0
Source: NCAERP field data. <4 4 to 6 7 to 10 >10 Project Control The educational status of the respondents cent. The number of respondents who had showed a variation only in the secondary acquired secondary education was noticeably group and among households characterised higher among households in the project by illiteracy. The prevalence of illiteracy was villages, at 19.2 per cent, as compared to higher in the control villages, at 14.2 per those in the control villages, at 15.6 per cent cent than in the project villages, at 12.5 per (Figure 3.6).
Figure 3.6: Distribution of educational status among respondents in the Project and Control Villages (%)
40
29.4 29.9 e on g 30 t i t a
u 18.6 18.7 19.2 n
b 14.2 e i 20 15.6
c 12.5 10.5
t r 10.4 r
s 7.7 7.5 e i 10 P 2.2 3.7 D 0 Illiterate Primary Middle Secondary Sr_Sec Sr Sec & Others Above Project Control Source: NCAER field data.
66 67 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
It may be interesting to compare the villages than the control villages. However, educational achievements of farmers with as regards the other levels of education, the those of the landless labourers. The level of figures were similar for both the project and educational attained at the middle level was control villages (Table 3.2). higher for all the categories in the project
Table 3.2: Distribution of educational achievements of households by categories of farmers and landless labourers Villages Categories Illiterate Literate+ Middle+ Senior+ Project Landless 14.5 35.3 39.1 10.3 Small and Marginal 15.0 29.1 41.5 12.5 Medium+ 8.9 28.9 41.6 18.2 Large 6.3 34.1 38.3 17.5 Total 14.1 30.8 40.8 12.6 Control Landless 18.9 37.0 32.8 10.4 Small and Marginal 14.7 33.9 37.2 13.4 Medium+ 13.1 28.7 39.4 17.9 Large 8.9 44.4 29.0 17.7 Total 15.4 34.3 36.2 13.3 Total Landless 15.2 35.6 38.1 10.3 Small and Marginal 15.0 29.9 40.7 12.7 Medium+ 9.7 28.9 41.1 18.1 Large 6.9 36.6 36.1 17.6 Total 14.3 31.4 40.0 12.7
Source: NCAER field data. Note: Literate+ includes those who are illiterate but are able to read and write plus those who are educated up to the primary level, Middle+ includes those who are educated up to Class VIII to secondary level, Senior+ includes those who have studied up to the senior secondary level plus all others who have undertaken professional and vocational courses. The family type in the household structure villages, at 74.8 per cent than in their control is another important consideration for counterparts, at 70 per cent. The proportion making demographic distinctions. It may be of joint families, on the other hand, was noted that the number of nuclear families, observed to be higher in the control villages, believed to be a reflection of the dynamic at 30 per cent than in the project ones, at 25.2 income category, was higher in the project per cent. (Figure 3.7).
Figure 3.7: Distribution of the family structure among households in the Project and Control Villages
74.8 80 70.0 n
o 70 t i u
b 60 i t r
s 50 i D 40 30.0 ge 30 25.2 t a n
e 20 c r
e 10 P 0 Nuclear Joint
Project Control Source: NCAER field data.
66 67 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
3.3. The Milk Producers
3.3.1. Landholdings was slightly higher in the project villages as compared to their control counterparts. This The landholding patterns among households trend was reversed for groups with medium+ in the project and control villages are and larger landholdings, whose share was illustratedFigure 3 in.8 :Figure Distr i3.8.bu tTheion proportionof househo ofld sizes comparativelyamong the P rhigheroject anin dthe C ocontrolntrol V villages.illages the landless and small andre marginallative to farmerssizes of their landholdings (%)
Figure 3.8: DiFigure70strib 3.8:uti oDistribution6n1 .o8f hous ofeh householdold size ssizes am amongong t hthee PProjectrojec 6andt1 .an6 Controld Con t rol Villages
n 60.6 o
t i 60 reVillageslative relativeto size tos osizesf th ofei theirr lan landholdingsdholdings (%) (%) u b
i 50
70t r 61.8 61.6 n
s 60.6
i 40 o D t i 60 25.9 24.5 25.7
u 30 ge b
i 50 t a 20 12.4 t r
n 10.5 10.9 s e i 40 c 10 2.5 D r 25.9 1.7 25.7 1.8 30e 24.5 P
ge 0
t a 20 Project Cont1r2o.l4 Total
n 10.5 10.9 e
c 10 2.5 r Landless 1.7 Small & Marginal Medium+ Large 1.8 e P 0 Project Control Total
Landless Small & Marginal Medium+ Large Source: NCAER field data.
It is observed that around 88 per cent of the dependence of poor farmers on livestock households from the NDP-I villages were for subsistence. The incidence of rearing of those of landless labourers and small and milch animals by poor farmers and landless marginal farmers. Among these categories, labourers was comparatively lower in the around 76 per cent of the landless labourers control villages (Figure 3.9). This effectively and 94 per cent of the small and marginal reflects better targeting of the programmes farmers were found to be rearing milch with regard to the selection of the villages. animals, which unequivocally reflects the
Figure 3.9:F Milchigure animals 3.9: M rearedilch an byi mtypeals of r farmers’eared b categoriesy type of in fa therm Projecters’ ca andteg oControlries Villages in the Project and Control Villages 6.0 6.1 8.6 29.8 8.2 7.0 11.4 n 100% 24.5 o i t 80% u Figure 3.9: Milch animals reared by type of farmers’ categories b i
r 60%
t in the Project and Control Villages s 94.0 93.9 93.0 i 91.4 91.8 40% 75.5 88.6
D 70.2 6.0 6.1 8.6 29.8 8.2 7.0 11.4 e n 1002%0% 24.5 g o i a t t 80%0% u n e b i c Landless Small & Medium+ Large Landless Small & Medium+ Large
r 60% r t e s M9a4r.0ginal 93.9 Marginal 93.0 i 91.4 91.8 P 40% 75.5 88.6
D 70.2
e 20% Project Control g a Sourcet 0: NCAER% field data. n Yes No e
Notec : Medium+L denotesandles sthe categorySmall of& farmersMe dwithium semi-+ Large Landless Small & Medium+ Large
r mediume and medium landholdingMar gsizes.inal Marginal P Among the landless labourersPr oandject farmers the landless labourers,C othentr oprevalencel of cattle who rear dairy animals, separate cattle shedsYe s shedsNo with pucca flooring was higher in the are required to ensure their productivity. It project villages, at 18.1 per cent, as compared may be noted that the prevalence of cattle to that in the control villages, at 9.7 per cent sheds with mud flooring is higher than sheds (Figure 3.10). with cemented flooring. Interestingly, among
68 69 Figure 3.10: Distribution of landless labourers and farmers with separate cattle sheds by type of flooring (%)
100% 1.4 0.4 4.0 1.6 0.6 5.4 90% 6.9 11.9 19.1 14.0 5.6 15.2 80% 70% Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India 60% 67.5 Household47.4 Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy68.6 Production Sector in the Project45.2 Areas 50% 66.5 69.7 40% 30% Figure 3.10: Distribution of landless labourers and farmers with separate cattle sheds Figure 3.10: Distributionby typ ofe landlessof floori labourersng (%) and farmers with 20% separate cattle sheds36.7 by type of flooring (%) 34.2 10% 18.1 25.3 25.2 100% 1.4 0.4 4.0 1.6 0.6 5.4
n 9.7 Percentage Distribution Percentage
0% o 90% 6.9 11.9 5.6 i 15.2 t 14.0 19.1
Pucca_Flooringu 80% Mud_Flooring No Shed Pucca_Flooring Mud_Flooring No Shed b
i 70% r t
s 60% 67.5 47.4 68.6 i Project Control45.2 66.5 D 50%
e 69.7
g 40% a
t 30% n
e 20% 36.7 c 34.2 r 10% Landless 25.3Small & Marginal Medium+ 25.2Large
e 18.1 9.7 P 0% Pucca_Flooring Mud_Flooring No Shed Pucca_Flooring Mud_Flooring No Shed Source: NCAER field data. Project Control
Landless Small & Marginal Medium+ Large Picture 3.1: Around 28 per cent of those who rear milch Source: NCAER field data. animals have no cattle sheds Picture 3.1: Around 28 per cent of those who rear milch animals have no cattle sheds
3.3.2. Economic Status of Households 3.3.2. Economicand Their M Statusilch Animal of Holdings Households and Their Milch Animal
Holdings The reach and coverage of NDP-I among activities, a snapshot of which can be seen in households from different economic classes Figure 3.11. The reach andmay coveragebe gauged through of NDP their dairying-I among households from different economic classes may be gauged through their dairying activities, a snapshot of which can be seen in Figure 3.11.
68 69
71 Analysing Socio-EconomicFig Impacture of3 the.11 NDP-I:: Rea Thec Nationalh an Dairyd c oPlanve ofr Indiaage of the NDP-I among Economic Classes (%)
70 62.4 n 60.0 o i 60 t u
Figureb 35Figure.011: R ea3.11:ch Reach and candov ecoveragerage o fof t hthee NDP-INDP- Iamong amo nEconomicg Econ oClassesmic C (%)lasses (%) i
r 38.2 t 36.1 s 40 i 70 62.4 n D 60.0
o 30 e i 60 t g a u
t 20
b 50 i n
r 38.2 t 10 c e 36.1 1.5 1.8 s
r 40 i e
D 0
P 30 e
g BPL APL Not reported a
t 20 n 10 Project Control c e 1.5 1.8 r e 0 P BPL APL Not reported
Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
It may be noted that among the economic of the households (over 60 per cent) were classes, the share of households from the rearing milch animals in the project villages Below the Poverty Line (BPL) community as compared to a corresponding figure of 58 within the villages covered under NDP-I per cent in the control villages (Figure 3.12). was higher as compared to those from the This unequivocally highlights the importance Above the Poverty Line (APL) community. of dairying activities among the poor and As regards the steps towards dairying the marginalised households in the project activities, rearing of milch animals was the villages. starting point. A significant proportion Figure 3.12: Rearing of milch animals by households from different Figure 3.12: Rearing of milch animals by households from different economic classes in the Project and Control Villages (%) economic classes in the Project and Control Villages (%) 70 n 61.0 58.0 o Figi u6r0e 3.12: Rearing of milch animals by households from different t u
b 50economic classes in the Project and Control Villages (%) i 39.9 r 37.3 t
s 40 i 70
n 61.0 D
30 58.0 o e i 60 t g a u 20 t
b 50 i n 39.9 r 10 37.3 t 1.7 2.1 c e
s 40 r i
e 0 D
P 30
e BPL APL Not reported g
a 20 t
n Project Control 10 1.7 2.1 c e
r
Sourcee : NCAER0 field data.
SourceP : NCAER field data. BPL APL Not reported Among all the social classes, households under the NDP-I project effectively in the project villages showed a greater Project supportedControl the Scheduled Castes (SCs),
Scheduled Tribes (STs) and Other Backward =inclination Source: towardsNCAER f irearingeld data. of milch animals as compared to those in the Control Classes (OBCs), enabling them to get villages. Figure 3.13 shows that intervention more intensely involved in the dairy-based economy.
70 71 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Figure 3.13: Rearing of milch Householdanim alCharacteristicss by ho uands ePerformanceholds fIndicatorsrom d ofi theffe Dairyren Productiont Soci Sectoral in the Project Areas Classes in the Project and Control Villages (%)
90
n 87.1 86.5 Figuro e 3.13: Rearing of milch animals by ho8u5s.4eholds from diffe8r5e.5nt Social t i Figure 3.13: Rearing of milch animals by households83 .from4 different Social u 85
b Classes in the Project and Control Villages (%) i 80.6 Classes in the Project and Control Villages (%) t r
s 80 78.5 i 90
n 87.1
D 86.5
75.8 o 85.4 85.5 e t i g 75 83.4 u 85 t a b i
n 80.6 e t r c s 7080 78.5 i r e
D SC ST OBC General
75.8 P e
g 75 Project Control t a n
e
c 70
Sourcer : NCAER field data.
e SC ST OBC General
P Project Control
S Sourceource:: NCAER NCAER field field data.dat a.
3.4. Income Trends, Dairying Activities, and Participation of Women The chief earner in the household is referred The distribution of the occupational profile to as Member 1, whose profile reflects the of the chief earners in a household shows most important indication of the family’s that the proportions of both agricultural and earning pattern and its impact on the family non-agricultural labourers are higher in the background. project villages as compared to their control counterparts (Figure 3.14). Figure 3.14: Occupational profiles of Chief Earners’ (Member 1) Figure 3.14: Occupational profilesin the Pofr oChiefjec t Earners’and C o(Memberntrol V i1)ll inag thees Project and Control Villages 50.0 44.1 44.7 45.0 Figure 3.14: Occupational profiles of Chief Earners’ (Member 1) 40.0 in the Project and Control Villages e 35.0 g 30.0 26.3 t a 50.0 44.1 44.7 n 25.0
e 2455.0.0 c
r 2400.0.0 e P e 1355.0.0 10.0 g 8.0 8.3 8.1 1030.0.0 26.3 7.1 t a 4.5 3.5 4.1 n 25.0 3.4 3.0
e 255.0.0 c
r 200.0.0 e . r r s k d L s r o P u e t c _ i 15.0 e o o i 10.0 e r
r r n
b 8.3
w 8.1 i
8.0 a va t d
g 7.1 u l a s 10.0 e t i a o s
L 4.5 l u 4.1 3.4 3.0 3.5 ll e S b u i u _ 5.0 B i a k n_ A C r S o g 0.0 H o N A . r r s k d L s r o
u e t c _ i e o o i e r
r r Project Control n b w i a
va t d g u l a s e t i a o s L l u ll e S b u i u _ B i a k n_ A Source: NCAER field data. C r S o g H o N A It is interesting to observe the involvement across the project and control villages. Table Project Control of the chief earners of the family in dairy 3.3 delineates the distribution of the chief activities, distributed in terms of gender earner’s involvement in dairy activities.
73
70 71 73 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Table 3.3: Distribution of the Chief Earners of the family by gender and involvement in Dairy Activities (%) Family Members Significantly Involved Partially Involved Marginally Involved No Involvement Project Villages Male 53.4 19.9 9.1 17.6 Female 60.2 17.1 9.9 12.9 Total 56.8 18.5 9.5 15.2 Control Villages Male 50.2 19.6 9.7 20.6 Female 45.7 22.7 10.4 21.2 Total 47.9 21.1 10.0 20.9 Source: NCAER field data. Table 3.3 clearly shows that female members Even among the household members next of the family exhibit a significantly higher in line to the chief earners in the family, the involvement in dairy activities in households significant involvement of female members in the project villages, at 60.2 per cent, as in dairy activities was considerably higher compared to those in the control villages, at in the project villages, at 57.1 per cent, as 45.7 per cent. Overall, the total proportion compared to the involvement of their male of dairy activities undertaken by the chief counterparts, at 43.8 per cent. The intensity earners of the households were significantly of dairy activities was much lower in the higher in the project villages, at 56.8 per cent, control villages as compared to the project as compared to those in the control villages, villages (Table 3.4). at 47.6 per cent, thereby indicating the impact of facilities provided under NDP-I.
Table 3.4: Distribution of the earning members (next in line to Chief Earners) in the family by gender and involvement in Dairy Activities (%) Family Members Significantly Partially Marginally No Involvement Involved Involved Involved Project Villages Male 43.8 22.7 7.8 25.7 Female 57.1 20.3 2.8 19.8 Total 50.5 21.5 5.3 22.7 Control Villages Male 38.8 19.5 9.0 32.7 Female 44.5 28.2 5.5 21.8 Total 41.7 23.8 7.2 27.3
Source: NCAER field data.
The high level of involvement in dairy Picture 3.2: VBMPS provided a boost to activities among the highest earners of the remunerative incomes family in the project villages clearly indicates that the NDP-I project has led to the creation of better opportunities for the concerned households with a basic thrust on nutrition at reasonable cost (RBP), and facilitation of the marketing of milk (VBMPS).
72 73 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
3.5. Ownership of Basic Amenities and Assets in the Project and Control Villages The proportions of ownership of dwelling control villages as compared to their project units were found to be 96.3 per cent and counterparts. On the other hand, ownership 95.8 per cent among households in the of pucca houses was found to be higher project and control villages, respectively. among households in the Project villages, The condition of the housing units points at 35.4 per cent as compared to the control to a higher incidence of ownership of villages, at 30.4 per cent (Figure 3.15). kutcha houses among the households in the
Figure 3.1Figure5: Di 3.15:strib Distributionution of t hofe the ho householdsuseholds by b ythe th typee ty ofp edwelling of dw eunitllin (%)g unit (%) 38 n 35.9 o 35.4
t i 36
u 33.7 33.6 b
i 34 t r
s 31.1 i 32 30.4 D
e 30 g
t a 28 n e
c 26 r e Kutcha Semi-pucca Pucca P
Project Control
S oSourceurce:: NNCAERCAER fieldfield ddata.ata . The availability of electricity grid per cent of the households in the project connections was higher in the control villages had solar connections as compared villages, at 97.5 per cent, as compared to a to only 11.4 per cent in the control villages corresponding figure of 94.1 per cent in the (Figure 3.16). project villages. Significantly, however, 15.4
Figure 3Figure.16: D3.16:ist r Distributionibution of ofh ohouseholdsusehold shaving havi nsolarg so powerlar p inow theirer i n their homehomess in t inh ethe P rProjectoject andand Control Contr Villagesol Villages
100 84.6 88.6
n 80 o ge t i t a
u 60 n b e i c t r
r 40 s e i 15.4
P 11.4 D 20 0 75 Yes No
Project Control
S o Sourceurce:: NNCAERCAER ffieldield ddata.ata . While 84.4 per cent of the households in the chores, the corresponding figure was lower, at project villages had access to water for daily 79.2 per cent, in the control villages (Figure 3.17).
Figure 3.17: Distribution of households by access to water in the Project and Control Villages (%) 100 84.4 79.2 n
o 80
72 ut i 73 b i 60 r t s i D
40 e 20.8 15.6 ta g 20 n e c r
e 0 P Yes No Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
Figure 3.18: Distribution of households by access to various water sources in the Project and Control Villages (%) 100%
n e o g
t i 80% 42.5 t a
u 12.7 18.1 26.7 n b e i 60% c t r r s e i
P 40% D 48.7 18.9 20% 10.6 21.8 0% Tap Well Tubewell Handpump Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
76 Figure 3.16: Distribution of households having solar power in their Figure 3.16: Dhisotmriebsu itnio tnh eo fP hrojuesceth aonld sC hoanvtirnogl Vsoilllaarg peso wer in their homes in the Project and Control Villages 100 84.6 88.6
n 10800 88.6 o 84.6 ge t i t a n u 8600 n o ge b e i t i c t a u t r
r 6400 n s b e i e i 15.4 P
c 11.4 D
t r 20
r 40 s e i 15.4
P 11.4 D 200 0 Yes No Yes No Project Control Project Control Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Figure 3.17: Distribution of households by access to Figuwrea 3ter.17 i:n D thiset rPirboujteicotn an ofd h Coounsterhool lVdsill bayg esac c(e%)ss to Figure 3.17: 10Distribution0 water of i householdsn the Pro byje caccesst and to C waterontr oinl theVill Projectages (and%) Control Villages (%) 84.4 79.2 n 100 o 80 84.4 79.2 n ut i o
b 80 i 60 r ut i t s b i i 60 r D t 40 s e i 20.8 D
40 15.6 ta g
e 20 n 20.8 e 15.6 c ta g
r 20 n
e 0 e P c
r Yes No e 0
P Project Control Yes No Project Control Source: NCAER field data. S Sourceource: :NCAER NCAE fieldR fie ldata.d d ata. As regards the sources of water, tap water was a higher usage of tap water, at 48.7 per cent, the dominant source in both the project and usage of hand pumps as a source of water control villages, followed by hand pumps. usage was more prevalent in the control However, while the project villages exhibited villages, at 26.7 per cent (Figure 3.18).
FigureFigu 3.18:re 3 Distribution.18: Distri bofu householdstion of h obyu accessseho ltod svarious by ac cwateress tsourceso vari inou thes Figuwrea 3te.1r8 s:o DuriscterisProjectb inu ttiho eandn Por fControl ohjoecuts ae Villageshnodl Cdos nb(%)tyr aocl cVeisllsa tgoe sv a(r%)io us 100% water sources in the Project and Control Villages (%)
n e o g 100%
t i 80% 42.5 n t a e u
o 12.7 18.1 26.7 g n b t i e i 80% 42.5
t a 60% c u 12.7 18.1 26.7 t r n r b s e i e i 60% c
P 40% t r D r s e i 48.7 18.9 P 40% 10.6 D 20% 21.8 48.7 10.6 18.9 21.8 200%% 0% Tap Well Tubewell Handpump Tap WPreoljlect Control Tubewell Handpump Project Control Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. SAccessource: NtoC AtoiletER f ifacilitieseld data. inside the residential the households in the project and control premises is one of the crucial health and villages, with the former having a slight edge hygiene awareness indicators. Figure 3.19 76 over the latter. shows the availability of toilets within 76
FiguFigurere 3.1 3.19:9: D Distributionistribution of o householdsf househ obyl daccesss by toac Toiletscess t insideo Toi thelet shousehold inside t he household ppremisesremis eins thein tProjecthe Pr oandjec Controlt and CVillagesontro (%)l Villages (%)
100 n
o 83.3 80.2 t i
u 80 b i t r
s 60 i D
e
g 40 t a
n 16.7 19.8 e
c 20 r e P 0 Yes No Project Control
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
74 75
Figure 3.20: Distribution of households by ownership of LPG Connections, Mobile Phones, and Refrigerators in the Project and Control Villages (%)
n 93.4 o 100 88.0 90.8
t i 84.4 u
b 80 i 61.8 65.1 t r
s 60 i 38.2 34.9 D 40 ge 12.0 15.6 t a 20 6.69.2 n e
c 0 r e Yes No Yes No Yes No P LPG Connection Mobile Phone Refrigerator
Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
77 Figure 3.19: Distribution of households by access to Toilets inside the household premises in the Project and Control Villages (%)
100 n
o 83.3 80.2 t i
u 80 b i t r
s 60 i D
e
g 40 t a
n 16.7 19.8 e
c 20 r e P 0 Yes No Project Control
Source: NCAER field data. Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
3.5.1. Household Assets things. It may be noted that households in the project villages had an upper edge over Access to Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) their counterparts in the control villages with connections helps households to stay in regard to ownership of all these household a smoke and pollution-free environment. assets. However, access to LPG connections Among other household assets, the mobile and ownership of mobile phones was phone is nowadays a leading mode of significantly higher than the ownership of communication, while the refrigerator is an refrigerators in both the project and control important means of preserving food items villages (Figure 3.20). Figandure life-saving 3.20: Di medicines,stribution among of ho uotherseh olds by ownership of LPG Connections, Mobile FigurePh o3.20:nes Distribution, and Refri ofg ehouseholdsrators in by th ownershipe Projec oft a LPGnd CConnections,ontrol Vill Mobileages (Phones,%) and Refrigerators in the Project and Control Villages (%)
n 93.4 o 100 88.0 90.8
t i 84.4 u
b 80 i 61.8 65.1 t r
s 60 i 38.2 34.9 D 40 ge 12.0 15.6 t a 20 6.69.2 n e
c 0 r e Yes No Yes No Yes No P LPG Connection Mobile Phone Refrigerator
Project Control Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. Today, the prominent means of ownership had little variation among entertainment are generally believed to be households in both the project and control the radio, television and Dish connections. villages. The ownership of television and However, the dynamics of entertainment Dish connections, on the other hand, was largely shows a tilt in favour of television found to be higher among households in the over radio in the dairy-based hinterland. 77 project as compared to the control villages The incidence of ownership of radio (Figure 3.21). was, therefore, found to be lower and its
Figure 3.21:Figure Dist 3.21:ribu tDistributionion of hou ofse householdsholds by byow ownershipnership of o Radio,f Rad iTV,o, TandV, and Dish ConneDishct Connectionion in the in P theroj Projectect an andd C oControlntrol VillagesVillages
80 71.3 70.5 n
o 70 61.5 t i 55.5 u 60 52.4 b 51.5 47.6
i 44.5 48.5
t r 50
s 38.5 i 40 D 28.7 29.5
ge 30
t a 20 n e
c 10 r
P e 0 Yes No Yes No Yes No Radio TV Dish Connection
Project Control
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
74 75 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
3.6. Milk Production and Income from Milk Production
3.6.1. Earnings from Dairy Activities: mechanism. Figure 3.22 shows the prevalence A Closer Look of higher shares of income from dairy activities among households with very low As has already been mentioned, a large income levels in the control villages, at 28.8 number of landless labourers and marginal per cent, as compared to a corresponding farmers are involved in dairy activities. figure of 20.8 per cent in the project Initiatives under NDP-I initiatives have villages. In the project villages, most of the strengthened the economic viability of dairy household’s share of annual dairy income farmers in the project villages, with relevant was seen to vary between Rs 15,000 to Rs interventions on the input side and also 1,50,000 per annum and was consistently efforts to direct them into channelising milk on the higher side in the project villages as production through an organised market comparison to their control counterparts.
Figure 3.22: DiFigurestri b3.22:utio Distributionn of hous eofh householdsolds by le byve levelsls of of d adairy-relatediry-relate dincomes incom ine thes in the Project anProjectd Con andtro lControl Villag Villageses (%) (%) (R an(Rangege in in R Rss ’000)’000) 35 n
o 28.8
t i 30 u b i 25 20.8 20.7 t r 19.4 s i 20 16.5 17.9 16.6
D 15.315.3 15.1
ge 15 t a
n 10 e 4.7
c 4.5 r 5 2.8 1.8 P e 0 <5k 5k to 15k 15k to 30k 30k to 50k 50k to 100k to >150k 100k 150k
Project Control
Source: NCAER field data. Note: k=1000. Source: NCAER field data. Note: k=1000. The scheme-wise comparison of income were operational. It may also be noted that groupings is shown in Figure 3.23. It may be the share of both components was low in the noted that in the NDP-I villages, household lower income range but high in the higher incomes got a major boost in villages where income ranges. both the programmes, i.e., RBP and VBMPS,
Figure 3.23: Distribution of households by dairy income levels across various scheme interventions in the Project Villages (%) (Range in Rs ’000) 30 26.2
n 25 o 21.4
i 20.9
t 21.2 21.4 20.9 20.8 u 19.5 19.1 b
i 20 r 17.2
t 15.6 s i 15.1 15.6 D
15 e 11.4 g a
t 9.1 9.1
n 10 e c r e 3.9 3.23.4 P 5 2.6 2.3
0 <5k 5k to 15k 15k to 30k 30k to 50k 50k to 100k 100k to 150k >150k
RBP VBMPS RBP_VBMPS
Source: NCAER field data. Note: k =1000 Source: NCAER field data. Note: k =1000
76 77
Figure 3.24: Average annual income (aggregated in rupee terms) linked to Dairy Activities in the Control and Scheme-related Villages
70000 t
e 61099 n 60000 n i
e 50000 m o c s. ) 39646 39755 39033 n
I 40000
( R
l s a
u 30000 n 79 n t er m A
e 20000 g a r
e 10000 v A 0 Control RBP VBMPS RBP_VBMPS
Source: NCAER field data.
30 26.2
n 25 o 21.4
i 20.9
t 21.2 21.4 20.9 20.8 u 19.5 19.1 b
i 20 r 17.2
t 15.6 s i 15.1 15.6 D
15 e 11.4 g a
t 9.1 9.1
n 10 e c r e 3.9 3.23.4 P 5 2.6 2.3
0 <5k 5k to 15k 15k to 30k 30k to 50k 50k to 100k 100k to 150k >150k
RBP VBMPS RBP_VBMPS
Source: NCAER field data. Note: k =1000 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
In this context, it would be interesting to note villages. The project villages with both the the pattern of annual income generation components (RBP and VBMPS programmes) through different dairy activities by registered the maximum rise in income levels households in the control and scheme-related (Figure 3.24).
Figure 3.24:Figure Aver 3.24:age aAveragennua lannual incom incomee (agg (aggregatedregated i inn rrupeeupee terms) term linkeds) lin tok e d to Dairy ActiDairyvitie sActivities in the Cino thent rControlol and and Sc hScheme-relatedeme-relate dVillages Villages
70000 t
e 61099 n 60000 n i
e 50000 m o c s. ) 39646 39755 39033 n
I 40000
( R
l s a
u 30000 n n t er m A
e 20000 g a r
e 10000 v A 0 Control RBP VBMPS RBP_VBMPS
S Sourceourc:e NCAER: NCAE fieldR fi edata.ld d ata.
3.6.2. Average monthly out-of-pocket incurred on rearing milch animals: Inter-period changes
The transition in the mean total expenditure impact of the NDP-I project. It may be noted (out-of-pocket expenses) on milch animals that the monthly expenditures in both the in the project and control villages would project and control villages had increased be an interesting indicator for assessing the over time (Figure 3.25). Figure 3.2Figure5: Av e3.25:rag eAverage out-o out-of-pocketf-pocket ex expensespenses incurredincurr eperd pmonther m oonn milchth on animals milch animals 3742 4000 3548
h 3462
c 3266 3256 l ) 3500 3071 i s 2859 2884 R m 3000 2595 2558
( 2499
n 2282
h 2500 o t
s n
e 2000 o s n m
1500 e r p e 1000 x p
e l 500 e a g m a 0 i r n e RBP VBMPS RBP_VBMPS Control a v A Before the Project (Rs Per month) Middle of the Project (Rs Per month) Presently (Rs Per month)
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
An analysis of the inter-period rise in during the period of implementation of expenditure shows that the growth in NDP-I. The growth of expenses on milch expenses, in fact, declined in the RBP villages animals per month between the Middle of
76 77
Figure 3.26: Growth (%) in average monthly out-of-pocket expenses on milch animals
30 27.2
25 20.0 20 18.4 ge s 15.5 15.4 t a 14.2 14.6 n 15 e 12.1 c r e
P 10
5
0 RBP VBMPS RBP_VBMPS Control
Per month Expenditure on Milch Animal: Before the Project to Middle of the Project (% Growth) Per month Expenditure on Milch animal: Middle of the Project to Present (% Growth)
Source: NCAER field data.
81 Figure 3.25: Average out-of-pocket expenses incurred per month on milch animals 3742 4000 3548
h 3462
c 3266 3256 l ) 3500 3071 i s 2859 2884 R m 3000 2595 2558
( 2499
n 2282
h 2500 o t
s n
e 2000 o s n m
1500 e r p e 1000 x p
e l 500 e a g m a 0 i r n e RBP VBMPS RBP_VBMPS Control a v A Before the Project (Rs Per month) Middle of the Project (Rs Per month) Presently (Rs Per month)
Source: NCAER field data.
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
the Project (MIDP) period to its completion RBP (Figure 3.26). This clearly demonstrates declined from 18.4 per cent to 15.5 per cent, the positive impact of NDP-I intervention whereas in the control villages, the growth in in economising the feed and fodder cost expenses went up from 12 per cent to over through the optimal and balanced utilisation 27 per cent, which was much higher than of nutrients for the milch animals. the growth rates for schemes other than Figure 3.2Figure6: Gr 3.26:owt hGrowth (%) i n(%) av ine raverageage m monthlyonthly out-of-pocketout-of-poc kexpenseset exp eonn smilches o nanimals milch animals 30 27.2
25 20.0 20 18.4 ge s 15.5 15.4 t a 14.2 14.6 n 15 e 12.1 c r e
P 10
5
0 RBP VBMPS RBP_VBMPS Control
Per month Expenditure on Milch Animal: Before the Project to Middle of the Project (% Growth) Per month Expenditure on Milch animal: Middle of the Project to Present (% Growth)
Source : NCAER Source field: NC Adata.ER field data.
3.7. Milk Consumption
3.7.1. Milk Consumption over the Duration of NDP-I 81 Milk consumption in the project villages average milk consumption remained almost showed a steady increase from 1.5 litres per constant, albeit showing a marginal increase day per household to 1.7 litres per day per from 1 litre per day (per household) in household over the period of implementation 2012-13 to 1.1 litre per day per household on of NDP-I whereas in the control villages, the completion of the project (Figure 3.27). Figure 3.27: Average milk consumption (litres) per day per Figure 3.27: Average milkho uconsumptionsehold in (litres)the P rperoj edayct apernd household Contro lin V theilla Projectges and Control Villages
2.0 1.7 n ) 1.6
o 1.5 t i
p 1.5
hh ld 1.1 / m 1.0 1.0 y
a 1.0 d ns u / o s c
e r k 0.5 l i li t ( M 0.0 Before the Project Middle of the Project Presently
Project Control
Source Sour:c NCAERe: NCAE fieldR fi eldata.d d ata.
78 79
Figure 3.28: Availability of milk as perceived by respondents from the Project and the Control Villages during NDP-I (% Distribution of Households)
60 55.9
s 50 e g 40 33.7 31.8 t a 26.6 n 30
e 20.9
c 17.3
r 20 e 5.8 8.0
P 10 0 Increased Decreased Unchanged Cannot_Say
Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
82 Figure 3.27: Average milk consumption (litres) per day per household in the Project and Control Villages
2.0 1.7 n ) 1.6
o 1.5 t i
p 1.5
hh ld 1.1 / m 1.0 1.0 y
a 1.0 d ns u / o s c
e r k 0.5 l i li t ( M 0.0 Before the Project Middle of the Project Presently
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India HouseholdProje Characteristicsct Contr andol Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
Source: NCAER field data.
The availability of milk during the period villages, at 55.9 per cent as compared to their of implementation of NDP-I is perceived to control counterparts, at 33.7 per cent (Figure have increased considerably in the project 3.28).
Figure 3.2Figure8: Av ai3.28:lab Availabilityility of m ioflk milk as pase rperceivedceived byby respondents responden fromts fthero mProject the andPro thejec t and the ControControll Villag Villageses dur duringing N DPNDP-I-I ( (%% DDistributionistributio ofn Households) of Househ olds)
60 55.9
s 50 e g 40 33.7 31.8 t a 26.6 n 30
e 20.9
c 17.3
r 20 e 5.8 8.0
P 10 0 Increased Decreased Unchanged Cannot_Say
Project Control
S Sourceource: NCAERNCAER field field data.dat a. It may be noted, as a corollary, that an cattle and buffaloes, whereas, for indigenous analysis of the ratio of in-milk to adult cattle, the proportion was higher in the female cattle for (a) indigenous cattle, (b) control villages as compared to the project cross-bred cattle, and (c) buffaloes showed a ones (Figure 3.29). This could be attributed higher concentration in the project villages to the impact of the breed improvement than in the control ones for cross-bred programme implemented under NDP-I. Figure 3.29: Milch cattle as a ratio of adult female cattle in the Figure 3.29: Milch cattle as a ratio of adult female cattle in the Project and Control Villages Project and Control Villages
100 n 82.6 79.2 o 73.1 75.4
t i 80 66.7 67.6 u b
i 60 t r s i 40 D 20 ge
t a n 0 82 e
c Indigenous Cross-Bred Buffalloes r e P Project Control
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
3.8. Milk Productivity and Growth in Different Seasons NDP-I has two major components: (a) (the producers’ company). Both these RBP and (b) VBMPS. There are exclusive components chiefly aimed at improving RBP villages, where the ration balancing milk productivity among dairy farmers and programme was launched and fostered. expanding the base of production. There are Similarly, the village-based milk procurement villages where both the components, that is, system was aimed at raising the share of RBP and VBMPS, were made operational. the organised market for the dairy farmer In this regard, it would be interesting to through a new age cooperative system note the change in the season-wise level of
78 79
Figure 3.30: Milk production (litres) per milch animal in the RBP, VBMPS and RBP+VBMPS Villages 20 15.5 15 12.8 12.8
ge s 11.8 11.8 11.5 11.3 10.4 t a 10.0 9.3 10.3 9.8 10.2 10.2 n 8.3 9.1 8.9 9.0 e 10 c r e P 5
0 RBP VBMPS RBP_VBMPS Summar BETP Summar Presently Rainy BETP Rainy Presently Winter BETP Winter Presently
Source: NCAER field data.
83 Figure 3.29: Milch cattle as a ratio of adult female cattle in the Project and Control Villages
100 n 82.6 79.2 o 73.1 75.4
t i 80 66.7 67.6 u b
i 60 t r s i 40 D 20 ge t a
n 0 e
c Indigenous Cross-Bred Buffalloes r e P Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
milk production per milch animal as an summer is the slack season in terms of milk interpretation of productivity before the production which goes up in the rainy and start of the project to its final culmination winter seasons. at the present level (Figure 3.30). Generally, Figure 3.30: Milk production (litres) per milch animal in the Figure 3.30: Milk productionR B(litres)P, VB perM milchPS an animald RB Pin+ theVB RBP,MP SVBMPS Villag andes RBP+VBMPS Villages 20 15.5 15 12.8 12.8
ge s 11.8 11.8 11.5 11.3 10.4 t a 10.0 9.3 10.3 9.8 10.2 10.2 n 8.3 9.1 8.9 9.0 e 10 c r e P 5
0 RBP VBMPS RBP_VBMPS Summar BETP Summar Presently Rainy BETP Rainy Presently Winter BETP Winter Presently
SSourceource: :NCAER NCAER field fiel ddata. da ta.
In this context, it would be interesting to whereas it achieved moderate productivity note the growth in impact of productivity growth of 21.1 and 24.4 per cent, respectively, of each of the schemes in terms of milk during the summer and rainy seasons production. There was positive growth (Figure 3.31). In the villages where both the in milk production for all the schemes. 83programmes (RBP + VBMPS) were running, The RBP is observed to have the highest the growth of production was in the range of productivity growth of over 67 per cent in 26 to 27 per cent. milk production during the winter season,
FigFigureure 3 3.31:.31: Scheme-wiseScheme-w iseasonalse seas growthonal g ofr omilkwth production of milk pperro milchduct ianimalon pe inr m theil cRBP,h a nVBMPSimal i andn th e RBP, VBMPRBP+VBMPSS and RBP+ VillagesVBMP (%)S Villages (%)
80
n 67.2 o 70 t i
u 60 b i
t r 50 s i 40 D 26.6 25.9 26.1 30 24.4 ge 21.1 20.2
t a 20 14.8 13.2 n e
c 10 r e 0 P RBP VBMPS RBP_VBMPS
Summer Rainy Winter
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
3.9. Selected Farm Level Practices Related to Dairying
3.9.1. Dung Management
Cow/buffalo dung is a good source of organic many beneficial constituents. If recycled fertiliser. Cattle manure is basically made effectively, these wastes can be used as of digested grass and grain, which contains fertilisers for crops and as fodder for animals,
80 81
84 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
and also to produce energy. Animal manure is effect. It could also pollute water sources rich in nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. and be instrumental in spreading infectious In addition to providing supplemental diseases. If the disposal of water is not nutrients for crop growth, manure has several properly planned, it might create social beneficial effects for enriching soil health. tension owing to the release of odour and The application of organic waste decreases contamination of water sources. The proper the bulk density of the soil by increasing disposal and return of nutrients back into both the organic fraction of the soil and the the soil without pollution and spreading of stability of aggregates. Organic wastes also diseases/pathogens, is thus imperative for improve the water filtration rate, water- ensuring the efficient utilisation of wastes. holding capacity, and hydraulic conductivity of the soil. All these properties of animal As far as dung management in the NDP-I waste would, however, be available only if villages is concerned, the maximum they are carefully managed. If not, they could concentration is noted for manure/compost have detrimental effects on the environment. pit and open dung storage, but its use is noted to have slightly decreased during the The most common environmental concern project, whereas the use of biogas and slurry with regard to animal wastes is that vitiates pit showed an increase in the project villages the atmospheric air by spreading offensive as compared to the control ones, thereby odours, and releasing large quantities of reflecting better awareness and transition carbon dioxide and ammonia, which might towards adoption of the Sustainable contribute to acid rain and the greenhouse Development Goals (SDGs) (Figure 3.32).
Figure 3.Figure32: D 3.32:ung DungMana Managementgement (% )(%) tr endtrendss d duringuring the th eProject Proje Periodct Per (%)iod (%) 70 58.2 55.5 60 54.7 52.5 s
e 50 g
t a 40 31.7 32.9 n 28.5 31.6 e
c 30 r
e 20 P 7.4 10 5.8 5.4 4.4 3.7 5.0 4.5 4.3 4.1 2.9 4.0 3.0 0 BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently Manure_Compost StoreDung_Open StoreDung_Biogas StoreDung_Slurry Other Pit Pit Project Control
SourSourcece: N:C NCAERAER fi efieldld d adata.ta. The dominant purpose of dung management the percentage use of dung for bio-gas plants is the manuring of agricultural crop, followed went up from 2.8 per cent before the project by fodder crops. However, dung usage for this (BETP) to 5.5 per cent on completion of the purpose was seen to decrease over the period project, which marks a useful transition in of the project, whereas in the project villages, the use and management of dung (Figure 3.33).
80 81
85 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Figure 3.33: Purpose of Dung Management during the Project Period (%) Figure 3Figure.33: P 3.33:urp oPurposese of D ofu Dungng M Managementanagemen duringt duri theng Projectthe Pr Periodoject (%)Period (%) 80 71.7 80 67.1 71.7 67.7 70 67.1 63.7 67.7 70 63.7 60 60 ges 50 a ges t 50 a n
4t 0 e n c 40 e r 30 18.8 c e
r 18.1 P 30 18.8 2e 0 12.4 12.412.0 18.1 P 8.9 12.0 3.5 20 129.4.6 7.6 5.5 12.4 3.2 10 9.6 8.97.6 4.33.2 2.8 3.8 3.53.7 3.2 10 4.3 5.5 3.8 3.7 0 3.2 2.8 y y y y y P P P P P l l l l 0 l t t t t t y y y y y P P P P P n n n n n l l l l l t t t t t e e e e e BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T n n n n n e s e s e s e s e s e e e e e BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T r r r r r e s e s e s e s e s P P P P P r r r r r P P P P Agri_Crop Foddar_Crop Bio_Gas Plant Dung_Cake P Other Agri_Crop Foddar_Crop Bio_Gas Plant Dung_Cake Other Project Control Project Control
S o u r c eSource: NCA: NCAERER field field data .data. Source: NCAER field data.
3.9.2. Use of Water in Dairying by Households
Piped water followed by hand pumps and usage during the pre-project period and on bore wells are the dominant sources of completion of the project in both the project drinking water for bovine animals. The and control villages were similar with only a pattern of usage and changes on their slight variation (Figure 3.34).
Figure 3.34Figure: Sou 3.34:rced Sourced drink idrinkingng wat ewaterr fo rfor b obovinevine animals:animal sAn: A Inter-periodn Inter-p ereadingriod reading Figure 3.34: Sourced drinking water for bovine animals: An Inter-period reading 35 31.4 28.8 35 31.4 27.1 27.0 30 28.8 26.6 26.3 26.2 s 23.4 26.6 21.2 20.9 27.1 27.0 e 30 21.4 21.4 26.3 26.2 s g 25 23.4 21.2 20.9 e a 21.4 21.4 g 2025 a n t
e 20 12.95 n t 15 11.35 r c e 9.3 8.9 12.95 e 15 8.2 7.6 8.82 7.0411.35 r c P 10 9.3 8.9 3.9 4.3 e 8.82 4.1 8.2 7.6 7.04 2.6 2.52.2 2.6 P 510 3.9 2.21.9 4.1 4.3 2.6 2.5 1.9 2.6 0 5 y y y y y y y P P P P P P P l l l l l l 0 l t t t t t t t y y y y y y y P P P P P P P n n n n n n n l l l l l l l t t t t t t t e e e e e e e BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T n n n n n n n e s e s e s e s e s e s e s e e e e e e e BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T r r r r r r r e s e s e s e s e s e s e s P P P P P P P r r r r r r r P P P P P P Piped Water Bore well Hand Pump P Well Pond or River Canal Other PSiuppepdl Wy ater Bore well Hand Pump Well Pond or River Canal Other Supply Project Control Project Control Sou r c eSource: NCA: ENCAERR field field data . data. Source: NCAER field data. Similar to the source of drinking water for usage during the pre-project period and on bovine animals, the dominant sources of completion of the project in both the project water for dairying were also piped water, and control villages were similar with only a followed by hand pumps and bore wells. slight variation (Figure 3.35). The pattern of usage and changes in their
86 82 83 86 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas Figure 3.35: Sources of water for Dairying: Assessment over the Project Period 35 31.4 28.8 27.1 27.0 30 26.6 26.3 26.2 23.4 25 Figure 3.35:21.421 Sources.2 21.420.9 of water for Dairying: Assessment over the Project Period ges Figure 3.35: Sources of water for Dairying: Assessment over the Project Period a
t 20
n 35 31.4 e 28.8 12.95 c 15 27.1 27.0 11.35 r 30 26.6 26.3 26.2 9.3 8.9 e 10 23.4 8.2 7.6 8.82 7.04 P 21.2 20.9 25 21.4 21.4 3.9 ges 4.1 4.3 2.6 2.2 2.6 5a 2.5 1.9 t 20 n
0e 12.95 c 15 11.35 y y y y y y y r P P P P P P P l l l l l l 9.3 8.9 l e t t t t t t 10 8.2 7.6 8.82 7.04 t n n n n n n n P e e e e e e 3.9 4.1 4.3 e BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T 2.2 BE T 2.6 2.5 1.9 2.6 e s e s e s e s e s e s 5 e s r r r r r r r P P P P P P 0 P y y y y y y y P P P P P P P l l l l l l l t t t t t t Piped Water Bore well Hand Pump Well Pond or River Canal Otht er n n n n n n n e e e e e e e BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T Supply BE T e s e s e s e s e s e s e s r r r r r r r P P P P P P Project Control P Piped Water Bore well Hand Pump Well Pond or River Canal Other Supply Source: NCAER field data.
Project Control
SoSourceurce: :N NCAERCAER fi fieldeld d adata.ta.
It is important to wash milch animals in away considerably from the mode of weekly order to maintain both dairy hygiene and cleaning to daily cleaning of milch animals. the quality of milk. An important change Before the initiation of NDP-I, only 29 per observed among the households subjected to cent of the households used to clean their NDP-I intervention was that they had moved milch animals daily (Figure 3.36). Figure 3.36: Washing practices for the milch animals: Figure 3.36: WashingA practicesssessm foren tthe o vmilcher th animals:e Proje Assessmentct Period over the Project Period Figure 3.36: Washing practices for the milch animals: 50 Assessm46e.2nt over the Project Period 43.4 43.4 45 43.2 50 46.2 34.8 ges 40 43.4 43.4 45 43.2 a 34.3 t 33.4 n 35 34.8 ges 40 e a c 29.1 34.3 t r 30 33.4 n 35 e e P
c 29.1
r 2530
e 18.5 P 2025 18.0 17.3 18.5 15.0 20 18.0 17.3 15 15.0 1015 6.7 6.7 4.9 5.0 10 6.7 6.7 5 4.9 5.0 0 5 0 BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently Daily Weekly Fortnightly Not fixed Daily Weekly Fortnightly Not fixed Project Control Project Control
Source: NCAER field data. Source : NCAER Source :field NCA Edata.R f ield data . As a corollary to the washing of milch cattle sheds had increased among households animals, washing of cattle sheds too is in the project villages during the NDP-I important for ensuring both better hygiene period (from 37 per cent to 40 per cent), this among the milch animals and better quality incidence of increase was proportionately of milk. It may, however, be noted that higher among the households in the control though the incidence of daily washing of villages (Figure 3.37).
87 87
82 83 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Figure 3.37: Washing practices for the cattle sheds: Assessment over the Project Period
50 46.6 Figure 3.37:Figure W45as h3.37:in4g 0Washing p.9ra4c0t.1ic practiceses for t hfore theca ttcattlele sh sheds:eds: Assessment Assessm overent otheve Projectr the PPeriodroje ct Period 40 37.1 5305 46.6 29.1 29.5 24.7 ges 4350 40.9 40.1 26.4 a
t 24.8 24.6 40 37.1 23.6 n 25
e 21.0
c 35 r 20 e 29.1 29.5 24.7 ges P 30 26.4 a 15 t 24.8 24.6 9.3 7.6 23.6 n 25 7.9 e 10 6.9 21.0 c
r 20 e 5 P 15 0 9.3 7.6 10 BETP Presently BETP Presently BET7P.9 P6r.9esently BETP Presently 5 Daily Weekly Fortnightly Not fixed 0 Project Control BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently
Daily Weekly Fortnightly Not fixed Source: NCAER field data. Project Control
S o Sourceurce: NCAERNCAER field fie lddata. da ta. It may be noted that among the sources supply had the highest penetration, followed of water for washing animals, piped water by hand pumps (Figure 3.38). Figure 3.38: Sources of water for washing animals: Figure 3.38: SourcesA ofss wateressm foren washingt over tanimals:he Pro jAssessmentect Perio overd the Project Period
40 34.4Figure 3.38: Sources3 o4.3f water for washing animals: 35 30.730.6 28.9 28.6 Assessment3 0o.1ver the Project Period 30 23.2 ges 4205 a 34.4 21.0 34.3 t 19.1 3250 17.9 16.8 30.730.6 17.2 e n 28.9 28.6 30.1 c 13.1 3105 e r 23.2 10.1 9.8 ges P 25 7.7 a 10 21.0 6.3 t 17.9 19.1 4.1 3.9 2.1 1.7 1.4 20 16.8 17.2 1.9 1.6 e n 5 0.9 1.2 1.1 c 13.1 150 e r 10.1 9.8 y y y y y y y P P P P P P P P l l l l l l 7.7 l t t t t t t 10 6.3 t n n n n n n 4.1 3.9 2.1 1.7 1n .4 e e e e e e 1.9 e BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T 5 0.9 1.2 1.6 BE T 1.1 e s e s e s e s e s e s e s r r r r r r r P P P P P P 0 P y y y y y y y P P P P P P P l l l l l l l t t t t t t Piped Water Bore well Hand Pump Well Pond Canal Other t n n n n n n n e e e e e e e BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T Supply BE T e s e s e s e s e s e s e s r r r r r r r P P P P P P Project Control P Piped Water Bore well Hand Pump Well Pond Canal Other Source: NCAERSup pfieldly data. Source: NCAER field data. The type of drainage used in the animalP roject Cosubstantialntrol reduction in kutcha drainage and
simultaneously there was an increase in pucca Sourcshede: NC AalsoER influencesfield data. the management of residuals and hygiene. It was observed over cemented drainage, which is considered as the period of the study that there was a a good practice for releasing waste water (Figure 3.39).
88
84 85 88 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Figure 3.39: SourcesHousehold of wat Characteristicser for was andhi nPerformanceg anim Indicatorsals: of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas Assessment over the Project Period Figure 3.39: Sources of water for washing animals: 50 45.3 45 Figure 3.39: SourcesAs ofse waterssme fornt washingover t3h7 animals:.9e Pro3j8e.5 cAssessmentt Period over the Project Period 40 36.2 50 33.2 35 33.3 45.3 29.2
ges 45 30 38.5
a 37.9 t 2450 22.5 36.2 20.1 e n 33.2 c 33.3 2305 17.8 e r 29.2 15.3 ges P 30 12.9 13.6 15.2 a 15
t 10.6 10.2 25 22.5 20.1 e n 10 2.7 c 17.8 2.3 250 1.5 1.7 e r 15.3
P 12.9 13.6 15.2 105 10.6 10.2 10 BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently 2.7 2.3 5 Pucca_Cemented Brick_Lined Kuchcha No Drainage 1O.5ther 1.7 0 Project Control BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Presently BETP Present ly Source: NCAER fPieulccd ad_aCtae.me nted Brick_Lined Kuchcha No Drainage Other
Project Control
SourSourcece: NC: ANCAERER field field data .data. Finally, the disposal of used water through from 49 per cent of the households before the a different form of drainage is extremely project in the project area to 39 per cent on important in the context of achievement of completion of the project. Another important the SDGs. It may be noted that there was a outcome was an increase in drainage to the marked difference during the period of the bio-gas plant (Figure 3.40). study in the drainage to open area, which fell Figure 3.40: Sources of water for washing animals: Figure 3.40: SourcesAss ofes watersmen fort o vwashinger the Panimals:roject P Assessmenteriod over the Project Period
60 48.0 48.9 50 Figure 3.40: Sources o4f2 .2water for washing animals: 39.1 40 Assessment over the Project Period ges a t 25.6 25.6 n 3600 25.0 25.1 e
c 48.0
r 48.9 e 2500 14.513.2 P 42.2 11.29.5 9.1 6.7 7.7 39.1 7.7 3.4 4… 2.9 4100 4.9 5.6 3.0 ges 2.8 3.1 2.6 3.1 2.5 2.7 a t 25.6 25.6 n 30 25.0 25.1 y y y y y y y e P P P P P P P l l l l l l l c t t t t t t t r n n n n n n n e e e e e e e e 13.2 BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T 20 14.5 BE T P e s e s e s e s e s e s 11.2 e s r r r r r r 9.5 9.1 r P P P P P P 7.7 7.7 4… P 2.9 10 6.74.9 5.6 3.4 3.0 2.8 3.1 2.6 3.1 2.5 2.7 Drainage to Pit Drainage to Bio- Drainage to Drainage to Drainage to Drainage to Other 0 gas Plant Open Area Agri field Sewerage Fodder dump y y y y y y y P P P P P P P l l l l l l l t t t t t t Project Control t n n n n n n n e e e e e e e BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T BE T e s e s e s e s e s e s e s r r r r r r Source: NCAER field data. r P P P P P P Source: NCAER field data. P Drainage to Pit Drainage to Bio- Drainage to Drainage to Drainage to Drainage to Other gas Plant Open Area Agri field Sewerage Fodder dump Project Control
Source: NCAER field data. 3.10. Women in the Dairy Sector
3.10.1. Women’s Participation: A Closer Look 89 As already noted in Tables 3.2 and 3.3, The overall workload of women for women’s participation in dairy activities in remunerative income was observed to have the project villages was noticeably higher increased significantly in the project villages than in the control ones. as compared to the control ones. Overall, 66
89 per cent of the women in the project villages
84 85 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
reported a significant increase in workload in workload was very high in the control as compared to a corresponding figure of villages, at 46.7 per cent, as compared to a 49.6 per cent in the control villages. The much lower corresponding figure of 31.5 per proportion of women reporting no change cent for women in the project villages (Figure 3.41). Figure 3Figure.41: C 3.41:han gChangee in th ine theov eoverallrall r remunerativeemunerati vworke w oamongrk am Womenong Women
70 66.0 60
s 49.6 46.7 e 50 g a t 40 31.5 n e
c 30 r
e 20 P 10 2.5 3.8 0 Increased Unchanged Decreased
Project Control
S o Sourceurce:: NNCAERCAER ffieldield ddata.ata . There are some other important parameters Picture 3.3: Women came out in the open to have for which questions were asked during a greater say in remunerative income and access (Karnataka) the SES regarding women’s social status, empowerment, and income generation through dairying activities. It may be noted that overall the position of women had improved in both the project and the control villages, but the improvement was more pronounced in the NDP-I villages. Around 77 per cent of the women reported an improvement in their status with respect to decision-making in the household (Figure 3.42).
Figure 3.Figure42: C 3.42:han gChangee in W ino Women’smen’s p positionosition in i nDecision-making Decision-ma atk itheng household at the h olevelusehold level 90 80 76.8
70 63.8
es 60
a g 50 en t
c 40 34.0
e r 30
P 22.0 20 90 10 1.2 2.2 0 Improved Unchanged Declined Project Control Source: NCAER Field data.
86 87
91 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
Women’s position with respect to mobility project villages reported an improvement too had improved post implementation of while 24 per cent reported that the position the project, as can be noted from Figure 3.43. had remained unchanged. Overall, 74 per cent of the women from the
Figure 3Figure.43: C 3.43:han Changege in W ino Women’smen’s ppositionositio withn wi respectth res tope Mobilityct to Mobility 80 74.1 70 64.1 60 s e g
a 50 n t
c e 40 33.4 r e
P 30 24.4 20
10 1.5 2.5 0 Improved Unchanged Declined
Project Control Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. The ownership of assets by women too cent of the women respondents reported showed an improvement but was less an improvement in asset ownership in the impressive as compared to the other project and control villages, respectively indicators. About 72 per cent and 63.5 per (Figure 3.44).
Picture 3.4: Women’s position about their status and participation in the dairy activities is re-affirmed in the NDP-I villages
86 87
92 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Picture 3.5: Women in the NDP-I villages have better access to facilities and ownership of assets to enhance the quality of their life
Figure 3.44: Change in Women’s position with respect to Ownership o f Assets
Figure 38.Figure404: C h3.44:an7g2 Change.e4 in W ino mWomen’sen’s p positionosition with wit respecth resp toe cOwnershipt to Owne ofr Assetsship of Assets 70 63.5 6800 72.4 70 63.5 ge s 50
t a 60 n 40 34.9 e c ge s
r 50 25.8
e 30 t a P n 40 34.9 e 20 c
r 25.8 e 1300 P 1.8 1.7 200 10 Improved Unchanged D1.e8clined1.7 0 Improved ProjectUncChoanntgreodl Declined
Source: NCAER field data. Project Control
S oSourceurce:: NCAERNCAER fieldfield ddata.ata . About 73 per cent and 63 per cent of the home in the project and control villages, the women respondents reported an respectively (Figure 3.45). improvement in their social status outside
Figure 3.Figure45: C 3.45:han gChangee in W ino mWomen’sen’s p positionosition with wi trespecth resp toe cSocialt to SStatusocia l Status
Figu80re 3.45: C7h2an.7 ge in Women’s position with respect to Social Status 70 63.1 80 72.7
s 60 e
g 70 63.1
a 50 t
s 35.9
n 60
e 40 g c e a r 50 25.6
t 30 e 35.9 n P 2400 c e
r 30 25.6 e 10 1.7 1.0 P 200 10 Improved Unchanged D1e.7cline1d.0 0 Improved ProjectUncChoanntgreodl Declined
S Sourceourc:e NCAER: NCAE fieldR fi edata.ld d ata. Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
88 89 93
93 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
The study also found a positive impact of cent in the project villages, as compared to a NDP-I on women’s income and concomitant corresponding figure of about 56 per cent in development, which had increased by 71 per the control villages.
Figure 3Figure.46: C3.46:han Changege in Win oWomen’smen’s positionpositio withn w respectith re stop eIncomect to Income Figure 3.46: Change in Women’s position with respect to Income 80 80 70.8 70 70.8 70
s 55.7
e 60 s 55.7
e 60
ta g 50 41.8
ta g 50 41.8 40 ce n 40 r
ce n 26.8
r 30 26.8 P e 30 P e 20 20 10 2.5 2.5 10 2.5 2.5 0 0 Increased Unchanged Declined Increased Unchanged Declined Project Project
S o Sourceurce: : NNCAERCAER ffieldield ddata.ata . Source: NCAER field data.
3.11. Knowledge Support to the Dairying Sector
3.11.1. Training of the Dairy Farmers
Training is one of the key interventions that mostly provided by NDDB, the Government, helps dairy farmers to use better methods the Milk Union, and other agencies like DCS for rearing milch animals. Such training is (Figure 3.47). Figure 3.47: Distribution of responses about the Training Programmes imparted by FigureFigure 3.47 :3.47: Dis Distributiontribution ooff responsesrespons aboutes ab theou Trainingt the Tr Programmesaining Pro impartedgramm byes variousimpar ted by various Agencies in the Project Villages (%) variousAgencies Agenci ines the in Projectthe Pr Villagesoject V (%)illages (%) 80 80 68.3 70 63.868.3 70 58.563.8 60 58.5
s 60 e s g
e 50
g 50 t a n t a 40 e n
c 40 e r c
e 30 r e P 30 20.9 17.818.8 P 20.9 20 17.818.8 20 11.612.9 11.612.9 8.9 9.1 10 8.9 9.1 5.5 4.1 10 5.5 4.1 0 0 NDDB Government Milk Union Other NDDB Government Milk Union Other BETP MIDP BETP MIDP
S oSourceurce:: NCAERNCAER fieldfield ddata.ata . Source: NCAER field data.
There were several non-responses MIDP periods. However, these non-responses
to the question about the usefulness came down significantly on completion of
of the training programmes in the the project and more participants responded NDP-I villages for the BETP and that the training programme had proved to be useful (Figure 3.48).
94 88 89 94 Analysing Socio-EconomicFigu rImpacte 3 .of4 the8: NDP-I: Dis Thetri Nationalbutio Dairyn ( Plan%) of o Indiaf responses pertaining to usefulness of Training imparted to the Dairy Farmers in the Project Villages
80 68.3 69.5 Figure 3.48:Figure Distr 3.48:ibut Distributionion (%) of r(%)esp ofo nresponsesses per pertainingtaining to to u usefulnesssefulnes ofs o f Training 58.9
s 60 imTrainingparted imparted to the Da to ithery DairyFarm Farmersers in t inhe the Pr Projectoject V Villagesillages e g
a 41.1 t 80 68.3 69.5 n 40 31.7 30.5
c e 58.9 r s 60 e e g P
2a 0 41.1 t
n 40 31.7 30.5 c e
r 0 e
P 20 Yes No
0 BETP MIDP Present Yes No Source: NCAER field data. BETP MIDP Present Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. The utility for training was clearly felt by project villages and around 39 per cent from over 61 per cent of the respondents from the the control villages (Figure 3.49).
Figure 3.49: DiFigurestrib u3.49:tion Distribution of respon ofs eresponsess perta ipertainingning to t toh ethe n eneeded fforor impartingimparti n g Training to DaiTrainingry Fa torm Dairyers iFarmersn the P inro theje cProjectt and andCon Controltrol V iVillagesllages (%)(%) Figure 3.49: Distribution of responses pertaining to the need for imparting Training to 70 61.2 Dairy Farmers in the Project and Control Villages (%) 60 53.5
s 70 46.5
e 50 61.2
g 38.8 a 60 53.5 t 40 n
s 46.5
e 50 c e
3g 0
r 38.8 a e t 40 P 2n 0
c e 30 r 10 e
P 20 0 10 Yes No 0 Yes Project Control No Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. Project Control The respondents who said ‘yes’ to the (ii) fodder processing, and (iii) cultivation, Source: NCAER field data. need for training also identified the areas whereas respondents from the control wherein they needed training the most. villages stated that feeding was the main area The respondents from the project villages in which the maximum training needed to be highlighted the need for training in the imparted (Figure 3.50). following areas: (i) breed development, FigureFigure 3.50: 3.50:Dist rDistributionibution of ofth thee a areasreas wwhereher eTraining Traini nisg most is m neededost ne (%)eded (%) 30 25.5 24.2 22.9 s 25 e 18.5 g 16.9 a 20 15.2 t 12.7 13.6 n 15 9.6
c e 8.5 8.2 r 10 6.9 95 5.8
e 5.1 3.23.2 P 5 95 0 l t s g g n r n & n n ng o r r e i i y i n m a e h k i o t ss i d m e i d r n t va t e d dd e Ai d ee d n O i c e a e v e t o t a F l a M a r s o n o F b F o e i a r r B i r g P Cu l e c F l a n mp r i Hu s e I V a S G
Project Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. 90 91
Figure 3.51: Distribution (%) of responses about the Demonstration Programmes held by Agencies in the Project Villages
70 64.8 59.5 60 50.8
s 50 e g
t a 40 n e
c 30 r
e 19.2 16.0 17.6 P 20 12.511.8 14.3 14.3 8.4 10.8 10 0 NDDB Government Milk Union Other
BETP MIDP Presently
Source: NCAER field data.
96 Figure 3.50: Distribution of the areas where Training is most needed (%)
30 25.5 24.2 22.9 s 25 e 18.5 g 16.9 a 20 15.2 t 12.7 13.6 n 15 9.6
c e 8.5 8.2 r 10 6.9 5.8 e 3.23.2 5.1 P 5 0 l t s g g n r n & n n ng o r r e i i y i n m a e k h i o t ss i d m e i d r n t va t e d dd e Ai d ee d n O i c e a e v e t o t a F l a M a r s o n o F b F o e i a r r B i r g P Cu l e c F l a n mp r i Hu s e I V a S G
Project
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Source: NCAER field data. Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
Demonstration is complementary to training, the implementation of NDP-I included as it helps farmers gain practical knowledge NDDB, the Government and the Milk Union, about various processes linked to the rearing along with others, in that order, as per the of milch animals. The agencies that held respondents (Figure 3.51). demonstrations along with training during
FigureFigure 3.51: 3.51:Dist riDistributionbution (% (%)) of of r eresponsessponses about abou thet th Demonstratione Demonstra tion ProgrProgrammesammes he lheldd by by A Agenciesgencies inin the th eProject Proje Villagesct Villages
70 64.8 59.5 60 50.8
s 50 e g
t a 40 n e
c 30 r
e 19.2 16.0 17.6 P 20 12.511.8 14.3 14.3 8.4 10.8 10 0 NDDB Government Milk Union Other
BETP MIDP Presently Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. It may be noted that the proportion proportion of RBP-related programmes, of training programmes as well as which comprise a crucial component of demonstrations held by NDDB increased NDP-I, had increased throughout the project throughout the period of the study. As period. However, there were variations for regards the types of demonstration, the other programmes (Figure 3.52). Figure 3.52: Distribution of responses about the types of Demonstration Programmes Figure 3.52: Distribution of responses about the types of Demonstration Programmes held by held by AgenAgenciescies i inn thethe Project Proje Villagesct Vill aduringges d theur iProjectng the Period Proj e(%)ct Period (%) 50 42.9 45 39.3 40 35.2
s 35 29.8
g e 30 24.7 24.9 96 25.8 t a 25 22.4 n r 20 12.3 e 12.5 12.2 P 15 12.2 10 5 2.6 1.3 1.9 0 Use of mower Fodder seed Silage Benefits of Bio-gas and for fodder production & preparation RBP-use of Gobar gas harvesting storage balanced feed plant ingredients
BETP MIDP Present
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. There was little variation with regard to the responses regarding the usefulness of the perceived usefulness of the demonstration demonstration programmes between the programme in the middle of the project period before the project (BETP) (about 60 (MIDP) and on its completion. However, per cent) and its completion (almost 67 per there was a significant rise in the positive cent) (Figure 3.53).
90 Figure 3.53: Distribution of re91sp o nses about the usefulness of Demonstration Programmes held by Agencies in the Project Villages during the Project Period (%) 80 70 66.75 66.76 59.78 60 s e
g 50 a
t 40.22 n 40 33.25 33.24 c e r
e 30 P 20 10 0 BETP MIDP Present
Yes No
Source: NCAER field data.
97 Figure 3.52: Distribution of responses about the types of Demonstration Programmes held by Agencies in the Project Villages during the Project Period (%)
50 42.9 45 39.3 40 35.2
s 35 29.8
g e 30 24.7 24.9 25.8 t a 25 22.4 n r 20 12.3 e 12.5 12.2 P 15 12.2 10 5 2.6 1.3 1.9 0 Use of mower Fodder seed Silage Benefits of Bio-gas and for fodder production & preparation RBP-use of Gobar gas harvesting storage balanced feed plant ingredients
BETP MIDP Present
Source: NCAER field data.
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Figure 3.53: Distribution of responses about the usefulness of Demonstration Figure 3.53: Distribution of responses about the usefulness of Demonstration Programmes held by Programmes heldAgencies by Agen inc theies Project in the Villages Proje duringct Vill theage Projects duri Periodng th e(%) Project Period (%) 80 70 66.75 66.76 59.78 60 s e
g 50 a
t 40.22 n 40 33.25 33.24 c e r
e 30 P 20 10 0 BETP MIDP Present
Yes No
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. As regards the need for holding of the respondents gave positive feedback demonstration programmes for any (Figure 3.54). dairying-related topics, over 51 per cent
FFigureigur e3.54: 3.5 Distribution4: Distribu oft iresponseson of re aboutspon theses need abo forut Demonstrationthe need for DemonstratProgrammesion Progra inm theme Projects in th Villagese Proj (%)ect Villages (%) 51.5 51.1 51.0
50.5 97 s
e 50.0 g a t
n 49.5 c e
r 48.9 e 49.0 P 48.5 48.0 47.5 Yes No
SourceSourc:e NCAER: NCAE Rfield fiel ddata. da ta.
3.11.2. Participation in Various NDP Programmes
When the households were questioned about 35 per cent, 30 per cent, and 23 per cent attending any demonstration programme, of them, respectively, responded in the meetings and discussions related to RBP, affirmative (Figure 3.55). VBMPS, and both RBP and VBMPS, about
Figure 3.55: Percentage share of positive responses about Field Demonstrations
40 34.9 35 30.3 30
es 23.2
g 25 a t 20 92 93 ce n
e r 15 P 10 5 0 RBP Field Demonstration VBMPS Field Both RBP-VBMPS Field Demonstration Demonstration
Source: NCAER field data.
98 Figure 3.54: Distribution of responses about the need for Demonstration Programmes in the Project Villages (%) 51.5 51.1 51.0 50.5 s
e 50.0 g a t
n 49.5 c e
r 48.9 e 49.0 P 48.5 48.0 47.5 Yes No
Source: NCAER field data.
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
Figure 3.5Figure5: Pe 3.55:rcen Percentagetage sha rsharee of ofp opositivesitive responsesrespon saboutes ab Fieldout DemonstrationsField Demon strations
40 34.9 35 30.3 30
es 23.2
g 25 a t 20 ce n
e r 15 P 10 5 0 RBP Field Demonstration VBMPS Field Both RBP-VBMPS Field Demonstration Demonstration
Sou r c e : SourceNCAE: RNCAER field d fieldata. data.
Households received multiple benefits benefits from RBP field demonstrations, from various field demonstrations on RBP, VBMPS field demonstrations, and both VBMPS, and both RBP and VBMPS, together. RBP and VBMPS field demonstrations, In the RBP villages, 43 per cent of the respectively. Similarly, in the VBMPS villages, households received demonstration benefits 15 per cent, 43 per cent, and 14 per cent related to RBP field demonstrations, 15 per of the households received benefits from cent from the VBMPS field demonstrations, RBP field demonstrations, VBMPS field and 15 per cent from both RBP and VBMPS demonstrations, and both RBP and VBMPS field demonstrations. In the RBP and field demonstrations, respectively (Figure VBMPS villages, 37 per cent, 35 per cent, 3.56). and 45 per cent of the households received
Figure 3.5Figure6: Pe 3.56:rcen Percentagetage sha rshareses of of S Scheme-wisecheme-wis responsese respo nons eFields on Demonstrations Field Demonstrations
50 43 98 45 43 40 37 35 es g
a 30 t
ce n 20 e r 15 15 15 14 P 10
0 RBP RBP_VBMPS VBMPS
RBP Field Demonstration VBMPS Field Demonstration Both RBP-VBMPS Field Demonstration
Source Sour: cNCAERe: NCA EfieldR fi edata.ld d ata. The percentage shares of scheme-wise and VBMPS villages, 16 per cent, 33 per cent, assistance availed of by the households and 39 per cent of the households availed revealed Figure 3.57 shows that 41 per of assistance under RBP, VBMPS, and both cent, 36 per cent, and 13 per cent of the RBP and VBMPS, respectively. Similarly, in households availed of assistance under the the VBMPS villages, 15 per cent, 43 per cent, RBP, VBMPS, and both RBP and VBMPS and 14 per cent of the households availed of programmes, respectively, during the period assistance under RBP, VBMPS, and both RBP of implementation of the project. In the RBP and VBMPS programmes, respectively.
92 93 Figure 3.57: Percentage share of Households availing of Scheme-wise Assistance
50 43 41 39 s 36 e 40 33 g a
t 30 n 16 15 14 c e 20 13 r e 10 P 0 RBP RBP+VBMPS VBMPS
Availed Assistance under RBP Availed Assistance under VBMPS Availed Assistance under Both RBP-VBMPS
Source: NCAER field data.
99 Figure 3.56: Percentage shares of Scheme-wise responses on Field Demonstrations 50 43 45 43 40 37 35 es g
a 30 t
ce n 20 e r 15 15 15 14 P 10
0 RBP RBP_VBMPS VBMPS
RBP Field Demonstration VBMPS Field Demonstration Both RBP-VBMPS Field Demonstration
Source: NCAER field data.
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Figure 3.57: Percentage share of Households availing of Scheme-wise Assistance Figure 3.57: Percentage share of Households availing of Scheme-wise Assistance 50 43 41 39 s 36 e 40 33 g a
t 30 n 16 15 14 c e 20 13 r e 10 P 0 RBP RBP+VBMPS VBMPS
Availed Assistance under RBP Availed Assistance under VBMPS Availed Assistance under Both RBP-VBMPS Source: NCAER field data. SoTheurc estudy: NCA EalsoR f ishowseld dat athat. households VBMPS were implemented, 33 per cent, 32 received multiple benefits from all the per cent, and 46 per cent of the households
programmes implemented under NDP-I. The received benefits from RBP, VBMPS, and percentage share of benefits received by the both RBP and VBMPS programmes, households may be assessed from following. respectively. Similarly, in the VBMPS villages, Figure 3.58 shows that in the RBP villages, 44 17 per cent, 41 per cent, and 20 per cent of per cent of the households received benefits 99 the households benefited from RBP, VBMPS from RBP, 20 per cent from VBMPS, and and both the RBP and VBMPS programmes, 21 per cent from both the RBP and VBMPS respectively. programmes. In villages where both RBP and
Figure 3.58: Percentage shares of benefits from RBP, VBMPS, and Both Figure 3.58: Percentage shares of benefits from RBP, VBMPS, and Both
50 44 46
es 41 g a t 40 33 32
ce n 30 e r 21
P 20 20 20 17 10 0 RBP RBP_VBMPS VBMPS RBP Programme VBMPS Programme Both RBP-VBMPS
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
3.12. Overall Economic Impact of the Programme
3.12.1. NDP-I and Its Impact on Overall Dairy Income at the Household Level about 73 per cent, respectively (Figure 3.59). The interventions under NDP-I had a major These figures were significantly higher than impact on household income for most the corresponding figures for respondents categories of respondents, especially landless in the control villages. These findings thus labourers, medium+ and small and marginal point to the success of NDP-I interventions farmers, for whom the incomes increased in augmenting the incomes of the poor and by over 68 per cent, nearly 77 per cent, and marginalised sections in the project villages.
94 95
100 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
Figure 3.59: Distribution of responses about change in Household Income (%) Figure 3.5Figure9: D i3.59:strib Distributionution of r ofes responsesponses aaboutbou tchange chan inge Household in Hous eIncomehold I(%)ncome (%) Increased No change Decreased Source: NCAER field data. Increased No change Decreased 100% 1.5 1.0 0.9 1.4 0.4 0.0 2.2 1.0 1.3
n 6.6
o 90% 100i % 22.9 t 1.5 1.0 0.296.5 1.4 0.4 0.0 2.2 27.1.0 1.3
n 30.1 6.6
u 80% o 90% 39.9 b i 50.6 22.9 i 54.4 t 70% 26.5 27.1 54.4 r 30.1 54.6 u 80t % 68.9 39.9 s
b 60% i 50.6 i 70% 54.4 54.4 d r 50% 54.6 t 68.9 e s 60% g i 40% 76.7 a
d 72.6 71.9
t 68.4 50%30% e
n 57.9
e 48.0 g 40% 45.6 44.3
c 20% 76.7 38.8 a 72.6 71.9 r
t 68.4 30.1
30e %10%
n 57.9 P e 0% 48.0 45.6 44.3 c 20% 38.8
r 30.1
e 10% Project Control Project Control Project Control Project Control Project Control P 0% Landless Small & Medium+ Large Total Project Control ProjeMctarCgionnatlrol Project Control Project Control Project Control Landless Small & Medium+ Large Total Source: NCAER field data. Marginal
Improvement Source: NCAE inR fdairyield d aincometa. is the primary reason for the enhanced level of income in related products, though in this case the both the project as well as control villages. control villages had a slight edge over the The next category in which there was an project villages in terms of improvement in improvement in household incomes during income (Figure 3.60). the course of the project was that of milk- Figure 3.60: Distribution of responses about Figure 3.60: Distributionreason ofs fresponsesor chan gaboute in H reasonsouseh forold change Incom ine Household (%) Income (%)
70 F6ig2.u8re 3.60: Distribution of responses about 60 55.3 reasons for change in Household Income (%) 50 ge s
70t a 40 62.8 n e
c 30 55.3 21.2 23.1 60r e 13.2 P 20 50 7.6 8.4 8.4 ge s 10
t a 40 n 0 e
c 30 21.2 23.1 r Improved income Improved income Increased wages Other e 13.2 P 20 from dairy farming from milk-related and salaries 7.6 8.4 8.4 10 products 0 Project Control Improved income Improved income Increased wages Other Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCfrAoEmR dfiaielrdy d faatram. ing from milk-related and salaries products There were also incidences of a decrease in implementation of the project, as seen in income for households in both the projectPr oject FigureContro l3.61. and control villages during the period of Source: NCAER field data. Figure 3.61: Distribution of responses about reasons for Figure 3.61: Distributiond ofec responsesrease in aboutHous reasonsehold I fornc odecreaseme (%) in Household Income (%)
35 31.5 28.6 28.5 30 24.6 s e 25
ta g 20 16.4 17.2 n
e 13.5 12.5 c 15 11.1 11.9 r e
P 10 5 2.8 1.4 0 Death of a Low price of High price of Diseases Lack of Other Dairy animal dairy dairy-related household products inpu10ts 1 labour
Project Control Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
94 95 101
Figure 3.62: Types of animals covered under RBP (% Share)
50 n o
t i 40 46.4 u b i t r s
i 30
D 29.6 ge 20 24.0 t a n e c
r 10 P e 0 Indigenous Cow Cross Bred Cow Buffalo
Source: NCAER field data.
102
Figure 3.61: Distribution of responses about reasons for decrease in Household Income (%)
35 31.5 28.6 28.5 30 24.6 s
e 25
ta g 20 16.4 17.2 n
e 13.5 12.5 c 15 11.1 11.9 r e
P 10 5 2.8 1.4 0 Death of a Low price of High price of Diseases Lack of Other Dairy animal dairy dairy-related household products inputs labour
Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Project Control
Source: NCAER field data.
The figure shows that the high cost of dairy control villages reported death of a dairy inputs is the major reason for a decrease animal as the reason for a decline in income, in dairy income, followed by low prices of while the corresponding figure was over 13 dairy products. More than 16 per cent of the per cent in the project villages. households (with decreased incomes) in the
3.13. Assessment of Interventions in the Exclusive RBP Villages
This section provides detailed information by buffaloes, at 29.6 per cent, and indigenous pertaining exclusively to the RBP villages. cows, at 24.0 per cent (Figure 3.62). Further, The study found that 57.7 per cent of the around 58 per cent of the animals were households had covered their animals under found to have been ear-tagged at the time of RBP, with the coverage of crossbred cows registration. The following figure depicts the being the highest at 46.4 per cent, followed comparative status:
FigFigureure 3 .3.62:62: T Typesypes o off aanimalsnimals coveredcovered under unde RBPr RB P(% ( %Share) Share)
50 n o
t i 40 46.4 u b i t r s
i 30
D 29.6 ge 20 24.0 t a n e c
r 10 P e 0 Indigenous Cow Cross Bred Cow Buffalo
S o u r c e : N C A SourceER fie:l dNCAER data. field data.
3.13.1. Impact of RBP on Improvement on Yield and Reduction 102 in Feeding Cost high as 12.57 per cent for feeding costs. The impact of RBP in terms of improvement The feeding cost fell mainly due to an on yield and bringing down the feeding improvement in the overall health of the and feed content costs can be gauged from animals and reduced inter calving period Figures 3.63 and 3.64. After implementation resulting from improvement in reproduction of the programme, the reduction was as efficiency. FigureFigure 3.63 3.63:: Im pImpactact of of R RBPBP p programmerogramm one oimprovementn improve min eYieldnt in (Litres/Day) Yield (Litres/Day) 9 7.79 8
) 6.63 y 7 a
D 6 /
s 4.87 e 5 r t i 3.44 L 4 ( 3 ld 2.14 e i 2 1.65 Y 1 0 Indigenous Cow Cross Bred Cow Buffalo
Before RBP Advisory After RBP Advisory Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. 96 97 Figure 3.64: Impact of RBP programme on reduction in Feeding Cost (Rs/Day) per Household
34
33.26 r 33 p e
)
y 32 a D / ld
s 31 o R h ( e
s t 30 s
u 29.08 o 29 C o H g
n 28
ee d i 27 F 26 Before RBP Advisory After RBP Advisory
Source: NCAER field data.
103 Figure 3.63: Impact of RBP programme on improvement in Yield (Litres/Day)
9 7.79 8
) 6.63 y 7 a
D 6 /
s 4.87 e 5 r t i 3.44 L 4 ( 3 ld 2.14 e i 2 1.65 Y 1 0 Indigenous Cow Cross Bred Cow Buffalo
Before RBP Advisory After RBP Advisory Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas Source: NCAER field data.
Figure 3.64: Impact of RBP programme on reduction in Feeding Cost (Rs/Day) per Figure 3.64: Impact of RBP programmeH ono ureductionsehold in Feeding Cost (Rs/Day) per Household
34
33.26 r 33 p e
)
y 32 a D / ld
s 31 o R h ( e
s t 30 s
u 29.08 o 29 C o H g
n 28
ee d i 27 F 26 Before RBP Advisory After RBP Advisory
Sourc e : N C A SourceER fi:e NCAERld data. field data. Figure 3.65 summarises the responses period (33.9 per cent), (ii) reduced age at pertaining to improvements brought about first calving (29.4 per cent), and (iii) overall by the implementation of RBP. Marked health of the milch animals (36.7 per cent), improvements were reported in terms of: all of which had a direct impact on increase (i) reduction in Ftheigu inter-calvingre 3.65: Res pcalvingonses on improinv eaccrualsments r fromesult idairying.ng from RBP
40 Figure 3.65: Responses on improvements resulting from 3R6B.7P Figure33. 93.65: Responses on improvements resulting from RBP 35 40 29.4 36.7 30 33.9 35 es
g 25 29.4 a t 30 20 103 ce n es g
e r 25 a t P 15 20 ce n 10 e r
P 15 5 10 0 5 Reduction Inter calving period Reduced Age at First calving Improvement in Overall health
0 Source: NCAERe fduielcdti dona tIan.t e r calving period Reduced Age at First calving Improvement in Overall health
SourceSourc:e NCAER: NCAER field field data.data . Figure 3.66 shows that the major benefits quality of milk (6.3 per cent), reproduction of RBP reported by households were efficiency (15.7 per cent), climatic increase in milk (31.8 per cent), followed management (3.7 per cent), and reduction in by improvement in health (16.8 per cent), feeding cost (15.6 per cent).
FiFiguregure 3 3.66:.66: BenefitsBenefit sof o fRBP RB P 35 31.8 Figure 3.66: Benefits of RBP 30
es 35 31.8 g 25 a t 30 ce n 20 16.3 16.8
es 15.7
e r 15.6 g P 25 a
t 15
ce n 20 10 15.7 16.3 16.8
e r 15.6 P 3.7 155 100 Increase in Milk Reduction in Improvement in Improvement in Improvement in Improv3eme.7 nt in 5 Yield Feeding Cost reproduction quality of milk Overall Health Climatic 0 efficiency Management Increase in Milk Reduction in Improvement in Improvement in Improvement in Improvement in SourceSour:c NCAERe: NCAE fieldRY fiell dddata. dat a. Feeding Cost reproduction quality of milk Overall Health Climatic efficiency Management
96 97 Source: NCAER field data.
104
104 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
The study further found that 67 per cent of practices. The two major reasons reported the households were feeding their animals by households for the non-adoption or as per RBP advice and 66 per cent were discontinuation of RBP were firstly, that satisfied with the services of the Local it offered only traditional, time-tested Resource Person (LRP). However, 56.7 knowledge rather than anything new, as per cent of the households reported that reported by 28.8 per cent of the households, they had fed their animals in the past as and secondly, that it had a marginal visible per the recommendations of RBP but had impact, as claimed by 17.7 per cent of the discontinuedFigur thise 3. trend,67: R eandspo 43.3nse perabo centut N on-adhouseholdsoption/Di s(Figurecontin 3.67).uation of RBP said35 that they had never followed RBP 28.8 30 Figure 3.67: Response about Non-adoption/Discontinuation of RBP 25 Figure 3.67: Response about Non-adoption/Discontinuation of RBP es g
a 35 17.7 t 20 28.8 16.5 30 ce n 15 10.3 e r 25 8.3 8.8 P es
10 g
a 17.7 4.9 4.7 t 20 16.5 5 ce n 15 10.3 0 e r 8.3 8.8 P l l e t t 10 P e a a l k g l o o 4.9 B l
4.7es n e n i b i c a g l o n n h ems e e d i g R 5 i l l a t s n g s t r t i i g m e b a n i n t e d ce a y g w a l i n n i t d i i d n i h n o t n 0 b a y d a o l l a a o n m e e s t e i t t e d r P r p t e l e a d i a l s t k g l s i g o o e s o t s B l es n f n n e n n eed i K i f a i b a of c h i t f l b c a o g t l f i o n n a cu l n h ems e e d f i e v e f g t R i n u g t g o l i a l t a t c s n g u f a i s i t r t f i i du c g m e s o b s a a n n a i n f n s t e d c r ce a y g w a l i n i e l r o o i n i n i t d i y i d p n e s o ue i h t n o s t t n n s b u n r l i b a y d a o g s i I D s a a o n t i m e s t e i e d p r r d e p i t e l d m d i s s t o n i s e n i g e n eme n s em s o t s n f n n eed i K d i i f a a a of c h t t C f l v b e x o o t f i e a e a i n cu l u n f a
v e e f i t n u g t l g o i a e h ce s t c o u f a i i r t f i du c n c h s o s a d n a b n f s c r t i i n i e l r T o o i i y p e s o d i ue t s t c n s u n r l s i b e g s i I D s pp r a t i n p d e i f d m s mp r r o n e n i n eme n V i em s A I d i a t p C c o v e x o e e a i u n a
i l e h ce s o r t i n c h d b t i T i d i c s e pp r a n f mp r r V i A Source: NCAER field data. I p c o SSourceource: NCAERNCAER ffieldield ddata.ata.
3.14. Assessment of Implementations in the Exclusive VBMPS Villages
This section specifically examines the status 51 per cent of the households reported of implementation of NDP-I in the VBMPS participating in the programme after the villages. The programme was implemented formation of new DCSes, and 49 per cent by (i) registration of new DCSes, and (ii) reported participation due to strengthening strengthening of the existing DCSs. Overall, of the existing DCSes (Figure 3.68).
Figure 3Figure.68: 3.68:VBM VBMPSPS com componentsponents implementedimplemen tundered u nNDP-Ider N DP-I Figure 3.68: VBMPS components implemented under NDP-I 55 55 51 49 50 51 49 50 s s e 45 e g 45 g a a t
t 40 n 40 n c e c e
r 35 r 35 e e P P 3030 2525 2020 NNewew D DCCSS SStrterenngtghtehneinnign ogf oDf CDSCS
S o u SroceSourceur: ceN:C NCAERNACEARE fRfieldie fldie ld data.d adt aat.a .
98 99
105 105 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
The households were posed specific they could not recollect the specific year- questions on price realisation with respect wise increase in milk prices, their responses to the prices they were getting before and pointed to substantial price increases of 20- after the opening of the DCSes. Although 27 per cent over a period of 3–4 years.
FiFgiugruerFigure e3 3.6.69 93.69:: :P Priri Priceccee of of m milkiillkk b beforebeefoforer and ea nadn after daf taef rtopening eorp oenpie nnofg i onfg of NeNwew DCSNew DCSe DCSes/Strengtheningess//SSttrrenengtheniinngg o ofof fEExisting Exixsitsintig nDCSes Dg CSDCSe (Rs/litre)s e(Rs s(/Rlist/re)lit re) 30 28.258.5
30e e r t r i
t 25 22.3 i 2L 5 22.3 / L s / 20 s R
20 R
l k 15
l k 15 m i
f 10 m i
o
f 10
c e 5 o i r
c e 5 P
i 0 r
P 0 BeforeDCS AfterDCS
BeforeDCS AfterDCS Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. The respondent households reported that per cent), private dairies (19.9 per cent) and before the opening of the DCSes, they were individual households/shops in the village mainly selling their milk to dudhias (23.5 (19.1 per cent), as depicted in Figure 3.69. Figure 3.70: Points for selling milk before opening of Figure 3.70: Points forN sellingew DCS milkes before/Stren openinggtheni ofng New of E DCSes/Strengtheningxisting DCSes of Existing DCSes Figure 3.70: Points for selling milk before opening of 25 23.5 New DCSes/Strengthening of Existing DCSes 19.1 19.9 20 25 23.5
es 14.1 g 15 19.9 a
t 19.1 20 9.7 ce n 10
e r 8.0 es
P 14.1 g 15 5.7 a t 5 9.7 ce n 10
e r 8.0 P 0 5.7 Individual HH/ Dudhia Private dairies Outside village Not selling Was not rearing Others=7 5 Shops in village milk/milk animals products Sour0ce: NCAER field data. SourceI:n NCAERdividual fieldHH/ data.D udhia Private dairies Outside village Not selling Was not rearing Others=7 Shops in village milk/milk animals said that thep rimplementationoducts of VBMPS had Figure 3.71 shows that 38.3 per cent of the Sourhouseholdsce: NCAER freportedield data. that they were getting helped resolve the problem of wastage of a better price for milk, while 27.8 per cent milk. Figure 3.71: Benefits of VBMPS for various components Figure 3.71: Benefits of VBMPS for various components 45.0 38.3 40.0 35.0 27.8 es 30.0 g a t 25.0
ce n 20.0
e r 15.0 11.2 P 8.8 8.5 10.0 5.4 5.0 0.0 Better price of No wastage of Advantage of Availability of Subsidized Time saved in milk milk getting longer better AI service Cattle Feed marketing milk time for pouring milk
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
98 99 106
106 Figure 3.72: Responses on increase in animals due to opening of New DCSes/ Strengthening of Existing DCSes
60 56.5 50
es 40 g a t 30 26.0 ce n 17.5 e r 20 P 10 0 Yes No Can't say
Source: NCAER field data.
Figure 3.73: Future plans to increase milch animals in households after setting up of New DCSes
60
es 49.7 g a t 40
ce n 29.0
e r 21.4 P 20
0 Yes No Not Sure
Source: NCAER field data.
107 Figure 3.71: Benefits of VBMPS for various components
45.0 38.3 40.0 Figure 3.71: Benefits of VBMPS for various components 35.0 27.8 es 3405.0.0 g 38.3 a t 4205.0.0 35.0 ce n 20.0 27.8 es e r 30.0 g 15.0 11.2 P a 8.8 8.5 t 2105.0.0 5.4
ce n 205.0.0 e r 15.0 11.2 P 0.0 8.8 8.5 10.0 Better price of No wastage of Advantage of Availability of Sub5si.4dized Time saved in 5.0 milk milk getting longer better AI service Cattle Feed marketing milk 0.0 time for pouring Better price of No wastage of Advamnitlakge of Availability of Subsidized Time saved in milk milk getting longer better AI service Cattle Feed marketing milk Source: NCAER field data. time for pouring milk
AnalysingSo Socio-Economicurce: NCA EImpactR fie ofld the d aNDP-I:ta. The National Dairy Plan of India
When asked if they would increase the the households responded in the affirmative number of their milch animals after the (Figure 3.72). settingFigur upe 3 of.7 2new: R DCSes,espon s56.5es o pern i ncentcrea ofs e in animals due to opening of New DCSes/ Strengthening of Existing DCSes Figure 3.72: ReFigurespon 3.72:ses o Responsesn increa onse increasein anim ina animalsls due dueto o top eopeningning o off New DCSes/ 60 56.5 NewStren DCSes/gthe Strengtheningning of Exis ofti Existingng DCS DCSeses 50 56.5 es 640 g a t 5300 26.0 ce n
es 17.5 e r 40 g 20 P a t 26.0 3010 ce n 17.5 e r 20 P 0 10 Yes No Can't say
Source: NC0AER field data. Yes No Can't say
S o u r c Sourcee: NC: ANCAERER fie fieldld d adata.ta. Figure 3.73 shows that 49.7 per cent of the had helped them by providing benefits of households responded positively with future transparency in the payment system or plans to increase the number of their milch flexibility in the timings for milk pouring. animals as the establishment of new DCSes Figure 3.73: Future plans to increase milch animals in Figure 3.73: Future planshous toeh increaseolds a fmilchter s animalsetting uinp households of New DCS afteres setting up of New DCSes Figure 3.73: Future plans to increase milch animals in 60
es 49.7
g households after setting up of New DCSes a t 40 ce n 60 29.0
es 49.7 e r
g 21.4 P a t 20 40
ce n 29.0
e r 21.4 P 0 20 Yes No Not Sure
S Sourceource:: NCAER N0CAER field field data.dat a. Yes No Not Sure
Specific questions posed to households to factors for the rise in income from milk Source: NCAER field data. ascertain the major reasons for an increase in production were an improvement in the
income after the commencement of the new quality of milk (24 per cent), production of
DCSes pointed to the positive contribution 107 a higher volume of milk (18.4 per cent), and of various factors such as transparency in the setting up of more collection points (12.9
payment systems and flexibility in milk 107 per cent), respectively (Figure 3.74). pouring timings. The main contributing Figure 3.74: Major reasons for increase in Income from milk production Figure 3.74: Major reasons for increase in Income from milk production 30 25 24.0 18.4 ge s 20 t a
n 15 12.9 e
c 10.0 r 10 7.2 e 5.7 6.2 6.2 P 5 3.4 3.0 2.9 0 f t r s s g k o n k o l o m t u o p n l s n
i t
o f r i i
i o I ts …
a s s t i t … s h c s c m g s b e P t e s r
s
m k s
e a
a n l r o g
ts om e ; i n m t e l ec t M r t i o t t r t i e l p c t y n i cc e n o u / i f t k i i cc e i a s
ge r l m g n o t e a l n l l s d a a
r i i e c o n d o n e
a f
d S l
r e at i e
r c v o fe e p r a l tu n o l r u e
m n C m r e a t e e r c r L q t r t e s r
t a o w l hi c a D h o e
i a
r ge n t e e o H a p r h e g e r o M i p n V r t h t G k tt e D O G e
w i Hi g B B e Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
100 101
108 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
Picture 3.6: Milk collection centre in an NDP-I village
Appendix to Chapter 3: Regression Results
Model 1: Average consumption of milk Western region (Maharashtra, Gujarat and (litres/day) (log) = Rajasthan), zero otherwise}, D (North) {=1 F [Average production of milk (litres/ for Northern region (Punjab, Haryana, and day/HH), D4 (=1 for Project areas, zero Uttar Pradesh), zero otherwise}, D (South) otherwise), D3 (=1 for the End project {=1 for Southern region (Karnataka, Andhra period, zero otherwise), D (East) {=1 for Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Kerala), zero Eastern region (West Bengal, Bihar and otherwise} and reference region is Central Odisha), zero otherwise}, D(West) {=1 for (Madhya Pradesh)]
Table A1: Dependent Variable: Average Consumption of Milk (Litres/Day) (log)
Independent Variables Coefficients Standard Error Model Fit Constant -0.191*** 0.008 R2=0.26 Average production of milk (log) 0.319*** 0.003 F= 2648.7 N= 53745 D4 0.218*** 0.004 D3 (End project) -0.141*** 0.003 D (East) -0.040* 0.008 D (West) -0.012*** 0.008 D (North) 0.106*** 0.008 D (South) -0.047*** 0.007
Note: *** Significant at 1% and * Significant at 10%.
The average consumption of milk shows Model 2: Average production of milk (litres/ a highly positive and significant relation day/HH) (log) = with the average production of milk and the implementation of NDP-I in the project F [Total female (Cow+ Buffalo)]; D [Animal villages. On the other hand, the consumption Covered under RBP (HH animal covered of milk is inversely related to all the region under RBP)], D (VBMPS=Type of VBMPS dummies except in the North. component implemented in the village), D4 (=1 for Project areas, zero otherwise),
100 101 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
D3 (=1 for the End project period, zero region (Punjab, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh), otherwise), D (East) {=1 for Eastern region zero otherwise}, D (South) {=1 for Southern (West Bengal, Bihar and Odisha), zero region (Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, otherwise}, D(West) {=1 for Western region Tamil Nadu and Kerala), zero otherwise} (Maharashtra, Gujarat and Rajasthan), zero and reference region is Central (Madhya otherwise}, D (North) {=1 for Northern Pradesh)]
Table A2: Dependent Variable: Average Production of Milk (Litres/Day/HH) (log) Independent Variables Coefficients Standard Error Model Fit Constant 1.054*** 0.011 2 Total Female (Cow + Buffalo) 0.067*** 0.001 R = 0.26 F= 2093.1 D (Animal Covered under RBP) 0.214*** 0.005 N= 53745 D (VBMPS) 0.076*** 0.005 D4 0.186*** 0.006 D3 (End project) 0.431*** 0.005 D (East) 0.265*** 0.011 D (West) 0.263*** 0.011 D (North) 0.189*** 0.012 D (South) 0.227*** 0.011 Note: *** Significant at 1%. The average production of milk shows a of VBMPS component implemented in highly positive and significant relation the village), D4 (=1 for Project areas, zero with the possession of a female animal otherwise), D3 (=1 for the End project (cow+buffalo) by the households, animals period, zero otherwise), D (East) {=1 for covered under RBP, coverage of VBMPS, Eastern region (West Bengal, Bihar and implementation of NDP-I in the project Odisha), zero otherwise}, D(West) {=1 for villages, and periodic impact for all the Western region (Maharashtra, Gujarat and region dummies. Rajasthan),zero otherwise}, D (North) {=1 for Northern region ( Punjab, Haryana, and Model 3: Average sale of milk (per day/HH) Uttar Pradesh), zero otherwise}, D (South) (log) = {=1 for Southern region (Karnataka, Andhra F [Average Production of Milk (litres/ Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Kerala), zero day/HH) (log), Average Consumption of otherwise} and reference region is Central Milk (litres/day) (log), D (VBMPS=Type (Madhya Pradesh)]
Table A3: Dependent Variable: Average Sale of Milk (per Day/HH) (log)
Independent Variables Coefficients Standard Error Model Fit Constant -1.164*** 0.003 R2=0.98 Average production of milk (litres/day/HH) (log) 1.534*** 0.001 F= 263823.5 N= 53745 D(VBMPS) 0.026*** 0.001 Milk Consumption (log) -0.567*** 0.002 D4 0.033*** 0.002 D3 (End project) 0.059*** 0.001 D (East) 0.007*** 0.003 D (West) 0.006*** 0.003 D (North) 0.023*** 0.003 D (South) -0.009*** 0.003
Note: *** Significant at 1%.
102 103 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas
The average sale of milk shows a highly animal covered under RBP), D4 (=1 for positive and significant relation with Project areas, zero otherwise), D3 (=1 for the average production of milk by End project, zero otherwise), D (East) {=1 the households, coverage of VBMPS, for Eastern region (West Bengal, Bihar and implementation of NDP-I in the project Odisha), zero otherwise}, D(West) {=1 for villages, and periodic impact for all the Western region (Maharashtra, Gujarat and region dummies except South. It is, on Rajasthan), zero otherwise}, D (North) {=1 the other hand, inversely related to milk for Northern region (Punjab, Haryana, and consumption of the producer household. Uttar Pradesh), zero otherwise}, D (South) {=1 for Southern region (Karnataka, Andhra Model 4: Total expenditure per (cow+ Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Kerala), zero buffalo) (log) = otherwise} and reference region is Central F [D (Animal Covered under RBP (HH (Madhya Pradesh)]
Table A4: Dependent Variable: Average Expenditure (Cow+Buffalo) (log) Independent Variables Coefficients Standard Error Model Fit Constant 0.146*** 0.049 R2=0.92 D (Animal Covered under RBP) -0.173*** 0.014 F=39519. 5 N= 53745 D4 0.117*** 0.018 D3 (End project) 6.824*** 0.014 D (East) 1.103*** 0.048 D (West) 1.314*** 0.049 D (North) 1.07*** 0.05 D (South) 1.08*** 0.048
Note: *** Significant at 1%; The average expenditure on cows and zero otherwise) D4 (=1 for Project areas, buffaloes shows a negative and significant zero otherwise), D3 (=1 for End project relation with the animals covered under RBP, period and zero otherwise), D (East) {=1 reflecting the impact of cost reduction due to for Eastern region (West Bengal, Bihar and effective implementation of the programme Odisha), zero otherwise}, D(West) {=1 for across project areas. It shows a highly positive Western region( Maharashtra, Gujarat and and significant relation with the project areas Rajasthan),zero otherwise}, D (North) {=1 and the end project period dummy for all the for Northern region ( Punjab, Haryana, and region dummies. Uttar Pradesh), zero otherwise}, D (South) {=1 for Southern region (Karnataka, Andhra Model 5: Average hours per animal spent by Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Kerala), zero women in different dairy activities= otherwise} and reference region is Central F [D (HH animal covered under RBP), D (Madhya Pradesh)] (VBMPS village=1 for VBMPS village and
102 103 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Table A5: Dependent Variable: Average Hours per Animal Spent by Women in Different Dairy Activities (log)
Independent Variables Coefficients Standard Error Model Fit Constant -0.599*** 0.021 R2=0.13 D (Animal Covered under RBP) -0.054*** 0.02 F=898.1 N= 53745 D (VBMPS village) 0.138*** 0.017 Ratio of Production to Sale (log) 0.502*** 0.013 D4 -0.116*** 0.01 D3 (End project period) 0.083*** 0.009 D (East) 0.543*** 0.019 D (West) -0.264*** 0.018 D (North) 0.216*** 0.02 D (South) 0.212*** 0.018
Note: *** Significant at 1%.
The average number of hours per animal Table A7: Average Sale of Milk (litre/day) spent by women shows a negative and State Project Control significant relation with the animals covered Andhra Pradesh 7.2 6.7 under RBP, reflecting the impact of better functionality of animals in response to the Bihar 6.8 5.4 programme across project areas. It shows Gujarat 7.9 6.7 a highly positive and significant relation Haryana 7.4 5.8 with the VBMPS villages, which is linked Karnataka 9.4 7.0 to procurement activities. The positive Kerala 7.5 4.6 relation is shown for the end project period Madhya Pradesh 5.6 4.4 dummy and for all the region dummies Maharashtra 7.8 6.2 except the western region comprising states Odisha 8.0 6.6 like Maharashtra and Gujarat. The average Punjab 6.3 6.1 number of hours on other productive Rajasthan 6.8 6.1 activities plausibly went up as reflected in the inverse relation shown in the project and the Tamil Nadu 7.2 4.7 control dummy, which also holds true for the Uttar Pradesh 7.9 6.3 regional dummy for the West. West Bengal 6.5 5.5 Source: NCAER field data Table A6: Average Production of Milk (litre/day) Table A8:Average Milk Consumption (litre/day) State Project Control State Project Control Andhra Pradesh 5.44 5.24 Andhra Pradesh 1.76 1.5 Bihar 5.04 3.81 Bihar 1.78 1.59 Gujarat 5.97 4.95 Gujarat 1.92 1.71 Haryana 5.52 3.97 Haryana 1.92 1.81 Karnataka 7.52 5.52 Karnataka 1.89 1.51 Kerala 5.55 2.98 Kerala 1.98 1.6 Madhya Pradesh 3.90 3.08 Madhya Pradesh 1.7 1.37 Maharashtra 5.99 4.76 Maharashtra 1.81 1.48 Odisha 6.22 5.08 Odisha 1.74 1.54 Punjab 4.19 4.27 Punjab 2.07 1.79 Rajasthan 4.95 4.54 Rajasthan 1.89 1.55 Tamil Nadu 5.42 3.19 Tamil Nadu 1.77 1.54 Uttar Pradesh 5.75 4.47 Uttar Pradesh 2.19 1.82 West Bengal 4.73 3.97 West Bengal 1.76 1.55 Source: NCAER field data Source: NCAER field data 104 105 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Household Characteristics and Performance Indicators of the Dairy Production Sector in the Project Areas . . . 3.7 2.2 2.0 4.6 5.7 8.0 7.8 2.1 2.0 3.7 12.6 Control After RBP After 2.6 2.7 9.6 8.9 7.5 2.4 8.1 7.3 2.3 5.1 2.1 2.2 5.1 10.5 Project Buffalo . . . 2.5 1.1 1.0 3.3 4.0 6.0 7.2 1.1 9.5 1.0 3.0 Control Before RBP Before 1.5 1.5 7.6 6.4 5.4 6.1 1.3 5.8 1.2 7.5 3.4 1.1 1.2 3.8 Project . . . 2.7 2.8 4.8 9.6 9.0 7.8 5.8 3.4 3.5 16.0 11.1 Control After RBP After 3.3 6.2 8.9 6.0 7.9 8.6 3.4 9.0 3.6 4.2 13.9 10.3 11.4 12.2 Project Crossbred . . . 2.3 2.3 7.0 8.5 7.3 6.5 5.6 4.4 1.8 14.8 11.0 Control Average Milk Yield (litres/day)/hh Yield Milk Average Before RBP Before 3.2 6.7 6.5 7.6 4.5 6.3 5.6 8.3 3.7 2.7 3.8 12.4 10.8 10.6 Project . . . Table A9: State-wise Impact of RBP on Yield RBP on of Impact A9: State-wise Table 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.1 3.8 4.0 1.1 6.9 1.7 6.0 1.1 Control After RBP After 1.8 1.1 3.5 4.4 5.3 0.4 2.9 2.8 1.1 1.0 2.0 2.5 10.3 10.6 Project . . . Indigenous Cow Indigenous 0.8 0.6 0.0 0.1 3.6 2.0 0.8 4.9 1.5 5.0 1.1 Control Before RBP Before 1.5 0.9 7.4 2.6 3.0 4.6 0.4 2.1 2.0 7.4 0.9 0.8 1.6 1.7 Project Andhra Pradesh Bihar States States Gujarat Haryana Karnataka Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kerala Maharashtra Odisha Punjab Tamil Nadu Tamil Rajasthan Uttar Pradesh Uttar West Bengal West
104 105 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Table A10: State-wise Impact of RBP on Feeding Cost States Feeding Cost (Rs/day/hh) Feed Cost Before RBP After RBP Project Control Project Control Andhra Pradesh 37.9 49.1 33.2 42.9 Bihar 46.8 47.2 40.9 41.2 Gujarat 22.6 7.8 19.7 6.8 Haryana 49.3 22.5 43.1 19.7 Karnataka 37.0 29.7 32.3 25.9 Kerala 30.7 4.4 26.8 3.9 Madhya Pradesh 36.3 15.8 31.8 13.8 Maharashtra 23.4 11.9 20.5 10.4 Odisha 30.0 22.0 26.2 19.2 Punjab 25.4 19.3 22.2 16.9 Rajasthan 19.6 10.5 17.1 9.2 Tamil Nadu 43.2 20.4 37.8 17.8 Uttar Pradesh 47.1 25.8 41.2 22.6 West Bengal 34.3 12.0 30.0 10.5
106 107 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Impact of NDP-I on Dairy Activites in India’s Chapter 4 Rural Economy
4.1. Introduction
Livestock development, in general, and dairy implications for smallholder farmers and development activities, in particular, are for poverty alleviation. The National Dairy key components of pro-poor development Programme I (NDP-I) was essentially strategies because livestock distribution launched to cater to the twin needs is observed to be much more equitable of uplifting the status of the poor and than land distribution. Thus, changes in downtrodden by promoting dairy activities the dairying environment have important through positive interventions as well as to enhance the supply of milk in the country.
4.2. Impact of NDP Intervention in Augmenting the Incomes of the Poor
Over the period of the study, there has been small and marginal farmers, earnings from a significant change in the income levels of dairy activities were comparatively higher farmers across gender in the project villages than those for medium (including semi- as compared to the control ones. However, it medium) and large farmers. The groupings is pertinent to note that the income levels of of income are equitably dispersed and stretch both landless labourers along with small and well beyond the lower levels. Moreover, the marginal farmers have improved perceptibly share of earnings among women was also and on completion of NDP-I, it was found found to be high among landless labourers that female members had a higher percentage and small and marginal farmers. This share of income as compared to their male clearly points to the importance of earnings counterparts with respect to the earnings from dairy activities among the poor and from dairy activities. Table 4.1 shows that the downtrodden in India’s hinterland, which earnings incomes of landless labourers, and thereby significantly impacts their livelihood.
Table 4.1: Distribution of Dairy Income by Gender among Landless Labourers and Farmers (%)
Income Landless Labourers Small and Marginal Medium+ Large Farmers (Annual) Farmers Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female <5k Project 39.5 59.6 51.0 35.4 8.8 4.8 0.7 0.2 Control 37.8 52.9 53.4 45.5 6.8 0.8 2.0 0.8 5k-15k Project 21.8 27.4 69.3 68.3 8.3 4.3 0.6 0.0 Control 21.9 23.8 70.7 76.2 7.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 15k-30k Project 24.8 32.3 66.1 65.3 8.4 2.3 0.8 0.0 Control 18.5 24.8 68.7 72.5 12.8 2.7 0.0 0.0 30k-50k Project 17.4 23.4 72.6 74.4 9.6 1.9 0.4 0.3 Control 14.8 16.2 72.8 73.2 12.1 10.5 0.3 0.0
106 107 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
50k-100k Project 12.9 23.7 66.3 69.6 18.8 4.5 2.0 2.2 Control 10.3 4.5 61.8 76.1 25.4 15.5 2.5 3.9 100k-150k Project 9.7 26.4 72.6 64.2 16.3 9.4 1.4 0.0 Control 6.4 0.0 54.2 50.0 39.4 50.0 0.0 0.0 >150k Project 8.9 7.7 50.8 63.5 28.8 18.2 11.5 10.5 Control 6.1 25.0 55.5 0.0 25.1 0.0 13.3 75.0 Total Project 22.7 32.6 64.1 63.2 11.8 3.6 1.4 0.6 Control 21.8 27.4 63.2 66.5 13.3 4.8 1.7 1.3
Source: NCAER field data.
The net yearly income (after deducting expenses) from dairy/dairy-related activities shows the accrual of higher incomes to households in the NDP-I villages in comparison to their counterparts in the control villages. Figure 4.1, however, shows that the average income per annum is the highest for farmers with large landholdings, followed by medium, small and marginal farmers, while landless labourers remain at the bottom.
FigureFigure 4.1: A4.1:ve rAverageage An Annualnual H Householdousehold Net Ne Incomet Inco m(Rs)e ( fromRs) fDairyrom Dairy
Project Control 160000 145004 140000 128832 120000
m 100000 73119 nn u 80000 69268 / A
s 60000 R 43483 38807 43710 39646 40000 26469 19123 20000 0 Landless Small & Marginal Medium+ Large Total
SoSourceurce:: NCAERNCAER field fiel ddata. da ta.
In this context, it is also important to note Table 4.2: Contribution of Dairy-based Income to the the distribution of dairy-based income in the Total Household Income by Land Categories (%) overall income (in net terms from all sources) Land Categories Project Control across both land categories (including for Landless 28 20 the landless) and social categories. About 28 116 Marginal 34 28 per cent of the overall net income of landless Small 33 29 labourers comes from dairy/dairy-related activities in the intervention villages, with Semi-medium 32 31 the corresponding figures for marginal and Medium 30 27 small farmers being 34 per cent and 33 per Large 24 27 cent, respectively. The corresponding figures Total 31 27 for all three categories in the Control villages Source: NCAER field data. were 20 per cent, 28 per cent, and 29 per cent, respectively (Table 4.2).
108 109 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Impact of NDP-I on Dairy Activites in India’s Rural Economy
Across social groups, the impact of Table 4.3: Contribution of Dairy-based Income to intervention was more pronounced among Total Household Income by Social Categories (%) the Scheduled Tribe (ST) community, for Social Class Project Control which the contribution of dairy-based SC 28 24 activities in the total net income was 36 per ST 36 23 cent, followed by 32 per cent for the Other OBC 32 28 Backward Classes (OBCs). Overall, dairy General 30 26 activities were seen to contribute 31 per cent Total 31 27 of the total net income in the NDP-I villages Source: NCAER field data. as compared to a corresponding figure of 27 per cent in the control villages. Among various income groupings, a sizeable proportion of the respondents reported an increase in income after the adoption of NDP-I (Table 4.4).
Table 4.4: Distribution of Respondents Who Perceived an Increase in Income after Implementation of NDP-I (%)
Family Income <5k 5k-15k 15k-30k 30k-50k 50k-100k 100k-150k >150k Members Groupings→ Villages↓ Male Project 9.2 17.6 19.7 22.9 20.8 4.1 5.7 Control 17.0 15.4 13.0 26.4 23.5 1.7 3.0 Total 9.8 17.4 19.2 23.2 21.0 3.9 5.5 Female Project 5.5 17.5 25.1 30.1 19.1 1.0 1.9 Control 2.5 12.1 24.8 28.5 26.2 3.0 3.0 Total 5.3 17.2 25.1 30.0 19.5 1.1 1.9 Total Project 8.4 17.5 20.8 24.4 20.4 3.5 4.9 Control 14.7 14.9 14.9 26.7 24.0 1.9 3.0 Total 8.9 17.4 20.4 24.6 20.7 3.4 4.8
Source: NCAER field data.
The overall impact of NDP-I emanated employment was through an increase in from improved income from dairy and wages and salaries (Table 4.5). milk-related products, while the impact on
Table 4.5: Reasons for Increase in Income: Percentage Distribution across Dairy Income Group and Gender
Activity Family Income <5k 5k-15k 15k-30k 30k-50k 50k-100k 100k-150k >150k Members Groupings→ Villages↓ Improved Male Project 8.5 19.4 18.4 22.9 21.2 4.5 5.0 income Control 17.5 16.4 13.7 27.6 20.6 1.8 2.6 from dairy farming Total 9.3 19.1 18.0 23.4 21.2 4.3 4.8 Female Project 5.5 20.0 24.4 30.2 16.8 1.3 1.8 Control 4.0 12.9 12.9 36.2 29.3 3.4 1.1 Total 5.4 19.6 23.7 30.6 17.6 1.4 1.7 Total Project 7.9 19.6 19.7 24.3 20.3 3.9 4.4 Control 15.5 15.9 13.6 28.9 21.9 2.0 2.3 Total 8.5 19.2 19.2 24.7 20.4 3.7 4.2
108 109 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Improved Male Project 16.0 10.5 21.5 21.3 19.7 2.9 8.0 income Control 28.5 14.9 3.8 25.7 20.0 0.9 6.2 from milk- related Total 17.3 10.9 19.7 21.8 19.8 2.7 7.8 products Female Project 5.8 13.8 24.4 30.8 23.0 0.1 2.1 Control 0.0 21.1 61.1 0.0 4.4 0.0 13.3 Total 5.5 14.2 26.2 29.2 22.1 0.1 2.7 Total Project 13.7 11.2 22.2 23.3 20.6 2.3 6.7 Control 25.2 15.6 10.5 22.7 18.2 0.8 7.0 Total 14.8 11.6 21.1 23.3 20.4 2.2 6.7 Increased Male Project 14.7 18.7 26.6 19.0 10.0 1.2 9.9 wages and Control 9.9 33.3 13.0 14.2 22.2 3.7 3.7 salaries Total 14.3 19.8 25.6 18.6 10.9 1.4 9.4 Female Project 6.0 8.4 27.6 45.4 9.4 0.0 3.2 Control 4.3 0.0 8.6 78.6 8.6 0.0 0.0 Total 5.9 7.6 25.8 48.6 9.3 0.0 2.9 Total Project 12.6 16.2 27.0 25.3 9.9 0.9 8.2 Control 8.2 23.3 11.6 33.6 18.1 2.6 2.6 Total 12.2 16.7 25.8 25.9 10.5 1.0 7.8 Other Male Project 43.7 16.0 13.1 13.4 10.5 1.4 2.0 Control 37.8 16.1 7.8 14.1 15.1 9.0 0.0 Total 42.9 16.0 12.4 13.5 11.1 2.4 1.7 Female Project 44.6 10.0 12.6 28.1 4.0 0.0 0.9 Control 58.0 10.9 8.4 19.3 3.4 0.0 0.0 Total 46.9 10.1 11.9 26.6 3.9 0.0 0.7 Total Project 43.9 14.9 13.0 16.0 9.3 1.2 1.8 Control 42.3 14.9 7.9 15.3 12.5 7.0 0.0 Total 43.7 14.9 12.3 15.9 9.7 2.0 1.5 Total Male Project 21.2 15.1 18.7 19.5 17.2 3.2 5.1 Control 29.5 14.4 15.4 17.7 15.8 1.9 5.3 Total 22.6 15.0 18.2 19.2 16.9 3.0 5.1 Female Project 18.4 16.2 22.3 26.5 14.1 0.9 1.6 Control 23.8 21.1 23.5 19.7 10.2 0.8 1.0 Total 19.1 16.8 22.4 25.7 13.7 0.9 1.5 Total Project 20.7 15.4 19.4 20.7 16.6 2.8 4.5 Control 28.8 15.3 16.5 17.9 15.1 1.8 4.7 Total 22.0 15.3 19.0 20.2 16.4 2.6 4.5
Source: NCAER field data.
The most important reasons for the rise quality, followed by an increase in the in income were the production of a higher number of accessible collection points volume of milk and improvement in its (Figure 4.2).
110 111 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Impact of NDP-I on Dairy Activites in India’s Rural Economy
Figure 4.2: Major Reasons for Increase in Income from Dairy Activities Figure 4.2: Major Reasons for Increase in Income from Dairy Activities 30 s
e 24.0 s 25 n 18.4 p o 20 s e 15 R 12.9 t 10.0 n 10
e 7.2
c 5.7 6.2 6.2 r 5 3.4 3.0
e 2.9 P
0 … f s s s e g k ts k ts o f l o e r p n l s n
i t c a i i
n I a s o t i o … i a t i s t s i h t f m c e P
s g r o
m s s v t
t r s s r o g n p u n m t i s t e
M e r i n o t; p t y n l c om e o o u / i f t k i i cc e n o t i s
l c t e l s l d l a i b d c a a o
i e
n e
cc e a f S d n a l e at i
g
i r t i v o a l a l r u
m n C
m e m c n e r c r tu n r q t r ha n r t e e g r
t a
hi c D r e t i e
l i a
r l d e k H a r o a t e h h e g l e
e o r t at e i i V p r t h c e e t o
p tt e D G r m e w l
e w i Hi g O o r G B B e ge n o n k L on ge r M Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
Interestingly, it has been found that a sizeable per cent of the households from the landless section of the landless, marginal and small category, 66.5 per cent from those of the farmers intend to produce a greater quantity marginal farmers, and 66.9 per cent from of milk in the intervention villages as those of small farmers reported that they compared to the non-NDP-I villages, except proposed to increase their production of milk for large farmers whose need for institutional in the project villages. These numbers were support is obviously minimal among all the significantly lower for the corresponding income categories. Figure 4.3 shows that 64.4 categories of farmers in the control villages. Figure 4.3: Households of Various Categories of Farmers Figure 4.3: Households Tofh Variousat Inten Categoriesd to Inc rofe aFarmersse Pro dThatucti oIntendn of M toi lIncreasek Production of Milk
100%
s 90% e 26.8 s 35.6 33.5 33.1 28.9 35.2 34.5 n 80% 42.2 45.9 43.5 o 54.5
p 70% 59.9
s
e 60% R
e 50% g
a 40% t 71.1 73.2 n 30% 64.4 66.5 66.9 64.8 65.5 e 57.8 54.1 56.5 c 45.5 r 20% 40.1 e
P 10% 0% Project Control Project Control Project Control Project Control Project Control Project Control Landless Marginal Small Semi-Medium Medium Large Yes No
SoSourceurce: NCAERNCAER field fiel ddata. dat a. The major components of NDP-I were as to cattle to help improve their productivity. follows: This has been implemented by the Local Resource Persons (LRPs), engaged by the 1. Ration Balancing Programme (RBP); 120 End Implementing Agencies (EIAs) at the 2. Village-based Milk Procurement System village level. The VBMPS aimed at enhancing (VBMPS); the share of the organised market for the 3. Breed Development; and dairy farmers through the setting up of 4. Fodder and Feed Development. Dairy Cooperative Societies (DCSes) and milk unions. One of the important measures Among the above components, RBP is in the Breed Development Programme basically aimed at providing a balanced diet
110 111
121 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
is Artificial Insemination (AI). This is in the coming years, driven by higher important for increasing the share of milch incomes and greater nutritional awareness animals, and enhancing the conception rate among a significant portion of the for reducing the inter-calving period to population. The consumption of processed boost milk production and productivity. The and packaged dairy products is also implementation of nutritional programmes increasing in urban areas. However, in many through fodder and feed development is parts of the country, consumers still prefer an important ingredient for improving the unpacked and unprocessed milk delivered by health of milch animals, as it contributes a local milkman because of its taste and the towards ensuring a comparatively early perception of freshness. In view of the high conceiving age along with a higher price sensitivity for milk, the demand for conception rate among the milch animals, milk is largely linked to price changes. thereby leading to a substantial increase in milk productivity. The genetic improvement The various factors that influence dairying programme also had a considerable impact activity included the quality of animals, on milk productivity. Reducing methane human resources and technical skills, land emission through RBP is another important availability, capital, credit, and infrastructure intervention that helps in the conservation and other inputs relevant to the value of the environment. Before the advent of chain. The quality of animals was critical NDP-I in 2012-13, improving and sustaining for determining milk productivity and the productivity of milch animals was one consequently, the overall production. NDP-I of the major challenges in India. Frequent has reportedly helped expand milk yield outbreaks of diseases like foot and mouth through enforcement of effective cattle disease, black quarter infection, and influenza and buffalo breeding programmes, in the adversely affected the health of the in-milk process doing away with traditional feeding cattle, thereby lowering the milk yield. practices and introducing scientific feeding However, this situation has changed after the methods that enhanced the availability and NDP-I intervention, with milk production affordability of quality feed and fodder. Due going up significantly. to effective AI breeding intervention, the proportion of high-yielding breed cows was It is imperative to ensure access to markets, higher in the project villages as compared which is also a pre-requisite for carrying to the control ones as the project offered out any planned growth programme of them specialised services in animal breeding dairy activities. Implementation of NDP-I and developing of seamen stations for the through VBMPS has helped enhance the procurement, production, and distribution of share of the organised market, which was breeding inputs along with capacity building earlier dominated by informal market programmes. It may be noted that AI services intermediaries who, in most cases, used to now cover a major portion of the households, exploit the producers. The programme also that is, about 60 per cent, in the project extends the benefits of collective bargaining villages for the breedable animals, which capacity, particularly to the landless, is more than 10 percentage points higher marginal, and the small producers. than the corresponding figure in the control villages (Figure 4.4). In all probability, the demand for dairy products in India is likely to grow positively
112 113 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Impact of NDP-I on Dairy Activites in India’s Rural Economy
Figure 4Figure.4: D i4.4:str iDistributionbution of tofh thee b breedingreedin gtechniques techniq adoptedues ad obyp ttheed dairy by t h e dairy farmefarmersrs in t hine the Pr Projectoject aass wellwell as a Controls Cont villagesrol vill (%)ages (%)
70
n 59.7 o
i 60
u t 47.3 b
i 50 42.4 r t
s 33.2
i 40 D
e 30 g a
t 20 7.0 10.3
ce n 10 e r
P 0 Natural AI Not aware
Project Control
Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. Earlier, farmers were not able to take indicates that smallholders constitute the advantage of the potential of their animals main strength of the dairy sector. While because they lacked information on feeding the strengths and weaknesses are directly and management practices. It was found that controllable, opportunities and threats extension, especially for women involved in derive from the external environment. Table cattle rearing, enhanced dairy production 4.3 points to a large number of weaknesses considerably through NDP-I. in the sector, implying considerable scope for interventions. The SWOT analysis in An analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, Table 4.3 entailed matching of each of these opportunities and threats (SWOT) of the elements with an appropriate action. performance drivers of the dairy sector
Table 4.3: SWOT Analysis of the Performance Drivers Strengths Building Blocks Large number of landless, marginal and small farmers Strengthen economic viability of dairy farms by involved in dairying. Dairy, an off-farm activity, interventions on the input side as well as ensure fair provides them an effective opportunity for subsistence farmer prices. occupation. The commitment of such farmers to this Increase the link between rural production areas and particular activity is continual and has long-term urban markets. prospects. Focus on strengthening the breed capability to help An effective marketing channel helps meet the growing significantly enhance the productivity of the milch demands of the urban consumer. animals. The very large number of milch animals offers a huge Ensure the availability of quality medicines and scope to enhance productivity. vaccination by strengthening the regulatory framework to ensure quality and quantity.
112 113 123 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Weaknesses How to Rectify Them In general, the productivity of milch animals is low in Focus on quality issues even in the informal channel relation to the global context. by training traders and by enforcing food quality A big share of the marketable surplus still goes through regulations. informal channels where quality remains a big concern. Develop infrastructure and training for clean milk Quality in the formal channel also needs attention. production. Farmers enjoy a miniscule share in the benefits of Bring about changes in the management of high demand because of poor governance issues of cooperatives to make them true representatives of cooperatives. farmers instead of letting them function as incoherent A scattered production base, and large number agencies. of farmers producing little quantities give rise to Support dairying as an enterprise to encourage difficulties in the transfer of technology and other profitable farming activity and encourage production developmental efforts. and productivity by extension and breed development. Milk distribution is limited to urban and semi-urban Enhance packaged milk distribution in more areas. areas. Strengthen dairy farmer cooperatives to enable farmers Low milk prices because of lower prices declared by to get a higher price for milk. cooperatives result in low prices of milk paid by all Create a rational export policy to enable farmers to take players. advantage of higher prices. There is lack of policy focus on strengthening Strictly implement quality regulations and improve indigenous breeds. infrastructure and training for quality enhancement. Very little extension facilities are available. Strengthen the breed development programmes. Farmers’ prices, particularly in the care of procurement Strengthen extension facilities. by dudhias, are not based on fat measurement, which Create policy regulations to make mandatory testing a affects their profitability basis for setting the milk price. Because of low access to credit and risk-taking ability, Make efforts to increase access to credit through dairy farmers face difficulties in increasing their cattle herd farmer organisations and other agencies, and constitute size. self-help groups (SHGs) among women members of the households. Opportunities How to take advantage of them Increased farmer income due to high demand. Create policies and activities geared towards enhancing Increased consumer sophistication and awareness of dairy farming activity by increasing, production and quality reception of quality packaged products (though productivity and ensuring fair farmer price of milk. slowly). Establish an enabling policy environment to enhance Entry of large corporations in retailing, which can lead investment. to more investment. Create policy support to enhance governance of Immense scope to enhance governance of dairy farmer producer companies. organisations and thus enable dairy farmers to demand Focus on quality issues that are a barrier to exports. higher prices. Encourage the private sector to increase investment in Potential for exports due to low cost of production. dairying. Overall positive growth environment, which is pushing the Government to enhance infrastructure.
Threats How to prevent them A large portion of the population does not care about Initiate consumer education about the negative health the quality issues in milk. impacts of unpackaged products. Because of high price sensitivity for dairy products, Develop packaging in small quantities to meet the people are not willing to pay for quality. needs of the poor. Significant increase in maize prices increases the feed Increase milk prices in accordance with feed prices. cost. Support expansion of dairy farmer organisations. Large informal markets that extend credit are Enhance productivity by breed improvement and constraining farmers. extension. Low productivity and scattered production lead to high Enforce price setting of milk based on fat and SNF cost of transportation. content to encourage the production of cow milk. Emphasis on milk fat and not on SNF content helps maintain relatively lower prices of milk
114 115 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Qualitative Assessment of the Local Informal Chapter 5 Marketing Outlets for Milk
Increasing the quality and productivity of village and the other in a control village. milk and enabling its marketing through formal channels are two of the major The FGDs were organised among households objectives of NDP-I. For achieving achieve and dudhias in both the project and control villages to obtain insights on a few pre- these goals, NDDB has been, inter alia, implementing the following two schemes: determined aspects, such as: (1) the milk (a) Ration Balancing Programme (RBP), and procurement system and purchase price; (2) (b) Village Based Milk Procurement System system of milk sale and sale price realization; (VBMPS) in 14 major States. In order to (3) milk cooling facilities and transportation; assess the impact of these schemes through (4) milk production scenario; (5) the qualitative information, two Focus Group business of milk collection; and (6) the role Discussions (FGDs) were organised in each of women in dairy activities. State, of which one was held in a project
5.1. Reflection on the Project Villages
5.1.1. Milk Procurement System and district. The villagers supply their surplus Purchase Price milk to the DCS and other organised agencies like SEJA, Arogya, and Sutti. These The milk procurement system was seen to agencies offer a slightly higher price than vary across the project villages. Despite the the DCS. Similarly, in village Ettipatti in presence of Dairy Cooperative Societies district Krishnagiri, and village Mellahali (DCSes) in all the project villages, private in Mysore district, villagers are content to organisations and dudhias play a significant supply milk to the DCS only and there is role in milk collection. It was observed that no dudhia culture at all in the village. In the all the members of the DCSes do not supply case of Gharchon’s DCS under BAANI Milk milk to the respective DCSes, whereas a few Producers Company Ltd. of Sangrur district, non-members instead provide milk to the all the 59 members supply their milk to the society in the mornings and evenings. In society. This village also has four organised the Khokhawala village of Jaipur, a DCS was milk collection centres and eight dudhias formed in 2003 with 48 women members. who collect the milk from the villagers. However, out of these 48 members, only 20 members supply milk regularly, whereas In Jamal village of Gandhi Nagar district, 30 non-members, on the other hand, also there is a very old DCS, Dudhmandali, with supply milk to this society regularly. The 1241 registered members, out of which 60 society collects about 325 litres of milk in the per cent are women. About 700 members morning and 275 litres in the evening. supply the milk regularly to the society. The society receives about 2500 litres in the There are no unorganised milk traders morning and 2000 litres in the evening. In (dudhias) in village Mapakhi of Chittoor Thantari (VBMPS) village of Palwal district,
114 115 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
a DCS was registered in 2017 with 25 women Picture 5.1: Milk testing apparatus 1 members, but this DCS receives only 40 litres of milk per day from the villagers. There are 2-3 dudhias who collect the milk from other households in the village. In Gayeshpur village of Nadia district, the DCS was formed in July 2016 with 51 women members. Initially 30-35 members were supplying milk to the society. However, at the time of the study, the number of active members had Picture 5.2: Milk testing apparatus 2 come down to 20-22. In the case of village Marukheda in Ujjain, the DCS was formed in 2015. Out of 30 women members, only 15 members supply milk to the society, and other members reportedly supply milk to the private dairy. In Garchandpur village in district Puri, the DCS was formed way back in 1981 with 10 members, which has now 5.1.2. System of Milk Sale and Sale increased to 110. The total milk collection Price Realisation has also increased from 30-40 litres to 700- 800 litres per day. In Zap village of Pune, the All the DCSes were found to be mixing DCS has 28 members, of which only five are both cow and buffalo milk before supplying women. All of them supply milk to this DCS, it to their respective plants. For example, which receives 325 litres of milk per day, the Dudhmandali was supplying milk including 170 litres in the morning and 155 to the Mahesana Dairy Plant, which was litres in the evening. located at a distance of about 45 km. The Gayeshpur DCS was supplying to the Kishan The purchase price also varies across the Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd., villages. The DCS and organised traders whereas Gharchon’s DCS and Baani Milk and some dudhias use FAT and SNF test Producers’ Company Ltd were supplying instrument to determine the price separately to the Phaguwal milk chilling centre. The for milk supplied by cows and buffaloes. The Khokhawala DCS, which did not have a purchase prices for both varieties of milk, transportation arrangement with chilling that is, cow milk and buffalo milk, are based facility, was supplying the milk to the Tunga on the FAT and SNF content of milk. The dairy plant, The DCS Murukheda was average price for cow milk varies from Rs 25 supplying the milk to Khoda Khajura. Private to Rs 40. The rate is decided by the units of dudhias were also supplying the milk to the fat content in the milk, and in some places, society and some of the dudhias were selling the price is Rs 6.50 per unit of FAT content. their milk to dhabas (roadside restaurants), The purchase price of buffalo milk is much halwais (confectioners), restaurants, and also higher than the average price of cow milk households, at relatively higher rates. Dudhias on account of the higher quantity of fat in from Thantari village were coming to the the former. It ranges between Rs 35 in village Ballabhgarh cooperative society, located at Thantari to Rs 70 in village Khokhawala. a distance on 25 kms. They were found to The purchase price of milk supplied by be mixing both cow and buffalo milk, and unorganised dudhias and other traders is also adding water on the sly while selling the slightly higher than that of the milk supplied concoction as cow milk. Some of the dudhias to all the DCSes covered under the FGD. were also not selling milk directly but were instead preparing value-added products like paneer (cottage cheese) and supplying it to the market at relatively higher rates.
116 117 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Qualitative Assessment of the Local Informal Marketing Outlets for Milk
Picture 5.3: Milk collection points
5.1.3. Milk Cooling Facilities and 1000 litres each, in 2012-13. The society was Transportation supplying milk to the Tunga dairy plant at a distance of about 40 kms. The Murukheda Milk chilling facilities were not available in DCS too did not have BMC facilities, and all the DCSes, and the nature and availability was transporting milk by motorcycles to the of transportation facilities varied across the Khoda Khajura dairy plant, where BMCs societies. For instance, the Gayeshpur village were available. The Dudhmandali, which DCS, which was established in 2016, did not was supplying milk to the Mahesana Dairy, have cooling facilities and was transporting received a BMC in 2011-12, with a capacity the milk to the Kishan Cooperative Milk of 4000 litres. A tanker with cooling facility producer Union Ltd. The Gharchon Baani was coming from Mahesana Dairy to the Milk Producer Company Ltd did not have Dudhmandali in the morning and evening to chilling facilities, and a milk collecting van collect the milk. Similarly, the BMC centre’s was coming to the DCS from the Phaguwal milk van would come every morning and Milk Chilling Centre both in the morning evening to collect the milk from Ettipatti and evening to collect the milk. The DCS of DCS, which was located at a distance of 2 Khokhawala village received an Automatic kms. Some of the private dudhias had their Milk Collection Unit (AMCU) and Bulk own refrigerators, and were transporting Milk Coolers (BMCs), with a capacity of the milk using motorcycles without chilling facilities.
116 117 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Picture 5.4: A Bulk Milk Cooler (BMC) being inspected by the NCAER study team
5.1.4. The Milk Production Scenario there was both an improvement in milk quality, and increase in milk quantity, The Except for two FGDs, the participants DCSes had helped improve milk production in the other FGDs reported that the by providing training inputs and bringing production of milk had been increasing about an improvement in the supply of during the preceding 3-5 years. The BMCs nutritional feed to the cattle under RBP. The had facilitated the marketing of milk and production of milk had also increased in also helped in handling of increased milk village Mellahali over for the previous five production. Similarly, in Khokhawala village, years. All the participants in the FGD had a the production of milk had increased after basic understanding of the seasonal variation the implementation of RBP and VBMPS. (dry and flush seasons) that occur in the Initially, the Khokhawala DCS used to receive production of milk by milch animals. 60 to 70 litres of milk but it had subsequently started receiving 600 to 800 litres of milk. The 5.1.5. Business of Milk Collection RBP was functional in the village until 2018. In the case of Gayeshpur, the production of The business of milk collection and milk had increased due to the introduction marketing has not attracted farmers as of hybrid cows and implementation of RBP an attractive occupation and none of the In the village. Similarly, in Murukheda, participant farmers in the FGD showed an the participants reported that milk inclination to take up this activity. It was production had increased due to an increase found that over the study period, the dairy in the number of murrah buffaloes and business had become more challenging. implementation of RBP. In Garchandpur The main reasons for this were the increase village, the participants reported that over in costs of feed, fodder and labour, and the study period, milk production had the hardship caused in feeding when increased due to an increase in the number the cattle become dry. Dairy activities of milch animals, introduction of RBP, and were contributing 10 to 50 per cent of the success of AI. The participants in the the household income. During the FGD, FGD from Mapakshi and Ettipatti villages the farmers, particularly the landless and reported that over the preceding five years, marginal farmers, expressed their inclination to continue with the dairy business.
118 119 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Qualitative Assessment of the Local Informal Marketing Outlets for Milk
Picture 5.5: The landless and marginal farmers expressed their inclination to continue with the dairy business
5.1.6. Role of Women in Dairy cooperativisation had helped create collective Activities bargaining power, particularly for women. As women increasingly get involved in activities The involvement of women in dairy activities related to dairying, they start showing a was found to vary across villages. In most of higher level of alertness and reap the benefits the villages, women were playing a major role of exposure to community activities, which in the households’ dairy activities, including enhances their entrepreneurship skills. milking, feeding, and washing the animals, A majority of the participants reported and cleaning the milk containers. They were that they did not keep separate accounts also collecting cow dung and making organic for income from dairy activities and that fertilisers/compost for use in cultivation. they counted their overall income as the About 10 to 15 per cent of the women were household income. However, in some cases, making value-added products like paneer the expenditure incurred by the household and ghee to generate additional income. on children’s education and healthcare had Some of the participants reported that improved.
Box 5.1: Success Story Resulting from NDDB Training NDDB has been organising various training programmes started creating awareness about RBP among other to achieve the goal of increased good quality milk women in the village. Before attending the training, she production and marketing through formal channels. Two had four animals. After attending the two-day training of the women in village Thantari had attended a two-day programme at NDDB in 2018, she implemented the training programme on September 11-12 in 2018 at lessons learnt there, which helped her buy additional NDDB, Anand NDDB, as a member of the DCS which cattle. At the time of the case study, as of September 19, had been formed in 2017. Mrs Satu was one of them. 2019, she owned 12 animals, seven of which were in-milk In 2017, the DCS was formed in this village with 25 cattle. The training she received had thus increased the members, all of them being women. household income manifold. More than one-third of the household income came from dairy activities. She had During the training programme, Mrs Satu learnt about thus set a target of increasing the number of animals RBP. She had learnt silage making, providing balance feed owned by her to 50 in order to enjoy the benefits of scale. during the lactation period, and production of organic fertilisers from cow dung, among other things. She said She was very happy with her dairy activities and was also that she was very happy to receive the training as it had encouraging other women in the village to engage in the helped her enhance her knowledge on dairying, which, same business. in turn, had allowed her to generate more income. She
118 119 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
5.2. Status of the Control Villages
5.2.1. Milk Procurement System and Picture 5.6: The milk procurement system varies Purchase Price across the selected control villages
The milk procurement system varied across the selected control villages. Both private dairy owners as well as dudhias played a significant role in the collection of milk from the producers. In village Gurha in Fatehabad tehsil, in Agra district, the earlier model of dudhia business had been modified. There were 4-5 dudhias who opened private dairies In two of the control villages, viz., Lalakhadi under the guidance of the ‘Naya Dairy Plant’ in Maidpur tehsil of Ujjain district, and located at a distance of 15 kms. The milk village Purusandha in Nimapada tehsil of producers in the village deposited their milk Puri district, two dairy societies had been at these private dairies. Each one of these functional. However, in Lalakhadi society, private dairy owners collected about 40 out of 16 members, 10-15 members were litres of milk each in the morning and in the giving the milk to dudhias, whereas in village evening. The dairy owner received about 3.5 Purusandha, about 60 per cent of the milk per cent as commission for collecting the produced by the villagers was being supplied milk. Similarly, village ‘Balewal’, in Malerkotla to the society. In village Bhavdi in Haveli tehsil, in Sangrur district had two private tehsil of Pune district, all the milk producers dairy owners. Both the dairies got milk from were supplying their milk to the nearest 20–22 households. The collection of milk societies. There were no dudhias. The village was about 800 litres per day per dairy. In was supplying about 1000 litres per day. In addition, there were four dudhias, who also village Soolamalai of Krishnagiri district, collected milk from some other households. and village Majarakothaplli of Chittoor In village Hijuli, in Santipur block of Nadia district, the milk producers were supplying district, there were 35 dudhias. They collected the milk to private dairy owners due to the milk from their village as well as from the lack of both dudhias and DCSes in both neighbouring 5-8 villages. Similarly, village these villages. In village Bhudarpur of Jaipur Rebhar, in Mandkola block of Palwal district district, there were only 2-3 dudhias. Each had about 20 dudhias. Each one of them one of them was covering 5–6 households covered 2–3 villages and collected milk and collecting milk 50–100 litres of milk from about 20 households each. The milk each. In village Anivalu of Mysore district, collection ranged from 40 to 100 litres per the milk producer supplied the milk to the day per dudhia. In contrast, there were no nearest DCS located at a distance of 5 kms. dudhias in village Jakhan in Limdi block of Surendranagar district. Here, only about All the private dairy owners and DCSes 20 households were involved in the dairy purchased milk at a price based on the FAT business. The producers were supplying the and SNF content in the milk. All the dudhias milk to Amul Dairy, which was located at a purchased milk at a fixed rate, but the rate distance of 12 kms. varied across villages.
120 121 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Qualitative Assessment of the Local Informal Marketing Outlets for Milk
Picture 5.7: Both private dairy owners as well as Picture 5.8: Dudhias play a significant role in dudhias play a significant role in the collection the collection of milk from the producers in of milk from the producers an unorganised market set-up, but their role is diminishing
5.2.3 Milk Cooling Facilities and Transportation
5.2.2. System of Milk Sale and Sale Some of the private dairy owners had Bulk Price Realization Milk Coolers (BMCs). In village Gurha, private dairy owners received the BMCs All the private dairy owners mixed cow and and AMCs in 2016 from the Naya dairy. buffalo milk for supplying to their respective The collection van would come from Naya dairy plants. The private dairy owners in dairy to collect the milk in the mornings and village Gurhawere supplying the milk to evenings. The private dairy owners in village Naya Dairy, and earning a commission of Balewal had BMCs. However, they were 3.5 per cent. In village Balewal, private dairy transporting the milk to various places using owners mixed both cow and buffalo milk, their own vehicles without cooling facilities. and sold it to restaurants, dhabas, hotels, In village Bhavdi, all the milk producers and households, and also supplied milk to were transporting about 1000 litres of milk marriages and festivals. They were selling at by motorcycles to the two nearest DCSes. slightly higher rates. In village Hijuli, all the Similarly, the private dudhias in villages dudhias mixed both cow and buffalo milk, Rebhar, Jakhan, Bhudarpur, and Hijuli were and sold it at rates than the purchase rate, transporting the milk by motorcycles without while recovering the difference by increasing cooling facilities. They had to supply the milk the quantity of milk by mixing water. The within the stipulated time before it got spoilt. dudhias from village Rebhar mixed both cow and buffalo milk, and sold it at Mankola and Ballabhgarh in various hotels, restaurants, 5.2.4. The Milk Production Scenario dhabas, and households. Some of them were Except in four FGDs organised in the control coming come to colonies in Delhi like Lajpat villages, all the participants in the other Nagar and Karol Bagh, and selling at much FGDs reported that the production of milk higher rates of Rs 50–60 per litre. All the had declined over the years. Village Bhavdi dudhias from village Bhudarpur were using was currently supplying 1000 litres of milk, tonga (horse - cart) to reach the nearest DCS which had declined over the year by 30 per to supply the milk, and were receiving a price cent, mainly due to low price realization. A based on the FAT and SNF content in the majority of the participants mentioned that milk. Dudhias from village Lalakhedi were comparatively higher costs of feed, fodder, going to Maakraun, and selling the milk at a and labour than the prevailing price of milk rate of Rs 6.80 per unit of fat, and to Halwai in the village were preventing them from at the rate at Rs 7.00 per fat content. In increasing their milk output. village Anivalu, all the milk producers were going to the DCSes at Hardur and Battapura to sell their milk, and were receiving a price of Rs 23 per litre.
120 121 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
5.2.5. The Business of Milk Collection generating additional income. A majority of the participants reported that they were not The contributions from dairy activities to the keeping separate accounts for the incomes incomes of households varied significantly they were earning from dairy activities, across the groups. In village Jakhan, which and that they were counting all income has producer households that do not overall as the household income. However collect milk from the other households, expenditure incurred by such households the participants in the FGD reported that on their children’s education and healthcare income from dairy activities contributed had improved, though marginally in most only 5 per cent to their household incomes cases. Some of the participants said that they whereas in village Rebhar, the dudhias were taking their female family members reported that dairy activities were their to jewellery shops occasionally to fulfil the main business. Income from dairy activities women’s demand for jewellery, reflecting the was contributing 80 per cent to their relative affluence in the family brought about household incomes. Over the years, the by dairying activities. number of dudhias had also increased due to unemployment and the lack of other 5.3. Summary and Conclusion of the activities and opportunities in the village. FGD Section Income from dairy activities contributed 20 per cent to the households’ incomes each in The FGDs were organised in all the 14 States villages Gurha and Balewal. Income from covered in the study. Two villages in each dairy activities contributed significantly in State were selected for the FGDs, including Hijuli (85 per cent of household income), one in a project village and another in a Majarakothaplli (75 per cent), Soolamalai control village. The names of the selected (60 per cent), Anivalu (40 per cent), and districts and villages visited are listed in Table Purusandha (25 per cent). All the milk 5.1. The milk procurement systems were producers reported that despite the high found to vary across the project and control cost of production, they would continue villages. Overall, in the case of the project with their dairy activities. The participants villages, DCSes were playing a major role in the FGD in villages Jakhan and Bhavdi in milk procurement systems, even though reported that if the DCSes were established, dudhias and private dairy owners were they would fully support them, whereas in running their personal businesses in some village Rebhar, the dudhias were not in favour States like Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan, and of having a DCS in the village due to the Uttar Pradesh. There was hardly any dudhia, apprehension that the DCS would hamper in either the project or control villages in their existing businesses. all the southern states, viz., Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, and Kerala. 5.2.6. Role of Women in Dairy In Jamla village of Gandhi Nagar district, Activities the Dudhmandali DCS had about 700 members who were supplying milk both in The time spent in dairy activities by the morning and evening. In Zap village of women varied across villages. In some Pune district, the DCS had 28 members, all villages, women were playing a major role of whom were supplying supply the milk to in households’ dairy activities, including the DCS. Similarly, in Sangrur district, the milking, feeding, and washing the animals, Gharchon DCS had 59 members, with all of and cleaning the milk containers. They were them supplying the milk to this dairy. In Puri, also collecting cow dung and making organic the Garchandpur DCS had 110 members on fertilisers/compost for use in cultivation. completion of the project. In this DCS, the Very few of them were preparing value- milk collection had also gone up from 30-40 added products like paneer and ghee, for litres to 700-800 litres per day during the sale to other households in the village for course of the project.
122 123 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Qualitative Assessment of the Local Informal Marketing Outlets for Milk
In the case of the control villages, due and SNF content in the milk. In the project to absence of DCSes, some private dairy villages, most of the participants reported owners and milk producers were playing that the production of milk had been a significant role in the milk business. In increasing continually over the preceding 3-5 village Gurha in Agra, some of the dudhias years. However, BMCs were not available in had stopped doing the dudhia business. They most of the DCSes. The contribution of dairy had started opening private dairies under the activities ranged from 5 per cent to 85 per guidance of the Naya Dairy Plant. Each one cent of the household income. Women were of them received 40 litres of milk from 20-22 playing an important role in dairy activities. households. A similar system observed in the Most of them did not have separate incomes control village Balewal’ whereas the control from dairy activities. However, they had full village Bhavdi in Pune produced 1000 litres decision-making power in the households. of milk every day. There was no dudhia in They also showed a higher level of alertness the village. All the producers were collecting and were reaping the benefits of exposure to their milk using motorcycles and supplying community activities. the milk to the nearest DCSes, located at a distance of 5–6 kms. In village Jakhan In the overall analysis, the project villages in Surendranagar, all the producers were reported the accrual of greater benefits to supplying the milk to Amul Dairy, which the individual producers from d activities was located at a distance of 12 kms. On the and related developmental programmes as other hand, in villages Rebhar and Hijuli, compared to the control villages, which may dudhias were playing a significant role, with be considered as a positive outcome of the the purchase price of milk based on the fat implementation of NDP-I.
Table 5.1: Names of Selected Districts and Villages Visited for the FGDs Sl. No. Districts Project Villages Control Villages 1 Palwal Thantari (VBMPS) Rebhar 2 Jaipur Khokhawala (RBP+VBMPS) Bhudarpur 3 Agra - Gurha 4 Sangrur Gharchon Balewal 5 Nadia Gayeshpur Hijuli 6 Gandhi Nagar Jamla Jakhan (Surendranagar) 7 Pune ZAP (Junnar) Bhavdi 8 Ujjain Murukheda Lalakhedi 9 Puri Garchandpur Purusandha 10 Ernakulam Arakapadi Narumbalum 11 Chittoor Mapakshi Majarakothpalli 12 Krishnagiri Ettipatti Soolamalai 13 Mysore Mellahali Anivalu 14 Patna Mananpur Giddha
Source: NCAER.
122 123 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
124 125 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Economic and Financial Analysis Chapter 6 of NDP-I
6.1. Ex-Post Economic and Financial Analysis
NDP-I focuses on 18 major milk-producing and Rs 200 crore from the National Dairy states of the country, viz., Andhra Pradesh, Development Board (NDDB) and its Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, subsidiaries. Subsequently, based on the Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, actual implementation of the project, the Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, outlay stood revised at Rs 2404.9 crore. Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Telangana, However, Rs 2238.74 crore had been actually Uttarakhand, Jharkhand, and Chhattisgarh, utilised by end of the project period, i.e. end which together account for 90 per cent of March 2020. Animal productivity comprising the country’s milk production. The primary of two major sub-components, viz. i) Animal aims of NDP-I were to augment the supply breeding, and ii) animal nutrition utilised of quality milk at an affordable price and investment worth 618 crores and 297 crores enhance farmers’ income by increasing respectively. Similarly, investment for milk animal productivity and facilitating market collection and bulking stayed at Rs 640 access to milk producers. NDP-I was crores, and that for project management implemented during the period 2012-13 turned Rs 82 crores. The utilization of to 2019-20 at an initial outlay of around NDDB’s own investment turned Rs 195 Rs 2,242 crore, including Rs 1584 crore as crores. The details of this expenditure credit from the International Development have been provided in Annexures I and II, Association (IDA), Rs 176 crore as a share respectively. Annexure III provides the details of the Government of India (GoI), Rs of sources of funds for meeting the project 282 crore as a share of End Implementing investments for the present analysis depicted Agencies (EIAs) participating in the project, in Annexures I and II, respectively.
6.2. Project Components
The project constitutes two major to markets by investing in village-level components, viz., Component A for milk collection and bulking facilities and productivity enhancement, envisaging formation of producer companies and dairy enhancement in productivity through: (i) cooperatives. improved animal breeding, (ii) nutrition NDP-I entailed a multi-pronged series of and fodder development, and (iii) delivery initiatives to enhance milk productivity in of Artificial Insemination (AI) Services, the country, and the key outputs envisaged and Component B for milk collection and under the programme have been delineated bulking, aimed at ensuring improved access in Table 6.1.
124 125 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Table 6.1: Activities and Key Outputs of NDP-I
Activity Key Output Achievements
Breed Improvement
Production of High • Production of 2500 HGM bulls • Production of 2456 HGM bulls Genetic Merit (HGM) • Import of 400 exotic bulls • Import of 274 bulls/equivalent cattle and buffalo bulls equivalent embryos embryos
Strengthening of A and B • Production of 100 million semen • Production of 88.18 million semen graded semen stations doses annually in the terminal year doses under NDP-I
Pilot model for viable • 3000 MAITs carrying out annual 4 • 1367 MAITs carried out AI of 0.783 doorstep AI delivery million doorstep AIs by the terminal million cases during 2018-19 year
Animal Nutrition
Ration Balancing • Coverage of 2.7 million milch • 2.87 million animals covered in Programme (RBP) animals in 40,000 villages 33,320 villages
Fodder Development • Production of 7,500 tonnes of • Production of 13,038.47 MT of Programme certified/truthfully labelled fodder fodder seed seed • Sale of 30,548.53 MT of fodder seed • 1350 silage making/fodder • Holding of 2144 silage making/ conservation demonstrations fodder conservation demonstrations
Village- based Milk Procurement System
Strengthening of Village- • 23,800 additional villages to be • 52,509 villages strengthened based Milk Procurement covered • 21,991 new villages covered Systems (VBMPS) • 1.2 million additional milk • 1.69 million additional milk producers to be enrolled producers enrolled
Project Management and Learning
Project Management and • Monitoring Learning and • Following ICT-based MIS systems Learning Evaluation system for collection, put in place for the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data analysis, and interpretation of data • Enterprise Project Management (EPM) • Procurement MIS (ProcMIS) • Grievance Redressal System (GRS) • Fund Utilisation Tracking System (FUC Tracker) • Information Network for Animal Productivity and Health (INAPH) • Semen Station Management System (SSMS)
Source: NDDB.
6.3. Details of Project Intervention and Outcomes
On the basis of actual implementation of 6.3.1. Component A: Productivity the project, its benefits have been quantified Enhancement in the ex-post evaluation for the item-wise project investments: This component accounts for nearly 46 per cent of the total project investments,
126 127 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Economic and Financial Analysis of NDP-I
which were shared between animal breed The four operational areas covered for EFA improvement and AI services (31 per cent) are: (i)- NDP-Bulls, SS and AI, (ii)- NDP- and animal nutrition including seed delivery Bulls and SS, Non-NDP AI, (iii)-NDP-Bulls, (15 per cent), respectively. There was a Non-NDP -SS and AI, and (iv) NDP-SS, reduction in investments to the extent of 21 Non-NDP Bulls and AI. The incremental per cent in this component as compared to milk production in the terminal year (2019- a share of 57 per cent provided in ex-ante 20) of the NDP-1 project over year of start allocation. The comparative allocation of (2012-13) touched 1.92 per cent of the all- fund and actual investment made on the India milk production. This underlines the above head has been detailed in Annexures advantage accruing from implementation of I and II depicting the project cost—final the breed improvement programme. estimates and project cost by utilisation till March 2020, respectively. Annexure III Here, it is pertinent to note that in the depicts the sources of funds for investment as ex-ante EFA, the costs and benefits were per the final estimation and actual utilization estimated over a project horizon of 20 years investment made till end March, 2020 at a 12 per cent opportunity cost of the capital. The estimated benefits were projected after attainment of an optimal level for the 6.3.2. Animal Breed Improvement remaining period of the project horizon. and AI Services For ex-post EFA the project benefits had The project builds on the existing 4 PT been estimated for the project period of programmes, which have been operating in eight years (2012-13 to 2019-20) at the same the country since 1992. Initially, the bulls opportunity cost of 12 per cent. The benefits from these programmes were ranked on under each of components have been carried genetic merit based on daughters’ ‘progeny’ further till end of 20 years. Hence, the ex-post performance, and the top 5-10 per cent of EFA is made comparable to the ex-ante EFA the bulls were mated to the top-performing for benefit enumeration. dams. These planned mating produced high (a) Increased milk productivity due to better genetic merit (HGM) young bulls for AI. genetics Under NDP-I, as many as 2,456 HGM bulls The genetic improvement in cattle had been produced against a target of 2,500 initiated under NDP-I has helped HGM bulls by. Further, 274 exotic bulls/ significantly enhance milk productivity. equivalent embryos had been imported This impact, however, could not be against a target of import of 400 exotic bulls/ captured due to the fact that it started equivalent embryos. getting marginally reflected only from the fifth year onwards. The milk contribution In order to meet the increasing demand of in this component is 0.01 million tonnes frozen semen doses (FSDs) for Artificial in 2019-20. The implications in terms Insemination (AI), existing semen stations, of semen production were, however, with a rating of either A or B grade, had been marginally visible. supported for expansion and upgradation (b) Reduced inter-calving period due to of the available facilities. These 28 semen improved conception rate stations had produced 88.2 million semen doses till 2018-19. In addition, 33.3 million The average conception rate, as envisaged semen doses were contributed by the NDP in the non-NDP area, that is, without the bulls. This amounts to a total production of project (WOP hereafter) was 35 per cent 118.5 million semen doses during the 2018- at the time of inception. The AI services 19, against the envisaged target of 100 million rendered under NDP-I successfully doses under NDP-I. enhanced the conception rate to 35 to 44 per cent in the four operational areas
126 127 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
considered for the EFA. The benefit thus inter-calving period was 1.25 million tonnes. realised was mainly due to the delivery The cumulative milk production vis-à-vis of high-quality semen through MAITs that achieved in the base year (2012-13) trained under the project. The subsequent due to higher animal breeding stood at 1.26 insemination of lactating bovines helped million tonnes as compared to 65.4 million in reducing the inter-calving period. tonnes achieved at the all-India level. This The reduced inter-calving figures for the implies that the contribution of NDP-I in operational areas I and II were estimated the total incremental milk production of to be 12.4 and 11.1 days, respectively. The the country was 1.9 per cent. The average reduction in inter-calving in the other two financial gross margin was Rs 3,204 per other areas was miniscule or remained metric tonne. The incremental financial unchanged. The composition of bovines benefits accruing primarily due to reduced on completion of the project stood at 17 inter calving aggregated to about Rs 4,032.7 per cent indigenous cattle, 56 per cent million in the terminal year. crossbred cattle, and 27 per cent buffaloes. The average lactation yields achieved 6.3.3. Animal Nutrition were 2.36, 7.02, and 4.80 kg/per day for indigenous cattle, crossbred cattle, and The Ration Balancing Programme (RBP) buffaloes against an initial assumption is a feed management innovation that has of 2.136, 6.869, and 4.751 kg/per day, been delivered to dairy producers through respectively. trained Local Resource Persons (LRPs) to The average conception rates achieved were produce the following benefits: (a) increased higher than estimated, at 44 per cent and 43 milk productivity, (b) reduced cost of milk per cent under operational areas I and II, production, and (c) reduced methane respectively. While the average conception emission. It has been observed that feeding rate remained stagnant at 35 per cent the balanced ration to milch animals not operational areas III, it showed a marginal only reduces the cost of feeding per kg improvement to touch 37 per cent under of milk production but also significantly and IV, respectively, following the NDP reduces methane emission. The achievements intervention. This outcome had a varying recorded under NDP-I, as per the Progress impact in all the four areas. The resultant Report prepared for the visit of the World increase in milk due to a reduction in the Bank Mission during the period April– October 2018 are detailed in Table 6.2.
Table 6.2: Total Coverage of Dairy Cooperatives and Producer Companies Parameter Cumulative till October 2018-19* Cumulative as per Ex-post EFA 2019-20 Villages covered (No.) 32,943 33,374 Animals covered (No.) 27,78,517 28,65,763 Reduction in cost of feeding per kg of Cooperatives: 11.8 11 milk (%) Producer Companies: 9.5 Reduction in methane emission (%) 13.8 13
Source: *World Bank Mission Visit (April–October 2018).
(a) Increased milk productivity intervention was 0.25 kg/day per animal. The average milk yield across lactating This led to a milk production of 0.26 bovines was 7.14 kg/day/ per animal. million tonnes in the eighth year, with The incremental milk yield due to RBP corresponding annual incremental
128 129 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Economic and Financial Analysis of NDP-I
financial benefits of Rs 499 million against There has been huge pressure on livestock an ex–ante target of 0.46 million tonnes resources in terms of availability of total and Rs 1417 million, respectively during feed and fodder in the country as the land the corresponding period. The reduction available for fodder production has been in financial benefits vis-à-vis the ex-ante declining. The ICAR - Vision 2025 report figures may be attributed to lower actual prepared by Indian Grass Land and Fodder investment under the specific head with Research Institute suggests that India a lower level of milk productivity actually presently is facing net deficit of 35.6 per achieved in relation to the anticipated cent green fodder, 10.95 per cent of dry crop figure. residues, and 44 per cent of concentrated (b) Reduced cost of milk production feed ingredients. It is therefore imperative to increase the productivity of cultivated and The RBP planned to cover about 2.78 common grazing land per unit area. million bovines, which actually went up to 2.87 million bovines, Thereby The green and dry are two main components contributing positively to the success of of fodder which were focussed under NDP- the project. The feed and fodder accounts 1. The fodder development programme for 70 per cent of total production cost. have been formulated with the objectives The reduction in feed and fodder due to to enhance the fodder availability for the RBP intervention was anticipated to be 5 livestock. The primary focus is to improve the per cent, while the actual figure turned out availability of green fodder by increasing the to be 11 per cent. green fodder yield of cultivated fodder from (c) Reduced methane emission the land already under fodder cultivation. Studies conducted by NDDB in Gujarat The present estimate of average green fodder and Uttar Pradesh have shown that RBP yield of 40 MT/ hectare/year of cultivated helps reduce methane emission by 10–14 land & 0.75 MT/hectare/year for common per cent in lactating bovines. The ex-post grazing land are too low and there is huge analysis took this figure to be 13 per cent potential to improve their productivity for 2.87 million lactating bovines covered through adoption of latest technologies. under RBP. Consequently, methane emission was reduced to the extent of 0.71 Two major interventions evaluated under million CER units as against a target of fodder development programme of NDP-1 0.45 million certified emission reduction are: i) fodder seed production, and ii) seed (CER) units. The annual incremental sale which accrued benefits respectively to a) benefits correspondingly amounted to an seed growing farmers, and b) DCS members. additional Rs 305 million in the eighth The total numbers of villages covered year (2019-20) of the project. A notable under seed production were 1725 which point worth noting is that the benefit benefitted total 5932 farmers during NDP-1 calculation due RBP is confined till end (Source: NDDB). Table 6.3 presents year of the project period (2019-20) and was wise quantity of seed produced during continued thereafter (Table 6.7). project period. As much as 13039 MT seed (d) Fodder Development Programme is produced during this period. By taking Under the Fodder Development cost estimates of fodder seed production Programme, the use of certified fodder and implicitly assuming productivity (MT/ seeds was promoted to increase fodder Hectare) for different fodder varieties, the production. Further, field demonstrations net income accrued to seed growers works of mowers, silage making, and biomass out to be Rs 45515.19 per unit of seed storage silos were also carried out to production. The cost of cultivation, net popularise these technologies among income incurred per hectare and per unit of farmers.
128 129 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
seed output is presented in Table 6.4. This The estimates for average net income, and enabled income worth Rs 59 crores realised average fodder productivity work out to be to the seed growers. The benefit accrued due Rs 87062 (Rs/Ha) and 55.58 (Tonne/Ha) to this intervention is considered in EFA respectively. This further led to increase in computation. income due to fodder seed sale to the extent of Rs 5321 crore during project period. The second benefit stream, i.e. fodder seed The incremental income due to higher sale which accrued to DCS members is productivity over and above 40 MT/hectare/ discussed here. Nearly, 2 million farmers year is considered for benefit calculation were covered under seed sale programme. under this segment. The NDDB data suggests Table 6.3 presents yearly proceeds to seed that only 39per cent of this realised benefit sale during project period. This resulted into which works out to be 2075 crores during outturn of seed sale to the order of 30559 project period which accrued to DCS MT. A rough estimate suggests that average members. While the outcome of fodder 50 Kg fodder seed is applied on per hectare seed sale NDP-1 is tangible, however due area. This further translates, the area to to mix nature of benefit accrual different the extent of 611180 hectare during entire stakeholders, we couldn’t consider this project horizon. The estimates of costs, benefit stream for ex-post EFA calculation. income and average productivity estimates for various fodder varieties are presented in Table 6.5.
Table 6.3: Contribution of Fodder Production and Fodder Seed Sale under NDP-I
2012- 2013- 2014- 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2019- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Fodder Seed Production
1.Fodder seed production (MT) 113 247 1875 2776 3238 2487 1380 923
2. Net income from seed 45515 45515 45515 45515 45515 45515 45515 45515 production (Rs/MT)
Net income to seed growers, 0.51 1.12 8.53 12.63 14.74 11.32 6.28 4.20 ((1)*(2)/10^7) Rs crores)
A. Fodder Seed Sale
1.Fodder Seed sale (MT) 367 2098 4003 5056 7046 7803 3324 863
2. Area Covered (Ha) Factor A 7331 41956 80056 101112 140924 156066 66480 17263
3. Net Income (Rs/ha) Factor B 87062 87062 87062 87062 87062 87062 87062 87062
Total income: (2)*(3) /10^7), Rs 64 365 697 880 1227 1359 579 150 crores)
Income increase due to 25 142 272 343 478 530 226 59 enhanced fodder productivity
Note: incremental increase in higher fodder productivity due to NDP-1 works out to be 15.58 (55.58-40) MT/hectare. The higher productivity attributed the benefits of seed sale to DCS members. Only 0.39 of per cent total income is taken for benefit calculation under this head. Source: NDDB.
130 131 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Economic and Financial Analysis of NDP-I
Table 6.4: Economics of Fodder Seed Production under NDP-1 Net Income Cost of Average Seed Total Income Net Income (Rs/MT Beneficiary Seed Crop Cultivation Yield (MT/ (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) of seed (Rs./hact) ha) production) Seed Grower Berseem 31559.00 139889.00 108330.00 1.41 76829.79 Seed Grower Oat 21478.67 110505.33 89026.67 1.50 59483.30 Seed Grower Sorghum 26678.00 102867.00 76189.00 1.96 38871.94 Seed Grower Lucerne 52581.00 105567.00 52986.00 1.43 37053.15 Seed Grower Maize 28181.00 91066.00 62885.00 4.10 15337.80 Average 32095.53 109978.87 77883.33 2.08 45515.19
Source: NDDB
Table 6.5: Cost of Production, Net Income and Productivity of Green Fodder Production on Farmers Field under NDP-I Cost of Total Income Net Income Beneficiary Crop Cultivation Yield (t/ha) (Rs /ha) (Rs/hact) (Rs/hact) DCS members Lucerne 84526.5 187686.5 103160 88.85 DCS members Bajra 18177.33 98758 80580.67 31.7 DCS members Berseem 29564.33 150952.67 121388.34 76.71 DCS members Oat 24073.5 104713.5 80640 64.4 DCS members Sorghum 19314.76 115785.62 96470.86 50.77 DCS members Maize 25318.8 65448.6 40129.8 21.07 Average 33495.87 120557.48 87061.61 55.58
Source: NDDB
6.4. Component B—Milk Collection and Bulking
Investments under this component substantially higher capacity was created, accounted for 50 per cent of the total project and its optimal utilisation is captured while costs as against the figure of 37 per cent enumerating the benefits at 20 years’ time estimated under the ex-ante analysis. Under horizon, which would get reflected in the the component of village level infrastructure present ex-post EFA analysis. for milk collection and bulking, institutional development was achieved through the 6.4.1. Reduced Transaction Costs formation of producer companies and dairy cooperative societies to improve access to It was observed that though there were markets for dairy producers. By the year higher achievements of physical parameters, 2019-20, the project actually installed a the project horizon had been taken for only bulk milk chilling (BMC) capacity of 12.49 eight years instead the 20 years envisaged in million kg per day against a target of 1.36 the ex-ante EFA. Hence, the reduced time million kg per day envisaged earlier. There frame in the ex-post EFA could not take is a gestation period between the installation into account the turnover that could have of capacity and its actual utilisation of it been achieved once the actual BMC capacity at optimal level. Accordingly, though a installed would start performing at optimal capacity utilisation.
130 131 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
6.5. Methodology for Conducting the Economic and Financial Analysis
The ex-post EFA relied on data from benefits of milk collection and bulking secondary sources, and is representative of (through BMCs) were the result of reduced the actual milk production typologies of the fuel usage and reduced power wastage. The participating States. The stream of benefits remaining cost savings in transportation emanating from the project were quantified and operations were transfers within the separately for indigenous cattle, cross-bred economy, from the transportation sector and cattle, and buffaloes. Next, the benefits were locally employed labour to milk producers. aggregated at the sub-component levels and The organised marketing structure through then finally aggregated for the project as a new producer companies and Dairy whole. The financial analysis was done at the Cooperative Societies (DCSes) provided prevailing market prices, with the project cost farmers a stable and assured marketing based on the actual utilisation till end of the channel, thereby eliminating malpractices project, i.e. end March 2020. such as holdouts and economic losses due to unfair trade practices by private vendors, The economic analysis was conducted after while also reducing the wastage of milk making appropriate adjustments to the during handling and transportation. financial benefits and costs. The economic
6.6. Results of the Economic and Financial Analysis
The cost-benefit analysis of the project was 6.6.1. The Financial Analysis conducted separately for major investment activities, namely, breed improvement The comparative summary of the EFA and AI service delivery, animal nutrition has been depicted in Tables 6.9. The management, and milk collection and undiscounted cumulative financial benefits bulking investments, all of which together from project investments till end of project accounted for around 96 per cent of the period were worth Rs 17 billion, of which project costs as compared to 93.6 per cent breed improvement contributed Rs 4.0 estimated in the ex-ante analysis. Next, the billion, nutrition management including benefits were aggregated and compared with feed and fodder sale i.e. Rs 8.3 billion, and the entire project costs, including project milk collection and bulking comes Rs 4.6 management and learning costs. The costs and benefits were estimated at 2012-13 prices billion (Appendix IV). These cumulative over period of 20 years, at a 12 per cent benefits were carried further till 20 years opportunity cost of capital vis-à-vis the 2011- project horizon except for Ration balancing 12 prices taken originally. The total project programme costs were estimated at Rs 22.4 billion. The The financial rates of return for the ex- economic project costs were estimated at Rs post analysis for overall project works out 22.1 billion after adjusting for transfers, taxes, and subsidies, and converting financial prices to be 70.3 per cent. The animal breeding to economic prices. The EFA computation component adds 91.8 per cent, animal built on the assumptions are delineated in breeding and animal nutrition together Table 6.6. The physical target achieved under contributes 87.5 per cent and village based undiscounted benefits accrued in case of milk procurement system generates 48.3 per bulking and RBP is explained in table 6.7 and cent respectively. 6.8.
132 133 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Economic and Financial Analysis of NDP-I
6.6.2. The Economic Analysis
Similar to the financial analysis, the The economic rates of return for the ex- undiscounted economic benefits from project post analysis for overall project turns out investments were worth nearly Rs 18 billion, to be 76.5 per cent. The animal breeding of which breed improvement contributed Rs individually contributes 95.6 per cent, and 3.9 billion, nutrition management excluding with animal nutrition together share 91.2 feed and fodder sale, Rs 8.3 billion, and milk per cent and village based milk procurement collection & bulking contribute Rs 5.8 billion system adds 59.3 per cent. (Table 6.9) (Appendix V). Table 6.6: Major Assumption for the EFA Analysis Parameters Unit Indigenous Cross-bred Buffaloes Cattle Cattle Lactation yield per year (Base year 2012- Litres 861 2562 1752 13) Incremental increase in animal % 1.22 0.53 0.79 productivity due to breeding projects of NDP-I Artificial Insemination (AI) done % 18 47 35 Age at first calving Years 4 3 4
Conception Rate (INAPH follow-up)— I II III IV Operational areas 44 % 43% 35% 37%
Semen Production (Lakh Doses) 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 28 SS 245.4 433.3 679.1 713.2 771.2 837.5 881.8 NDP-I bulls ------56.9 164.7 303.3
1.Weighted average milk yield (kg/day/ 7.14 animal) 2. Incremental milk yield with RBP 0.25 intervention (kg/day/animal) RBP Intervention 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 3a.Villages covered (Nos.) 86.0 1562.0 8632.0 21,835.0 29,973.0 32,064.0 33,268.0 3b.Animals covered (‘000 Nos.) 7.1 80.1 576.4 1545.0 2355.2 2661.3 2848.4 4. Methane emission Unit Indigenous Cross-bred Buffaloes Cattle Cattle 4a. Proportion of animals % 10 45 45 4b.Methane emission per unit of milk/ kg/animal/annum 28 67 80 animal/annum
Source: NDDB. Note: i) Operation Areas: I = NDP Bulls, NDP-SS, NDP –AI, II=NDP Bulls, NDP-SS, Non-NDP–AI; III=NDP –Bulls Non-NDP- SS, Non-NDP –AI; IV= NDP –SS, Non- NDP-Bulls Non-NDP–AI; ii) The incremental increase in animal production due to NDP-I was estimated to be 70 per cent of the incremental increase in productivity at the all-India level. iii) * conception rate without NDP-I is 35 per cent.
132 133 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Table 6.7: Built-up BMC Capacity and Benefits Build-up of BMC 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Capacity Cumulative Million LPD 0.01 0.30 1.02 2.18 4.25 5.12 8.33 12.49 Utilised Million LPD 0.01 0.24 0.81 1.74 3.40 4.10 6.66 10.0 Milk Million KPD 0.01 1.08 1.42 3.12 3.78 4.99 5.87 5.36 Procurement Financial Benefits Cost saving Rs Million / due to BMC 0 32 200 557 1238 1592 2620 3931 Year handling Economic Benefits Cost Saving Rs Million / due to BMC 0 42 262 729 1620 2083 3429 5145 Year Handling Source: NCAER computation with basic data provided by NDDB. Note: Better price realisation due to institutional milk procurement is not considered for calculation of benefits. However, the same component was considered under the ex-ante analysis. LPD=Liters per day; KPD=Kg per day
Table 6.8: Stream of Benefits under the Ration Balancing Programme Ration Balancing 2012- 2013- 2014- 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2019- Programme 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Villages covered Number 86 1562 8632 21835 29973 32064 33268 33374 Animals covered Million nos. 0.01 0.08 0.58 1.54 2.36 2.66 2.85 2.87
Financial/Economic Benefits Reduction in Rs Million/Year 0 0 3 100 740 2359 4751 7442 Feeding Cost Reduction in Rs Million/Year 0 0 0 4 30 97 194 305 Methane emission Increase in Milk Rs Million/Year 0 0 0 7 50 158 319 499 Productivity Source: NCAER computations with basic data provided by NDDB. Note: The weighted average yield (kg/day) was estimated to be Rs 7.14. The incremental milk productivity due to RBP invention was Rs 0.25 per kg/day/animal). The financial production cost was estimated as Rs 21.7 per kg, as provided by NDDB. The gross financial margin works out to be Rs 3204 per tonne.
Table 6.9: Summary of Financial and Economic Analysis (Rs Billion) Ex- Post Analysis Financial Economic PVC PVB NPV IRR PVC PVB NPV IRR 1. Breed improvement 4.0 72.1 68.1 91.8% 5.9 69.9 64.0 95.6% 2. (plus) Animal nutrition 6.0 80.3 74.3 87.5% 8.7 78.0 69.3 91.2% 3. Village Based Milk Procurement System 6.1 17.8 11.7 48.3% 9.2 22.3 13.2 59.3% Overall Project 12.6 98.1 85.5 70.3% 18.6 100.4 81.8 76.5% Ex-Ante Analysis Financial Economic PVC PVB NPV IRR PVC PVB NPV IRR 1. Breed improvement 6.2 10.1 3.8 18.0% 5.6 10.9 5.3 20.5% 2. (plus) Animal nutrition 10.5 23.1 12.6 24.9% 9.4 25.9 16.5 29.0% 3. Village Based Milk Procurement System 6.3 9.7 3.4 20.2% 5.6 6.4 0.8 14.3% Overall Project 17.8 32.7 14.9 22.1% 16.0 32.3 16.2 23.5%
NCAER Computations 134 135 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Economic and Financial Analysis of NDP-I
6.7. Indirect Project Benefits Not Accounted for EFA The project had an enormous potential ● It was possible to compile the project- for various indirect benefits to farmers, wise analysis of INAPH data on in particular, and the dairy industry, in various technical parameters. general. For example, semen production ● A pool of trained manpower and AI delivery components would help specialising in performance recording decrease the spread of diseases, improve the in smallholder conditions across the overall genetic potential, and contribute to country was created. the preservation of biodiversity. Nutrition ● The availability of a large number of interventions would improve the feed performance records made it possible conversion ratio, milk quality, and the sector- to introduce genomic selection in wide management of scarce feed resources. the HFCB, JCB and Gir cattle and Milk collection and bulking would lead to buffaloes. an improvement in BMC capacity utilisation and the quality of liquid milk and products b. Replacement of bulls under semen collection for consumers. These indirect benefits were with HGM bulls excluded from the financial and economic ● The HGM bulls (born through analysis due to data limitations, and nominated mating) were selected on therefore, the estimated economic impact of the basis of EBV (and in some cases the project provides lower-bound estimates. GEBV). ● The Government of India constituted a 6.7.1. Qualitative Impact of Animal Breeding Value Estimation Committee Breeding Projects Implemented for estimating the value of breeding. under NDP-I ● The BV of all the bulls having >70 a. Establishing infrastructure for performance per cent reliability (in the case of recording cattle) and >60 per cent (in the case of buffaloes) were regularly published on For the first time, large data on field- ● NDDB’s website. based performance records became available in the country. ● The Government took the decision to distribute HGM bulls on the basis of It was found that huge variability ● only the breeding value. within breeds (Rathi, Tharparkar, Kankrej, Jaffrabadi, and Pandharpuri, c. Establishment of an AI network in the among others) can effectively be used native tract of indigenous breeds for enhancing the genetic potential of ● The demand for indigenous breeds these breeds. increased. ● The Introduction of GPS-enabled ● The number of indigenous bulls under Smart Weighing Scale (SWS) used semen collection increased from 440 in for performance recording helped in 2011-12 to 876 in 2018-19. improving the data quality and overall ● The share of indigenous breed in the supervision of the activity. total semen production increased from ● Real-time recording of field events, 12.33 per cent to 16.52 per cent. using the smartphone-based INAPH ● The share of the semen sale indigenous Android application enabled a breeds increased from 11.14 per cent in high quality database, ensured 2011-12 to 17.04 per cent in 2018-19. implementation of SOPs, and provided ● The actual sale of semen of indigenous timely information leading to the breeds increased from 7.76 million in proper follow-up of activities. 2011-12 to 20.3 million in 2018-19.
134 135 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
d. Import of HF and Jersey germplasm 6.7.2. Non-tangible Benefits of Flexi ● The NDDB, in association with DAHD, Biogas modified the import guidelines. ● It provides a better alternative to the ● Appropriate clauses pertaining to traditional use of cow dung as fuel and the import of young bulls based raw manure which entails storage and on genomic breeding values were health hazard. incorporated in the import guidelines. ● Flexi-biogas provides an alternative to the ● New genetics of HF and Jersey breeds use of hazardous and unhygienic manure from dairy were procured from the management practices, as it produces the developed countries through imports. cleanest and most cost effective fuel in e. Strengthening of selected A and B graded terms of gas. semen stations ● If each milch-owning household has a ● Modern facilities for semen production biogas plant, the ecosystem thus created were created at 28 semen stations. could help fulfil the twin objectives of achieving a clean and hygienic ● Infrastructure was created to house a environment in one hand and increasing higher number of bulls. farmers’ incomes, on the other. ● Appropriate Bio-security measures ● Flexi biogas intervention is easy to use and were been put in place. maintain at low costs, thus providing an ● The mechanisation of fodder economic means of obtaining a hygienic production operations resulted in rural environment while at the same time considerable savings of labour. providing clean fuel in a cost-effective manner. ● A Semen Station Management System ● Market linkages for the surplus slurry (SSMS) was rolled out in various produced assure extra income to farmers. semen stations for disseminating information. ● The participation of women members in this congregation provides exposure and ● CASA was provided for an objective recognition to women in their efforts at evaluation of semen doses. animal rearing. ● The commissioning of biogas ● The use of flexi biogas also liberates plants resulted in lower electricity women from the smoke emanated by the consumption. use of traditional fuel wood/cow dung as fuel and the resultant health hazards. f. Innovative projects under NDP-I ● Standardised the method of estimation 6.7.3. Non-tangible Benefits of of GEBV using chromo-painting in Implementation of VBMPS CBHF and CB Jersey cattle; ● By organising the DCSes in the hitherto ● Whole Genome Sequencing of 296 untouched area, the VBMPS sub-project buffaloes of 10 major Indian buffalo provided an opportunity to rural milk breeds was performed to study the producers to organise themselves for their variation in Indian buffaloes. own economic/social development. ● A medium density microarray ● It provided rural milk producers access chip “BUFFCHIP” was developed to organised markets, thereby increasing in collaboration with USDA to their income. implement genomic selection in ● It espoused the cause of women’s buffaloes. empowerment by encouraging more women members to be a part of the
136 137 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Economic and Financial Analysis of NDP-I
formal cooperative system, providing a fair and transparent system ushers them with exposure, training, and in, farmers are demanding similar orientation on different aspects of animal institutional set-ups for their other rearing, feeding practices and issues agricultural products. related to animal health. ● Installation of bulk milk coolers (BMCs) ● As more and more women members in villages/clusters of villages substantially are becoming a part of the management improved the quality of milk procured committees of DCSes, and getting and has provided milk producers. involved in business processes, they are ● Improvement in the quality of milk becoming more business-savvy and procured enabled milk unions to diversify are perceiving themselves as positive their product baskets and include high contributors to their family and society at end-products like UHT milk. It also large. helped improve the softness, taste, ● Exposure to different aspects related and texture of milk products, thereby to animal health and animal nutrition, increasing the acceptability of milk and and understanding their importance in milk products among consumers. Larger obtaining optimal outputs from animals consumer affiliations provide greater has enabled members to appreciate returns in terms of value for money to the importance of health, hygiene, and milk producers. balanced nutrition in their own family ● The AMCU/DPMCUs provided rural milk lives. producers the opportunity to digitalise ● Rural milk producers were provided with records. This will enable farmers to a robust sustaining milk procurement benefit from DBTs in milk payments and system, which ensured fairness and also enable them to access records over a transparency in all its operations. period of time. Witnessing the economic benefits that
6.8. Qualitative Parameters to Gauge the Effectiveness of Training and Capacity Building in NDP-I
6.8.1. Key factors in Implementation enabled leadership. The execution of of the Activity the project helped in transformation of rural India by providing training to ● The project addressed the needs of rural all stakeholders. The NDP experience milk producers holistically. It helped the highlights the importance of partnership dairy cooperatives meet the needs of between suppliers, producers, and EIAs. rural milk producers and designed and ● The third factor was the coordinating imparted training and capacity building role played by NDDB played vis-à-vis of manpower involved in its management the different stakeholders of NDP-I. for better feed management, localised The different stakeholders listen to what BMCs, and in promoting transparency by NDDB had to say and NDDB, on its part, installing DPMCUs/AMCUs at the level of gave well-researched and expert advice. DCSes, veterinary services, AI, and breed improvement for higher yield in local ● A rigorous performance management conditions. system was evolved by developing an ERP system to monitor result-based ● The project helped in evolving an effective achievements, fund disbursement style of management and the culture
136 137 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
and procurements. NDDB now had 6.8.3. Digitalisation of the Training a fairly rigorous information and Process through ICT Tools monitoring system, both formal and informal. The NDDB officials who Virtual classroom sessions were conducted made these visits were encouraged to through A-View. Executives of Andhra settle problems amicably. Furthermore, Pradesh and Telangana were addressed NDDB transformed into a service during the post training follow-up workshop, provider, extending all support to EIAs in using this tool. An interaction on the implementing the project with a focus on significance of dairy cooperatives was the outcomes. conducted with the Trichy MCM members during their three-day training at NDDB, 6.8.2. Training and Knowledge Bangalore. The use of ICT tools resulted in Sharing on a digital Platform to reducing carbon footprints by eliminating Increase Outreach through an travel and related cost savings. E-learning Module
The cooperative training group developed an e-learning module on BMC operations and maintenance and troubleshooting. The digital forum would help in reaching out to more participants. The Android-based CMP module was developed to reach out to a maximum number of milk producers. Applications were developed with the objective of ensuring clean milk production at the producer level. 6.8.4. Social Media Platforms—Key for Disseminating Knowledge
138 139 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Economic and Financial Analysis of NDP-I
The Cooperative Training Group utilised through WhatsApp, and 150 WhatsApp social media platforms like Facebook, groups have been created to disseminate WhatsApp, and the NDDB website to reach knowledge. out to more and more participants in order ● Using online platforms like Twitter, to address their queries related to the dairy Facebook, and Google Drive for sharing sector. The feedback of the participants, dairy-related information and delivering extension education films made by NDDB, effective training. reading materials, and training brochures ● 729 technical officers and trainers were were shared in the media. A total of 22,600 trained during implementation of the social media users accessed the feedback RBP. They, in turn, trained and helped in video uploaded by the Cooperative Training creating a pool of 33,411 LRPs, who have Group and 150 WhatsApp groups were been able to connect with the farmers formed, which continue to be active. and are taking the scientific innovations to the farmers’ doorstep. As many as 21, 6.8.5. Extending Support to EIAs 57,497 farmers have benefited from the programme. The Cooperative Training Group extends handholding support to the EIAs in the ● NDP provided an opportunity for following ways beyond training programmes: 11,620 participant milk producers from developing States like Chhattisgarh, ● Helping in identifying resource persons Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Uttar Pradesh, and developing relevant training modules and West Bengal to travel beyond their and curricula; own areas and learn best practices in other ● Sharing knowledge and reading materials developed states. Women accounted for 44 per cent of the total producers covered.
Table 6.8: Number of Producers and Women Trained in Best Practices S. No. State Milk Producers Trained (Nos.) Women Producers Trained (Nos.) 1. Chhattisgarh 348 30 2. Odisha 1412 532 3. West Bengal 4491 2879 4. Madhya Pradesh 1156 440 5. Uttar Pradesh 4213 1273 Total 11,620 5,154
Source: NDDB
1. Impact Study for DCS Secretaries 2. Sustainable business processes were (Conducted at the Bhagirathi Milk Union adopted by village level dairy cooperative to assess the impact of the training) societies along with the inclusion of women (Conducted at the Jaipur and Findings of the study: Panchmahal Milk Unions to analyse and - After the training, the DCS secretaries evaluate the trainings of FIP/FOP & CMP. were found to be more aware about The scope of the study spans the women writing cash books, resolution books, members of the DCSes. and preparation of the trial balance, Findings of the study: among other things. - 76 per cent of the producers felt that - They were able to test and read the fat the training content was adequate while 46 per cent felt that the content content of milk. was applicable to a large extent in their - They were trained in the proper activities; 91 per cent were satisfied maintenance of purchase registers, cash with the way facilitators handled their books, and ledger books. queries during training.
138 139 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
- The major learning was on CMP 5. Measuring the effectiveness of trainings practices (81 per cent) and balanced imparted to the secretaries of the Dairy feeding systems (70 per cent). Co-operative Societies in Uttar Pradesh, - The importance of member (Conducted at Bijnore, Meerut and involvement was understood and a Lucknow Milk Unions) higher number of women members Findings of the study: were now actively involved in milk - 81 per cent of the secretaries were production. maintaining all records and registers in 3. Achieving sustainable/viable business the DCS after the training. proposition by capacity building of - 63 per cent of the DCSes were stakeholders (Conducted at Ichhamathi conducting their MCM meetings on a and Kishan Milk Unions, West Bengal, to monthly basis. assess the effectiveness of the training in - 70 per cent of the secretaries were the dairy cooperative societies (DCS performing sample tests of each Findings of the study: farmer’s milk on a daily basis. - The BAP programmes have brought 6. FOP/FIP Training Effectiveness study about positive behavioural changes (conducted across India for different Milk among the executives of the milk Unions over telephone, with a sample size unions. of 225 farmers) - The FIP/FOP training programmes Findings of the study: have nurtured interest among the - Awareness about milk prices had women members of DCS. increased among 89 per cent of the participants. - As an impact of the TOT programme, union officials gained knowledge to - 83 per cent of the participants conduct effective training programmes were aware of the importance of at the field level. participation in AGMs while 82 per cent became aware about the - Training for new field supervisors ownership of the cooperatives. brought about clarity about the - 71 per cent of the participants asserted DCS facilitation and promote better that they were aware of the criteria of communication. ideal DCSes and 82 per cent were aware 4. Perception mapping of the Institution about cooperatives and patronage. Building interventions in a milk union - 43 per cent of the participants had adopted by MCM on making viable started the cultivation of guinea grass/ cooperative business and DCS (Conducted CO4, prepared silage, and purchased at Bhilwara Milk Union, to assess the chaff cutters. awareness and participation of members - 66 per cent of the participants had in MCM training) adopted the practice of feeding mineral Findings of the study: mixture and ensured availability of - The training has brought about water for 24 hours. changes in terms of clean milk - 9 per cent of the participants had production practices, awareness on started regular check-ups of mastitis discarding the first few streams of milk, using mastec and cleaning of tits of the and development in terms of increased animals. milk supply to the DCSes. - 125 new members had joined the - The MCMs have become aware of their cooperatives, and record keeping had roles and responsibilities, and actively improved in two societies attend the monthly meetings. - 68 of the participants had started the use of SS vessels.
140 141 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Economic and Financial Analysis of NDP-I
7. Effectiveness of training for executives by more than 1000 litres. This survey was conducted across India - 78 per cent of the respondents for 95 new Field Supervisors and 25 highlighted the achievement of factors Line Managers of 26 EIAs through such as profitability, growth, financial online questionnaires and telephone strength, stability, high morale, new interviewing. The findings of the study technology dissemination, and self- findings on a scale of 1 to 10 for different development. parameters are as follows: a. The profitability of farmers had 6.8.6. Lessons Learned for Future increased. Operations b. There was growth in milk production ● NDP-I provided the opportunity to in the specific area. establish regular and active connect with c. The financial strength of the milk the milk-producing members by regularly producers had improved. conducting different training and awareness generation programmes. These d. Stability was noticed in the programmes can continue to function performance of supervisors/DCS staff. as interactive forums for addressing the e. Operating efficiency improved at the issues and concerns of milk producer level of the DCS. members. f. The morale of the supervisors and ● Investing in the capacity building of DCS staff had improved. manpower engaged in sustaining dairy g. There was greater Dissemination of cooperatives has now become an integral new technology among dairy farmers. part of creating professional institutions run by members as profitable business h. The image of the milk producer had enterprises. improved. ● The training menu has been increased i. Efforts at self-development were to cover all fields of dairy cooperatives, noticed among the extension officers including animal breeding, animal and field supervisors. nutrition, animal health, quality assurance, j. The social status of women had cooperative institution building, and dairy improved. farm management. k. Adaptability of new technology among ● NDP-I also stressed process improvement farmers had increased. in the entire training cycle and l. Milk producers were being encouraged standardisation at all levels. This helped to develop innovative ideas in dairy in the implementation of the complete farming. training cycle. Findings of the study: ● Some pilots were undertaken for connecting distant locations by using IT, - 18 per cent said that milk procurement and this effort needs to be strengthened had improved but by less than 100 further. litres. ● Market research has pointed to the need - 44 per cent of the participants said that for promoting training and capacity milk procurement had increased by building in marketing and for addressing 100-500 litres in their respective areas customer aspirations and product after the training. development among the milk unions. - 15 per cent of the participants said ● Micro training centres (MTCs) have the milk procurement had improved become effective extension platforms by 500-1000 litres per day in their for imparting farmer training in dairy respective areas. management. Women too can participate - 23 per cent of the participants claimed in these local level training programmes as that milk procurement had increased they do not have to travel long distances to attend them.
140 141 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
● The training under NDP helped During follow-up training, MTC maintain a dialogue with BODs, officers, trainers observed an increase in sale and producer members for sharing of mineral mixture in the Ulaav information on recent developments and DCS; 200 kg of the mineral mixture translating scientific information into was sold in a month. applications at the grassroot level.
6.8.7. Spin-off of the NDP Trainings for womenfolk who find travelling long distance for training challenging. Till October As a result of effective training delivery 2019, more than 18,000 participants had under VBMPS, in NDP-I, milk unions in been trained in the MTCs. the States of Gujarat, Karnataka, Madhya The CT group is in continuous touch Pradesh, Odisha, Uttar Pradesh, and over social media with the MTC resource Tamil Nadu are now requesting NDDB to persons. The screenshot of one such conduct training for their newly recruited interaction screenshot shown here proves P&I officers. Those programmes are being that the CT group believes in carrying the conducted for a duration of 2-4 weeks learning process even beyond the training each. Hitherto, 500 newly recruited officers programme. have been trained. Further, 210 veterinary officers from the Vidarbha and Marathwada regions were trained on scientific animal husbandry practices. Milk unions are now also asking for designing of solution-oriented training programmes. Farmer level training programmes are also being developed to impart training on fertility management and adoption of ethno-veterinary practices. Micro Training Centre
The MTC is an effective extension platform for future training programmes. Under NDP-I, 20 MTCs were established in 10 milk unions, which led 4 progressive dairy farmers to start MTCs in 2018 with the support of the Barauni Milk Union. These centres are working as effective platforms for knowledge extension on good dairy animal rearing practices, best suited to the particular areas being covered under each MTC. The latter also serves as an effective platform especially
6.9. Conclusion
The ex-post EFA reveals that for project objectives and goals in the foreseeable future, horizon 20 years, the FRRs and ERRs for at least the next 12 years, which would have both substantially improved, which definitely lead to additional benefits for the establishes that the project achieved its betterment of the dairy sector of the country. coveted goals, to a great extent. The capacity The project therefore needs to be monitored till the completion of project period, 2019-20, on a regular basis to ascertain its overall certainly would help in pursuing the project socio-economic impact.
142 143 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Economic and Financial Analysis of NDP-I
Annexure-I Project Cost as per Final Estimation (Rs Crores)
A. Productivity 2012- 2013- 2014- 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2019- Total Enhancement 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
1. A.1 Animal Breed
Improvement
A.1(i) Bull Production 1.1 17.0 30.5 36.7 51.6 46.8 63.9 44.6 292.3
A.1(ii) Semen 0.0 16.7 52.1 79.3 49.3 21.1 47.6 28.9 295.0 Production
A.1(iii) Artificial 0.0 2.4 9.4 13.6 14.6 14.3 19.6 3.6 77.3 Insemination / Delivery
Subtotal 1.1 36.1 92.0 129.6 115.5 82.1 131.1 77.1 664.5
2. A.2 Animal Nutrition
A.2 (i) Ration Balancing 0.8 18.9 29.4 74.1 56.8 26.3 17.6 10.4 234.2 Programme
A.2 (ii) Fodder 0.2 3.1 12.9 16.6 15.9 7.2 3.3 12.8 72.0 Development
Subtotal 1.0 22.1 42.3 90.8 72.7 33.4 20.9 23.1 306.2
Total (A) 2.1 58.2 134.3 220.3 188.2 115.6 151.9 100.2 970.7
B. Milk Collection and 0.1 23.8 59.7 133.4 107.2 60.7 146.3 155.1 686.2 Bulking
C. Project Management 1.4 3.4 3.9 5.1 3.7 7.1 22.9 55.5 103.0
Total Project Cost (A) 3.5 85.4 197.9 358.8 299.1 183.4 321.1 310.9 1760.0 +(B) + (C)
EIA Contribution 0.0 19.3 40.3 83.6 49.7 25.8 105.6 120.5 444.9
Sub-total 3.5 104.8 238.2 442.4 348.7 209.2 426.7 431.4 2204.9
NDB Contribution to 14.7 18.7 25.1 31.8 37.3 29.7 25.2 17.6 200.0 NDP-1
Grand Total 18.2 123.5 263.2 474.2 386.1 238.9 451.9 449.0 2404.9
Source: NDDB.
142 143 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Annexure-II Project Cost as per Utilization (till End March 2020) Rs Crores
A. Productivity 2012- 2013- 2014- 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2019- Total Enhancement 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1. A.1 Animal Breed
Improvement A.1(i) Bull Production 1.08 17.02 30.52 36.72 51.59 46.81 63.94 7.32 255.00 A.1(ii) Semen 0.00 16.71 52.09 79.28 49.33 21.06 47.57 20.95 287.00 Production A.1(iii) Artificial 0.00 2.40 9.41 13.55 14.56 14.25 19.56 2.24 75.97 Insemination / Delivery Subtotal 1.08 36.14 92.02 129.54 115.48 82.13 131.07 30.51 617.97 2. A.2 Animal Nutrition A.2 (i) Ration 0.80 18.92 29.39 74.13 56.78 26.25 17.59 4.16 228.01 Balancing Programme A.2 (ii) Fodder 0.17 3.14 12.89 16.64 15.92 7.18 3.28 10.21 69.42 Development Sub-total 0.97 22.06 42.29 90.76 72.70 33.43 20.87 14.36 297.44 Total (A) 2.04 58.19 134.31 220.31 188.18 115.56 151.94 44.87 915.41 B. Milk Collection and 0.09 23.82 59.68 133.38 107.17 60.69 146.28 109.35 640.46 Bulking
C. Project 1.40 3.42 3.87 5.07 3.70 7.12 22.89 34.93 82.39 Management
Total Project Cost (A) 3.53 85.44 197.85 358.76 299.06 183.36 321.11 189.15 1638.26 +(B) + (C) EIA Contribution 0.00 19.32 40.32 83.64 49.68 25.83 105.62 81.13 405.53 Sub Total 3.53 104.75 238.17 442.40 348.74 209.20 426.72 270.28 2043.79 NDB Contribution to 14.65 18.72 25.05 31.81 37.33 29.71 25.16 12.53 194.95 NDP-1 Grand Total 18.17 123.47 263.23 474.20 386.07 238.91 451.88 282.82 2238.74 Source: NDDB.
Annexure III Sources of funds for Investment as per Final Estimates and Fund Utilisation till End March 2020, Rs Million
Investment as per approval: Project Closure Utilization as on End March 2020 Component Grant EIA NDDB Total Grant EIA NDDB Total A1 6645 -- 760 7405 6180 -- 735 6915 A2 3062 -- 340 3402 2974 -- 354 3328 B 6862 4449 780 12091 6405 4055 762 11222 C 1030 -- 120 1150 824 -- 98 922 Total 17599 4449 2000 24048 16383 4055 1950 22387
Source: NDDB. Note: A1: Animal Breed Improvement; A2: Animal Nutrition; B: Milk Collection and Bulking or Village Based Milk Procurement System; C: Project Management.
144 145 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Economic and Financial Analysis of NDP-I
Annexure IV Project Cost and Undiscounted Financial Benefits, Rs Million 2012- 2013- 2014- 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2019- Total Year\Components 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Project Cost (As per Utilisation till End March 2020) Animal Productivity A.1 Animal Breed 66.0 432.0 1014.7 1415.4 1295.7 933.4 1405.6 352.4 6915.1 Improvement A2. Animal Nutrition A2.1 Ration Balancing 30.0 218.3 325.5 788.4 620.7 304.9 214.4 48.1 2550.4 Programme A2.2 Fodder 6.3 36.2 142.8 177.0 174.1 83.3 40.0 118.3 777.9 Development B. Village Based Milk 58.1 504.6 1097.9 2294.5 1714.5 981.4 2617.3 1953.8 11222.0 Procurement system C. Project Management 21.3 43.6 51.3 66.7 55.8 86.1 241.5 355.6 922.0 and Learning Grand Total 181.7 1234.7 2632.3 4742.0 3860.7 2389.1 4518.8 2828.2 22387.4 A Animal Productivity Undiscounted Benefits A1 Animal Breeding Operation Area I 0 0 0 13 34 45 63 98 Operation Area II 0 0 0 0 0 379 1174 2210 Operation Area III 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operation Area IV 0 0 1021 1607 1718 1725 1725 1725 Total A1 Incremental 0 0 1021 1621 1752 2149 2962 4033 vis a vis (2012-13) A2. Animal Nutrition Increased milk 0 0 0 7 50 158 319 499 productivity Reduced unit cost of 0 0 3 100 740 2359 4751 7442 production Reduced methane 0 0 0 4 30 97 194 305 emissions Fodder Seed 5 11 85 126 147 113 63 42 Production Total A 2 5 11 89 238 967 2727 5327 8288
B. Village Base milk Procurement System Increased Price due to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 bulking Cost savings due to 0 32 200 557 1238 1592 2620 3931 BMCs Cooperative Services 4 48 222 497 691 650 655 616 Total (B) 4 80 422 1053 1929 2242 3275 4547 Grand Total (A1)+(A2) 9 91 1532 2912 4648 7117 11564 16868 +(B)
Source: NCAER Estimates based on Data provided by NDDB
144 145 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Annexure V Project Cost and Undiscounted Economic Benefits (Rs Million) 2012- 2013- 2014- 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2019- Total Year\Components 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Project Cost (As per Utilisation till End March 2020) Animal Productivity A.1 Animal Breed 59.4 388.8 913.3 1273.9 1166.1 840.0 1265.0 316.6 6223.1 Improvement A2. Animal Nutrition A2.1 Ration Balancing 27.0 196.5 293.0 709.6 558.6 274.4 193.0 43.3 2295.3 Programme A2.2 Fodder 5.7 32.6 128.5 159.3 156.7 75.0 36.0 106.3 699.9 Development B. Village Based Milk 52.3 454.1 988.1 2065.0 1543.0 883.2 2355.6 1757.9 10099.3 Procurement system C. Project Management and 19.2 39.3 46.1 60.0 50.2 77.5 217.4 320.0 829.7 Learning Grand Total 163.5 1111.2 2369.0 4267.8 3474.7 2150.1 4066.9 2543.9 20147.3 A Animal Productivity Undiscounted Benefits A1 Animal Breeding Operation Area I 0 0 0 13 32 43 61 95 Operation Area II 0 0 0 0 0 367 1138 2140 Operation Area III 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operation Area IV 0 0 989 1557 1664 1670 1671 1671 Total Incremental vis a 0 0 989 1570 1697 2081 2869 3906 vis (2012-13) A2. Animal Nutrition Increased milk 0 0 0 7 50 158 319 499 productivity Reduced unit cost of 0 0 3 100 740 2359 4751 7442 production Reduced methane 0 0 0 4 30 97 194 305 emissions Fodder Seed 5 11 85 126 147 113 63 42 Production Total 5 11 89 238 967 2727 5327 8288
B. Village Base milk Procurement System Increased Price due to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 bulking Cost savings due to 0 42 262 729 1620 2083 3429 5145 BMCs Cooperative Services 4 48 222 497 691 650 655 616 Total (B) 4 89 483 1225 2311 2733 4084 5762 Grand Total (A1)+(A2) 9 101 1562 3033 4975 7542 12280 17956 +(B)
Source: NCAER Estimates based on Data provided by NDDB
146 147 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Impact of NDP-I Chapter 7 on the Rural Economy
7.1. Background and the Context
The agenda for Sustainable Development interventions. In order to better support the Goals (SDGs) was adopted in September integration of livestock policies and practices 2015 by 193 member-states at the historic with sustainable development strategies, this United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), chapter synthesises the key linkages involved, which came into effect from January 1, examines some initiatives, and suggests how 2016. The agenda delineated 17 SDGs the livestock sector can actively help achieve and 169 targets to help organise and sustainability goals. streamline development actions for greater achievement of human well-being across While livestock production relates directly or the world through the eradication of indirectly to each of the SDGs, the linkages poverty, promotion of inclusive growth, and with some goals and targets are stronger than protection of the environment. with others. These relationships are often defined by a two-way linkage in which, on The livestock sector plays a key role in the one hand, the development of the sector economic development in India, resolving helps achieve some targets; while, on the many present challenges by providing other, the achievement of a target creates adequate and reliable supplies of safe, the right conditions for more sustainable healthy and nutritious food to its population; development of the sector (Table 7.1). creating employment opportunities upstream and downstream in the food Dairy activities play a key role in improving chain; strengthening the financial, physical, the lives of millions in rural India by and social assets of families; and generating providing reliable supplies; accounting for fiscal revenue and foreign exchange. the consumption of milk and dairy products; In order to fulfil its potential, however, generating income and employment; and the sector will have to face a new set of strengthening the ownership of assets to intersecting challenges. Increased demand enable rural households to achieve their for livestock products will, for example, livelihood objectives. add pressure on ecosystems, biodiversity The dairy sector also empowers rural women and the environment; livestock producers and members of the SC/ST community will encounter greater competition for by providing them greater opportunities capital, labour, land, water and energy; for participation in collective approaches intensified production could prompt the to markets; improving the efficiency of emergence and spread of infectious diseases natural resources; broadening access to and, with increased use of antibiotics, clean and renewable energy; and supporting heighten the threat to public health posed by sustainable economic growth. In the true antimicrobial-resistant pathogens. sense of its term, this sector stimulates A wide range of policy instruments are small-holder entrepreneurship, reduces available to strengthen the positive effects inequality gaps,and promotesquality or mitigate the negative outcomes of consumption and sustainable production patterns. Simultaneously, it increases the
146 147 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
resilience of households to climate shocks improvements in yield as also reducing their and brings together multiple stakeholders environmental footprint. Dairy farmers to achieve all these goals. The dairy sector use manure not only as fertilisers but also invests in programmes that provide to generate biogas for clean energy. This is knowledge and skills. The use of technology especially beneficial in rural areas as a cheap and other improvements in production and source of energy, which otherwise may prove marketing introduced in the dairy sector to be an environmental hazard. create employment opportunities for youth, particularly women and the economically As regardsthe environmental impacts, weaker sections like landless labourers, in the the SDGs create a platform where the rural areas. dairy sector contributes in minimising environmental degradation and endeavours The dairy sector is continually finding new to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs). ways to optimise efficiencies in water and Protecting natural resources allows farmers energy useby lowering the operating costs not only to grow their businesses but also to for dairy farms. By using animal manure as safeguard their lands. Table 7.1 relates the inputs in crop production, and establishing SDGs to the concomitant NDP activities. feed efficiencies, farmers are ensuring
Table 7.1: Identification of the Related Areas of SDGs with NDP
SDGs Target Link between NDP Activities and the Nature of the Impact of NDP on the Specific SDGs Specific SDGs
Goal 1 Reducing India’s dairy development approach, Direct impact as dairy development poverty based on a small-holder production opens up avenues for improvement system linked to an institutional in income from milk-producing network with significant contribution households that include the landless and from women, helps address Goal 1 in poor. reducing poverty. Dairy income acts as a remunerative support to cushion against failure of crops. Mostly landless workers and small and marginal farmers are covered under NDP that helps raise their income status above poverty. Moreover, above 60 per cent of the BPL community have benefited from NDP. Goal 2 Zero hunger Increased livelihood opportunities Indirect impact by improving income through dairying and synergies between levels from milk production and sale. crop production and dairying help improve both the purchasing power of the population and availability of food. Goal 3 Good health A better income through dairy activities Direct impact due to increased and well- ensures better consumption that reduces production of milk, a nutritious food being nutritional deficiency, while ensuring item. good health and well-being. Proportion of the population with access to basic amenities could be a worthy indicator. Goal 4 Quality Education is not directly linked to NDP. Indirect impact, through imparting education However, NDP necessitates imparting of training on the operation and of training and implementation of an management of dairy sector activities at awareness programme related to the both the farm level and the processing domain activities. and distribution levels; both improve the skill levels of workers in the sector.
148 149 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Impact of NDP-I on the Rural Economy
Table 7.1: Identification of the Related Areas of SDGs with NDP (Contd.) Goal 5 Improving Women’s involvement in dairy activities Direct impact as it provides income- gender has expanded due to NDP schemes earning opportunities for women in the equality through various awareness and training rural households. programmes, which have helped improve mobility, status and recognition for women in the NDP areas as reflected in the Socio-Economic Survey (SES) of NCAER. Goal 6 Clean water Although this is not directly linked Significant potential for an indirect and sanitation to NDP, yet access to clean water and impact through its impact at the sanitation is imperative in order to local level by raising participation of ensure procurement of quality milk. households in collective efforts at local development. Goal 7 Affordable Proper dung management and emphasis Direct impact as it creates opportunities and clean on biogas usage in the NDP areas is for the utilisation of dung of dairy energy closely linked to access to affordable animals in producing biogas for clean energy. domestic uses. Goal 8 Ensuring NDP has helped enhance the importance Direct impact, as the programme creates inclusive of the milk business through better opportunities for the landless and poor economic procurement (VBMPS), strengthening among the rural population to enable growth the business by providing Bulk Milk them to earn income through milk Coolers (BMCs) to the District production. Cooperative Society (DCS), which has provided decent work opportunities and thereby contributed to economic growth. Goal 9 Industry, Dairy activities emerged as an industry The modernisation of the dairy sector innovation and implementation of Artificial at the farm level, input supply level, and and Intelligence (AI) with other forms of the processing and distribution levels infrastructure breed development mechanisms and necessitates innovative approaches and infrastructure provision (such as setting supply infrastructure of high quality. up of a semen station) have brought about a significant change in the NDP areas. Goal 10 Preventing Since the landless, small and marginal Dairy cooperatives provide equal access rising farmers have benefited the most from to farmers irrespective of how much inequality NDP, it has helped reduce inequality milk they supply. in the project areas as compared to areas that did not receive the NDP interventions. Goal 11 Sustainable This goal is not directly linked to NDP. No significant linkage. cities and communities Goal 12 Responsible NDP has improved the consumption The dairy production process entails consumption of milk, which, in turn, has helped adoption of feeding practices that raise and reduce nutritional deficiencies. It has the potential for conservation of land; production also increased production through use of a collective approach to marketing measures like breed development, fodder also helps improve the quality of the development, RBP, and VBMPS that product and reduce cost. have helped optimise production and channelise them through the market mechanism.
148 149 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Table 7.1: Identification of the Related Areas of SDGs with NDP (Contd.) Goal 13 Lowering India’s model of milk production is Adoption of feed mix that leads to methane based on feeding crops, residues and reduction in methane emissions in the emission agricultural by-products and using dairying sector. family labour to add value to resources, which otherwise have limited alternative economic value. In India, buffaloes account for nearly 50 per cent of milk production and their average methane emissions are lower than the regional average for buffaloes. The RBP as part of NDP has also helped reduce methane emission from the ruminants through better and balanced intake of feed and green fodder development that has ultimately helped contain the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Goal 14 Life below This goal is not directly linked to NDP. No direct linkage. water Goal 15 Sustainable India’s milch herd comprises a number The dairy sector can help in promoting use of of indigenous breeds of both buffaloes the more sustainable use of natural terrestrial as well as cows, which helps address resources by adopting practices as noted ecosystems Goal 15 in terms of halting the loss of under SDGs 12 and 13. and land biodiversity. Goal 16 Inclusive NDP induces strong institutional Through its significant impact on SDGs societies and linkages of various institutions like DCS, 1, 5, 8 and 10, dairy development, which institutions MPI and NGCs. is the primary aim of NDP, contributes to the achievement of SDG 16. Goal 17 Partnership to NDP has successfully collaborated NDP requires collaboration with a range achieve goals with different village level institutions of stakeholders, through which it can for ensuring the success of NDP play an important role in enhancing its programmes that eventually benefited contribution towards achievement of the the targeted population belonging to the SDGs. deprived segments of society.
Source: United Nations, NCAER.
In order to address the mounting challenges which contributed in many ways in achieving in the dairy sector and simultaneously the UNDP SDG goals. promote gender equality, a central sector scheme of National Dairy Plan-I was In this context, an effort has been made launched for implementation during the here to examine the link between the period 2011-12 to 2018-19. The two primary objectives and outcomes of NDP-I and the development objectives of this scheme are to 17 broad SDGs.As may be seen from Table increase the productivity of milch animals 7.1, NDP, with its focus on achieving dairy and thereby increase milk production to meet development, has many links with the SDGs. the rapidly growing demand for milk, and to This chapter focuses on the following seven provide rural milk producers greater access to SDGs,which having close linkages with the organised milk sector while maintaining several NDP-I objectives: the critical equilibrium needed to achieve the 1. Goal 1 : Reducing poverty; SDGs. In order to fulfil these objectives, the 2. Goal 5 : Improving gender equality; NDP-I agenda focused on several key areas like fodder management, re-vegetation of 3. Goal 8 : Ensuring inclusive economic degraded land due to over-grazing and over- growth; exploitation, and setting up of semen stations 4. Goal 10 : Preventing rising inequality; for genetically improved high-yielding 5. Goal 13 : Lowering methane emissions; variety of milch animals including bulls,
150 151 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Impact of NDP-I on the Rural Economy
6. Goal 15 : Propagating the sustainable limited alternative economic value. In India, use of terrestrial ecosystems buffaloes account for nearly 50 percent of and land; and milk production, and their average methane 7. Goal 16 : Promoting inclusive societies emissions are lower than the regional average and institutions. for buffaloes. This model contains certain elements such as dependence on buffaloesfor India’s dairy development approach, based lower methane emissions and avoiding the on a small-holder production system model use of land for feeding animals, which help linked to an institutional network with a address Goal 13 in terms of a lower average significant contribution from women, helps per unit of methane emission as compared to address Goal 1 of reducing poverty, Goal the regional average, and Goal 15 in terms of 5 of improving gender equality, Goal 8 of propagating the sustainable use of terrestrial ensuring inclusive economic growth, Goal ecosystems and land. India’s milch herd 10 of preventing rising inequality, and Goal comprises a number of indigenous breeds of 16 of promoting inclusive societies and both buffaloes as well as cows, which helps institutions. address Goal 15 in terms of halting the loss India’s model of milk production is based of biodiversity. Furthermore, the findings on feeding crops, residues and agricultural of the NCAER survey results have also been by-products and using family labour to add incorporated for the purpose of analysis. value to resources, which otherwise have
7.2. Goals 1, 5, and 8: Reducing Poverty, Improving Gender Equality, and Ensuring Inclusive Economic Growth
Livestock can indeed play a catalytic role related to poverty eradication, are presented in strengthening the assets used by rural in Table 7.2, which shows the current status households,enabling them to achieve their of involvement of households in poverty livelihood objectives, and in increasing the reduction and livelihood activities, and the resilience of families to cope with shocks. The availability of basic amenities as per the possible indicators from the NDP-I survey, NDP-I Survey, 2019.
Table 7.2: Indicators Impacting SDGs 1, 5, and 8
Indicators Project vs.Control Before/After Percentage Coverage (i)Households with milch animals Project village Before the project 49.4 Currently (2019) 52.6 Control village Before the project 38.5 Currently (2019) 43.9 (ii)Change in share of households Project village Before the project 77.1 engaged in dairy activities Currently (2019) 81.0 Control village Before the project 47.2 Currently (2019) 54.0 (iii) Contribution of dairy milk Project village Before the project 43.7 production to incomes of households Currently (2019) 59.4 (% reported as very significant) Control village Before the project 30.0 Currently (2019) 36.9
150 151 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Table 7.2: Indicators Impacting SDGs 1, 5, and 8 (iv) BPL households rearing milch Project village Before the project animals Currently (2019) 61.0 Control village Before the project Currently (2019) 58 (v) Tap drinking water Project village Before the project Currently (2019) 48.7 Control village Before the project Currently (2019) 42.5 (vi) Electricity grid connection Project village Before the project Currently (2019) 94.1 Control village Before the project Currently (2019) 97.5 (vii) Toilet inside the premises Project village Currently (2019) 83.3 Control village Currently (2019) 80.2 (viii) LPG connection Project village Currently (2019) 88.0 Control village Currently (2019) 84.4 (ix) Households with TV Project village Currently (2019) 61.5 Control village Currently (2019) 55.5 (x) Women’s participation in dairy Project village Currently (2019) 66.0 activities (increased) Control village Currently (2019) 49.6 (xi) Women’s position in household Project village Currently (2019) 76.8 decision-making improved (% Control village Currently (2019) 63.8 reported) (xii) Women’s mobility outside Project village Currently (2019) 74.1 households improved (% reported) Control village Currently (2019) 64.1
Source: NCAER field data.
The first four indicators, viz.: (i) households the commencement of the project, which with milch animals, (ii) change in share of went up to 81 per cent on completion of the households engaged in dairy activities, the project. It was also observed that the (iii) contribution of dairy milk production productive activities performed by the female to the households’ income (per cent reported members of the households were increasing as very significant) and (iv) BPL households after implementation of the project. Further, rearing milch animals, may be considered as the contribution of dairy income to the relevant national indicators for eradicating incomes of householdshas been significant. extreme poverty at the lowest income strata of the society. About 44 per cent of the respondents from the project villages reported that The percentage of households with milch the contribution of dairy income to the animals has been increasing in both the total household income, which wasalready project and control villages. Before the start significant before the project, had gone up of NDP-I, 49 per cent of the households had to 59 per cent on completion of the project. milch animals, which increased to 53 per About 60 per cent of the BPL households that cent on completion of the project. Similarly, were rearing milch animals indicated that the there were positive changes in the share households were engaged in remunerative of households engaged in dairy activities. activities, which, inter alia, helped reduce In the project villages, 77 per cent of the income poverty. respondents reported positive changes before
152 153 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Impact of NDP-I on the Rural Economy
The relevant indicators for assessing the in all the training and capacity building “proportion of the population living in programmes, (v) ensuring participation of households with access to basic services” are women in capacity building programmes, (i) tap drinking water,(ii) electricity grid and (vi) providing advisory services directly connection,(iii) toilet inside the premises,(iv) to women beneficiaries. The NCAER SES LPG connection, and (v) households with TV identified a few more possible indicators, (Table 7.2). viz.,(i) facilitating greater participation of women in dairy remunerative activities, The Socio-economic Survey (SES) conducted (ii) improving the position of women in by NCAER found that about half of the household decision-making,(iii) ensuring sample households had access to tap drinking women’s mobility outside the households, water in the project villages whereas the and (iv) increasing enrolment of women corresponding figure of sample households members in the existing and new DCSes. in the control villages was about 43 per cent. Secondly, electricity grid connectionshad The survey found that 66 per cent of the reached over 95 per cent of the households in women participated in dairy remunerative both the project and control villages. Third, activities in the project villages as compared more than 80 per cent of the households had to 50 per cent of their counterparts in the toilets inside the premises in both the project control villages. Secondly, about 77 per cent and the control villages. Fourth, 88 per cent of the respondents reported an improvement and 84 per cent of the households in both in women’s position in household decision- the project and control villages, respectively, making in the project villagesas compared to owned LPG connections. The ownership a corresponding figure of 64 per cent in the of TV by households is a symbol of social control villages. About 74 per cent and 64 per status. About, 62 per cent and 56 per cent of centof the women reported an improvement the households in the project and control in women’s mobility outside households in villages, respectively, owned TV sets. the project and control villages, respectively, and 49 percent reported enrolment of Throughout the developing world, women women members in the existing and new and girls in rural areas are deeply involved DCSes. in livestock production.However, women livestock farmers typically face greater Goal 8 seeks the promotion of sustainable challenges than men, including economic, economic growth and full and productive social, and institutional barriers. The employment. The livestock sector also has interventions under NDP-I helped in the tremendous potential to create jobs reducing poverty and empowering women in and reduce inequality, thereby directly a number of ways. Under NDP, the specific contributing to SDG 8 in promoting focus has been on gender integration at all inclusive and sustainable economic the three levels, that is, at the farmer’s level, growth, employment, and decent work functionary level, and institutional level. for all. Dairying has become an important The following steps were being taken under secondary source of income for millions of the project for ensuring greater inclusion rural families and has assumed an important of women: (i) promoting formation of role in providing employment and income- new Women Dairy Cooperative Societies generating opportunities, particularly for (DCSes), (ii) improving enrolment of marginal farmers and rural women. The women members in the existing and new NCAER SES indicates that over the study DCSes, (iii) increasing involvement of period, there was a significant change in women in leadership roles as members of the income levels of farmers across gender management committees and on boards of in the project villages as compared to the milk unions, (iv) including more women as control ones. It is pertinent to note that field functionaries and gender integration the incomes of landless labourers along
152 153 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
with those of small and marginal farmers to their male counterparts. The impact changed perceptibly during the course of the of NDP-I thus emanated from improved project, and by the end of NDP-I, the female income from dairy and milk-related members in the respondent households products, as well as enhanced employment accounted for a higher percentage share of through an increase in wages and salaries. income from dairy activities as compared
7.3. Goal 10: Preventing Rising Inequality
The SDG 10 calls for reducing inequalities As already stated earlier, NDP-I was basically in income, as well as those deriving from sex, designed to support the poorest sections of age, disability, race, class, ethnicity, religion, the rural economy in order to enhance their and opportunity, both within and among capability of remunerative earnings through countries (UN, 2016c). SDG 10 is closely dairy activities. The programme was well- correlated to SDG 1 (elimination of poverty) intended as its coverage to the poorest strata and while there has been progress on impacted about 90 per cent of the landless poverty reduction over the past decades, the labourers and small and marginal farmers. world continues to suffer from substantial The shares of households from the categories inequalities.In this context, institutional of landless and marginal farmers in the reforms in the livestock sector can be project villages, along with their respective very effective in stimulating smallholder income shares, as compared to those in the entrepreneurship and closing inequality control villages for both the categories are gaps. Livestock rearing is a potent catalyst for delineated in Figure 7.1. growth in smallholder income, growth, with relatively low investment, inputs, and labour
costs.
FigurFiguree 7.1: 7.1: Sh aSharere o fof H Householdsousehold ands an Incomesd Inco mamonges am Landong Land CatCategoriesegories i nin t thehe ProjectProjec andt an Controld Cont Villagesrol Villages
50 45.0
n 43.2
o 45
i 37.7 t 40 35.2 u
b 35 i 27.0 r 30 25.6 25.0 t 22.5 s
i 25 17.9 16.9 18.3 D 20 14.6 e 11.1 11.8 g 15 8.8 7.9 a 6.7 6.25.6 t 10 5.5 2.6 3.4 n 5 0.8 0.7 e
c 0 r
e Household Share Income Share Household Share Income Share P Project Control
Landless Marginal Small Semi-Medium Medium Large
SSourceource: :NCAER NCAE Rfield fie lddata. da ta. After approximation of the Lorenz curve of inequality for the NDP-I villages in using data from the SES, the Gini coefficient comparison to the control ones, thereby notched a value of 0.22 for the project fulfilling one of the critical objectives of the villages and 0.24 for the control villages. SDGs. However, it may be noted that in the This critically reflects the positive effect rural areas, the work-related categories were of intervention in registering lower level mostly overlapping, which impacted the estimation of the coefficient.
154 155
182 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Impact of NDP-I on the Rural Economy
7.4. Goal 13: Lowering Methane Emissions
Goal 13 calls for urgent action to combat which might have changed the rumen climate change and its impacts. The fermentation pattern towards more microbial relationship between livestock and climate cell production and lower acetate and change works in two ways. While on the butyrate production. one hand, livestock make a significant Another study was carried out by Kundu,et contribution to climate change,on the al. (NDRI) on the impact evaluation of RBP other hand, climate change affects livestock on methane emissions in dairy animals in production, for example, through the quality Punjab. The study found that the average and availability of feed and forage, and the baseline emission was 22.40 g/kg milk yield, incidence and prevalence of animal diseases. which was significantly reduced by 13.6 per Global warming is a major concern due to cent (p<0.01) after a balanced ration (19.36 the increase in atmospheric concentration g/kg milk yield) was fed to lactating cows. of greenhouse gases (GHGs), mainly due Similarly, in buffaloes, feeding a balanced to anthropogenic activities. Methane is one ration significantly (p<0.05) reduced enteric of the most harmful GHGs and ruminant methane emission by 11.2 per cent (31.40 husbandry is one of the major sources of versus 27.87 g/kg milk yield). Balanced GHG. According to the report of the Indian feeding reduced average methane emission Network for Climate Change Assessment (g/kg milk yield) by about 12.4 per cent in (INCCA, 2010), of the total methane emitted lactating cows and buffaloes. by all the sectors in India, about 50 per cent Kannan and Garg (2009) carried out a study is contributed by livestock alone. Ruminant on 22 lactating Jaffarabadi buffaloes and five animals lose 4-12 per cent of the gross energy Gir cows under field conditions in Gujarat. intake in the form of methane, which is not Their study reported that the average only detrimental to the environment but also methane emission reduction, in terms of results in energy loss to animals. g/day and g/kg DMI (Dry Matter Intake) Methane emission from livestock in India, was 14.14 per cent, and 11.56 per cent in especially after the adoption of NDP-I, was lactating buffaloes,which was lower (p<0.01) found to be much lower than the estimates as compared to baseline emissions. The of the International Panel for Climate corresponding values for cows were 13.29 Change (IPCC), that is, 46 kg per animal per per cent and 10.87 per cent, respectively, and year(Current Science, Vol. 91, No 10). methane emission was also lower (p<0.01 and p<0.05) than the baseline emission. The Ration Balancing Programme (RBP) implemented under NDP-I has the potential A field condition study was carried out to improve milk production efficiency and by Subhash, et al. (2016) in two villages reduce methane emission with an increase in Anand district of Gujarat on 37 early in the net daily income of milk producers. lactating and it was observed that balanced Animals fed on imbalanced ration produce feeding reduced the average methane more methane per unit of dry matter intake emission (g/kg milk yield) by about 15.21 per due to lower microbial protein production cent in experimental animals. and higher acetate production, the main The above studies indicate that ration substrate for methane production. Studies balancing has the potential to improve milk conducted in the states of Gujarat, Uttar production efficiency and reduce methane Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, and Maharashtra emission with an increase in the net daily indicated that feeding balanced ration income of milk producers. Thus, the large- reduced methane emission by 15–20 per cent scale implementation of this programme can in lactating animals (IDF, 2011; Kannan,et al. help in improving the productivity of milch 2010; 2011). The reduction in the methane animals in an environmentally sustainable emission observed in the studied regions manner. is attributed to the balancing of nutrients,
154 155 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
7.5. Goal 15: Sustainable Use of Terrestrial Ecosystems and Land
The SDG 15 focuses on reducing degraded other hand, only about 21 per cent of the natural habitats and fighting biodiversity farmers reported undertaking the same loss.Acrossthe globe, natural resources are activity.Efforts were also made to re-vegetate deteriorating, ecosystems are under stress, grazing land, which is imperative for the and biological diversity is getting depleted. growth of cattle. While the livestock sector plays a part in biodiversity reduction, land degradation Animal waste is a major environmental and deforestation, it also provides invaluable concern, as it releases large quantities of services that protect, restore, and promote carbon dioxide and ammonia into the the sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, environment, which could contribute to acid combat desertification, reverse land rain and the greenhouse effect. As a result degradation, and halt biodiversity erosion. of dung management in the villages where NDP-I was implemented, the use of biogas The various schemes and programmes and slurry pit showed an increase in the implemented under NDP-I attempted to project villages as compared to the control ensure that the balance of the ecosystem ones, reflecting greater awareness about was maintained. The credible link between and transition towards attainment of the Goal13 and the impact of the NDP-I SDGs (NCAER SES). It is essential to build intervention has been summarised below. effective drainage outlets for animal sheds for ensuring better management of residuals In order to ensure the conservation, and hygiene. Over the years,there has been restoration, and sustainable use of terrestrial a substantial reduction in ‘kutcha’ ‘drainage and inland freshwater ecosystems and and increase in ‘pucca’ cemented drainage services in particular forests, wetlands, for releasing unclean and waste water from mountains and drylands by 2030, NDP-I the cattle sheds. The NCAER SES reveals that aimed at improving the productivity of there was a marked reduction in households fodder crops and common grazing lands, using drainage to open areas during the and to conserve surplus green fodder to course of the project, falling from 49 per cent enhance its availability during the lean of the households before implementation of period. Some of the focused areas of the project in the project area to 39 per cent operation under NDP-I are aligned with the on completion of the project. As regards the fundamental realms of the SDGs. Under the use of ‘inland fresh water ecosystems’, the Fodder Development Programme of NDP-I, NCAER SES reports that about 49.0 per cent certified fodder seeds are being promoted of the households in the project villages were to increase fodder production. Field using tap water as compared to 43.0 per cent demonstrations of mowers, silage making, of the households in the control villages. and biomass storage silos are also being Consequently, the percentage of households carried out to popularise these technologies using wells was about 11.0 per cent in the among farmers.The NCAER SES indicates project villages as compared to 13 per cent thatfodder development activities are more in the control villages. This indicates that the significant in the project villages as compared increase in income from dairy activities in to the control ones. About 45 per cent, 54 the project villages due to implementation per cent, and 55 per cent, of the project of NDP-I enhanced the capacity of the villages reported that fodder development households to opt for tap water connections. activities were functional before the project (BETP), during the middle of the project One of the crucial mandates of the SDGs is (MIDP), and on completion of the project, to combat desertification, restore degraded respectively. In the control villages, on the land and soil, including land affected by
156 157 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Impact of NDP-I on the Rural Economy
desertification, drought, and floods, and lands by the government for various other strive to achieve a land degradation-neutral activities. NDP-I aims for re-vegetation world by 2030. A decline in the availability of of the degraded grazing land due to over- common grazing land was widely reported grazing and over-exploitation by locals, to be in both the project and control villages achieved by strengthening the institutional studied as part of the NCAER SES (Figure arrangements at the village level (Figure 7.3). 7.2). The major reason for this decline has The success achieved by NDP-I in terms of been the allotment of common grazing the re-vegetation completed in the project and control villages is depicted in Figure 7.4. Figure 7.2: Percentage Share of Common Grazing Land in the Figure 7.2: Percentage Share Pofr oCommonject and Grazing Contro Landl Vill inag thees Project and Control Villages
64 63 62 61 n
o 60 i 60
u t 60 b i r
t 58 s
i 58 D e
g 56 a 55 t
ce n 54 e r P 52
50
BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently
Project Villages Control Villages
Source S: oNCAERurce: N fieldCAE Rdata. fie ld data.
Figure 7.3: Re-vegetation in Selected Project and Control Villages FiguFigurere 7.3 :7.3: Re -Re-vegetationvegetation in in S eSelectedlected P Projectroject aandnd CControlontrol VillagesVillages Re-vegetation Effort for Grazing Land
n
o Re-vegetation Effort for Grazing Land
i n 185 60o 53.1 u t 51.6 i 50.6 49.5 50.3 50.0 b 53.1
i 60 u t 50.6 49.5 50.3 50.0 51.6 r 50b t i s r 50 i t 33.3 34.4 40s 32.8 D i 40 32.8 33.3 34.4
D 26.3 e 24.2 25.8 23.4 25.0 g 30 26.3 e 24.2 25.8 25.0 20.6
a 23.4 g 30 17.2 t 16.5 20.6 a 17.2 15.3 t 16.5 20 20 15.3 ce n
10ce n e r 10 e r P 0P 0 BETBPETP MIMDIPDP PPreresseenntlytly BEETTPP MMIDIPDP PrePsreenstlyently
ProPjreocjetct CoCnotnrotrlol YYeses NNoo Not awaarree Source: NCAER field data. FigFuirgeu r7e.4 7:. 4A: cAhciheiveevmemenent to of fR Ree--vveeggeettation EEffffoorrttss i nin S Seleelcetcetde d Figure 7.4: Achievement ofP Re-vegetationrPorjoejcetc ta anndd C C oEffortsonnttrrooll Vini llSelectedaggeess Project and Control Villages
n o n i Re-vegetation successful
o i u t Re-vegetation successful
b i u t 64.3 r 70 61.8 b 61.6 t
i
s 64.3 r 70i 61.8 61.6 t 60 s D i
60e
D 42.5 g 50 41.0 41.3 40.0
a 38.6
e 37.5 t 42.5 g 50 40 41.0 41.3 40.0 a 38.6 37.5 t 40ce n 30 22.5 21.6 21.5 20.5 21.3 e r 16.8 17.5
ce n 15.6 30P 20 22.5 21.6 14.211.5 20.5 21.3 e r 15.6 16.8 17.5 P 20 10 14.1 10 0 0 BETP MIDP Presently BETP MIDP Presently BETP MPIDroPject Presently BETP CoMntIrDolP Presently Project Yes No Not aware Control Yes No Not aware Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data. Source: NCAER field data.
156 157
186
186 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Another mandate of SDG 15 is to promote compared to 16.8 per cent of the households fair and equitable sharing of the benefits in the control villages. A ‘small increase’ arising from utilisation of genetic resources in income was attained by more than 50 and enable appropriate access to such per cent of the households in the project resources, as internationally agreed. The villagesas compared to a corresponding intervention towards the production of figure of only 27.5 per cent in the control high genetic merit (HGM) bulls, semen villages. Among the social groups, 28 per production, and the pilot model for door-to- cent, 36 per cent, and 32 per cent of the door AI delivery services resulted in a higher SC, ST, and OBC households in the project share of crossbred cows in the project areas, villages reported that the contribution of whereas the share of indigenous cows and dairy to their total household incomes had buffaloes was higher in the control villages. increased. The corresponding proportions Further, the share of crossbred cows in the of such households were comparatively milch animal population increased in the lower in the control villages, at 24 per cent, intervention areas more sharply than in the 23 per cent, and 28 per cent, respectively. comparable control villages (NCAER Study, The proportion of households in the project 2019). villages reporting an increase in income due to more than two hours of involvement in Enhancing global support for efforts to dairy activities was 77 per cent as against only combat poaching and trafficking of protected 53 per cent in the control villages. (NCAER- species by increasing the capacity of local NDDB Study). At the national level, the communities to pursue sustainable livelihood increase in the share of livestock sector GVA opportunities is part of the mandates of the to agriculture sector GVA from 21.8 per cent SDGs. In view of the NDP-I intervention and in 2011-12 to 28.4 per cent in 2017-18 could its overall impact, a ‘big increase’ in income largely be attributed to implementation of was reported by more than 21 per cent of various NDP-I initiatives. the households in the project villages as
7.6. Goal 16: Promoting Inclusive Societies and Institutions
The promotion of inclusive societies and like Bulk Milk Coolers (BMCs), and milk institutions is a crucial constituent for re- cans, among other things. Strengthening of aligning with the objectives of the SDGs. the DCSes and producer companies though Societies and institutions are the major Data Processor-based Milk Collection sources of outreach for a targeted impact Units (DPMCUs) and Automatic Milk through delivery of welfare services to the Collection Units (AMCUs) has resulted poor and marginalised sections of society. in greater transparency and fairness in milk procurement operations while the The Village-Based Milk Procurement installation of BMCs has given farmers more System (VBMPS) under NDP-I aims at flexibility in terms of both increasing the providing rural milk producers greater quantity as well as improving the quality of access to organised milkprocessing activities milk. The NCAER SES shows that 65.6 per by forming and strengthening Dairy cent of the project villages had DCSes within Cooperatives Societies (DCSes) and producer the village and 9.6 villages had societies in the companies. Apart from the formation of new adjoining villages. societies/pooling points, existing societies/ pooling points are also being strengthened Dairy cooperatives not only serve as a by providing them village-level capital items channel for marketing of milk but also buy
158 159 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Impact of NDP-I on the Rural Economy
their milk at a price objectively based on the from the untapped remote areas. Project quality of milk determined by various testing villages are better off in terms of availability facilities available in the societies. The project of BMC facilities and Genset facility for villages were found to be better equipped uninterrupted operations of BMC as with milk testing facilities as compared to the compared to the Control villages. control villages. Most of the dairy processed products, cattle feed, AI services, and mineral The various State Federations (SFs) mixtureswere being provided at reasonable remained the key to the impact on markets prices to the dairy cooperative members and profitability with respect to NDP-I in the villages. In most of the cases, the interventions. The role of the state milk payments for these services were being settled federations is undergoing a change due to by the DCSes against the payments to be the demand-driven market for milk in India. made to the dairy farmers. However, the level For instance, federations are vying for new of support in such cases was commensurate markets with the removal of restrictions with the amount of milk poured and the associated with milk shed areas and also the amount due for payment. This was found expansion of existing markets in the context to be common across the states of Punjab of rising industrialisation and urbanisation. and Gujarat, and was also used as a strategy Milk Unions (MUs) primarily work under to prevent dairy farmers from shifting to the guidance of the SFs and are responsible middlemen from the DCSes. for the procurement and processing of milk. It was observed that some people The level of dependency and autonomous were depending on the growth of the functioning of the milk unions varies across cooperatives for sustenance. However, loss the states. Although guided by the SFs on of accountability at the village level can be certain issues, the MUs follow their own very detrimental to the basic foundation of approach to increasing the participation the cooperatives in the village. In the case of the producers. The MUs of some of the of Bihar, for instance, the lack of access to districts have tried to innovate, such as in the infrastructure at all levels has somewhat case of the Banaskantha Milk Union, which hindered the progress of the dairy sector. has started numerous innovative schemes. It has not only invested in training and capacity To enhance procurement of milk, NDDB building but has also coordinated with other envisaged mobilisation and institution government schemes, apart from initiating building through the promotion of new some of them on their own. The Union also Milk Producers’ Institutions (MPI) and New has procedures in place to obtain feedback Generation Cooperatives (NGCs), which and resolve grievances and challenges from would have to be registered subsequently as the field. Producer Companies under the Companies Act. It was observed from the NCAER field The participation of the SC/ST population data that around 20 per cent of the Project in dairying is dependent on several factors villages and 7 per cent of the Control villages related to the overall development of dairying have NGCs. across regions. The limited access to land, as well as their not taking up dairying as a BMCs are crucial into the value chain. A traditional occupation, appears to be a hurdle better substitute to the present collection in their participation. The feedback received system is cooling of milk immediately after from stakeholders from the States revealed milking in Bulk Milk Chilling Units (BMCU) a common pattern, wherein some of the which has become popular in the recent major concerns are a limited understanding past because it not only helps in increasing of dairying and the unavailability of seed the shelf-life of milk but also provides a capital, lack of access to monetary resources systematic and simple way of procuring milk and to credit, and the absence of alternate
158 159 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
sources of income. However, the families they were willing to pay if the quality of AI already involved in dairying have not services was good. Most of the AI service reported any kind of grievance faced at the providing agencies follow the same pattern DCS level. for delivery of AI services in the village.
The type of participation is largely There are five major service providers who determined by education levels, prevailing have been providing AI services to the dairy gender dynamics as well as the opportunities farmers in the study area. Nearly 22 per cent available in the region. Some of the Milk of the project villages had availed of the Unions in Karnataka (for example, Kolar) service from milk cooperative workers and have promoted the training of female government veterinary doctors followed workers as AI technicians. In contrast, in by private vet doctors (21.2 per cent) and states like Punjab, a shift in the use of the mobile AI technicians (18.2 per cent). In the migrant labour for work purposes has been control villages,the main AI service providers observed. This has gradually alienated both were private vet doctors (38.2 per cent), men and women from their daily chores due followed by government veterinary doctors to a fall in the dependence on the labour. The (23.5 per cent) and milk cooperative workers rest of the decision-making on the whole (19.1 per cent), respectively. was seen to remain with the men at both the DCS and household levels. However, among The AI services were also being provided members of the lower socio-economic by Government veterinary hospitals categories, women have continued to play and dispensaries. Some of the states had an important role in dairying at both the integrated the AI services provided by the household level and DCS levels. veterinary department with the other service providers in the field. In the case of Bihar, Among various breed development processes, the Bihar Livestock Development Agency artificial insemination (AI) is one of the (BLDA) was jointly monitoring the services most effective practices available to dairy provided by other service providers like farmers for improving the productivity and IndiaGen, BAIF and JK Trust. The unions profitability of their enterprise on a long- too were taking interest in the provision term basis. In AI, a few superior quality bulls of AI services in the village, though their are efficiently used to expand the breeding intervention was limited to training and coverage for a large number of dairy cows, ensuring the supply of LN and semen doses notwithstanding their location. The usage to the AI service providers. The quality of of AI services in the project villages stood at AI services through the use of semen doses around 59 per cent, vis-à-vis 26.3 per cent provided by the unions was reportedly in the control villages before NDP-I,which satisfactory. went up to 67 per cent in the project villages and 33 per cent in the control villages after A major impediment to the growth of the the interventionsduring NDP-I. The AI livestock sector is the prevalence of diseases constituted a major part of the application like Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD), Peste for cross-bred cows in the project villages des Petits Ruminants (PPR), Brucellosis, (45) per cent, followed by buffaloes and Anthrax, Haemorrhagic Septicemia (HS), indigenous cows while in the control villages, Black Quarter (BQ), Classical Swine Fever AI was typically done on buffaloes. (CSF), Ranikhet Disease (RD), and Avian Influenza (AI), among others, which result The AI service providers are among the in both morbidity and mortality, and important players in the improvement of consequent production losses, thereby genetic potential of animals in the villages. adversely affecting animal productivity. The Across the states, farmers reported lack of presence of diseases deters domestic and availability of quality AI services, though foreign investment in the livestock sector.
160 161 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Impact of NDP-I on the Rural Economy
These not only wreak havoc on the existing villages as compared to 58 per cent in the stock but also limit international trade. It control villages. was observed that during the pre-project period, serious diseases were common in The state veterinary department is one of 51 per cent of the project villages and 53 the primary veterinary service providers at per cent of the control villages. However, as the village level. The veterinary departments a result of various animal disease control- across states have not been able to raise related programmes and interventions, this the service delivery system up to the incidence was reduced to 46 per cent in expectation of the dairy farmers in most of the project villages and 42.1 per cent in the the states. Apart from cattle and buffaloes,the control villages. Similarly the incidence of veterinary departments are also mandated serious illness was 54 per cent in the project to deal with the veterinary healthcare of the other livestock too.
7.7. Conclusion
Dairy development in India is based on which was earlier dominated by an informal a small-holder production system model market set-upthat in most cases, used to linked to an institutional network with a exploit the producers. The programme also significant contribution from women.This extended the benefits of collective bargaining sector thus helps address various SDGs, capacityfor the landless, marginal, and the including Goal 1 in reducing poverty, Goal small producers. 5 in improving gender equality, Goal 8 in The demand for dairy products in India ensuring inclusive economic growth, Goal is likely to grow positively in the coming 10 in preventing rising inequality, Goal 16 years, driven by higher incomes and greater in terms of promoting inclusive societies nutritional awareness among a significant and institutions, Goal 13 in achieving lower portion of population. The demand for average per unit methane emissions as processed and packaged dairy products too compared to the regional average, Goal 15 in is increasing in urban areas. Nonetheless, facilitating the sustainable use of terrestrial in many parts of the country, consumers ecosystems and land, Goal 13 in bringing still prefer unpacked and unrefined milk down the average per unit methane emissions delivered by a local milkman because of its as compared to the regional average, and taste and the perception of freshness. The Goal 15 in terms of ensuring the sustainable price sensitivity for milk is high and its use of terrestrial ecosystems and land. demand is strongly linked to price changes.
Before NDP-I, raising productivity of milch Dairying entailsconsideration of the quality animals was one of the major challenges in of animals, human resources, technical skills, India due to frequent occurrences of diseases land availability, capital, credit, infrastructure like foot and mouth, black quarter infection, and other inputs relevant to the value influenza etc. which affected the health of chain. The quality of animals is critical in the in-milk cattle, thereby lowering yield. determining the volume of milk output and The situation has considerably changed productivity. NDP-I has reportedly helped through NDP-I intervention, following expand the milk yield through effective whichthe growth of milk production has cattle and buffalo breeding programmes gone up significantly. Along with measures and scientific feeding methods that have for sustaining milk production and dairy enhanced the availability and affordability of activities, NDP-I, through VBMPS, has quality feed and fodder. Following effective boosted the share of the organised market AI breeding intervention, the proportion of
160 161 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
high yielding breed cows increased in the cattle rearing, enhanced dairy production project villages as compared to the control during the major parts of NDP-I. Within the ones through the setting up of semen stations framework of increasing competitiveness, and the procurement, production, and small-holders constitute the strength of the distribution of breeding inputs along with dairy sector. The strengths and weaknesses capacity building programmes. of the sector are directly manageable, while opportunities and threats mostly stem from Extension, especially for women involved in the external environment.
162 163 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Concluding Reflections Chapter 8
Rearing dairy animals is an adjunct to levels among households in the project mainstream crop agriculture and therefore villages, reflecting better opportunities offers a significant opportunity to transform for carrying out dairy activities by setting the economy by bringing prosperity to up organised structures like DCSesand the rural sector. Dairy entrepreneurship producer companies (such as new through specialised dairy farming can be a age cooperatives), ensuring adequate major source of sustainable livelihood and supply of inputs, and facilitating the income generation for farmers, especially remunerative marketing of produce. the marginalised sections of the rural • Expenditure on dairy activities: economy. The increase in on-farm fodder Expenditure on dairy activities showed yields, reduction of reliance on expensive an implicit decline for the RBP villages market feeds and selective mechanisation and had more or less stabilised in the have helped reduce milk production costs. other scheme-related villages, but it had Carrying out commercial dairy farming relatively increased in the villages where closer to the cities and milk factories has also NDP-I was not implemented. contributed to achievement of the above • Consumptionof milk: The consumption goals. Considering the sheer size to which of milk had gone up over the study the dairy industry has grown today, there is period among households in the project a need to rescue dairying from its narrow villages, implying that the growth in ‘subsidiary/residual’ approach and treat it as income had led to a decline in nutritional an independent business in itself. deficiencies in these villages. Facilitating sustainable and economically • Production and productivity: Growth in viable dairy farming, which would generate productivity and production have given income and self-employment opportunities rise to a higher motivation to produce through entrepreneurship, is the need of more in the project villages as compared the day for providing livelihoodsto millions to the control ones. of farmers and youths in rural areas. • Women’s participation: The participation Following are the major features and findings of women in dairy activities, particularly emerging from the socio-economic survey of in the project villages, hadgone up households by NCAER: significantly,thereby enhancing their role as principal performers in dairy-based • Composition of households, demographic economic activities in the country’s characteristics: More than 70 per cent of hinterland. the households surveyed comprise the landless labourers and marginal farmers. • Women’s empowerment: The This is also true for the BPL community empowerment ofwomen in the society, in the economic class category and the particularly in terms of decision-making, dominance of SCs, STs, and OBCs in the mobility, ownership of assets, and social class category. status outside the home,had increased noticeably in the project villagesas • Income scenario: Overall, there was a compared to the control ones, which considerable improvement in income
162 163 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
essentially points to the positive outcome enhance their earnings and also counter of the NDP-I interventions. the uncertainty of income due to • Miscellaneous impact: It has been variations in crop output. The vulnerable observed that the implementation of and marginalised rural populations also NDP-I also motivated dairy farmers to exhibited sustained commitment to dairy undertake efficient dung management activity,which ensures long-term prospects and water use. This would have a long- for it. The creation of an effective marketing lasting impact in terms of alignment channel as part of the support structure built with the Sustainable Development Goals under NDP-I would provide a much-needed (SDGs) for both a reduction in methane fillip to farmers to market their incremental gas emissions along with expansion of milk production while also meeting the dairy activities. growing demands of urban consumers. The thrust on balanced feed has helped rationalise In essence, the survey found that a large input costs and enable improvements in number of landless, marginal, and small yield. Moreover, spreading general awareness farmers involved in dairying were able about the need to treat dairy activities as part to enjoy remunerative returns for their of an integrated framework for ushering in subsistence after the NDP-I interventions. the overall development of the sector also Dairying, an off-farm activity, provides had an impact on both the producers and farmers an effective opportunity to consumers.
Annexure A: List of sample villages
State: Andhra Pradesh (includes Telangana) Sample villages: Project District Tehsil Village Intervention Mahabubnagar Balanagar Lingaram RBP Mahabubnagar Keshampet Raghyathanda RBP Mahabubnagar Keshampet Lemamidi RBP Mahabubnagar Kondurg Chinnayelkicherla RBP Mahabubnagar Amangal Kadthal RBP Mahabubnagar Midjil Kanchanpalli RBP Mahabubnagar Midjil Vallabharaopalli RBP Nalgonda Alair Bahadurpet RBP Nalgonda Bhongir Kunoor RBP Nalgonda Gundala Anantaram RBP Nalgonda Rajapet Parupalle RBP Nalgonda Bhongir Banda somaram RBP Nalgonda Alair Golankonda RBP Nalgonda M.Turkapalle Velpupalle RBP Nalgonda Alair Matoor RBP Nalgonda Gundala Seetarampur RBP Nalgonda Rajapet Begumpet RBP Nalgonda M.Turkapalle Dattai palle RBP Nalgonda Rajapet Renikunta RBP Nalgonda Bhongir Baswapur RBP Nalgonda M.Turkapalle Madha puram RBP Nalgonda Gundala Velmajala RBP
164 165 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Andhra Pradesh (includes Telangana) Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Nalgonda Yadagirigutta Chinnakandukur RBP Nalgonda Yadagirigutta Mallapur RBP Rangareddy Kandukur Gummadavalle RBP Rangareddy Kandukur Kandukur RBP Rangareddy Kandukur Mucherla RBP Chittoor Thavanampalle Govindareddypalli RBP Chittoor Y.S.Gate Besthapalli RBP Chittoor Gudupalle Peddagollapalli RBP Chittoor Gangadhara Nellore K v puram RBP Chittoor Yerpedu Kandadu RBP Chittoor Renigunta R.mallavaram RBP Chittoor Venkatagirikota K.gollapalle RBP Chittoor Putturu CC Tarakaramanagar RBP Chittoor Karvetinagaram Alathur RBP Chittoor Putturu CC Thatneri gollapalli RBP Chittoor Putturu CC R.v.kandriga 2 RBP Chittoor Renigunta Gajulamandyam RBP Chittoor Vadamalapeta T.c.agraharam RBP Chittoor Yerpedu M.d.puthur RBP Chittoor Renigunta Ammavaripatteda RBP Chittoor Vedurukuppam K.m.agraharam RBP Chittoor Putturu Vepagunta RBP Chittoor Putturu Parameswaramangalam RBP Chittoor Vadamalapeta Vemapuram RBP Chittoor BN Kandriga Bhavanisankarapuram RBP Chittoor Putturu Gollapalle RBP Chittoor Putturu CC Obularajukandriga RBP Chittoor Putturu Thoruru RBP Chittoor Putturu Sirugurajupalem RBP Chittoor Putturu CC Paparajukandriga RBP Chittoor Putturu CC Desuvari kandriga RBP Chittoor Y.V.Pallyam Chennareddygaripalli RBP Chittoor Y.V.Pallyam Varanasivaripalle RBP Chittoor Piler Appireddygaripalli(talapula) RBP Chittoor Chinnagottigallu Gandinagar RBP Chittoor Chinnagottigallu Thippireddygaripalli RBP Chittoor Chinnagottigallu Valasareddygaripalli RBP Chittoor Chinnagottigallu Kuravapalli RBP Chittoor M.Kottur B.agraharam RBP Chittoor Gudupalle M.kothuru RBP Chittoor Narayanavanam/G N Kandriga Govindappanaidu kandrig RBP Chittoor Narayanavanam Keelagaram RBP Chittoor Narayanavanam Kalyanapuram RBP Chittoor Narayanavanam Palamangalam dakshini RBP Chittoor Narayanavanam/G N Kandriga Chittoor kandriga RBP Chittoor Yerravaripalem V.k.r.puram RBP Chittoor Nagari Nagarajukuppam RBP
164 165 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Andhra Pradesh (includes Telangana) Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Chittoor Yadamarri Dasara palli aaw RBP Chittoor Thavanampalle Kattakinda vuru RBP Chittoor Srirangarajapuram Pedakondepalle RBP Chittoor Chittoor Pc kandriga RBP Chittoor Reddygunta Kodigutta RBP Chittoor Reddygunta Thopathipalli RBP Chittoor Reddygunta Kammarayinimaitta RBP Chittoor Reddygunta Thimmasanipalli hw RBP Chittoor Chittoor Mapakshi RBP Chittoor Chittoor Thumindhapalem aaw RBP Chittoor Gangavaram Eduru RBP Chittoor Gangavaram Kothapalle 2 RBP Chittoor Irala Gundlapalle RBP Chittoor Baireddipalli Pathurunatham RBP Chittoor Baireddipalli Lakkanapalle RBP Chittoor Baireddipalli Kaigallu RBP Chittoor Baireddipalli Kammanapalle RBP Chittoor Palamaner Thavadapalle RBP Chittoor Palamaner Kurmoi RBP Chittoor Peddapanjani Peddapanjani RBP Chittoor Peddapanjani Nelapalle RBP Chittoor Peddapanjani Brahmanapalle RBP Chittoor Palamaneru C.C J.r.kothapalle RBP Chittoor Palamaneru C.C Pedda uggini RBP Chittoor Chittoor Chintalagunta RBP Chittoor V.Kota Papepalle RBP Chittoor Santhipuram Kalamaladoddi RBP Chittoor Santhipuram Kadapalle RBP Chittoor Santhipuram Jalliganipalle RBP Chittoor Santhipuram Cheemanapalle RBP Chittoor Gudupalle Ontipalle RBP Chittoor Kuppam Kotapalle RBP Chittoor Yadamarri Oterupalli RBP Chittoor Vayalpadu Vayalpadu RBP Chittoor Vayalpadu Vittalam RBP Krishna Movva Yaddanapudi RBP Krishna Movva Avurupudi RBP Krishna Movva Chinamuttevi RBP Y.S.R. Pulivendula Erraballe RBP Y.S.R. Lingala Parnapalle RBP Y.S.R. Lingala Bonala RBP Karimnagar Husnabad Choutapalle RBP+VBMPS Karimnagar Bheemadevarpalle Ratnagiri RBP+VBMPS Karimnagar Bheemadevarpalle Koppur RBP+VBMPS Karimnagar Bheemadevarpalle Bheemadevarpalle RBP+VBMPS Karimnagar Husnabad Anthakkapeta RBP+VBMPS Karimnagar Elkathurthi Suraram RBP+VBMPS
166 167 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Andhra Pradesh (includes Telangana) Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Karimnagar Husnabad Mothukullapalli RBP+VBMPS Karimnagar Elkathurthi Damera RBP+VBMPS Karimnagar Bheemadevarpalle Mustafapur RBP+VBMPS Karimnagar Kamalapur Kannuru RBP+VBMPS Warangal Dharmasagar Gundlasagar RBP+VBMPS Warangal Dharmasagar Mupparam RBP+VBMPS Warangal Dharmasagar Narayanagiri RBP+VBMPS Warangal Dharmasagar Kyathampalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Buchinaidu Kandriga Alathur RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Buchinaidu Kandriga Parlapalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Buchinaidu Kandriga Kothapalem RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gangadhara Nellore Kondepalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gangadhara Nellore Vezzupalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gangadhara Nellore Vepanjeri RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gangadhara Nellore Veerakanellore RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gangavaram Kothapalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gangavaram Gundugallu RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gangavaram Gandrajupalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gudupalle Athinatham RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gudupalle Vengepalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gudupalle Kotapalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gudupalle Sonnarasanapalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gurramkonda Ramapuram RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gurramkonda Sangasamudram RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Gurramkonda Cherlopalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Punganur Aradigunta RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Santhipuram Konerukuppam RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Vadamalapeta Ramasamudram RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Vadamalapeta Pachikalva RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Thavanampalle Cherlopalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Varadaiahpalem Sathambedu RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Vadamalapeta Ramasamudram RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Vadamalapeta Pachikalva RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Venkatagirikota Yalakallu RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Venkatagirikota Padigalakuppam RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Venkatagirikota Kongatam RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Yerpedu Nachaneri RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Yerpedu Mannasamudram RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Yerpedu Kandadu RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Vijayapuram Kothuru RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Yerpedu Chellur RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Yerravaripalem Yerravaripalem RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Yerravaripalem Bodevandlapalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Yadamarri Gollapalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Yadamarri Kasiralla RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Yadamarri Nadimpalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Chittoor Anupalle RBP+VBMPS
166 167 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Andhra Pradesh (includes Telangana) Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Chittoor Chittoor Thalambedu RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Chowdepalle Laddigam RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Kalakada Gangapuram RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Kalikiri Kalikiri RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Kambhamvaripalle Boppasamudram RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Kambhamvaripalle Garnimitta RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Kambhamvaripalle Gyarampalle RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Kalikiri Guttapalem RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Nindra Nindra RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Nindra Athur RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Narayanavanam Thumbur RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Palamaner Jallipeta RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Palamaner Pengara kunta RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Nimmanapalle Agraharam RBP+VBMPS Chittoor Penumuru Guntipalle RBP+VBMPS Sri Potti Sriramulu Venkatachalam Allurupeta VBMPS Nellore Nalgonda Atmakur (M) Kurella VBMPS Nalgonda Bhongir Rayagir VBMPS Nalgonda Valigonda Muddapur VBMPS Nalgonda Atmakur (M) Raghavapur VBMPS Nalgonda Rajapet Burugu palle VBMPS Nalgonda Bhongir Hanmapur VBMPS Rangareddy Yacharam Kurmidda VBMPS Nalgonda Mothkur Repaka (P) VBMPS Nalgonda Atmakur (M) Koratikal VBMPS Nalgonda Yadagirigutta Vanga palle VBMPS Rangareddy Pargi Mittakoduru VBMPS Nalgonda Yadagirigutta Yadagiripalle VBMPS Nalgonda Yadagirigutta Saidapur VBMPS Rangareddy Pargi Yabajipalle VBMPS Nalgonda Mothkur Mothkur VBMPS Nalgonda Thungathurthi Jalapur VBMPS Rangareddy Yacharam Chinthapatla VBMPS Rangareddy Kandukur Dasarlapalle VBMPS Rangareddy Kandukur Mailarugudem VBMPS Rangareddy Kandukur Pulumamidi VBMPS Chittoor Karvetinagaram Mukkaravaripalle VBMPS Chittoor Gudupalle Athinatham VBMPS Chittoor Vedurukuppam Veperi VBMPS Chittoor Vedurukuppam Vedurukuppam VBMPS Chittoor Kuppam Kothapalle VBMPS Chittoor Kuppam Sajjalapalle VBMPS Chittoor Gudupalle Irisiganipalle VBMPS Chittoor Gudupalle Sirigiripalle VBMPS Chittoor Bangarupalem Thambuganipalle VBMPS Chittoor Bangarupalem Bodabandla VBMPS
168 169 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Andhra Pradesh (includes Telangana) Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Chittoor Gangadhara Nellore Kondepalle VBMPS Chittoor Gangadhara Nellore Vezzupalle VBMPS Chittoor Gangavaram Kothapalle VBMPS Chittoor Gangavaram Gundugallu VBMPS Krishna Challapalle Nimmagadda VBMPS Krishna Nuzvid Marribandam VBMPS Krishna Mudinepalle Alluru VBMPS Krishna Nandigama Damuluru VBMPS Krishna Bantumilli Satuluru VBMPS Krishna Challapalle Nukalavari palem VBMPS Krishna Chatrai Arugolanupeta VBMPS Krishna Chatrai Burugugudem VBMPS Krishna Nuzvid Boravancha VBMPS Krishna Mudinepalle Bomminampadu VBMPS Krishna Nuzvid Ravicherla VBMPS Krishna Nandigama Magallu VBMPS Krishna Bantumilli Arthamuru VBMPS Krishna Bantumilli Mulaparru VBMPS Guntur nagaram Pamidimarru VBMPS Guntur Bapatla Narasayapalem VBMPS Guntur Repalle Nalluru VBMPS Guntur Bhattiprolu Gorigapudi VBMPS Guntur Nagaram Siripudi VBMPS Guntur Amruthalur Govada VBMPS Guntur pittlavanipalem Pittlavanipalem VBMPS Guntur Bhattiprolu Konetipuram VBMPS Guntur Karlapalem Karlapalem VBMPS Guntur Bapatla P.pinaboyinapalem VBMPS
State: Andhra Pradesh (includes Telangana) Sample villages: Control
District Tehsil Village Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore Venkatachalam Punjulurupadu Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore Kodavaluru Pemmareddipalem Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore Muthukuru Duvvurivaripalem Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore Dagadarthi Ramalingapuram Mahbubnagar Kothur Edulapalle Mahbubnagar Narayanpet Singar Mahbubnagar Peddakothapalle Maredumandinne Mahbubnagar Waddepalle Chinnadhanwada Nalgonda M.Turkapalle Gollapalle Nalgonda Mothkur Nagireey Bai Rangareddy Pargi Kudhavanpur Nalgonda Mothkur Janakipur Rangareddy Mominpet Kesaram Nalgonda Rajapet Masanpalli
168 169 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Andhra Pradesh (includes Telangana) Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Rangareddy Pargi Khudavanpur Rangareddy Manchal Rangapur Chittoor Satyavedu Pedukuppam Chittoor Yadamarri Majara Kothapalle Chittoor Putturu Gollapalle Chittoor Putturu Kasamkuppam Krishna A.Konduru Madhavaram (West) Krishna Bapulapadu Rangannagudem Krishna Mudinepalle Korraguntapalem Krishna Pamidimukkala Inampudi Guntur Dachepalle Pondugula Guntur Narasaraopet Kakani Guntur Kakumanu Garikapadu Guntur Repalle Kaithepalle Y.S.R. Peddamudium Nemalladinne Y.S.R. Porumamilla Dammanapalle Y.S.R. Thondur Bhadrampalle Y.S.R. Sambepalle Guttapalle
State: Bihar Sample villages: Project
District Tehsil Village Intervention Begusarai Bhagwanpur Malhipur RBP Begusarai Bhagwanpur Surajpura RBP Begusarai Bhagwanpur Mukhtiarpur RBP Begusarai Balia Phulwaria[238338] RBP Khagaria Parbatta Chakki Bharkal RBP Khagaria Khagaria Jal Kaura RBP Khagaria Khagaria Kasimpur RBP Khagaria Khagaria Mahsaurhi RBP Khagaria Alauli Saharbani RBP Khagaria Alauli Ladaura RBP Khagaria Parbatta Punaur RBP Khagaria Gogri Paikant RBP Khagaria Parbatta Madhopur Karari RBP Khagaria Gogri Sondiha RBP Khagaria Khagaria Marar RBP Khagaria Alauli Ambaicharua RBP Khagaria Alauli Badhchatar RBP Khagaria Khagaria Marar RBP Khagaria Gogri Gochhari RBP Khagaria Parbatta Saurh RBP Khagaria Parbatta Khirarahi RBP Khagaria Gogri Banni RBP Samastipur Khanpur Jagdispur RBP Samastipur Bibhutpur Chak Hoja RBP
170 171 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Bihar Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Samastipur Dalsinghsarai Dhepura RBP Samastipur Dalsinghsarai Khajautia RBP Samastipur Khanpur Hariabad Chak RBP Samastipur Khanpur Shahpur RBP Samastipur Morwa Songar RBP Samastipur Morwa Maricha RBP Samastipur Bibhutpur KIshunpur Tabhka RBP Samastipur Bibhutpur Gangauli RBP Samastipur Dalsinghsarai Basaria RBP Samastipur Morwa Chak Sikandar RBP Samastipur Bibhutpur Boria RBP Samastipur Bibhutpur Bharpura RBP Banka Amarpur Khardauri RBP Banka Amarpur Satghara RBP Banka Rajaun Sohani RBP Banka Amarpur Bhadaria Buzurg RBP Banka Rajaun Dharma Chak RBP Banka Rajaun Lashkari RBP Banka Shambhuganj Baidpur RBP Banka Rajaun Lilatari RBP Banka Shambhuganj Gidhaura RBP Banka Shambhuganj Bagha RBP Banka Shambhuganj Bhatasila RBP Banka Shambhuganj Itahri [241314] RBP Banka Rajaun Dhai Hanna RBP Banka Amarpur Lachhmipur Chiraia RBP Banka Amarpur Barmasia RBP Banka Shambhuganj Kaitha [241327] RBP Bhagalpur Shahkund Tetaria RBP Bhagalpur Sultanganj Tilakpur [239580] RBP Bhagalpur Sultanganj Hario [239615] RBP Bhagalpur Sultanganj Nayagaon RBP Bhagalpur Pirpainti Topra Milik RBP Bhagalpur Shahkund Sarha RBP Bhagalpur Jagdishpur Choraya Khurd RBP Bhagalpur Sultanganj Hemra [239705] RBP Bhagalpur Shahkund Dindealpur RBP Bhagalpur Sultanganj Sarifa RBP Bhagalpur Pirpainti Bholsar RBP Purnia Barhara Latraha RBP Muzaffarpur Gaighat Patsawan Donimaknawan RBP Muzaffarpur Sakra Madsudanpur Fakirana RBP Muzaffarpur Sakra Mushari Ram RBP Muzaffarpur Kurhani Damodarpur Dumri RBP Muzaffarpur Sakra Ganiari RBP Muzaffarpur Sakra Rampur Mani RBP Muzaffarpur Kurhani Baghi Gopalpur Gopinath RBP
170 171 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Bihar Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Muzaffarpur Sakra Semra RBP Muzaffarpur Gaighat Shakarwara Nur RBP Muzaffarpur Gaighat Kumhrauli RBP Muzaffarpur Gaighat Loma urf Loama RBP Muzaffarpur Kurhani Chhajan Harshankar RBP Gobindpur (Part in Mansur Begusarai Bachhwara Chak) RBP+VBMPS Begusarai Bhagwanpur Bhagwanpur [237678] RBP+VBMPS Begusarai Cheria Bariarpur khanjahanpur RBP+VBMPS Begusarai Khodabandpur Narullahpur RBP+VBMPS Khagaria Alauli Raun RBP+VBMPS Khagaria Alauli Simraha RBP+VBMPS Khagaria Parbatta Khajraitha RBP+VBMPS Khagaria Parbatta Kabaila RBP+VBMPS Banka Rajaun Singhnan RBP+VBMPS Banka Belhar Dumaria [241511] RBP+VBMPS Banka Belhar Jamua RBP+VBMPS Bhagalpur Pirpainti Nawada [239082] RBP+VBMPS Bhagalpur Pirpainti Amba [239263] RBP+VBMPS Bhagalpur Pirpainti Ragharia RBP+VBMPS Bhagalpur Pirpainti Gauripur RBP+VBMPS Purnia Rupauli Nathpur RBP+VBMPS Mohanpur Istamrar (Jhunni Purnia Rupauli Istamrar) RBP+VBMPS Begusarai Bachhwara Ranitol VBMPS Begusarai Cheria Bariarpur Sakrauli VBMPS Lakhisarai Chanan* Bataspur VBMPS Lakhisarai Chanan* Mananpur VBMPS Darbhanga Manigachhi Barhampur VBMPS Darbhanga Manigachhi Kotma VBMPS Darbhanga Manigachhi Bhandarso VBMPS Madhubani Madhwapur Awari VBMPS Madhubani Madhwapur Madhwapur VBMPS Samastipur Kalyanpur Bhuskaul VBMPS Araria Bhargama Sukela VBMPS Araria Bhargama Dhanesri VBMPS Purnia Banmankhi Chakla VBMPS Purnia Dagarua Viswaspur VBMPS Purnia Dagarua Maria VBMPS Purnia Banmankhi Jianganj VBMPS Gopalganj Bijaipur Jagdishpur VBMPS Gopalganj Kuchaikote Banian Chhapra VBMPS Gopalganj Bijaipur Matiari VBMPS Gopalganj Kuchaikote Lachhi Kharea VBMPS Gopalganj Kuchaikote Rup Chhap VBMPS Gopalganj Kuchaikote Banian Chhapra VBMPS Gopalganj Gopalganj Chatur Bagaha VBMPS
172 173 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Bihar Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Pashchim Champaran Narkatiaganj Chamua VBMPS Pashchim Champaran Majhaulia Ramnagar Bankat VBMPS Pashchim Champaran Chanpatia Bishunpur Maolakar VBMPS Pashchim Champaran Lauriya Barwa Kalan VBMPS Tolarampurwamotalkekurwa Pashchim Champaran Chanpatia Mathia VBMPS Pashchim Champaran Majhaulia Gurchurwa VBMPS Pashchim Champaran Majhaulia Parsa Tola Dumri VBMPS Pashchim Champaran Majhaulia Chailabhar VBMPS Pashchim Champaran Chanpatia Bhaisahi VBMPS Pashchim Champaran Chanpatia Ghogha VBMPS Purba Champaran Mehsi Majhauliya VBMPS Purba Champaran Harsidhi Arazi Nankar VBMPS Purba Champaran Kalyanpur Puran Chhapra VBMPS Purba Champaran Areraj Kauwaha VBMPS Purba Champaran Chiraia Harnaraina VBMPS Purba Champaran Kalyanpur Siswa Kharar VBMPS Purba Champaran Harsidhi Bhada VBMPS Purba Champaran Chiraia Khorha VBMPS Purba Champaran Chiraia Koilasi VBMPS Purba Champaran Areraj Chatia VBMPS
State: Bihar Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Begusarai Bhagwanpur Mubarakpur urf Behta Begusarai Bhagwanpur Jairampur Khagaria Alauli Chharapatti Khagaria Parbatta Udaipur Lakhisarai Surajgarha Basauni Lakhisarai Halsi Giddha Darbhanga Hanumannagar Bishunpur Darbhanga Kusheshwar Asthan Aurahi Madhubani Laukahi Mahthoura Madhubani Rajnagar Az Rakbe Simri Samastipur Pusa Mahamadpur Birauli Samastipur Ujiarpur Saidpur Zahid Banka Rajaun Rahimdih Banka Bausi Bhalki Tola Mahguri Bhagalpur Nathnagar Gaura Chauki Bhagalpur Jagdishpur Sonhauli Araria Forbesganj Belai Araria Raniganj Nananpur Purnia Krityanand Nagar Akbarabad Purnia Baisa Harbhanga Gopalganj Katiya Neuri Gopalganj Kuchaikote Maniara
172 173 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Bihar Sample villages: Control (Contd.) Muzaffarpur Kurhani Balra Ismail Muzaffarpur Kurhani Mathurapur Pashchim Champaran Gaunaha Mehnaul Kalan Purba Champaran Paharpur Parsauni Purba Champaran Piprakothi Bir Chhapra Muzaffarpur Sahebganj Sarae urf Gopiganj Muzaffarpur Bochaha Etwarpur Jointi Bhojpur koilwar Rajapur Bhojpur Tarari Sahiara Bhojpur Tarari Kudariya Bhojpur Tarari Shankar Dih Gopalganj Katiya Neuri Gopalganj Hathua Mura Gopalganj Thawe Gawandari Fakirana Pashchim Champaran Gaunaha Mehnaul Kalan Pashchim Champaran Thakrahan Bhagwanpur Purba Champaran Tetaria Chak Chauhani Purba Champaran Chakia(Pipra) Mahuawa
State: Gujarat Sample villages: Project District Tehsil Village Intervention Banas Kantha Tharad Kesargam RBP Banas Kantha Tharad Khoda RBP Banas Kantha Tharad Taruwa RBP Banas Kantha Tharad Thara RBP Gandhinagar Kalol Dingucha RBP Gandhinagar Kalol Jamla RBP Kheda Kapadvanj Pirojpur RBP Kheda Kapadvanj Ukardina Muvada RBP Kheda Kapadvanj Lal Mandva RBP Panch Mahals Godhra Gotavipura RBP Panch Mahals Santrampur Pithapur (Borvada) RBP Panch Mahals Kadana Padamjini Muvadi RBP Panch Mahals Kalol Ghoda RBP Panch Mahals Lunawada Juna Gorada RBP Panch Mahals Lunawada Hadmatiya (Lunawada) RBP Panch Mahals Santrampur Sandh Paliya RBP Panch Mahals Lunawada Sadhakpur RBP Panch Mahals Shehera Kotha RBP Panch Mahals Lunawada Mota Vadadla RBP Panch Mahals Lunawada Madhvas RBP Panch Mahals Kadana Kelamul RBP Panch Mahals Shehera Labhi RBP Panch Mahals Santrampur Vankdi RBP Panch Mahals Lunawada Kadachhala RBP
174 175 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Gujrat Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Panch Mahals Godhra Sankali RBP Panch Mahals Lunawada Pattan RBP Panch Mahals Lunawada Charangam (Salawada) RBP Panch Mahals Godhra Sampa RBP Panch Mahals Shehera Bilitha RBP Panch Mahals Kadana Talwada RBP Panch Mahals Shehera Demli RBP Panch Mahals Kalol Karoli RBP Sabar Kantha Himatnagar Surpur (Likhi) RBP Sabar Kantha Idar Ranasan RBP Sabar Kantha Himatnagar Rampur (Ghorvada) RBP Sabar Kantha Idar Mahivada RBP Sabar Kantha Himatnagar Agiyol RBP Sabar Kantha Idar Maniyor RBP Sabar Kantha Idar Poshina RBP Surat Mandvi Kevadiya RBP Surat Mahuva Miyapur RBP Surat Mandvi Junvan RBP Surat Mahuva Bilkhadi RBP Tapi Vyara Malotha RBP Tapi Vyara Dhangdhar RBP Tapi Songadh Amalpada RBP Tapi Songadh Bedvan P Bhensrot RBP Tapi Vyara Kanja RBP Tapi Songadh Kumkuva RBP Tapi Vyara Umarkachchh RBP Tapi Songadh Ghodchit RBP Tapi Vyara Katasvan RBP Amreli Dhari Khicha RBP Amreli Dhari Chalala (M) RBP Amreli Dhari Hudli RBP Bhavnagar Palitana Dungarpur RBP Bhavnagar Palitana Mandavda RBP Bhavnagar Palitana Gheti RBP Jamnagar Lalpur Godavari RBP Jamnagar Jodiya Bhadra RBP Jamnagar Jodiya Hadiyana RBP Jamnagar Dhrol Hamapar RBP Jamnagar Lalpur Sajadiyali RBP Jamnagar Lalpur Khad Khambhaliya RBP Kachchh Mandvi Rayan Moti RBP Surendranagar Chotila Piyava RBP Surendranagar Chotila Janivadla RBP Surendranagar Chotila Tramboda RBP Surendranagar Sayla Kanpur RBP+VBMPS Surendranagar Sayla Mota Bhadla RBP+VBMPS Bhavnagar Talaja Mota Ghana RBP+VBMPS
174 175 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Gujrat Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Bhavnagar Gadhada Sanjanavadar RBP+VBMPS Bhavnagar Talaja Kodiya RBP+VBMPS Bhavnagar Palitana Sanjanasar RBP+VBMPS Bhavnagar Vallabhipur Pati[516107] RBP+VBMPS Bhavnagar Palitana Anida(Lakhavad) RBP+VBMPS Bhavnagar Sihor Lavarda RBP+VBMPS Bhavnagar Talaja Bakhalka RBP+VBMPS Jamnagar Bhanvad Sajadiyali RBP+VBMPS Jamnagar Bhanvad Timbdi RBP+VBMPS Jamnagar Kalyanpur Chachlana RBP+VBMPS Jamnagar Khambhalia Madhupur RBP+VBMPS Jamnagar Kalyanpur Gangdi RBP+VBMPS Jamnagar Kalyanpur Goji Nes RBP+VBMPS Jamnagar Khambhalia Beraja RBP+VBMPS Jamnagar Bhanvad Mokhana RBP+VBMPS Jamnagar Khambhalia Kotha Visotri RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Kodinar Pipli RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Patan-Veraval Meghpur RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Kodinar Jantrakhadi RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Sutrapada Prashnavda RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Kodinar Damli RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Patan-Veraval Navadra RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Talala Gundaran RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Kodinar Ronaj RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Sutrapada Padruka RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Kodinar Panadar RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Kodinar Malsaram RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Mangrol Divasa RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Mangrol Sultanpur RBP+VBMPS Junagadh Mangrol Ajak RBP+VBMPS Kachchh Bhuj Dhori RBP+VBMPS Kachchh Nakhatrana Haripar (Hirapar) RBP+VBMPS Kachchh Bhuj Kali Talavdi RBP+VBMPS Kachchh Bhuj Mamuara RBP+VBMPS Kachchh Nakhatrana Tharavada RBP+VBMPS Kachchh Bhuj Vinchhiya RBP+VBMPS Porbandar Kutiyana Chauta RBP+VBMPS Porbandar Porbandar Balej RBP+VBMPS Porbandar Porbandar Chhaya (M) RBP+VBMPS Porbandar Porbandar Gosa RBP+VBMPS Porbandar Porbandar Ratiya RBP+VBMPS Porbandar Ranavav Khambhala RBP+VBMPS Porbandar Kutiyana Gokaran RBP+VBMPS Surendranagar Sayla Kotda RBP+VBMPS Surendranagar Sayla Thoriyali RBP+VBMPS Surendranagar Sayla Ovangadh RBP+VBMPS Dohad Limkheda Chatki VBMPS
176 177 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Gujrat Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Dohad Devgadbaria Vadodar VBMPS Dohad Jhalod Kachaldhara VBMPS Dohad Jhalod Moli VBMPS Dohad Limkheda Chhaparvad VBMPS Dohad Devgadbaria Toyani VBMPS Navsari Chikhli Panikhadak VBMPS Navsari Chikhli Ranverikalla VBMPS Rajkot Jasdan UKARDA VBMPS Rajkot Jasdan Chanol Navi VBMPS Rajkot Jasdan Chitaliya VBMPS Surendranagar Sayla Sejakpar VBMPS Vadodara Dabhoi Fofaliya VBMPS Vadodara Savli Mokampura VBMPS Vadodara Karjan Kahona VBMPS Vadodara Dabhoi Anguthan VBMPS Vadodara Dabhoi Amreshwar VBMPS Vadodara Sinor Bithali VBMPS Vadodara Jetpur Pavi Bar VBMPS Vadodara Vadodara Ramnath VBMPS Vadodara Sinor Nana Karala VBMPS Vadodara Savli Sherpura VBMPS Vadodara Vadodara Asoj VBMPS Vadodara Karjan Dethan VBMPS Vadodara Jetpur Pavi Sajva VBMPS Vadodara Karjan Abhara VBMPS Vadodara Padra Sadhi VBMPS Vadodara Padra Umaraya VBMPS Bhavnagar Vallabhipur Hadmatiya VBMPS Bhavnagar Vallabhipur Navaniya VBMPS Kachchh Abdasa Karodiya Nana VBMPS Kachchh Bhuj Varli VBMPS Kachchh Abdasa Vadapaddhar VBMPS Kachchh Lakhpat Pipar VBMPS Kachchh Lakhpat Koriyani VBMPS Kachchh Bhuj Shervo VBMPS Kachchh Bhuj Bhitara Mota VBMPS Rajkot Jasdan Ambardi VBMPS Rajkot Jasdan Belda VBMPS Rajkot Jasdan Sanala VBMPS
176 177 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
State: Gujarat Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Dohad Limkheda Moti Vav Dohad Garbada Pandadi Dohad Devgadbaria Nani Khajuri Dohad Devgadbaria Bhut Pagalan Navsari Gandevi vaghalvada Navsari Chikhli khundh Rajkot Rajkot Gadhda Rajkot Rajkot Intala Nana Rajkot Jamkandorna Charel Rajkot Dhoraji Gunda Amreli Babra Lunki Amreli Savar Kundla Moldi Amreli Rajula Chikhali Bhavnagar Vallabhipur Sajeli Bhavnagar Sihor Jashavantpar Bhavnagar Mahuva Bhanavav Jamnagar Jamnagar Kansumara Jamnagar Lalpur Kanalus Junagadh Malia Ambalgadh Junagadh Una Elampur Junagadh Una Pankhan Kachchh Lakhpat Punrajpar Kachchh Abdasa Charopdi Moti Kachchh Abdasa Balachod Nani Porbandar Lalpur Zankhar Porbandar Kalyanpur Ashiyavadar Rajkot Rajkot Kalipat Rajkot Lodhika Vagudad Rajkot Gondal Shemla Surendranagar Dasada Haripura Surendranagar Chotila Loma Kotadi Surendranagar Limbdi Jakhan
State: Haryana Sample villages: Project
District Tehsil Village Intervention Ambala Ambala Bhurangpur (286) RBP Ambala Ambala Konkpur (273) RBP Ambala Barara Chudiala (191) RBP Ambala Naraingarh Chand Sauli (116) RBP Ambala Barara Rampur (155) RBP Ambala Naraingarh Husaini (Part)(308) RBP Ambala Naraingarh Rasidpur (270) RBP
178 179 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Haryana Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Ambala Ambala Barola (276) RBP Ambala Naraingarh Ujjhal Majri (194) RBP Ambala Ambala Bhurangpur (286) RBP Ambala Naraingarh Bari Bassi (70) RBP Ambala Ambala Panjokhara (29) RBP Panchkula Kalka Charnian (128) RBP Panchkula Kalka Dhamala (122) RBP Panchkula Kalka Kona (93) RBP Panchkula Kalka Kiratpur (127) RBP Panchkula Kalka Paploha (139) RBP Sirsa Sirsa Jlalana(251) RBP Sirsa Sirsa Dhaban(182) RBP Sirsa Sirsa Surtia(168) RBP Sirsa Sirsa Jogiwala(1) RBP Sirsa Sirsa Chauburja(41) RBP Sirsa Sirsa Gusaiana(8) RBP Ambala Naraingarh Gazipur (27) RBP+VBMPS Ambala Barara Duliani (141) RBP+VBMPS Ambala Barara Kambasi (243) RBP+VBMPS Ambala Barara Paplotha (91) RBP+VBMPS Kurukshetra Thanesar Morthala (107) RBP+VBMPS Kurukshetra Thanesar Mangoli Jattan (131) RBP+VBMPS Kurukshetra Thanesar Singhaur (163) RBP+VBMPS Sirsa Dabwali Sakta Khera(272) RBP+VBMPS Sirsa Dabwali Jandwala Bishnoian(265) RBP+VBMPS Ahmadpur Sirsa Dabwali Darewala(261) RBP+VBMPS Sirsa Dabwali Alika(276) RBP+VBMPS Ambala Barara Sajjan Majri (213) VBMPS Jind Narwana Dhakal (121) VBMPS Kaithal Kaithal Wajir Nagar VBMPS Kaithal Kaithal Prabhawat (81) VBMPS Kaithal Kaithal Mator(26) VBMPS Mewat Ferozepur Jhirka Saral(44) VBMPS Mewat Ferozepur Jhirka Notki(3) VBMPS Mewat Nuh Jogipur (105) VBMPS Mewat Ferozepur Jhirka Kansali(1) VBMPS Mewat Ferozepur Jhirka Mohlaka(123) VBMPS Mewat Nuh Naushera (142) VBMPS Mewat Nuh Adbar (106) VBMPS Mewat Ferozepur Jhirka Sakras(64) VBMPS Palwal Palwal Sikandarpur(11) VBMPS Palwal Palwal Thanthri (182) VBMPS Rewari Rewari Punsika (56) VBMPS Rewari Rewari Bhandor (59) VBMPS Rewari Rewari Tint (41) VBMPS Rewari Rewari Berli Kalan VBMPS
178 179 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Haryana Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Mewat Ferozepur Jhirka Notki(3) VBMPS Mewat Nuh Jogipur (105) VBMPS Mewat Nuh Adbar (106) VBMPS Mewat Ferozepur Jhirka Sakras(64) VBMPS Palwal Palwal Sikandarpur(11) VBMPS Palwal Palwal Thanthri (182) VBMPS
State: Haryana Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Ambala Ambala Ghel (52) Ambala Ambala Dadiana (36) Hisar Hisar Rawalwas Khurd(52) Hisar Hisar Kharar(149) Hisar Hansi Sheikhpura(121) Jind Narwana Koel (48) Jind Narwana Bhikhewala (91) Jind Narwana Dhabi Teksingh (55) Jind Safidon Harigarh (36) Kaithal Guhla Arnoli (32) Panchkula Kalka Bar (135) Panchkula Panchkula Bhoj Kudana (314) Rewari Rewari Motla Khurd (95) Sirsa Sirsa Mirpur(150) Mewat Nuh Bhirawati(184) Palwal Hathin Kalsara(229) Palwal Hathin Ribar(216)
State: Karnataka Sample villages: Project District Tehsil Village Intervention Bangalore Bangalore North Shamabhattara Palya RBP Bangalore Anekal Sakalawara RBP Bangalore Anekal Submangala RBP Bangalore Anekal Panditana Agrahara RBP Bangalore Bangalore North Nagadasanahalli RBP Bangalore Bangalore North Hurali Chikkanahalli RBP Bangalore Bangalore North Adde Vishwanathapura RBP Bangalore Anekal Muthanallur RBP Bangalore Rural Devanahalli Irigenahalli RBP Bangalore Rural Dod Ballapur Purusanahalli RBP Bangalore Rural Devanahalli Doddasanne RBP Bangalore Rural Devanahalli Nagamangala RBP Bangalore Rural Devanahalli Byradenahalli RBP
180 181 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Karnataka Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Bangalore Rural Dod Ballapur Marahalli RBP Bangalore Rural Dod Ballapur Sakkaregollahalli RBP Bangalore Rural Devanahalli Koramangala RBP Bangalore Rural Devanahalli Karahalli RBP Bangalore Rural Dod Ballapur Ujjani RBP Ramanagara Kanakapura Arekadakalu RBP Ramanagara Magadi Hebbalalu RBP Ramanagara Magadi Guddahalli RBP Ramanagara Kanakapura Virupasandra RBP Ramanagara Magadi Nagasettihalli RBP Ramanagara Magadi Kannasandra RBP Ramanagara Kanakapura Kurubarhalli RBP Ramanagara Channapatna Nelamakanahalli RBP Ramanagara Channapatna Nagavara RBP Ramanagara Channapatna Sulleri RBP Ramanagara Channapatna Makali RBP Ramanagara Kanakapura Nallahalli RBP Hassan Hassan Chigatihalli RBP Hassan Hassan Byadarahalli[616116] RBP Hassan Hassan Bachihalli RBP Mysore Mysore S.Hemmanahalli RBP Mysore Mysore Mellahalli RBP Mysore Mysore Koodanahalli RBP Tumkur Madhugiri Sanjeevapura RBP Tumkur Madhugiri Hosakote RBP Tumkur Madhugiri Chinnenahalli RBP Tumkur Koratagere Gowjagal RBP Tumkur Koratagere Thogarigatta RBP Tumkur Madhugiri Doddahosahalli RBP Tumkur Koratagere Huluvangala RBP Tumkur Koratagere Kurihalli RBP Tumkur Koratagere Voddagere RBP Mandya Krishnarajpet Hubbanahalli RBP Mandya Krishnarajpet Somanahalli RBP Mandya Krishnarajpet Sindaghatta RBP Mysore Hunsur Undavadi RBP+VBMPS Mysore Krishnarajanagara Malanaikanahalli RBP+VBMPS Mysore Krishnarajanagara Sreeramapura RBP+VBMPS Mysore Hunsur Ayarahalli RBP+VBMPS Tumkur Madhugiri Badakanahalli RBP+VBMPS Tumkur Madhugiri Thippanahalli RBP+VBMPS Bellary Kudligi Mangapura RBP+VBMPS Bellary Kudligi Thoolahalli RBP+VBMPS Chamarajanagar Gundlupet Baragi RBP+VBMPS Chamarajanagar Chamarajanagar Sagade RBP+VBMPS Chamarajanagar Kollegal Palya RBP+VBMPS Chamarajanagar Kollegal Channalinganahalli RBP+VBMPS
180 181 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Karnataka Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Chamarajanagar Chamarajanagar Channappanapura RBP+VBMPS Chamarajanagar Kollegal Huthur RBP+VBMPS Mysore Hunsur Vaddarahalli VBMPS Mysore Hunsur Agrahara VBMPS Tumkur Sira Javanahalli VBMPS Tumkur Madhugiri Jakkenahalli VBMPS Tumkur Madhugiri Gutte VBMPS Tumkur Sira Kyadikunte VBMPS Tumkur Sira Magodu VBMPS Chikkaballapura Sidlaghatta Kumbarahalli VBMPS Chikkaballapura Sidlaghatta Bommanahalli VBMPS Chikkaballapura Chikkaballapura Kariganapalya VBMPS Chikkaballapura Chikkaballapura Bandahalli VBMPS Chikkaballapura Chintamani Bommepalli VBMPS Chikkaballapura Chintamani Hussainpura VBMPS Chikkaballapura Chintamani Channakeshavapura VBMPS Chikkaballapura Sidlaghatta Gambeeranahalli VBMPS Kolar Malur Angasettihalli VBMPS Kolar Malur Mittiganahalli VBMPS Kolar Bangarapet Nernahalli VBMPS Kolar Kolar Nachahalli VBMPS Kolar Bangarapet Nernahalli VBMPS Kolar Malur Nallandahalli VBMPS Kolar Kolar Begli Hosahalli VBMPS Kolar Kolar Muduvathi VBMPS Kolar Bangarapet Hunukunda VBMPS Koppal Kushtagi Paramanhatti VBMPS Koppal Kushtagi Kandakur VBMPS Mandya Krishnarajpet Thagadur VBMPS Mandya Krishnarajpet Mathikere VBMPS Mandya Krishnarajpet Kadahemmige VBMPS Mandya Krishnarajpet Santhebachahalli VBMPS Mandya Malavalli Pandithahalli VBMPS Mandya Malavalli Sujjalur VBMPS Shimoga Bhadravati Mathighatta VBMPS Shimoga Bhadravati Gudumagatta VBMPS
State: Karnataka Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Bangalore Anekal Chikkanahalli Bangalore Rural Dod Ballapur Mugachinnenahalli Ramanagara Magadi Garageswarapura Ramanagara Kanakapura Mavathoor Hassan Arkalgud Neralahalli Hassan Arkalgud Honnenahalli
182 183 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Karnataka Sample villages: Control (Contd.) Mysore Piriyapatna Anivalu Mysore Tirumakudal - Narsipur Kudluru Tumkur Chiknayakanhalli Kallenahalli Tumkur Madhugiri Avinamadu Tumkur Gubbi Guddadahallii Chamarajanagar Chamarajanagar Kellamballi Chamarajanagar Chamarajanagar THELLANUR Bellary Hagaribommanahalli Guledahalu Bellary Hospet Chilakanahatti Chikkaballapura Gauribidanur Chikkamallekere Kolar Malur Krishnapura Kolar Bangarapet Madivala Koppal Kushtagi Jumlapur Koppal Gangawati Dasanhal Shimoga Sorab Chikkamakoppa Shimoga Tirthahalli Marahalli Shimoga Bhadravati Nellisara
State: Kerala Sample villages: Project District Tehsil Village Intervention Kannur Taliparamba Peralam RBP Kannur Taliparamba Thirumeni RBP Kannur Taliparamba Kankole RBP Kannur Taliparamba Padiyoor RBP Kannur Taliparamba Vellad RBP Thiruvananthapuram Chirayinkeezhu Kudavoor RBP Thiruvananthapuram Neyyattinkara Anavoor RBP Thiruvananthapuram Chirayinkeezhu Edava RBP Thiruvananthapuram Chirayinkeezhu Madavoor RBP Thiruvananthapuram Chirayinkeezhu Pulimath RBP Thiruvananthapuram Neyyattinkara Kulathoor RBP Thiruvananthapuram Neyyattinkara Kunnathukal RBP Thiruvananthapuram Neyyattinkara Thirupuram RBP Ernakulam Kunnathunad Arakapady RBP+VBMPS Thiruvananthapuram Neyyattinkara Karode RBP+VBMPS Idukki Udumbanchola Kulamavu VBMPS Idukki Udumbanchola Kudayathoor VBMPS Kottayam Changanassery Chambakkara VBMPS
182 183 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
State: Kerala Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Ernakulam Kochi Kuzhuppilly Ernakulam Kochi Nayarambalam Ernakulam Kochi Edavanakkad Idukki Udumbanchola Pampadumpara Kottayam Changanassery Vellavoor Kottayam Kottayam Akalakunnam Thiruvananthapuram Nedumangad Mannoorkara
State: Madhya Pradesh Sample villages: Project District Tehsil Village Intervention Betul Multai Gopaltalai RBP Betul Multai Semjhira RBP Betul Multai Bagholi Buzurg RBP Betul Multai Parsodi RBP Betul Multai Siladehi RBP Betul Multai Dunai RBP Betul Multai Kheteda Kalan RBP Betul Multai Chikhali Kalan RBP Chhatarpur Rajnagar Beniganj RBP Chhatarpur Rajnagar Bara RBP Sagar Banda Kanera RBP Sagar Banda Bamhori jagdish RBP Sagar Banda Dhand(460159) RBP Sagar Banda Kotiya RBP Sagar Banda Sorai RBP Sagar Banda Chilpahadi RBP Sagar Banda Prahlad pura RBP Sagar Banda Dhaboli RBP Sagar Banda Manijla RBP Sagar Banda Bhadrana RBP Sagar Shahgarh Semra sanodia RBP Sagar Shahgarh Kajrawani(460343) RBP Sagar Shahgarh Bagrohi RBP Sagar Shahgarh Hansrai(460361) RBP Sagar Shahgarh Niwahi RBP Morena Joura Mohna RBP Morena Joura Jonara RBP Morena Sabalgarh Bamsoli RBP Shajapur Shajapur Piploda RBP Shajapur Shajapur Pachola Banhal RBP Dhar Dhar Baloda Buzurg RBP Dhar Dhar Kharsoda RBP
184 185 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Madhya Pradesh Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Dhar Dhar Raipuria RBP Dhar Dhar Bagdi RBP Dhar Dhar Bhicholi RBP Dhar Sardarpur Kapasthal RBP Dhar Sardarpur Gondikheda Rajod RBP Dhar Sardarpur Morgaon RBP Indore Depalpur Begnda RBP Indore Depalpur Kulala RBP Indore Depalpur Kai RBP Indore Depalpur Methwada RBP Betul Betul Danora RBP+VBMPS Betul Betul Bhadus RBP+VBMPS Indore Indore Goga Khedi RBP+VBMPS Indore Indore Phali RBP+VBMPS Bhopal Berasia Barbeli Kalan VBMPS Bhopal Berasia Rampura Khurd VBMPS Bhopal Berasia Kadia Chabar VBMPS Bhopal Berasia Harrakheda VBMPS Hoshangabad Sohagpur Kajal Khedi VBMPS Hoshangabad Sohagpur Bhaukhedi Kalan VBMPS Ujjain Mahidpur Bhavrasi VBMPS Ujjain Mahidpur Marukheda VBMPS Dewas Dewas Sukliya VBMPS Dewas Dewas Tigariya Goga VBMPS
State: Madhya Pradesh Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Betul Bhainsdehi Khamapur Betul Betul Danora Bhopal Berasia Ankia Bhopal Huzur Pipliya Bajkhan Chhatarpur Nowgong Chandora Chhatarpur Chhatarpur Shyamripurwa Hoshangabad Babai Raipura Hoshangabad Sohagpur Ramnagar Sehore Ashta Rupa Kheda Sehore Budni Khatpura Shajapur Shajapur Sankota Shajapur Moman Badodiya Kamardipur Ujjain Tarana Lalakhedi Ujjain Tarana Haidarpura Tikamgarh Niwari Durgapur Tikamgarh Prithvipur Beer Sagar Tal Dewas Dewas Sunwani Karad Dewas Khategaon Padyadeh
184 185 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Madhya Pradesh Sample villages: Control (Contd.) Dhar Sardarpur Idriya Dhar Kukshi Naingaon Dhar Sardarpur Idriya Dewas Tonk Khurd Kamlapur(Chhota)
State: Maharashtra Sample villages: Project District Tehsil Village Intervention Kolhapur Radhanagari Banachiwadi RBP Kolhapur Kagal Sangaon Mouje RBP Kolhapur Panhala Waloli RBP Kolhapur Kagal Hanbarwadi[567738] RBP Kolhapur Radhanagari Rashiwade Kh. RBP Kolhapur Radhanagari Amjaiwharwade RBP Kolhapur Chandgad Narewadi[568130] RBP Kolhapur Panhala Pohale T.Borgaon RBP Kolhapur Kagal Vandoor RBP Kolhapur Radhanagari Burambali RBP Kolhapur Karvir Adur RBP Kolhapur Karvir Khatangale RBP Kolhapur Karvir Bahireshwar. RBP Kolhapur Panhala Katebhogaon RBP Kolhapur Panhala Gothe RBP Kolhapur Radhanagari Gudal RBP Kolhapur Chandgad Dukkarwadi RBP Kolhapur Karvir Bele RBP Kolhapur Karvir Amashi RBP Kolhapur Chandgad Hallarwadi RBP Kolhapur Karvir Mharul RBP Kolhapur Panhala Mahadikwadi RBP Sangli Walwa Bhavaninagar RBP Sangli Walwa Rethare Harnaksha RBP Sangli Walwa Bagani RBP Sangli Walwa Gotkhindi RBP Ahmadnagar Sangamner Kauthe Kamaleshwar RBP+VBMPS Ahmadnagar Sangamner Khandgaon RBP+VBMPS Kolhapur Panhala Pimple T.Thane RBP+VBMPS Kolhapur Hatkanangale Mauje Vadgaon RBP+VBMPS Pune Shirur Ranjangaon Sandas RBP+VBMPS Pune Daund Peth[555526] RBP+VBMPS Pune Junar Warulwadi RBP+VBMPS Pune Junar Vadgaon Sahani RBP+VBMPS Sangli Walwa Kurlap RBP+VBMPS Sangli Walwa Malewadi[568376] RBP+VBMPS Sangli Walwa Chikurde RBP+VBMPS Ahmadnagar Kopargaon Kasali VBMPS
186 187 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Maharashtra Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Ahmadnagar Kopargaon Dhotre VBMPS Ahmadnagar Kopargaon Anjanapur VBMPS Ahmadnagar Kopargaon Sonewadi VBMPS Bid Bid Anjanwati VBMPS Bid Bid Borkhed VBMPS Bid Bid Golangri VBMPS Kolhapur Karvir Khupire VBMPS Kolhapur Karvir Donwade VBMPS Latur Nilanga Botkul VBMPS Latur Nilanga Rathoda VBMPS Pune Junar Narayangaon VBMPS Pune Junar Zap VBMPS Pune Ambegaon Shindemala VBMPS Pune Shirur Karandi VBMPS Pune maval Sudumbare VBMPS Pune Khed Kaman Barapatti VBMPS Sangli Jat Bagalwadi VBMPS Sangli Atpadi Banpuri VBMPS Sangli Atpadi Talewadi VBMPS Sangli Jat Avandhi VBMPS Sangli Jat Sonyal VBMPS
State: Maharashtra Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Ahmadnagar Sangamner Mengalwadi Ahmadnagar Akola Pimpalgaon Nakvinda Ahmadnagar Rahta Pimpari Lokai Bid Ashti Wanvewadi Bid Bid Jeba Pimpri Bid Bid Bhavanwadi Kolhapur Chandgad Mirwel Kolhapur Shahuwadi Kasarde Kolhapur Radhanagari Olavan Latur Renapur Vanjarwadi Latur Udgir Ismalpur Latur Udgir Kashiram / Somlatanda Pune Haveli Burkegaon Pune Junnar Hadsar Sangli Shirala Pachumbri Sangli Khanapur (Vita) Vejegaon Solapur Mohol Korwali Solapur Sangole Tippehali
186 187 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
State: Odisha Sample villages: Project Tehsil Village Intervention Kendrapara Kendrapara Sadar Sahaspur RBP Kendrapara Kendrapara Sadar Samagudia RBP Kendrapara Kendrapara Sadar Sahaspur RBP Kendrapara Kendrapara Sadar Kesarpur RBP Kendrapara Kendrapara Sadar Kurutunga RBP Jagatsinghapur Jagatsinghapur Sarambo RBP Jagatsinghapur Jagatsinghapur Jira RBP Cuttack Mahanga Malihata[399465] RBP Cuttack Mahanga Debario RBP Cuttack Mahanga Dihigop RBP Cuttack Salepur Basudeipur RBP Cuttack Salepur Purusottampur[399707] RBP Baleshwar Baliapal Malikuda RBP Baleshwar Soro Rahaniaganja RBP Baleshwar Soro Chittol RBP Baleshwar Bhograi Kanthibhaunri RBP Baleshwar Singla Kamargadia RBP Baleshwar Bhograi Dehurda RBP Baleshwar Bhograi Jalasuhuria RBP Baleshwar Singla Kundali RBP Baleshwar Baliapal Jambhirai RBP Bhadrak Basudebpur Radhamohanpur RBP Bhadrak Basudebpur Padmapur RBP Bhadrak Basudebpur Chudamani RBP Gajapati Gurandi Mahadeipur RBP Gajapati Gurandi Jangalpadu RBP Cuttack Gobindpur Sanamulai RBP+VBMPS Cuttack Niali Lunigan RBP+VBMPS Cuttack Gobindpur Dhanamandala RBP+VBMPS Cuttack Niali Pokharigan RBP+VBMPS Kendrapara Mahakalapada Alailo RBP+VBMPS Kendrapara Mahakalapada Kiar banka RBP+VBMPS Gajapati Garabandha Labanyagada RBP+VBMPS Ganjam Kashinagara Kashinagar (Nac) RBP+VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Jagatsinghapur Jaysol VBMPS Cuttack Salepur Gangapur VBMPS Cuttack Mahanga Baradia VBMPS Cuttack Salepur Mahanapur VBMPS Cuttack Salepur Raghabapur VBMPS Cuttack Mahanga Naptuan VBMPS Cuttack Salepur Pikola VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Balikuda Jaitalanga VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Jagatsinghapur Kalyanpur VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Balikuda Jenamani VBMPS
188 189 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Odisha Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Jagatsinghapur Ersama Serapur VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Balikuda Naradia VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Tirtol Sinida VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Naugaon Tiruna VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Jagatsinghapur Singipur VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Balikuda Sangrampur VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Jagatsinghapur Khairanga VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Balikuda Rambhila VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Tirtol manijanga VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Jagatsinghapur Ayara VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Balikuda Anantpur VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Tirtol Samantarapur VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Kujang Panpalli VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Balikuda Badagan VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Balikuda Sukida VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Tirtol Salampur VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Naugaon Bhatapada VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Kujang Tentuliakhamar VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Jagatsinghapur Abidyanandapur VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Ersama Paida VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Naugaon Deriki VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Tirtol Kolata VBMPS Jagatsinghapur Naugaon Galadari VBMPS Kendrapara Derabish Nilikana VBMPS Kendrapara Derabish Bibhutipada VBMPS Kendrapara Patkura Potari VBMPS Kendrapara Patkura Kharisan VBMPS Kendrapara Patkura Haridaspur VBMPS Kendrapara Patkura Pakhada VBMPS Puri Nimapada Renchkhelar VBMPS Puri Astaranga Silari VBMPS Puri Kakatpur Kundhei VBMPS Puri Kakatpur Patasundarpur VBMPS Puri Nimapada Durgapur VBMPS Puri Nimapada Tulasipur VBMPS Puri Kakatpur Kendrapati VBMPS Puri Gop Gadarupas VBMPS Puri Gop Bisulipada VBMPS Puri Kakatpur Othaka VBMPS Puri Astaranga Beguniabasta VBMPS Puri Nimapada Garhchandpur VBMPS Puri Kakatpur Bhandagarh VBMPS Puri Astaranga Talada VBMPS Puri Pipili Laxminarayanpur[408675] VBMPS Puri Pipili Poparanga VBMPS Puri Pipili Jasuapur VBMPS Puri Pipili Aruha VBMPS
188 189 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Odisha Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Nabarangapur Dabugan Chattiguda VBMPS Nabarangapur Dabugan Karagam VBMPS Bargarh Bheden Padhanpali VBMPS Bargarh Bheden Talmenda VBMPS Bargarh Bargarh Sadar Chakerkend VBMPS Bargarh Bargarh Sadar Khandhat VBMPS Bargarh Bhatli Nuagarh VBMPS Bargarh Bhatli Chadeigan VBMPS
State: Odisha Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Cuttack Badamba Badaberana Cuttack Gurudijhatia Kaduanuagan Jagatsinghapur Tirtol Kanimul Jagatsinghapur Balikuda Santarapur Kendrapara Aali Mulasahi Kendrapara Kendrapara Sadar Lokanathpur Jagatsinghapur Tirtol Dianpur Baleshwar Bhograi Gitkhola Baleshwar Similia Kuladharbindha Bhadrak Dhamanagar Karada Bhadrak Chandabali Nischanta Puri Nimapada Nahantara Puri Nimapada Pupusandha Malkangiri Orkel M.V.36 Malkangiri M.V. 79 Pendalbai Nabarangapur Jharigan Karmari Nabarangapur Kodinga Gumundaligura Bargarh Paikamal Laudmal Bargarh Jharbandha Kulanti Subarnapur Ulunda Guja Subarnapur Tarbha Dunguripali Subarnapur Tarbha Deogaon Gajapati Kashinagara Kabitibhadra Gajapati Kashinagara Purutiguda
State: Punjab Sample villages: Project District Tehsil Village Intervention Bathinda Bathinda Khemuana RBP Bathinda Rampura Phul Burj gill RBP Bathinda Talwandi Sabo Malwala RBP Bathinda Talwandi Sabo Manwala RBP Bathinda Talwandi Sabo Shekhpura RBP Faridkot Faridkot Pakhi khurd RBP
190 191 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Odisha Sample villages: Control (Contd.) Faridkot Jaitu Ramuwala a RBP Faridkot Jaitu Rori kapura a RBP Faridkot Faridkot Hari nau RBP Faridkot Faridkot Arrian wala kh RBP Firozpur Zira Pandori khatrian RBP Firozpur Jalalabad Duleke RBP Firozpur Jalalabad Fattuwala RBP Firozpur Aboher Jodhpur RBP Firozpur Zira Mallan wala RBP Firozpur Aboher Bazidpura RBP Firozpur Zira Behk gujran (144) RBP Moga Moga Daudhar garbi RBP Moga Bagha Purana Dhilwan RBP Moga Nihal Singhwala Machhike RBP Moga Moga J k charhik RBP Moga Nihal Singhwala Machhike RBP Sangrur Sangrur Nakta RBP Sangrur Sunam Nilowal RBP Sangrur Sangrur Gharachon RBP Sangrur Sangrur Bibar RBP Sangrur Malerkotla Madevi RBP Firozpur Zira Bundala purana (330) RBP+VBMPS Firozpur Fazilka Pakan RBP+VBMPS Firozpur Firozpur Saide ke rohela (86) RBP+VBMPS Firozpur Firozpur Kot karor khurd (170) RBP+VBMPS Firozpur Firozpur Machhi bugra (184) RBP+VBMPS Firozpur Firozpur Dhira pattra (217) RBP+VBMPS Firozpur Zira Pir mohamand RBP+VBMPS Firozpur Firozpur Mehman (228) RBP+VBMPS Mansa Sardulgarh Nandgarh RBP+VBMPS Mansa Mansa Kot dharmu (111) RBP+VBMPS Mansa Mansa Fafre bhaike RBP+VBMPS Mansa Sardulgarh Danewala RBP+VBMPS Moga Moga Longiwind (177) RBP+VBMPS Moga Moga Jhandiana sharki RBP+VBMPS Moga Moga Kahan singwla RBP+VBMPS Faridkot Faridkot Jhariwala VBMPS Faridkot Jaitu Behbal khurd (143) VBMPS Firozpur Fazilka Jorki andhewali (215) VBMPS Firozpur Jalalabad Chak nidana (177) VBMPS Firozpur Jalalabad Balelke ruhela VBMPS Firozpur Firozpur Pharuwala VBMPS Firozpur Firozpur Pojoke uttar VBMPS
190 191 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
State: Punjab Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Bathinda Bathinda Killi Nihal Singhwali (179) Bathinda Bathinda Lehra Khana (202) Bathinda Talwandi Sabo Rai Khana (21) Faridkot Faridkot Koharwala (130) Faridkot Faridkot Rattirori (72) Faridkot Jaitu Ghanian (7) Firozpur Firozpur Miran Shah Noor (87) Firozpur Fazilka Chak Banwala (226) Firozpur Fazilka Kawanwali (297) Ludhiana Payal Dhaul Kalan (388) Ludhiana Ludhiana (East) Gopalpur (333) Ludhiana Ludhiana (West) Sangowal (257) Mansa Sardulgarh Rorki (188) Mansa Mansa Peron (93) Mansa Mansa Bapiana (47) Moga Nihal Singhwala Badhni Khurd (100) Moga Bagha Purana Ladhaike (131) Moga Moga Ramuwala Kalan (93) Sangrur Malerkotla Balewal (32) Sangrur Malerkotla Balewal (32) Sangrur Dhuri Sultanpur (35) Sangrur Lehra Gurney (71)
State: Rajasthan Sample villages: Project District Tehsil Village Intervention Alwar Rajgarh Bahali RBP Alwar Rajgarh Bhooda RBP Bhilwara Asind Bagmali RBP Bhilwara Asind Pandroo RBP Bhilwara Asind Barana RBP Chittaurgarh Bhadesar Soniyana RBP Chittaurgarh Bhadesar Lohana RBP Jaipur Phagi Dodsara RBP Jaipur Phagi Mordi RBP Jaipur Phagi Palri RBP Jaipur Chomu Bai ka Bas RBP Jaipur Mauzamabad Loradi RBP Jaipur Mauzamabad Panva kalan RBP Jaipur Chomu Nopura RBP Jaipur Chomu Kerli ki dhani RBP Jaipur Shahpura Uda wala RBP Jaipur Mauzamabad Baget RBP
192 193 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Rajasthan Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Jaipur Chomu Kanarpura RBP Jaipur Mauzamabad Dantari RBP Pali Jaitaran Ramawas khurd RBP Sikar Sri Madhopur Neemki RBP Sikar Danta Ramgarh Chak mitai RBP Sikar Sri Madhopur Bamanwas@sajanpura RBP Sikar Sri Madhopur Bahadurpura RBP Sikar Sri Madhopur Hod RBP Sikar Danta Ramgarh Umara RBP Sikar Danta Ramgarh Rulana RBP Sikar Sri Madhopur Dhani gumansingh RBP Alwar Rajgarh Danpur RBP Bhilwara Asind Pandroo RBP Bhilwara Asind Kanwlas RBP Bhilwara Asind Barana RBP Dwarkanathpura @ Jaipur Phagi keriya RBP Jaipur Phagi Mordi RBP Jaipur Shahpura Hanutiya RBP Jaipur Shahpura Trilok pura RBP Jaipur Shahpura Kalwaniyon ka bas RBP Sikar Sri Madhopur Neemki RBP Sikar Danta Ramgarh Chak mitai RBP Sikar Sri Madhopur Bamanwas@sajanpura RBP Sikar Sri Madhopur Bahadurpura RBP Sikar Sri Madhopur Hod RBP Ajmer Kishangarh Goojarwara RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Sarwar Dabrela RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Masuda Bari RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Kishangarh Kishangarh (rural) RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Kishangarh Sarwar RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Masuda Sathana RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Kishangarh Jhadol RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Masuda Sikhrani RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Kishangarh Bhambholao RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Sarwar Tantoti RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phagi Bisaloo RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phulera (Hq.Sambhar) Chainpura RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phagi Chandama kalan RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phulera (Hq.Sambhar) Jorpura jobner RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Amber Sudarshanpura RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Amber Sherawatpura RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Amber Bugalia RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Amber Pratappura khurd RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phagi Beechi RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phulera (Hq.Sambhar) Khejda was RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Amber Jairampura RBP+VBMPS
192 193 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Rajasthan Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Jaipur Phulera (Hq.Sambhar) Asalpur RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Amber Nangal ladi RBP+VBMPS Pali Jaitaran Balara RBP+VBMPS Tonk Malpura Gulab pura RBP+VBMPS Tonk Malpura Kurad RBP+VBMPS Tonk Malpura Nagar RBP+VBMPS Tonk Malpura Awra RBP+VBMPS Pali Jaitaran Balara RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Amber Bugalia RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phulera (Hq.Sambhar) Chainpura RBP+VBMPS Tonk Malpura Doriya RBP+VBMPS Tonk Malpura Gulab pura RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Kishangarh Jhadol RBP+VBMPS Tonk Malpura Kurad RBP+VBMPS Tonk Malpura Nagar RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Masuda Sathana RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Amber Sherawatpura RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Kishangarh Goojarwara RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Masuda Shiv nagar RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Sarwar Dabrela RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Masuda Bari RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Kishangarh Kishangarh (rural) RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Kishangarh Sarwar RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Masuda Sikhrani RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Kishangarh Bhambholao RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Sarwar Sarana RBP+VBMPS Ajmer Sarwar Tantoti RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phagi Chandama kalan RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phulera (Hq.Sambhar) Dehra RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Amber Rojda RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phagi Beechi RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phulera (Hq.Sambhar) Kalakh RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Amber Nangal ladi RBP+VBMPS Pali Jaitaran Paliyawas RBP+VBMPS Pali Jaitaran Bassi RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phagi Bisaloo RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Amber Sudarshanpura RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phulera (Hq.Sambhar) Asalpur RBP+VBMPS Jaipur Phulera (Hq.Sambhar) Hirnoda RBP+VBMPS Bhilwara Mandal Malas B VBMPS Chittaurgarh Nimbahera Rathanjana VBMPS Chittaurgarh Nimbahera Barda VBMPS Chittaurgarh Nimbahera Mailana VBMPS Chittaurgarh Dungla Tila khera VBMPS Jaipur Jaipur Jaisinghpura kankroda VBMPS Jaipur Jaipur Bichpari VBMPS Jaipur Bassi Jhajhwar VBMPS
194 195 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Rajasthan Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Jaipur Jamwa Ramgarh Neemla VBMPS Jaipur Sanganer Awaniya VBMPS Jaipur Sanganer Hariharpura VBMPS Jaipur Kotputli Dantil VBMPS Jaipur Sanganer Ajayrajpura VBMPS Pali Raipur Deoli kalan VBMPS Pali Rohat Sanwalta kalan VBMPS Pali Marwar Junction Bhagwanpura VBMPS Pali Desuri Gurha jaitsingh VBMPS Sikar Lachhmangarh Mirjwas VBMPS Sikar Lachhmangarh Sankhoo VBMPS Sikar Lachhmangarh Churi miyan VBMPS Tonk Deoli Bisanpura VBMPS Tonk Deoli Deopura VBMPS Jaipur Bassi Jhajhwar VBMPS Sikar Lachhmangarh Mirjwas VBMPS Sikar Lachhmangarh Sankhoo VBMPS Jaipur Jaipur Jaisinghpura kankroda VBMPS Jaipur Bassi Mansar kheri VBMPS Jaipur Kotputli Torda goojran VBMPS Jaipur Sanganer Bagru khurd VBMPS Jaipur Sanganer Kalwara VBMPS Jaipur Bassi Bainara VBMPS Jaipur Kotputli Dantil VBMPS Pali Desuri Salariya VBMPS Pali Raipur Deoli kalan VBMPS Sikar Lachhmangarh Churi miyan VBMPS Tonk Deoli Bisanpura VBMPS Bhilwara Mandal Hisniya VBMPS Bhilwara Mandal Baddoo VBMPS Govindpura @ Jaipur Jaipur jaichandpura VBMPS Jaipur Jaipur Bichpari VBMPS Jaipur Sanganer Dahmi kalan VBMPS Pali Desuri Dhalop VBMPS Pali Desuri Deoli VBMPS Pali Raipur Kalab kalan VBMPS
State: Rajasthan Sample villages: Control
District Tehsil Village Ajmer Kishangarh Khajpura Ajmer Ajmer Sedariya Alwar Kathumar Badka Alwar Kathumar Bahtoo kalan Bhilwara Shahpura Nayagaon @ malikhera
194 195 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Rajasthan Sample villages: Control (Contd.) Bhilwara Mandal Daulatpura Chittaurgarh Rawatbhata Sanga ki badi Chittaurgarh Bari sadri Gundalpur Jaipur Sahjpura Ravpura Jaipur Jamawaramragh Phutalav Pali Rohat Sirana Pali Bali Bheetwara Sikar Lachhmangarh Jhajhar Sikar Sri madhopur Chaukri Tonk Tonk Wazeerabad Tonk Uniara Balithal Alwar Behror Chaubara Alwar Mandawar Jhajharpur Alwar Tijara Mahesara Alwar Tijara Rambas jhonpri Alwar Alwar Shahpur Alwar Rajgarh Kundroli Alwar Lachhmangarh Phahri Alwar Lachhmangarh Mahrana Alwar Kathumar Badka Ajmer Bhinay Kheri Ajmer Kekri Dhunwaliya Alwar Tijara Mahesara Alwar Kathumar Bahtoo kalan Bhilwara Shahpura Nayagaon @ malikhera Bhilwara Mandal Daulatpura Jaipur Jamwa ramgarh Darolai Jaipur Bassi Bhudarpura Pali Rohat Sirana Pali Bali Sela Sikar Lachhmangarh Jhajhar Sikar Danta ramgarh Tehat Tonk Uniara Fatehganj Tonk Uniara Sedri
State: Tamil Nadu Sample villages: Project District Tehsil Village Intervention Coimbatore Pollachi Kambalapatti RBP Coimbatore Coimbatore North Kanuvakkarai RBP Coimbatore Coimbatore North Naickenpalayam RBP Coimbatore Pollachi Sokkanur RBP Coimbatore Pollachi Periapodu RBP Cuddalore Tittakudi Kandamathan RBP Cuddalore Tittakudi Mangulam RBP Cuddalore Tittakudi Vadapathy RBP
196 197 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Tamil Nadu Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Cuddalore Tittakudi Sirupakkam RBP Krishnagiri Krishnagiri Beemandapalli RBP Krishnagiri Krishnagiri Soolamalai RBP Krishnagiri Krishnagiri Kathinayanapalli(Hamlet:Poosaripatti) RBP Madurai Usilampatti Krishnapuram RBP Madurai Usilampatti Keeripatti RBP Madurai Usilampatti Eravarpatti RBP Madurai Usilampatti Jothilnaickanur RBP Namakkal Namakkal Tholur RBP Namakkal Namakkal Akkiyampatti RBP Namakkal Namakkal Tattayyangarpatti RBP Salem Salem Nallarayampatti RBP Salem Salem Valaiyakkaranur RBP Thiruvallur Tiruttani Santhanagopalapuram RBP Thiruvallur Tiruttani Kalambakkam RBP Tiruchirappalli Manapparai Kannudayanpatti RBP Tiruchirappalli Manapparai V.Periapatti RBP Tiruchirappalli Manapparai Thenur RBP Tiruvannamalai Tiruvannamalai Andapattu RBP Tiruvannamalai Tiruvannamalai Nachianandal RBP Tiruvannamalai Tiruvannamalai Kalvasal RBP Tiruvannamalai Polur Munivanthangal RBP Tiruvannamalai Polur Arunagirimangalam RBP Tiruvannamalai Tiruvannamalai Kalpattu RBP Tiruvannamalai Arani Adanur RBP Viluppuram Kallakkurichi Kurur RBP Viluppuram Sankarapuram Poruvalur RBP Viluppuram Sankarapuram Murarbad RBP Viluppuram Sankarapuram Kulathur RBP Viluppuram Sankarapuram Vadachettiyandal RBP Viluppuram Kallakkurichi Sadaiyampattu RBP Viluppuram Kallakkurichi Porpadakurichi RBP Viluppuram Sankarapuram Periakolliyur RBP Viluppuram Kallakkurichi Karadichittur RBP Viluppuram Sankarapuram Alambalam (Kallakurichi) RBP Viluppuram Kallakkurichi Elavadi RBP Erode Bhavani Padavalkalvai RBP+VBMPS Erode Gobichettipalayam Kanakampalayam RBP+VBMPS Erode Erode Elumathur RBP+VBMPS Erode Gobichettipalayam Koshanam RBP+VBMPS Erode Erode Thuyyampoondurai RBP+VBMPS Erode Bhavani Anthiyur RBP+VBMPS Tiruppur Kangeyam Mudalipalayam RBP+VBMPS Tiruppur Kangeyam Valliarachal RBP+VBMPS Erode Sathyamangalam Kurumbapalayam VBMPS Erode Gobichettipalayam Kurumandur VBMPS Erode Gobichettipalayam Pulavakalipalayam VBMPS
196 197 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: Tamil Nadu Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Erode Sathyamangalam Chikkarasampalayam VBMPS Erode Bhavani Nagalur VBMPS Erode Bhavani Illippili VBMPS Salem Attur Sarvoy VBMPS Tiruppur Dharapuram Puduppai VBMPS Tiruppur Dharapuram Ponnivadi VBMPS Tiruvannamalai Chengam Japthikariyandal VBMPS Tiruvannamalai Chengam Madavilaagam VBMPS
State: Tamil Nadu Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Coimbatore Mettupalayam Vadakkalur(Hamlet:Mookanur) Coimbatore Coimbatore South Theethipalayam Coimbatore Pollachi Kolarpatti Cuddalore Cuddalore Tennambakkam Cuddalore Cuddalore Gunduuppalavadi (Part) Erode Sathyamangalam Koothampalayam Erode Sathyamangalam Pudupeerkadavu Erode Erode Thindal Krishnagiri Hosur Thattiganapalli Krishnagiri Krishnagiri Ettipatti Madurai Melur Pulipattii Madurai Vadipatti Rajakkalpatti Madurai Thirumangalam Ammapatti Namakkal Tiruchengode Kannurpatti Namakkal Namakkal Sarkar Manappalli Salem Omalur Kombukuttakadu(Hamlet) under the RV Salem Attur Thekkampatti(Hamlet:Senkaradu) Thiruvallur Gummidipoondi Poovalai Thiruvallur Tiruttani Melmaligaipattu Tiruchirappalli Thuraiyur Venkatesapuram Tiruchirappalli Thiruverumbur Vengur Tiruppur Kangeyam Naalroad Tiruppur Dharapuram Verajimangalam Tiruvannamalai Chengam Aridharimangalam Tiruvannamalai Tiruvannamalai Sammandanur Viluppuram Gingee Naranamangalam Viluppuram Tirukkoyilur Kadiyar
State: Uttar Pradesh Sample villages: Project District Tehsil Village Intervention Agra Bah Badagaon RBP Agra Fatehabad Khera Jawahar RBP Agra Fatehabad Naugawan RBP
198 199 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: Uttar Pradesh Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Aligarh Iglas Kaimthal RBP Budaun Bilsi Govindpur Shivnagar RBP Budaun Bisauli Gadgaon RBP Budaun Bisauli Nagla Baraha RBP Budaun Gunnaur Kail RBP Budaun Bilsi Gandhrauli RBP Etah Etah Kishanpur[214790] RBP Etah Aliganj Dhumari RBP Jyotiba Phule Nagar Amroha Atairana RBP Mainpuri Bhogaon Syona RBP Mainpuri Bhogaon Uncha Islamabad RBP Moradabad Chandausi Ghasipur RBP Ambedkarnagar Allapur Akhalaspur VBMPS Ambedkarnagar Alapur Madainiya VBMPS Barabanki Nawab Ganj Lakshmanpur VBMPS Barabanki Nawab Ganj Nanmau VBMPS Farrukhabad Amritpur Udhranpur Lilapur VBMPS Farrukhabad Amritpur Karanpur Datt VBMPS Faizabad Bikapur Karanpur VBMPS Faizabad Bikapur Tulsi Ka Purwa VBMPS Bijnor Najibabad Ubhhanwala.941 VBMPS Bijnor Najibabad Shahpur Sukkha.398 VBMPS Bijnor Bijnor Hadarpur.454 VBMPS Bijnor Dhampur Kakrala.54 VBMPS Bijnor Chandpur Nawada.906 VBMPS Agra Etmadpur Chirhauli VBMPS Agra Etmadpur Benai VBMPS Aligarh Iglas Dokauli VBMPS Aligarh Iglas Toori VBMPS Budaun Gunnaur Gaguri VBMPS Budaun Gunnaur Chabutara VBMPS Budaun Gunnaur Akbarpur VBMPS Budaun Gunnaur Arthal VBMPS Etah Jalesar Jainpura VBMPS Etah Etah Bamnai VBMPS Etah Etah Banthal Qutabpur VBMPS Firozabad Shikohabad Bahadurpur VBMPS Firozabad Shikohabad Kutubpur VBMPS Jyotiba Phule Nagar Dhanaura Papsari Khader VBMPS Moradabad Chandausi Faridpur Khushal VBMPS Moradabad Chandausi Darni VBMPS
198 199 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
State: Uttar Pradesh Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Ambedkar Nagar Allapur Neware Ambedkar Nagar Allapur Syampur Alampur Bara Banki Nawabganj Kewari Faizabad Milkipur Gaddaupur Faizabad Bikapur Manjha Sonaura Farrukhabad Farrukhabad Nagla Narain Farrukhabad Kaimganj Mistini Farrukhabad Kaimganj Ataipur Kohana Bijnor Najibabad Chaugawa.669 Bijnor Dhampur Lakhhuwala Agra Agra Balhera Agra Fatehabad Krapal Pura Aligarh Khair Nayal Aligarh Gabhana Daoopur Kota Bijnor Nagina Jemalpur Banger Bijnor Chandpur Bera Budaun Bisauli Bavepur Budaun Dataganj Gudhana Etah Etah Nagla Datti Etah Etah Rijor Farrukhabad Kaimganj Bichhauli Farrukhabad Farrukhabad Ninaura Shanklapur Firozabad Firozabad Jilupura Firozabad Shikohabad Bharhaipura Jyotiba Phule Nagar Dhanaura Jajruh Jyotiba Phule Nagar Dhanaura Jajruh Jyotiba Phule Nagar Amroha Raipur Khurd Urf Sehzadpur Mainpuri Bhogaon Hannukhera Mainpuri Bhogaon Merapur Khizarpur Mainpuri Bhogaon Merapur Khizarpur Moradabad Thakurdwara Fareedpur Haji Moradabad Moradabad Rasulpur Nagli
State: West Bengal Sample villages: Project
District Tehsil Village Intervention Paschim Medinipur Debra Jotnarayan RBP Paschim Medinipur Debra Ashari RBP Paschim Medinipur Daspur - I Pukurdana RBP Paschim Medinipur Debra Dhubni RBP Paschim Medinipur Debra Biju RBP Paschim Medinipur Debra Chandramer RBP Paschim Medinipur Sabang Basantapur RBP Paschim Medinipur Debra Tangaishri RBP Paschim Medinipur Daspur - I Dadpur RBP Paschim Medinipur Sabang Khorai RBP
200 201 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections State: West bengal Sample villages: Project (Contd.) Paschim Medinipur Daspur - I Kalara RBP Paschim Medinipur Debra Nanda Bari RBP Paschim Medinipur Daspur - II Palashpai RBP Paschim Medinipur Daspur - II Guchhati RBP Paschim Medinipur Debra Golgram RBP North Twenty Four Parganas Bongaon Chalki RBP North Twenty Four Parganas Bongaon Polta RBP North Twenty Four Parganas Bagda Nawapara RBP+VBMPS North Twenty Four Parganas Bagda Patkelpota RBP+VBMPS North Twenty Four Parganas Bagda Tankshali RBP+VBMPS North Twenty Four Parganas Bagda Sagarpur RBP+VBMPS North Twenty Four Parganas Bagda Sindranj RBP+VBMPS North Twenty Four Parganas Swarupnagar Purba Polta RBP+VBMPS Nadia SHANTIPUR Gayeshpur RBP+VBMPS Nadia Nakashipara Adibasipara (Bholadanga) RBP+VBMPS Nadia Karimpur - II Charmokrpur VBMPS Nadia Karimpur - I Mathurapur VBMPS Nadia Karimpur - II Manikdihi VBMPS Nadia Tehatta - I Khaspur VBMPS Bankura Sonamukhi Khaer Bani VBMPS Bankura Taldangra Bhedua VBMPS Bankura Sonamukhi Aligang VBMPS Bankura Simlapal Baricha VBMPS Bankura Simlapal Jhumka VBMPS Bankura Simlapal Dhuliapur VBMPS Bankura Taldangra Douni VBMPS Bankura Sonamukhi Moheshpur VBMPS Bankura Taldangra Satmauli VBMPS Bankura Simlapal Hatibari VBMPS Murshidabad Burwan Ghasiara VBMPS Murshidabad Khargram Garutia VBMPS Murshidabad Raninagar - I Baliharpur VBMPS Murshidabad Burwan Jikharhati VBMPS Murshidabad Khargram Sitalgram VBMPS Murshidabad Raninagar - I Godhanpara VBMPS North Twenty Four Parganas Bagda Auldanga VBMPS
State: West Bengal Sample villages: Control District Tehsil Village Nadia Kaliganj Chak Bege Nadia Kaliganj Chakundi Nadia Nakashipara Bargachhi Bankura Onda Chhagulia Bankura Sarenga Narayanpur Bankura Indus Bhagabanbati Murshidabad Sagardighi Ganja Sinheswari Murshidabad Suti - I Gopalnagar
200 201 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India State: West Bengal Sample villages: Control (Contd.) Jhargram Gopiballavpur - II Chandias Jhargram Gopiballavpur - II Padima Paschim Medinipur Kharagpur - II Tentulmuri Paschim Medinipur Keshpur Lalte Hari North Twenty Four Parganas Gaighata Jaytara North Twenty Four Parganas Habra - II Beraberi
Annexure B 1. Questionnaires: Listing Sheet
Sl. No. General Information Detail Response 1 HH Serial No. Sl. No. [to be filled automatically?) 2 Name of Village Name/ Code [to be filled automatically?) 3 Block/ Tehsil Name/ Code [to be filled automatically?) 4 District Name/ Code [to be filled automatically?) 5 State Name/Code [to be filled automatically?) 6 Name of Head of Household First/Middle/Last 7 Name of Respondent (If the First/Middle/Last respondent is other than Head of Household) 8 Gender of Respondent Male/Female 9 Relationship of the Respondent Self/ Son/ Brother/ Father/ Mother/ with the Head of the Household Daughter/ Daughter in Law/ Others 10 Age of Respondent Years 11 Caste SC=1, ST=2, OBC=3, General=4 12.1 Economic Status BPL=1, Antodaya=2, Annapurna=3, APL=4 12.2 Land-ownership Status Land less=1; Marginal (Below 1.0 ha) =2; Small (1.0 – 2.0 ha) =3; Semi-medium (2.0 – 4.0 ha) =4; Medium (4.0 –10.0 ha.)=5; Large (10.0 ha above) =6. Note: (1 ha= 2.5 acre) 13 Address and Land-Mark for the Near what? 1. House 2. 14 Contact Number of the Own: Respondent Other (specify the name and relationship with the respondent) 15 Does the household have milch Yes=1; No=2 animals 16 If the village has a Dairy Yes=1, No=2 Cooperative Society (DCS) 17 If Yes, are you a member of DCS? Yes=1, No=2
18 Number of adult Milch animals Indigenous Crossbred Buffalo (No.) owned Cow (No.) Cow (No.) In-milk Total
202 203 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
Participation in NDP (only for the Project villages)
Sl. No. Details NDP-I: Ration NDP-I: NDP-I: Balancing Village Both RBP and Programme Based Milk VBMPs ( RBP) Procurement System (VBMPS) 19 Took part in demonstration/training/ meetings/discussion of these NDP-I programmes (Yes=1, No=2) 20 If Yes, please specify the year 21 Availed Assistance ( monetary as well as knowledge) under these NDP-I programmes (Yes=1, No=2) 22 If yes, please specify the month/ year of receiving benefits/ joining the program.
23 Do you find these Programmes beneficial to you (Yes=1, No=2)
Date of Interview Date/month/year Interviewer ID Name
202 203 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
2. Questionnaires: Village Schedule (Please record latitude and longitude of the place of interview in the village upto 6 points of decimal)
Before Middle Q No. Item Specifics the of the Presently Project Project Part I: Village-Pradhan or Senior Gram Panchayat Members/Officials 1 General Information of the Village 1.1 Name of the Village To be filled automatically X X X 1.2 Name of the Block To be filled automatically X X X 1.3 District To be filled automatically X X X 1.4 State To be filled automatically X X X 1.5 Total Population In Number 1.5.1 Male Population In Number 1.5.2 Female Population In Number 1.6 Total Households In Number 1.6.1 Total Female-headed In Number Households 1.7 Total Landless Households In Number 1.8 Total Marginal Landowner In Number Households (under 1 ha land) 1.9 Total Small Landowner In Number Households ( 1 to 2 ha land) 1.10 Total Medium and Large In Number Landowner Households (over 2 ha land) 1.11 How significant is dairy milk Very significant =1, Somewhat production in contributing significant=2, Not significant to household income in the =3 village? 1.12 Total Households having Milch In Number Animal/s 1.13 Total Households engaged in In Number Dairy Activities 1.14 Antodaya Card holders In Number 1.15 Total BPL households In Number 1.16 Total APL Households In Number 1.17 Total SC households In Number 1.18 Total ST Households In Number 1.19 Total SHGs in the Village In Number 1.20 Total number of SHG members In Number 1.21 Total women members of SHG In Number 1.22 Total area under cultivation In Acres including perennial crops such as fruit trees (excluding fodder crops ) 1.23 Total area under fodder crops In Acres 1.24 Is there any common grazing Yes=1, No=2 land in the village?
204 205 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
Before Middle Q No. Item Specifics the of the Presently Project Project 1.25 If yes, total common grazing In Acres land area in the village 1.26 Shops selling cattle feed ( grain, In Number oilcake, mineral mixture) in the village or within 5 kms 1.27 If farmers buy green fodder, Other farmers=1, DCS=2, source of fodder NGC=3, Supplied from outside village=4 1.28 If farmers buy dry fodder, Other farmers=1, DCS=2, source of fodder NGC=3, Supplied from outside village=4
*In case of Control villages’ period will be 2012-13, 2015-16 and 2018-19
Part II: Broad Infrastructure Availability in the Village 2 Infrastructure, Health & Education Sources of Drinking Water Facilities in the x x X Village 2.1 Panchayat Well (Open well) In Number 2.2 Panchayat Well (Tube or Bore well) In Number 2.3 Tap water connection Yes=1; No=2 2.4 Hand Pump In Number 2.5 Average water table depth in the case of In feet tube wells 2.6 Toilets in the Village (Common) In Number 2.7 Toilets in the Village (Household) In Number 2.8 Does the Village have Electricity Yes=1, No=2 connection? 2.9 If yes - Households having Electricity In Number connection 2.10 How many household installed biogas In Number facilities 2.11 Does the village has Primary Health Yes=1, No=2 Centre (PHC)? 2.12 If No, Distance from the village to PHC Km 2.13 If Yes, Doctors in the PHCs which are In Number located within the village 2.14 Does the village have Primary School? Yes=1, No=2 2.15 If no, distance from the village Km 2.16 Does the village have Secondary School? Yes=1, No=2 2.17 If no, distance from the village Km 2.18 Main approach road to Village Pucca Road=1; Kutcha Road=2; Both=3, Other=4; 2.19 If the main approach road is not Pucca Distance in Kms all-weather Road, distance to Pucca all- weather Road (kms) 2.20 Major facilities for the villagers for goods Tractor=1, Pickups or small transport (Multiple options possible) trucks=2, Auto Rickshaw=3, Other Specify=4
204 205 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
2.21 Status of Transport facility available in the 1=Very inadequate, 2=Just village for goods adequate, 3=Adequate, 4=None 2.22 Name of nearest town Name
2.23 Distance of nearest town Kilometre
2.24 Status of Mobile Phone Network Not available =1, 2=Very inadequate, 3=Just adequate, 4=Adequate 2.25 Internet facility 1= Not available, 2=Very inadequate, 3=Just adequate, 4=Adequate 2.22 Availability of Post office in the village Yes=1; No=2
2.26 Availability of Village Information Centre Yes=1; No=2, Not aware-3 in the village (Dairy related ) 2.27 Availability of Banking facility in the Yes=1, No=2 village 2.28 If No, distance to the nearest banking Available within 5 kms =1 facility Available between 5 to 10 kms =2 Available at more than 10 kms=3 2.29 Availability of ATM service in the village Yes=1, No=2
2.30 If Yes, the status of ATM service in your Most of the time in working village condition=1 Most of the time not in working condition=2 2.31 If No, the nearest availability of ATM Available within 5 kms =1 service in KM Available between 5 to 10 kms =2 Available at more than 10 kms=3
Part III: Dairy related Programmes and Participation in the Village [Questions to be asked to the Milk Procurement Official (with name/contact number)) in the village]
3. Availability of Dairy Cooperatives and Other Facilities
3.1 Is this village covered by the Yes, society within village =1, Yes, Village based Milk Procurement society in an adjoining or nearby system under NDP-I project? village= 2, Not covered at all=3 3.1.1 If, covered, month and year of Mention Month and year commencement of the scheme in the village 3.1.2 If there is no coverage of the Yes =1, No=2 village by DCS, is there a milk procurement facility in the village? 3.1.3 If yes, When did this facility Mention Month and year become operational? 3.2 Is this village covered by the Yes =1, No=2 Ration Balancing Scheme for Dairy Animals under NDP-I project?
206 207 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
3.2.1 If, covered, month and year of Mention Month and year commencement of the scheme in the village 3.2.2 Is it still in operation? Yes=1; No=2
3.2.3 If not, when it is closed? Mention Month and year
3.3 Is this village covered by the AI Yes =1, No=2 Scheme for Dairy Animals under NDP-I? 3.3.1 If, covered, month and year of Mention Month and year commencement of the scheme in the village 3.4 Is there a New Generation Yes =1, No=2 Cooperatives (NGC)/Producer Companies within village? 3.4.1 If yes, month and year of Mention Month and year commencement of the scheme in the village 3.5 Availability of Bulk Milk Chilling Yes =1, No=2 facility within village? 3.5.1 If yes, month and year of Mention Month and year commencement of this facility in the village 3.6 Number of Households linked In Number to Bulk Milk Chilling facility/s or procurement centre 3.7 Is Genset facilities for running Yes =1, No=2 Bulk Milk Chilling is available in the village 3.71 If Yes, how adequate Genset 1=Very inadequate, 2=Just facilities for running Bulk Milk adequate, 3=Adequate, 4=None Chilling? 3.8 Milk testing facilities in the Lactometer test=1, Clot & village (multiple response Boiling test=2, Garber test=3, possible) Organoleptic test=4, Rasazurin test=5, None=6 3.9 Veterinary hospital within village Yes=1, No=2 3.10 If No, how far villagers have In km to travel to go to a Veterinary hospital 3.11 Access to Veterinary Medical In kms Services: Distance to where the Vet Doctor is located
Before the Middle of Presently Project the Project 3.12 Availability of AI Yes, located within Technician/Gopalak for village=1, Yes, technician dairy animals visiting the village=2, Neither=3 3.13 Availability of Bull/NS Yes, located within service Provider for Dairy village=1, Yes, technician animals visiting the village=2, Neither=3 3.14 Availability of Para Vet Yes, located within village=1, Yes, technician visiting the village=2, Neither=3
206 207 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
4 Availability of AI Service Provision Facilities 4.1 Is AI services available in the Yes=1; No=2 within village? 4.2 If Yes, who provides AI Milk Cooperative services Workers=1; Mobile ÀI Technicians-MAITS=2; Government Veterinary Doctor=3; Livestock Inspector=4; Private Vet Doctors=5; Other Private AI Technicians=6 4.3 If AI services not available Kilometre within the village, then specify the distance 5 Livestock Number of Indigenous Cow 5.1 livestock Number (Desi) in village 5.2 Cross-bred Cow Number 5.3 Buffalo Number 6 Market Linkages and Value Chains 6.1 Total quantity of cow milk In litres per day procured by DCS [This should be obtained from DCS officials] 6.2 Total quantity of cow milk In litres per day procured by NGC 6.3 Total quantity of cow milk In litres per day procured by Private Dairy 6.4 Total quantity of cow milk In litres per day procured by the Dudhias 6.5 Total quantity of buffalo In litres per day milk procured by DCS 6.6 Total quantity of buffalo In litres per day milk procured by NGC 6.7 Total quantity of buffalo In litres per day milk procured by Private Dairy 6.8 Total quantity of buffalo In litres per day milk procured by the Dudhias 6.9 Milk used for preparing Yes=1, No=2 value added products for sale by households 6.10 Where are Value-Added Within village=1, Outside products of milk are sold by village=2, Both =3, Not households sold =4 7 NDP Components/Other Programmes in the Village 7.1 Fodder development Yes=1, No=2 7.2 Pedigree Selection (PS) Yes=1, No=2 7.3 Progeny Testing (PT) Yes=1, No=2
208 209 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
7.4 Any other government programme related to dairy Yes=1, No=2 sector are in operation in the village? 7.5 If Yes, please specify the name of the programmes 7.6 And since when it is operation in the village (Month/Year)
8 Dairy related details Before the Middle of Presently Project the Project 8.1 What is the average milk In litres production per day per animal in the summer season? 8.1.1 Indigenous cow In litres 8.1.2 Crossbred Cow In litres 8.1.3 Buffalo In litres 8.2 What is the average milk In litres production per day per animal in the rainy season? 8.2.1 Indigenous Cow In litres 8.2.2 Crossbred Cow In litres 8.2.3 Buffalo In litres 8.3 What is the average milk In litres production per day per animal in the winter season? 8.3.1 Indigenous Cow In litres 8.3.2 Crossbred Cow In litres 8.3.3 Buffalo In litres 8.4 What are the common green Give names To be filled automatically fodders fed to milch animals in the village? 8.5 What are the common dry fodders Give names To be filled automatically fed to milch animals in the village?
8.6 Has any revegetation effort for Yes= 1, No=2, Not grazing land been taken up in the aware =3 last five 5 years?
8.7 If yes, is the revegetation Yes= 1, No=2, Not successful? aware =3 8.8 What is the average price of young In Rs indigenous female calf? (less than two years) 8.9 What is the average price of young In Rs crossbred female calf? (less than two years) 8.10 What is the average price of young In Rs female buffalo calf? (less than two years) 8.11 What is the average price of adult In Rs indigenous cow? (more than two years)
208 209 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
8.12 What is the average price of adult In Rs crossbred cow? (more than two years) 8.13 What is the average price of adult In Rs female buffalo? (more than two years) 8.14 Are cattle and buffaloes taken away Only some from village because of lack of households=1, water in summer? commonly seen =2, not taken =3 8.15 If livestock migration is common, In kms how far away are the animals taken? 8.16 In your opinion, what is the health Serious diseases are status of the dairy animals in the common=1, Incidence village of serious illness is negligible =2 8.17 Are any subsidies available from Yes= 1, No=2, Not the government for dairying? aware =3 8.17.1 Low interest loans for purchase of Yes= 1, No=2, Not milch animals aware =3 8.17.2 Subsidies for purchase of milch Yes= 1, No=2, Not animals aware =3 8.17.3 Subsidised fodder seeds Yes= 1, No=2, Not aware =3 8.17.4 Subsidised machinery for dairying Yes= 1, No=2, Not aware =3 8.17.5 Any other Specify 8.18 Has any dairy farmer received Yes=1, No=2 recognition or prize for his milch animals (highest milk yield, quality of milk or other achievements) 8.19 If yes, how many awardees are In Number there in the village 8.20 Has availability of milk for Yes, significantly =1, consumption in the village Moderate increase or increased presently as compared to no change =2, Declined before the project? significantly=3; varies from time to time=4 8.21 In your opinion, what are the Milk collection/ constraints for expansion of marketing facilities =1; dairying in the village? Veterinary Medical ( Multiple options possible) ( facilities=2; Please rank them based on severity Green fodder of the constraints) availability=3; Dry fodder availability=4; Note: While developing app, Cattle feed/ oilseed ranking option should be there cake availability=5; from rank 1 to rank 5) Water for dairy animals=6; Labour availability=7; Cost of milk production=8; Low yield of milk=9; Price of milk=10; Price of milch animals=11; low Profitability of dairying compared to other activities=13; Any other=14
210 211 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
3. Questionnaires: Dairy Households
Section 1: Identification S.No Items Details Response 1.1 State To be filled automatically 1.2 District To be filled automatically 1.3 Block/ Tehsil To be filled automatically 1.4 Village Name To be filled automatically 1.5 Village Category RBP Village=1; VBMPS To be filled automatically Village=2, Both=3
Section – 2: Socio-Economic Status of the Household S. No Questions Details Response 2.1 Respondent’s Name 2.2 Relationship with the head of the Self=1; Husband=2; Wife=3; Household Daughter=4; Son=5; Relative normally living in the house=6; Other=7 ( please specify) 2.3 Contact Number Mobile Number
Years (Do not proceed with the survey 2.4 Age if age is less than 20 years)
2.5 Gender Male=1, Female=2 2.6 Respondent’s highest level of formal Primary Level (Up to Class V) =1; educational achievement: Middle Level (Up to Class VIII) =2; Secondary Level (Up to Class X) =3; Senior Secondary (Up to Class XII) =4; Senior Secondary College / University =5; Vocational =6; Professional (Diploma/Degree/ Certificate etc.)=7; No formal education but able to read and write=8, Unable to read or write=9; Other=10 (Give details if response is 10) 2.7 Marital Status Married= 1, Separated=2; Divorcee=3, Widow/Widower=4, Never Married=5 2.8 Household Type Single=1; Nuclear Family =2; Joint Family=3 Total Household Size Total Number of Members (including 2.9 infants) Total Male members in the 2.10 Number Household including children Total Female Members in the 2.11 Number Household including children 2.12 Social group SC=1, ST=2, OBC=3 & General=4 BPL =1; APL =2; Antodaya=3; 2.13 Economic Status of the household Annapurna= 4; No cards=5 ; other=6 (specify) Owned=1; Leased in=2; Leased out Cultivation of Agricultural Land 2.14 own land = 3 (all possible; applicable only for cultivating hhd)
210 211 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Section 3: Land Holding Pattern and Land Use
S. No Questions Detail Response 3.1 Farmer Category Land less=1; Marginal (Below 1.0 ha) =2; Small (1.0 – 2.0 ha) =3; Semi-medium (2.0 – 4.0 ha) =4; Medium (4.0 –10.0 ha.)=5; Large (10.0 ha above) =6. Note: (1 ha= 2.5 acre) 3.2 Land Owned Acres 3.3 Net Land available for cultivation Acres Gross Area Cultivated under Acres 3.4 agriculture in 2018-19 (excluding fodder crops) Gross Area Cultivated under Fodder 3.5 Acres Crops in 2018-19
Section 4: Occupation of the Working Members of the household
S.No Details Detail Response 4.1.1 Member 1: Name 4.1.2 Gender Male=1; Female=2 4.1.3 Age Years 4.1.4 Main occupation Cultivator=1; Agricultural labour=2; Non- agricultural labour=3; House work=4; Salaried=5; Doctor/ lawyer/other professional =6; Carpenter/ electrician etc.=7; Business=8; Other=9 (specify) 4.1.5 Whether involved in dairying Significantly (spending more than 2 hours per day=1; Partially (spending 1-2 hours per day=2; Marginally( spending less than 1 hour per day)=3; No involvement=4
4.2.1 Member 2: Name 4.2.2 Gender ( Male=1; Female=2) Male=1; Female=2 4.2.3 Age ( Years) Years 4.2.4 Main occupation Cultivator=1; Agricultural labour=2; Non- agricultural labour=3; House work=4; Salaried=5; Doctor/ lawyer/other professional =6; Carpenter/ electrician etc.=7; Business=8; Other=9 (specify) 4.2.5 Whether involved in dairying: Significantly (spending more than 2 hours per day=1; Partially (spending 1-2 hours per day=2; Marginally( spending less than 1 hour per day)=3; No involvement=4
Note: Please collect information for maximum two family members having highest share in family income
Section-5: Basic Amenities Questions Detail Response 5.1 Ownership Status of Dwelling Unit Own=1; Rented=2; Partly rented=3; Guest with family or relative=4; Temporary Shelter=5; Others=6 (specify) 5.2 Condition of the Dwelling unit Kutcha-1; Semi-Puccca-2; Pucca-3 5.3.1 If the household rears milch animals? Yes=1; No=2
212 213 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
5.3.2 If Yes, is there a separate cattle shed? Yes=1; No=2 If yes, is its floor Pucca (cement/ other) =1 ; just mud 5.3.3 flooring=2 Are all milch animals accommodated Yes=1; Only some=2 5.3.4 there? 5.4.1 Does your house have Electricity (Grid Yes=1; No=2 connection) 5.4.2 Does your house have Electricity (Solar) Yes=1; No=2 Tap (own/ shared with other households)=1; Well (own/ shared with Does your house have access to water: other households)=2; Tubewell (own/ 5.5.1 If yes, shared with other households)=3; Hand pump (own/ shared with other households)=4 If water is not available in house, 5.5.2 In Kilometer/Meter distance to source If water is not available within village, 5.5.3 In Kilometer distance to source 5.6 Toilet inside the premises Yes=1; No=2
Section 6: Household Assets Questions Details Response 6.1 Do you / your household own these items (choose as many asapply)? Items Response 6.1.1 LPG connection Yes=1; No=2 6.1.2 Mobile phone Yes=1; No=2 6.1.3 Refrigerator Yes=1; No=2 6.1.4 Radio Yes=1; No=2 6.1.5 TV Yes=1; No=2 6.1.6 Satellite dish/ Cable connection Yes=1; No=2 6.1.7 Bicycle Yes=1; No=2 6.1.8 Motorcycle Yes=1; No=2 6.1.9 Bank account Yes=1; No=2 6.1.10 Washing machine Yes=1; No=2 6.1.11 Sewing machine Yes=1; No=2 6.1.12 Vehicle (Multiple option possible) Car/Jeep=1; Pickup=2; Tractor=3; Tiller=4; Auto rickshaw=5; Other=6 6.1.13 Fan Yes=1; No=2 6.1.14 Cooler Yes=1; No=2 6.1.15 AC Yes=1; No=2
Section 7: Source/Sources of Household Income (net income after deducting expense) per year (2018-19) 7.1 Sources of household income (all members together) (Multiple options possible) Income in Rupees 7.1.1 Dairy farming 7.1.2 Crops and horticulture 7.1.3 Livestock other than dairy animals 7.1.4 Fishing and aquaculture 7.1.5 Farm labour
212 213 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
7.1.6 Non-farm daily labour 7.1.7 Skilled labour 7.1.8 Salary or Regular Job 7.1.9 Remittances 7.1.10 Pension 7.1.11 Business (including shops) 7.1.12 Handcrafts, weaving, tailoring 7.1.13 Other non-farm enterprise 7.1.14 Grants or subsidy
Section-7.3: Consumption of Milk
S. No. Item Details Before the Middle Presently* Project* of the Project* 7.3.1 How much milk do you Litres consume per day in the household (all purposes) 7.3.2 Do you buy any milk for Occasionally=1; Regularly every household use? day=2; Do not buy=3 7.3.3 If you buy milk, how Litres much do you buy per day 7.3.4 Source of purchase Milk producing households in the village=1, Dairy Cooperative in the village =2, Other dairies in the village=3, Dudhia =4, Others in the village =5, Others outside village =6 7.3.5 Has availability of milk Increased =1, Decreased=2, No improved or declined in change =3, Can’t say =4 the village after NDP-I project started in your village?
*Incase of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section-8: Livestock Profile S.No Details of Milch Animals Responses Possessed by the Household Indigenous Crossbreds Buffaloes M F M F M F 8.1.1 Number of adult cattle: cows, buffalo and bulls (more than 2 year old) 8.1.2 Number of adult in- milk cows/ XXX XXX XXX buffaloes 8.1.3 Number of calves of cattle and buffalo (2 years or less)
214 215 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
Section 9: Information for each Adult Female Milch Animal: (All the questions to be repeated for each selected milch animal) S.No Details Animal1 Animal2 Animal3 9.1.1 Name of the cow/buffalo if any 9.1.2 Type of Animal (Indigenous=1; Cross bred= 2; Buffalo=3) 9.2 Name of the breed 9.3 Age of the cow/buffalo
9.4 How was the cow acquired (purchased=1; bred on farm=2; other=3) 9.5 If purchased, what was the price? (Rupees) 9.6 Number of calvings the cow has had so far (including the present calving, if any) 9.7 If the cow has calved more than once, what is the average lactation period? 9.8 If the cow has calved more than once, what is the average inter- calving period? 9.9 Is the cow now in milk (Yes=1; No=2) 9.10 If the cow is in milk, for how many months? 9.11 What is the expected remaining lactation period from now onwards? 9.12 In the present lactation, Milk yield per day (In litre) 9.13 Has the milch animal suffered any disease/ illness in the last twelve months [Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD)] =1; Haemorrhagic Septicaemia (HS)=2; Black Quarter (BQ) =3; Theileriosis among Crossbreds / (Tick transmitted High fever) =4; Brucellosis (Knee Joint swelling, high fever and abortion) =5; Mastitis=6 Other=7 (Specify) 9.14 Against which diseases the cow/ buffalo was vaccinated in the last twelve months (Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) =1; Haemorrhagic Septicaemia (HS)=2; Black Quarter (BQ) =3; Theileriosis among Crossbreds / (Tick transmitted High fever) =4; Brucellosis (Knee Joint swelling, high fever and abortion) =5; Mastitis=6 Other=7 (Specify) 9.15 Do you know that some diseases can be transmitted from animals to human beings? (Yes=1; No=2) 9.16 Do you know which of the diseases people can get through a diseased animal while working at the animal farm/field or drinking milk/eating meat? (Tuberculosis=1; Brucellosis ( knee joint swelling, high fever and abortion)=2; Any other disease=3 ( please specify); Not aware=4 9.17 Is the milch animal insured? (Yes=1; No=2) 9.18 Who provided insurance?( Govt=1, Private=2)
9.19 Cost of insurance premium (per year) in Rupees
214 215 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Section 10. Details relating to Overall Dairy Activity: Part I S.No Question Before the Middle Presently* Project* of the Project* 10.1 Total number of adult female cows possessed by the household 10.2 Total number of adult female buffaloes possessed by the household 10.3 Total number of female calves of cattle (cow) 10.4 Total number of female buffalo calves 10.5 Total number of adult male cattle (bulls/ bullocks) 10.6 Total number of adult male buffaloes (bulls/ bullocks)
*In case of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section 11. Average Milk Production per Day Before the Middle of Presently* Project* the Project* 11.1 Average milk 11.1.1 In litres Production per 11.2.2 from (number of milkingcows) day in the summer season 11.2.3 from (number of milking buffaloes) 11.2 Average milk 11.2.1 In litres Production per day 11.2.2 from (number of milking cows) in the rainy season 11.2.3 from (number of milking buffaloes) 11.3 Average milk 11.3.1 In litres production per day 11.3.2 from (number of milkingcows) in the winter season 11.3.3 from (number of milking buffaloes)
11.4 Do you plan to increase the amount of Yes=1, No=2 milk you produce? 11.4.1 If yes, how do you plan to increase your Increase the number of dairy cows =1; milk production? (Choose up to 3) Increase the number of dairy buffaloes =2; Improve the grade of animals =3; Produce more feed =4; Buy more feed =5; Spend more on controlling animal disease =6; Follow best practices =7; don’t know =8; Other =9 (specify) 11.5 Do you think there are any significant Yes=1, No=2 constraints to the milk production? 11.5.1 If yes, which are the four main Lack of fodder =1; Low quality of fodder =2; constraints you are facing with. Low quality of concentrate feed =3; High cost of concentrate feed =4; Lack of credit to buy new animals =5; Low quality of milk =6; Low milk yield =7; Low market price of milk =8; high expenditure = 9; Unavailability of labour =10; Infertility of dairy animals=11; Animal disease =12; Lack of good quality semen and genetics =13; Mosquitoes=14; other =15
*In case of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
216 217 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
Section 12. Details relating to Sale of Milk: Part III
12.1 Average Milk Sold per Day (Litres) Before the Middle of the Presently* Project* Project* 12.1.1 Cows (all cow milk) 12.1.1.1 Summer season (March-June) 12.1.1.2 Rainy season (July-October) 12.1.1.3 Winter season (November-February) 12.1.2 Buffaloes (all buffaloe milk) 12.1.2.1 Summer season (March-June) 12.1.2.2 Rainy season (July-October) 12.1.2.3 Winter season (November-February)
*In case of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section 13. Season wise and Channel wise Sale of Milk Questions Details Before Middle of Presently* Project* the Project* 13.1 Do you sell Yes=1, No=2 milk in summer season? 13.2 If Yes, Where do 13.2.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies (DCSs) you sell milk in the 13.2.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI)/ summer Season? NGC (New Generation Cooperatives) 13.2.3 Individual HH 13.2.4 Shops in Village 13.2.5 Dudhiya 13.2.6 Private Dairy 13.3 How much 13.3.1.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies milk do you sell (DCSs): Cow in a day regularly 13.3.1.2 Milk Producer Institutions to these channels (MPI)/NGC (New Generation in summer season Cooperatives): Cow (Litres)(Please ask separately for cow 13.3.1.3 Individual HH: Cow and buffalo) 13.3.1.4 Shops in Village: Cow 13.3.1.5 Dudhiya: Cow 13.3.1.6 Private Dairy: Cow 13.3.2.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies (DCSs): Buffalo 13.3.2.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI)/NGC (New Generation Cooperatives): Buffalo 13.3.2.3 Individual HH: Buffalo 13.3.2.4 Shops in Village: Buffalo 13.3.2.5 Dudhiya: Buffalo 13.2.2.6 Private Dairy: Buffalo
216 217 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
13.4 How much do 13.4.1.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies you get paid for one (DCSs): Cow litre of milk sold? (In 13.4.1.2 Milk Producer Institutions Rs) during summer (MPI)/NGC (New Generation season in these Cooperatives): Cow channels (Please ask separately for cow 13.4.1.3 Individual HH: Cow and buffalo) 13.4.1.4 Shops in Village: Cow 13.4.1.5 Dudhiya: Cow 13.4.1.6 Private Dairy: Cow 13.4.2.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies (DCSs): Buffalo 13.4.2.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI)/NGC (New Generation Cooperatives): Buffalo 13.4.2.3 Individual HH: Buffalo 13.4.2.4 Shops in Village: Buffalo 13.4.2.5 Dudhiya: Buffalo 13.4.2.6 Private Dairy: Buffalo 13.5 Basis for the Flat rate per liter=1; only fat=2, Fat & payment received in SNF/LR=3; Equivalent fat basis=4 and this channel? other =5 13.6 Frequency of Daily=1; Weekly=2; 10 day interval=3; payment for the Fortnightly=4; Monthly=5; As and when milk sold summer needed=6 season 13.7 What are the Better price=1; Regular and timely two most important Payment=2; Price differentials=3; reasons for selling Doorstep milk collection=4; Collection milk to these center nearby=5; Faith in milk testing=6; channel? Personal relation=7; Animal husbandry or veterinary services=8; Subsidized cattle feed=9; Feed/fodder on credit=10; Cash payment=11, due to taken advance=12; Due to taken loan=13; No other channel=14; Others=15
14.1 Do you sell milk Yes=1, No=2 in rainy season? 14.2 If Yes, Where do 14.2.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies (DCSs) you sell milk in the 14.2.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI)/ rainy season? NGC (New Generation Cooperatives) 14.2.3 Individual HH 14.2.4 Shops in Village 14.2.5 Dudhiya 14.2.6 Private Dairy
218 219 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
14.3 How much 14.3.1.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies milk do you sell in (DCSs): Cow a day regularly to 14.3.1.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI)/ these channels in NGC New Generation Cooperatives): Cow rainy season (Litres) (Please ask separately 14.3.1.3 Individual HH: Cow for cow and buffalo) 14.3.1.4 Shops in Village: Cow 14.3.1.5 Dudhiya: Cow 14.3.1.6 Private Dairy: Cow 14.3.2.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies (DCSs): Buffalo 14.3.2.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI)/ NGC (New Generation Cooperatives): Buffalo 14.3.2.3 Individual HH: Buffalo 14.3.2.4 Shops in Village: Buffalo 14.3.2.5 Dudhiya: Buffalo 14.2.2.6 Private Dairy: Buffalo 14.4 How much 14.4.1.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies do you get paid for (DCSs): Cow one litre of milk 14.4.1.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI)/ sold? (In Rs) during NGC (New Generation Cooperatives): rainy season in these Cow channels (Please ask separately for cow 14.4.1.3 Individual HH: Cow and buffalo) 14.4.1.4 Shops in Village: Cow 14.4.1.5 Dudhiya: Cow 14.4.1.6 Private Dairy: Cow 14.4.2.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies (DCSs): Buffalo 14.4.2.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI)/ NGC (New Generation Cooperatives): Buffalo 14.4.2.3 Individual HH: Buffalo 14.4.2.4 Shops in Village: Buffalo 14.4.2.5 Dudhiya: Buffalo 14.4.2.6 Private Dairy: Buffalo 14.5 Basis for the Flat rate per liter=1; only fat=2, Fat & SNF/ payment received in LR=3; Equivalent fat basis=4 and other =5 this channel? 14.6 Frequency of Daily=1; Weekly=2; 10 day interval=3; payment for the milk Fortnightly=4; Monthly=5; As and when sold summer season needed=6
14.7 What are the Better price=1; Regular and timely two most important Payment=2; Price differentials=3; reasons for selling Doorstep milk collection=4; Collection milk to these center nearby=5; Faith in milk testing=6; channel? Personal relation=7; Animal husbandry or veterinary services=8; Subsidized cattle feed=9; Feed/fodder on credit=10; Cash payment=11, due to taken advance=12; Due to taken loan=13; No other channel=14; Others=15 15.1 Do you sell milk Yes=1, No=2 in winter season?
218 219 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
15.2 If Yes, Where do 15.2.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies (DCSs) you sell milk in the winter season? 15.2.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI)/ NGC (New Generation Cooperatives) 15.2.3 Individual HH
15.2.4 Shops in Village
15.2.5 Dudhiya
15.2.6 Private Dairy
15.3 How much milk 15.3.1.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies do you sell in a day (DCSs): Cow regularly to these 15.3.1.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI)/ channels in winter NGC (New Generation Cooperatives): season (Litres) Cow (Please ask separately for cow and buffalo) 15.3.1.3 Individual HH: Cow 15.3.1.4 Shops in Village: Cow 15.3.1.5 Dudhiya: Cow 15.3.1.6 Private Dairy: Cow 15.3.2.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies (DCSs): Buffalo 15.3.2.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI/ NGC (New Generation Cooperatives): Buffalo 15.3.2.3 Individual HH: Buffalo 15.3.2.4 Shops in Village: Buffalo 15.3.2.5 Dudhiya: Buffalo 15.2.2.6 Private Dairy: Buffalo 15.4 How much do 15.4.1.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies you get paid for one (DCSs): Cow litre of milk sold? (In 15.4.1.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI)/ Rs) during winter NGC (New Generation Cooperatives): season in these Cow channels (Please ask separately for cow 15.4.1.3 Individual HH: Cow and buffalo) 15.4.1.4 Shops in Village: Cow 15.4.1.5 Dudhiya: Cow 15.4.1.6 Private Dairy: Cow 15.4.2.1 Dairy Cooperative Societies (DCSs): Buffalo 15.4.2.2 Milk Producer Institutions (MPI/ NGC: Buffalo 15.4.2.3 Individual HH: Buffalo 15.4.2.4 Shops in Village: Buffalo 15.4.2.5 Dudhiya: Buffalo 15.4.2.6 Private Dairy: Buffalo 15.5 Basis for the Flat rate per liter=1; only fat=2, Fat &SNF/ payment received in LR=3; Equivalent fat basis=4 and other =5 this channel? 15.6 Frequency of Daily=1; Weekly=2; 10 day interval=3; payment for the milk Fortnightly=4; Monthly=5; as and when sold summer season needed=6
220 221 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
15.7 What are the Better price=1; Regular and timely two most important Payment=2; Price differentials=3; reasons for selling Doorstep milk collection=4; Collection milk to these center nearby=5; Faith in milk testing=6; channel? Personal relation=7; Animal husbandry or veterinary services=8; Subsidized cattle feed=9; Feed/fodder on credit=10; Cash payment=11, due to taken advance=12; Due to taken loan=13; No other channel=14; Others=15 16.1 Disposal of Milk Produced after sale of liquid milk 16.1.1 Out of the In litres total milk produced or purchased how much milk do you retain for household consumption? 16.1.2 How much In litres milk is being used for value addition in home
*In case of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section 17: Expenditure (Out of pocket expenditure) in Rupees per month on per milch animal in Rupees
Before Middle of Presently* Project* the Project* Total Expenditure in Rupees Per month on per Milch 17.1 animal 17.1.1 Total Expenditure on Feed and Fodder 17.1.1.1 Green fodder (based on present market price) 17.1.1.1.1 feed grown on own field (valued based on present market price) 17.1.1.1.2 Purchased 17.1.1.2. Dry Fodder (based on present market price) 17.1.1.2.1 feed grown on own field (valued based on present market price) 17.1.1.2.2 Purchased 17.1.1.3. Concentrate ( Oilseeds cake, grains etc)(based on present market price) 17.1.1.3.1 feed grown on own field (valued based on present market price) 17.1.1.3.2 Purchased 17.1.2 Total Expenditure on Labour 17.1.2.1 Labour 17.1.2.1.1 Male (Hired) 17.1.2.1.2 Male (0wn) (valued at market rate) 17.1.2.1.3 Female (Hired) 117.1.2.1.4 Female (0wn) (valued at market rate) 17.1.3 Total Expenditure Veterinary services/ medicines 17.1.4 Expenditure on Mineral Mixture 17.1.5 Other Expenses 17.2 If you purchased then please indicate the quantity per month
220 221 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
17.2.1 If purchased, please indicate amount purchased per month 17.2.1.1 in summer season (kg) Concentrate 17.2.1.2 Forage/Fodder (qtl) feed 17.2.1.3 Feed supplements 17.2.1.4 Mineral Mixture
17.2.2 If purchased, please indicate amount purchased per month 17.2.2.1 in rainy season (kg)/ Concentrate 17.2.2.2 Forage/Fodder (qtl) feed 17.2.2.3 Feed supplements 17.2.2.4 Mineral Mixture
17.2.3 If purchased, please indicate amount purchased per month 17.2.3.1 in winter season (kg) Concentrate 17.2.3.2 Forage/Fodder (qtl) feed 17.2.3.3 Feed supplements 17.2.4.4 Mineral Mixture
*In case of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section 18: Details relating to Animal Breeding S.No Questions Details Response 18.1 Artificial Insemination 18.1.1 If your milch animals are bred through AI, Year when was the first time you obtained this service? 18.1.2 Is AI now adopted for different types of milch Indigenous cows= 1; Crossbred animals? (multiple responses possible) cows=2; Buffaloes=3; None=4
18.1.3 In the present calving, how was the breeding Natural =1, AI =2, Not aware=3 done? 18.1.4 If AI was not used, specify reason Not required=1; AI facility is not available=2; High cost of AI=3 18.1.5 If the cow/ buffaloe has had previous calvings, Natural =1, AI =2, Not aware=3 please specify the method of breeding 18.1.6 If AI was not used, specify reason Not required=1; AI facility is not available=2; High cost of AI=3
Before the Middle of the Presently* Project* Project* 18.1.9 Cost of AI service (Rupees) (Government ) 18.1.10 Cost of AI service (Rupees) (Private )
*In case of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
222 223 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
18.1.10 If your milch animals are bred through AI, Milk coop worker = 1; Mobile technicians which service provider provided AI services – MAITS = 2; NGO/Pvt. Doctor, AI Service to your animals most of the time? Provider = 3; Govt. Vet doctor or livestock inspector = 4; Others = 5 18.1.11 What are the reasons for availing AI Door Step service=1; Higher chances of services for animals of this service provider conception=2;Better progeny=3; Low cost most of the time (Multiple response of service=4; Using this method for long possible) time=5; Bull not available in the village=6; Confidence in the service provider=7; No other option=8; Others=9 18.1.12 Are you satisfied with the service provider Yes=1, No=2
18.2 Natural Service 18.2.1 Is NS now adopted for different types Indigenous cows= 1; Crossbred cows=2; of milch animals? (multiple responses Buffaloes=3; None=4 possible) 18.2.2 If animal has received NS, which service Milk Cooperative=1; Traditional provider provided NS services to your Breeder=2; Private Bull Facility=3; animals most of the time? Government Bull facility=4, Others=5 18.2.3 What are the reasons for availing NS Door Step service=1; Higher chances of services for animals of this service provider conception=2;Better progeny=3; Low most of the time ( Multiple response cost of service=4; Traditionally using this possible) method =5; Bull available in the village=6; No other option=7; Not aware of AI= 8; Others=9 18.2.4 Are you satisfied with the service provider Yes=1, No=2
Section 19. Details relating to Feeding Practices S.No Questions Details Indigenous Crossbred Buffalo cow Cow 19.1 If the cow/ buffalo fed with Only when in milk=1; Both green fodder then when? when in milk or dry=2 19.2 If the cow/ buffalo fed with dry Only when in milk=1; Only fodder then when? when the animal is dry=2; Both when in milk or dry=3 19.3 If the cow/ buffalo fed with Only when in milk=1; Both concentrate (oil cake, grains when in milk or dry=2) etc.) then when? 19.4.1 Which of these feeding Group feeding=1; Feeding practices are adopted for of each animal separately=2; feeding green and dry fodder Individual feeding for to animals before the project? in-milk and pregnant animals=3 19.4.2 What was the practice Group feeding=1; Feeding presently? of each animal separately=2; Individual feeding for in-milk and pregnant animals=3 19.5.1 Which of these feeding Group feeding=1; practices are adopted for Feeding of each animal feeding concentrates (cake/ separately=2; Individual grains/other feed) to animals feeding for in-milk and before the project? pregnant animals=3 19.5.2 What was the practice Group feeding=1; presently? Feeding of each animal separately=2; Individual feeding for in-milk and pregnant animals=3
222 223 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
19.6 Is there a common grazing land in the Yes=1, No=2 village? 19.7 Is the cow/ buffalo sent for grazing in Yes=1, No=2 common land? 19.8 If no, what are the reasons for not No need=1, Far off=2; My community/ sending your animals for grazing to the HH is not allowed=3; Available grazing common grazing land in the village? area is not sufficient=4, Quality of available grass is not good=5; Grazing area reduced from past=6; Other=7
*Incase of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section 20. Details relating to Availability of Feed and Fodder Questions Detail Before Middle of the Presently* the Project* Project* 20.1 Do you experience a Yes=1, No=2 shortage of any feed or fodder? 20.1.1 If yes, which feed? Green fodder=1, (multiple responses possible) Dry fodder=2, Concentrates (grains/ cake)=3 20.1.2 If yes, which season 20.1.2.1 Summer / month do you experience season: Green the most severeshortage and fodder=1, Dry which feed (multiple responses Fodder=2, possible) Concentrates=3; 20.1.2.2 Rainy Season: Green fodder=4, Dry fodder-5, Concentrates=6 20.1.2.3 Winter Season: Green fodder=4, Dry fodder-5, Concentrates=6 20.2.1 How do you obtain feed Open grazing=1; when experiencing a shortage of Purchased from feed, During summer Season? fodder shop=2; Other (specify)=3 20.2.2. How do you obtain feed Open grazing=1; when experiencing a shortage of Purchased from feed, During rainy Season? fodder shop=2; Other (specify)=3 20.2.3. How do you obtain feed Open grazing=1; when experiencing a shortage of Purchased from feed, During Winter Season? fodder shop=2; Other (specify)=3 20.3.1 Doyoumakeconserved/ Yes=1, No=2 hay/Silage? 20.3.2 If yes, how much hay/ Quantity Silage do you make? 20.4 Have you experienced Increased=1, remain same=2; differences in feed availability Decreased=3 over the project period?
*In case of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
224 225 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
Section 21: Details relating to Fodder Cultivation
Questions Details Before the Middle of Presently project the project 21.1 Do you grow fodder? Yes=1; No=2
21.2 From which sources do you DCSs/MPI=1; Private seed get/buy fodder seeds? (Multiple shops=2; Fellow farmers=3; options possible) Seed grown at own farm=4; Any other=4 21.3 Are you aware of certified Yes=1, No=2 seeds/Hybrid seeds for fodder? 21.4 What types of seeds do you Certified Seeds=1; Hybrid use for growing fodder? Seeds=2; Local seeds=3; (Multiple options possible) Truthfully labeled seed=4 21.5 Do you use any chemical Chemical Fertilizer=1; Organic fertilizers or organic manure for Manure=2; Both=3 growing fodder crops? 21.6 Do you use mechanical Yes=1, No=2 methods such as use of mower for harvesting fodder crops in the field 21.7 Which of the fodder storage Silage making=1; Straw practice do you adopts enrichment=2; Hay making=3 21.8 For what purpose do you Feeding own animals=1; Fodder grow fodder? for sale=2; Seed for own use=3; Seed for sale=4 21.9 If you sell fodder seeds then DCS/MPI=1; Private seed whom do you sell? shops=2; Fellow farmers=3; Other =4
*In case of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section 22. Details relating to Milking Practices and Milk Production Questions Detail Before the Presently project 22.1 Doy our clean hands before milking Clean hands=1, Wear gloves =2, or wear gloves? Neither=3 22.2 Do you use milking machines? Yes=1, No=2 22.3 If yes, when did you start the practice? Year 22.4 Do you clean milk ingutensils before Yes=1, No=2 milking?
Section 23: Details relating to Dung Management Question Detail Before the Middle of Presently* project* the Project* 23.1 How do you store dung? Manure/compost pit=1; Open (Multiple options possible) storage=2; Biogas pit=3; Slurry pit=4; other=5 23.2 For what purpose do you Manure for agricultural use dung? crop=1; Manure for fodder crop=2; Bio-gas plant=3;Dung cake for fuel for household=4; Other=5
*In case of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
224 225 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Section 24. Details relating to Use of Water in Dairying
Questions Detail Before the Middle of Presently* project* the Project* 24.1 What are the main Piped water supply=1; Bore sources of drinking water for well=2; Hand pump=3; bovine animals Well=4; Pond/river=5; Canal=6; Other=7
24.2 Total time taken to collect Please respond in Hour and water s from major source Minutes
24.3 How frequently do you Daily=1, Weekly=2, wash your Milch animals? Fortnightly=3, Not fixed=4
24.5 How frequently do you Daily=1, Weekly=2, wash your Non-Milch animals Fortnightly=3, Not fixed=4
24.6 How frequently do you Daily=1, Weekly=2, wash cattle shed? Fortnightly=3, Not fixed=4
24.7 What are the sources Piped water supply=1, Bore of water for washing your well=2, Hand pump=3, animals? Well=4, Pond/river=5, Canal=6, Other=7 24.8 What type of drainage do Pucca-Cemented=1, Brick you have in the animal shed? lined=2, Kuchha=3, No Drainage=4, Other=5
24.9 Where do you drain the Drainage leading to pit=1, water used for washing animal Drainage leading to bio-gas and cleaning animal shed? plant=2, Drainage leading to open area=3, Drainage leading to agricultural field=4, Drainage leading to sewerage=5, Fodder dump=6, Other=7
*In case of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section 25: Details relating to Role of Women in Dairying Activities
Question Details Before the Middle of Presently* project* the Project* 25.1 What is the total 25.1.1 Feeding of animals number of hours in a 25.1.2 Milking of animals day spent on various dairy activities by a 25.1.3 Washing of animals women in your family? 25.1.4 Selling of milk 25.1.5 Fodder collection 25.1.6 Chaffing of fodder 25.1.7 Grazing of animals 25.1.7 Cleaning of shed 25.1.8 Dung collection 25.1.9 Other
226 227 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
25.2 Who does most 25.2.1 Feeding of animals of these activities most 25.2.2 Milking of animals of the time? (Male member=1; female 25.2.3 Washing of animals member=2; hired=3) 25.2.4 Selling of milk 25.2.5 Fodder collection 25.2.6 Chaffing of fodder 25.2.7 Open grazing of animals 25.2.7 Cleaning of shed 25.2.8 Dung collection 25.2.9 Other 25.3 How has the Increased=1, No change=2, overall workload of Decreased=3 women (including both domestic and income generating work) changed ) 25.4 How has the 22.4.1 Decision making within the position of women household changed? (Improved 25.4.2 Mobility outside the home significantly=1; Improved slightly=2; No 25.4.3 Ownership of assets change=3; Worsened=4) 25.4.4 Status outside the home 25.5 How has the Increased Significantly=1,Increased income of women from slightly=2, No change=3, Decreased=4 dairy activity changed?
*In case of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section26. Details relating to Participation in Dairying, Training and Demonstration
Questions Detail Before the Middle of Presently* Project* the Project* 26.1 If you receive any training NDDB=1; Government=2 on dairy related topics, who Milk Union=3; End provided the training? Implementing Agencies (EIA)=4; Other=4 26.1.1 If yes, what were the Breed Improvement=1; topics of training? Feeding=2; Fodder cultivation=3; Fodder/ fodder seed production or processing=4; Silage making=5; Vaccination and First Aid=6; General Animal Husbandry Practices=7; Others=8 26.1.2 What were the duration In days of trainings? 26.1.3 Were the trainings Yes=1, No=2 useful? 26.1.4 Does you need training Yes=1, No=2 on any dairying related topics?
226 227 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
26.1.5 If Yes, please specify the Breed Improvement=1; area Feeding=2; Fodder cultivation=3; Fodder/ fodder seed production or processing=4; Silage making=5; Vaccination and First Aid=6; General Animal Husbandry Practices=7; Others=8 26.2 If you receive any NDDB=1; Government=2 demonstration on dairy Milk Union=3; End related topics, who provided Implementing Agencies the demonstration? (EIA)=4; Other=4 26.2.1 If yes, what were the Use of mower for fodder topics of demonstration? harvesting=1; Fodder/fodder seed production and storage=2; Silage preparation=3; Benefit of RBP-use of balanced feed ingredients=4; Bio-gas/Gobar- gas plant=5; Other=6 26.2.2 Were the demonstration Yes=1, No=2 useful? 26.2.3 Does you need Yes=1, No=2 demonstration on any dairying related topics? 26.2.4 If Yes, please specify the Use of mower for fodder area harvesting=1; Fodder/fodder seed production and storage=2; Silage preparation=3; Benefit of RBP-use of balanced feed ingredients=4; Bio-gas/Gobar- gas plant=5; Other=6
*Incase of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section 27. Details relating to how has total household income changed Question Detail Response 27.1. How has total household income Big increase=1, Small increase=2, No changed after adoption of NDP-I change=3, Small decrease=4, Large programme? decrease=5 27.2 If income has increased, what is the Improved income from dairy farming=1, main reason for this? Improved income from milk-related products=2, Increased wages and salaries=3, Other=4 27.3 If income has decreased, what is the Death of cattle=1, Low price of dairy main reason for this? products =2; High price of Dairy-related inputs=3, Diseases =4, Lack of household labour force=5 , Other =6
*Incase of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
228 229 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
Section 28. Details relating to Governance and Accountability Action Plan Questions Detail Before the Middle Presently* Project* of the Project* 28.1 Are you a member of any If Yes, from which Year? committee of the DCS in the village? 28.2 Do you attend any meetings If Yes, from which Year? of the DCS in the village? 28.3 Do you know about any Yes=1; No=2 document covering all the roles (Please give response period and responsibility of DCS level wise) officials? 28.4 Whether any complaint Yes=1; No=2 register is available with DCS in (Please give response period your village? wise) 28.5 Whether you or someone Yes=1; No=2 known to you have ever lodged (Please give response period any complaint for redressal wise) 28.6 If Yes, what is the average (Minutes/hour/days/month) time taken to dispose of (Please give response period complaints or redressal wise) of grievances as per your experience?
*Incase of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section 29: Details relating to Sources of Information
Question Detail Before the Middle of Presently* Project* the Project* 29.1 From which source Radio =1; TV =2; Newspaper =3; do you get information Banners/Hoardings=4; DCS/ MPI relating to dairying? =5; Private Doctor who visits for the (Multiple options treatment=6; Internet/ Facebook=7; possible) Friends/ Relatives/ Fellow Producers=8; Others =9; No information received=10
*Incase of control villages please mention the period as: in 2012-13, in 2015-16 and in 2018-19
Section 30. Details relating to Ration Balancing Programme (Exclusive): Part Questions Detail Response 30.1 Do you know about Ration If yes, from which year Balancing Programme-RBP? 30.2 Have you ever been approached If yes, from which year by someone to feed your animals as per RBP? 30.4 Was/ is any of your animals covered Yes=1; No=2 under RBP? 30.5 If yes, Type of animal (multiple Indigenous Cow=1; Cross Bred Cow=2; options) Buffalo=3 30.6 In which year you have registered 30.6.1 Indigenous Cow your animal? 30.6.2 Cross Bred Cow 30.6.3 Buffalo 30.7 Was the animal ear-tagged at the Yes=1; No=2 time of registration?
228 229 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Before RBP Advisory After RBP Advisory 30.8 What was the yield? (Litres/day) per animal 30.8.1 Indigenous Cow 30.8.2 Cross bred Cow 30.8.3. Buffalo 30.9 What was the feeding cost? (Rs/ day) 30.10 What was the FAT ? (Per cent) 30.11 Are you still feeding the animal as per RBP advice? Yes=1; No=2 30.12 If No, when did you stop following RBP advice? Month and Year 30.13 f Yes, what are the benefits of RBP? Increase in milk yield =1; Reduction in feeding cost =2; Improvement in reproduction efficiency =3; Improvement in quality of milk =4; Improvement in overall health =6; improvement in climatic management=7 30.14 By using RBP, have you found any improvement? Reduced Inter calving period =1; Reduced Age at first calving =2; Improvement in Overall health=3 30.15 How frequently does/did Local Resource Person More than once in a (LRP) visit you? month=1; Monthly=2; Once in two months =3; No visit =4 30.16 Are the feed / mineral mixture recommended by Yes=1: No=2 LRP is easily available in your area? 30.17 Whether LRP provides 0ther information on Importance of Drinking water =1; Colostrum feeding=2; Chaffing of fodder=3; Regular de- worming =4; Vaccination =5; Medicine spraying for controlling tick infestation =6; other =7 30.19 Are you satisfied with the services of the LRP? Yes=1: No=2 30.20 In past have you ever given feed to your animals as Yes fed but have per the recommendations of RBP? discontinued=1, Never followed=2 30.21 What are the reasons for not adopting / Traditional knowledge discontinuing RBP – balance ration? =1; Visible impact is marginal =2; Increase in milk production is not substantial =3; Difficulty in understanding the changes in feed items =4; feed items suggested not easily available =5; Cost of feeding RBP unaffordable =6; Improvement in physical condition is not noticeable =7; Apprehension of changes in existing feeding practices due to traditional beliefs =8
Section 31: Details relating to Village Based Milk Procurement System
(Exclusive) 230 231 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India Concluding Reflections
Questions Detail Before the Middle of Presently project the Project 31.1 Type of VBMPS component New DCS=1; implemented (under NDP-I ) in the Strengthening of village DCS=2 31.2 Year of Implementation Year Response 31.3 Where were you selling milk before Individual HH/ Shops in opening of DCS/MPI? village=1; Dudhia=2; Private dairies=3; Outside village=4; Not selling milk/milk products=5; was not rearing animals=6; others=7 31.4 What price of milk did you get Rs per litre before opening of DCS/ MPI? 31.5 What price of milk did you get after Rs per litre opening of DCS/ MPI? 31.6 Have you been benefitted in any of Better price of milk=1; No these manners? wastage of milk=2; Advantage of getting longer time for pouring milk= 3; Availability of better AI service=4; Subsidized Cattle Feed=5; Time saved in marketing milk=6; Any Other=7 31.7 Have you ever faced any Yes=1; No=2 discrimination at the milk collection center? 31.8 Are you satisfied with? (Please tick if Behavior of the appointed person satisfied) multiple options possible) at milk collection center=1; Milk Testing=2; Milk Price received=3; other subsidised or free service=4; any other =5 31.9 Did you notice increase in animals Yes=1; No=2; Can’t say=3 in your village due to starting of new DCS or transparency in payment system or flexibility in milk pouring timings? 31.10 Do you plan to increase animals in Yes=1; No=2; Not sure=3 your house due to starting of new DCS or transparency in payment system or flexibility in milk pouring timings? 31.11When selling your milk to DCSs/ Yes=1; No=2 MPIs, is the milk you sell checked for fat using a lactometer or similar apparatus? 31.12Are you aware of the FAT & SNF Yes=1; No=2 testing process 31.13Has the cost of collecting and Increased=1; Decreased=2; No transporting milk per liter increased Change=3 or decreased now compared to before project? 31.14What is most important to help Higher volumes of milk=1; you increase your income from milk Better quality milk=2; More collection? collection points=3; Greater (Multiple selection possible) access to knowledge about safe milk handling practices and hygiene=4;’ Digital fat testing meter=5; Vehicle for milk transport=7; Handling cans=8; Greater access to credit=9; Opportunities for other income generating activities (feed selling, etc.)=10; Longer term contracts=11; Better relationships with DCSs/MPIs=12 and Other=13
230 231 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
Selected References
1. FAO(2018). “World Livestock: Transforming the Livestock Sector through the Sustainable Development Goals”. Rome.Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. 2. IDF (2011). International Dairy Federation: “FIL-IDF-Climate Changes-Optimizing Animal Feeding”,Available at: http://www.dairy-sustainability-initiative.org/Public/ListPage. php?ID=143&parentID=109 3. Kannan, A. and M.R. Garg (2009).“Effect of Ration Balancing on Methane Emission Reduction in Lactating Animals under Field Conditions”,Indian Journal of Dairy Science, 62(4). 4. Kannan A. et al. (2011).“Effect of Ration Balancing on Milk production, Microbial Protein Synthesis and Methane Emission in Crossbred Cows under Field Conditions in Chittoor District of Andhra Pradesh”,Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition, 28(2). 5. Kannan, A., Mayank Garg and Pankaj Kumar Singh (“2010).“Effect of Ration Balancing on Methane Emission and Milk Production in Lactating Animals under Field Conditions in RaeBareli District of Uttar Pradesh”,Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition, 27(2). 6. Kundu, S.S. et al. (2015).“Evaluation of the Impact of Ration Balancing on Methane Emission in Dairy Animals”, Dairy Cattle Nutrition Division, NDRI (Karnal). 7. Lattanzio, Richard K., et al. (2016). “Methane: An Introduction to Emissions Sources and Reduction Strategies”, Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov. 8. Planning Department (2018).“Socio-economic Survey”, Government of Andhra Pradesh. 9. Subhash, et al. (2016).“Evaluation of the Impact of Ration Balancing on Methane Emissions in Dairy Animals”, Animal Nutrition Research Station, Anand Agricultural University, Anand, Gujarat. 10. Sustainable Development Goals Report (2019). Progress and information. UN 11. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/progress-report/
232 233 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I: The National Dairy Plan of India
232 233 Analysing Socio-Economic Impact of the NDP-I