Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
This presentation explores the state of agriculture in tribal areas of chhattisgarh, india, focusing on the transition from traditional shifting cultivation to modern permanent cultivation. It examines the economic viability of agriculture for tribal communities, considering factors like land ownership, irrigation, input use, and financial inclusion. The presentation highlights the challenges faced by tribal farmers, including low productivity, limited access to resources, and reliance on traditional practices. It concludes by emphasizing the need for substantial public investment to ensure the sustainability of agriculture in these areas.
Typology: Slides
1 / 21
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Professor (Retd’) Centre for Economic and Social Studies (CESS) Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA
Introduction The aim of the study is to understand tribal agriculture in the Chhattisgarh state with special emphasis on tribal agriculture in fully scheduled and partly scheduled areas. The state of agriculture is in the state of transition from traditional shifting cultivation to modern permanent cultivation in Chhattisgarh and one must know what its effects on them. Chhattisgarh has a total of 26 million population, which comes 2.1 percent of India’s population. Sex ratio is relatively favorable to women. Out of total population, 50. percent are males and 49.76 percent are females. Female literacy rate is very low compared to male literacy rate in the state. Poverty is very high in Chhattisgarh, especially poverty is very high among tribal people.
Contd…, Chhattisgarh state came into existence on 1st November 2000 by partitioning 16 Chhattisgarhi- speaking south-eastern districts of Madhya Pradesh, and is the 10th largest state in India. It is a major source of electricity and steel in the country, for instance, Chhattisgarh accounts for 15 percent of the total steel produced in the country. Chhattisgarh is known for paddy cultivation and called “rice bowl” of India. As far as land cover of the state is concerned, around 45 per cent of the total land area is under forest cover and a vast majority of tribal people centered on here. Fertile land and good climatic conditions helped the state to be a leading producer of paddy, jowar, groundnut, gram, oilseeds, etc. Land of Chhattisgarh contains huge and good quality minerals and mineral reserves found in Chhattisgarh attract entrepreneurs to establish industries in the State. Approximately 27 per cent revenue of Chhattisgarh is received in the form of mineral revenue from exploitation of minerals. There is abundance of coal, bauxite, lime stone and dolomite in the State. The Chhattisgarh state is the sole producer of tin ore of strategic importance in the country.
Agro-climatic Zones in the Chhattisgarh State
Methodology and Sample Frame The study has used both primary and secondary data. The primary data has been generated using focus group discussions and household surveys by taking samples from major tribal groups who are practicing agriculture. Each tribal group is considered as a homogenous group while taking the samples. Distinctions were made between traditional subsistence-based farmers and modern settled agriculture to capture the difference in agriculture practices. Three predominantly tribal districts viz., Bastar (FSA-Fully Scheduled Area), Sarguja (FSA) and Gariaband (PSA-Partially Scheduled Area) were choosen and from these three districts, 21 agricultural settlements were choosen. A total 400 sample tribal farmer households were randomly picked up for an intensive household survey. These agriculture settlements were listed using census method to draw at least 10 percent of the sample for a detailed household survey.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Agriculture in Chhattisgarh Rainfed agriculture is the dominant production system and about 74% of the Chhattisgarh plains, 97% of the Bastar plateau and 95% of the Northern Hills are cultivated under rainfed conditions. The main sources of irrigation are canals, fed by major, medium, and minor irrigation projects, which are also rain dependent. The average productivity is low, especially in tribal areas in the state. The productivity of paddy of ST households in the state is 3228 KGs per hectare which is lower than the productivity of paddy for ‘other’ households and all households which are 3954 KGs per Hectare and 3827 KGs per Hectare. The productivity of Gram of ST households (570 KGs per Hectare) is quite lower than that of households belong to other categories i.e. 649 KGs per Hectare, and all households in the state i.e. 642 KGs per Hectare.
Land Holding in the Chhattisgarh State (Area in 000’ ha and Number in000’) S.N. Operational Holdings No. % Area % 1 Marginal (0.5 to 1.0 ha.) 1919 55.45 841 16. 2 Small (1.0 to 2.0 ha.) 760 21.96 1077 20. 3 Semi Medium (2.0 to 4.0) 517 14.94 1396 26. 4 Medium (4.0 to 10.0) 231 6.67 1327 25. 5 Large (Over to Hundred) 34 0.98 569 10. Total 3461 100.00^5210 100.
Land Use Pattern of Chhattisgarh State (area in 000’ha.) Source: Chhattisgarh at a glance 2011 and Sharma, Rathi, Chouhan and Niranjan (2014) (^) Table above shows land use has been changing over a period. It can also be seen that net sown area and gross cropped area increased between 2000-01 and 2010-11 in the state. (^) As usual, forest area is almost same as previous estimate.
(^) Table below shows there are 160 tribal farmers in Bastar, of which 77 are MF, 68 are SF, 9 and MDF and 6 are LF respectively while these were 32, 37, 4 and 7 in Gariabanda and 68, 73, 13 and 6 in Sarguja. Out of 400 samples, 355 tribal farmers are belong to MF and SF and the rest of them are belong to MDF and LF. **Distribution of households having land category Note: MF: Marginal farmer (<2.5 acres), SF: Small farmer (2.5-5 acres), MDF: Medium farmers (5.1-10 acres), LF: Large farmer (Above 10 acres) *FSA: Fully scheduled area, PSA: Partly scheduled area Source: Field survey
Development of Irrigation Interestingly, a vast majority of tribal farmers depend on rainfall and a very few farmers are depending on dug well, bore well, etc. It means that development of irrigation is still poor in the study areas, indicating that development of irrigation is not a considerable factor. So, agriculture of tribal farmers is still in traditional mode but it is changing slowly. Distribution of households used following inputs in agriculture District Name Types of Farmers Bullock Tractor Own seed Fertilizer Human labour Pest Total No % no % No % No % no % No % no Bastar (FSA)
Gariabanda (PSA)
Sarguja (FSA)
Note*FSA: Fully scheduled area, PSA: Partly scheduled area Source: Field survey
A vast majority of tribal farmers, with sole exception of MDF and SF in Bastar, using own seeds for agriculture. It means that they are not using HYVs extensively. Is it because of poor services of agricultural officers and of course, poverty of tribal farmers are one main causes of poor accessibility of HYVs. HYVs are most important factor of agriculture intensification. It is revealed that, a major chunk of the tribal farmers in Chhattisgarh uses seeds collected from own farms (with less productivity) in agriculture. They are using very less amount of purchased seed (with higher productivity). Institutional Changes in Agriculture (^) Almost all MF, SF, MDF and LF are doing self-cultivation. (^) Leased in and leased out are not major phenomena among sample farmers in Chhattisgarh. HYVs Seeds
District name Types of farmers Self – Cultivation Leased out in Fixed rent Leased in- fixed rent Total No % No % No % no % Bastar (FSA) MF 76 98.7 0 0.0 1 1.3 77 100. SF 68 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 68 100. MDF 9 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 9 100. LF 6 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 6 100. Total 159 99.4 0 0.0 1 .6 160 100. Sarguja (FSA) MF 68 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 68 100. SF 73 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 73 100. MDF 13 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 13 100. LF 6 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 6 100. Total 160 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 160 100. Gariabanda (PSA) MF 32 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 32 100. SF 36 97.3 1 2.7 0 0.0 37 100. MDF 4 100.0 0 .0 0 0.0 4 100. LF 7 100.0 0 .0 0 0.0 7 100. Total 79 98.8 1 1.2 0 0.0 80 100. Distribution of households reported type of tenure practicing in sample area of Chhattisgarh state Note*FSA: Fully scheduled area, PSA: Partly scheduled area
District name Types of farmers Rupees Less than 15000 15000-25000 25001-35000 Above 35000 Total no % No % no % no % No % Bastar (FSA)
Total 27 16.9 72 45.0 7 4.4 54 33.8 160 100. Gariabanda (PSA)
Total 22 27.5 12 15.0 31 38.8 15 18.8 80 100. Sarguja (FSA)
Total 6 3.8 80 50.0 26 16.2 48 30.0 160 100. Distribution of households’ income from agriculture Note*FSA: Fully scheduled area, PSA: Partly scheduled area Source: Field survey
(^) A vast majority of farmers belong to Bhatra, Gond, Kanwar, Muriya and Nagasia tribal communities in the study area, of which, majority of them are marginal and small farmers, especially in the Bastar district which is backward interms of natural and physical endowments. (^) A vast majority of tribal farmers use bullocks, own seeds, human labour and fertilizers and pesticides to some extent. Fertilizers and pesticide are part of technology based agriculture intensification. At the same time they use traditional inputs as well. It may be because of lack of money to invest in agriculture. The use of HYVs and tractor are low. (^) Tribal farmers approach private money lenders like landlords for seeking loans. However, many have started approaching RRBs, Cooperative banks, commercial banks, and SHGs for agri-culture loans or credits in the study area. Landlords are main source of credits in fully scheduled areas like Bastar and Sarguja. (^) A vast majority of tribal farmers do not have bank accounts whether it is individual or joint or post office account. Hence, it can be inferred that financial inclusion is very poor. (^) Out of 355 marginal and small farmers, about 100 farmers received more than Rs.35000 from agriculture per year. There are 12 out of 29 medium farmers received agriculture income above Rs.35000. Hence, one could say that agriculture is not viable for majority. (^) To Sum-up the agriculture in tribal areas of Chhattisgarh state remains a subsistence and many radical changes are happening. Unless substantial public investment is made the agriculture in tribal areas seen from the above characteristics can not be made viable and sustainable. (^) It shows that mean cost of production and loans received by tribal farmers are much higher than that of income received by tribal farmers. So, one can conclude that agriculture is not viable to tribal farmers. Conclusions:
