IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/inijae/206339.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maize Composites Enhance Economic Returns from Dry Land Farming: Evidences from Uplands of Kashmir Valley

Author

Listed:
  • Wani, M.H.
  • Baba, S.H.
  • Ramasundaram, P.
  • Yousuf, Shoaib
  • Yousuf, Shahid

Abstract

The present study is conducted in dry uplands of Kashmir region to assess the potential of three location-specific maize composites, C6, KG1 and C8 respectively in the Central, South and North regions of Kashmir valley for enhancing the economic returns and sustenance of livelihood of rural masses under the dry land conditions. The study forms part of NAIP project, “Visioning Policy Analysis and Gender (VPAGe)” undertaken at SKUAST-K, Shalimar during 2009-11 and is based on the cross sectional survey data collected from 240 farm households cultivating maize under dry land conditions in the upper belts of Kashmir valley. The adoption of dry land maize composites and its determinants were examined by employing regression function. Economic surplus model and economic feasibility tests were employed to assess the economic gains from research and extension investment involved in the development of maize composites under the study. The bi-variate Probit model was fitted to identify the factors responsible for probability of adoption of maize composites. The study revealed significant yield gains of 32.20, 27.10 and 27.80 q/ha respectively in C6, KG1 and C8 maize composites which increased the marketable surplus significantly. The labour productivity was the highest in C6 followed by C8 and KG1. The net change in partial budget to the tune ` 20,916 per hectare indicated capability of commercial orientation of maize composites and also high B-C ratio of maize composites held the view that maize seed technology could prove a boon for sustenance of farm families of dry lands maize growers in Kashmir valley. The Probit model estimates revealed that the average size of land fragments, educational level, experience of maize growing and yield risk in local varieties were positively significant, while negative significance of average size of land holding suggested that non-fragmentation could help in the adoption of composite maize seed technology. The study concludes that cultivation of maize composites has the potential to secure and sustain livelihood of stake holders under dry land conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Wani, M.H. & Baba, S.H. & Ramasundaram, P. & Yousuf, Shoaib & Yousuf, Shahid, 2013. "Maize Composites Enhance Economic Returns from Dry Land Farming: Evidences from Uplands of Kashmir Valley," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 68(3), pages 1-15.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:inijae:206339
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.206339
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/206339/files/Wani68_3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.206339?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kumar, Shubh K., 1994. "Adoption of hybrid maize in Zambia: effects on gender roles, food consumption, and nutrition," Research reports 100, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Kebede, Yohannes & Gunjal, Kisan & Coffin, Garth, 1990. "Adoption of new technologies in Ethiopian agriculture: The case of Tegulet-Bulga district Shoa province," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 27-43, April.
    3. Nkamleu, G. B. & Adesina, A. A., 2000. "Determinants of chemical input use in peri-urban lowland systems: bivariate probit analysis in Cameroon," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 111-121, February.
    4. Wani, M.H. & Baba, S.H. & Hussain, M. & Yousuf, Shahid & Mir, S.A. & Kubravi, S.S., 2012. "Food and Nutritional Security in the Frame of Crop Diversification in the Temperate Region of Jammu and Kashmir," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 67(3), pages 1-13.
    5. Anupama, J. & Singh, R.P. & Kumar, Ranjit, 2005. "Technical Efficiency in Maize Production in Madhya Pradesh: Estimation and Implications," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 18(2), July.
    6. Adesina, Akinwumi A. & Zinnah, Moses M., 1993. "Technology characteristics, farmers' perceptions and adoption decisions: A Tobit model application in Sierra Leone," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 297-311, December.
    7. Ames, Glenn C. W. & Reid, Donald W. & Hsiou, Li-Fang, 1993. "Risk analysis of new maize technology in Zaire: a portfolio approach," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 203-214, September.
    8. Martinez, Juan Carlos & Sain, Gustavo & Yates, Michael, 1991. "Toward farm-based policy analysis: concepts applied in Haiti," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 223-235, July.
    9. Glenn C.W. Ames & Donald W. Reid & Li‐Fang Hsiou, 1993. "Risk analysis of new maize technology in Zaire: a portfolio approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(3), pages 203-214, September.
    10. Shiyani, R. L. & Joshi, P. K. & Asokan, M. & Bantilan, M. C. S., 2002. "Adoption of improved chickpea varieties: KRIBHCO experience in tribal region of Gujarat, India," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 33-39, May.
    11. Akinwumi A. Adesina & Moses M. Zinnah, 1993. "Technology characteristics, farmers' perceptions and adoption decisions: A Tobit model application in Sierra Leone," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(4), pages 297-311, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rahman, Sanzidur, 2008. "Determinants of Crop Choices by Bangladeshi Farmers: A Bivariate Probit Analysis," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, June.
    2. Ouma, James Okuro & De Groote, Hugo & Owuor, George, 2006. "Determinants of Improved Maize Seed and Fertilizer Use in Kenya: Policy Implications," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25433, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. B Kelsey Jack, "undated". "Market Inefficiencies and the Adoption of Agricultural Technologies in Developing Countries," CID Working Papers 50, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    4. Casey, James F. & Caviglia-Harris, Jill L., 2000. "Deforestation And Agroforestry Adoption In Tropical Forests: Can We Generalize? Some Results From Campeche, Mexico And Rondonia, Brazil," 2000 Annual Meeting, June 29-July 1, 2000, Vancouver, British Columbia 36466, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    6. Ruzzante, Sacha & Labarta, Ricardo & Bilton, Amy, 2021. "Adoption of agricultural technology in the developing world: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    7. Wubeneh, Nega Gebreselassie & Sanders, J.H., 2006. "Farm-level adoption of sorghum technologies in Tigray, Ethiopia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 91(1-2), pages 122-134, November.
    8. Negatu, W. & Parikh, A., 1999. "The impact of perception and other factors on the adoption of agricultural technology in the Moret and Jiru Woreda (district) of Ethiopia," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 205-216, October.
    9. Adesina, Akinwumi A. & Baidu-Forson, Jojo, 1995. "Farmers' perceptions and adoption of new agricultural technology: evidence from analysis in Burkina Faso and Guinea, West Africa," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, October.
    10. Bekelc Shiferaw & Stein T. Holden, 1998. "Resource degradation and adoption of land conservation technologies in the Ethiopian Highlands: A case study in Andit Tid, North Shewa," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 18(3), pages 233-247, May.
    11. Teno, Gabriel & Lehrer, Kim & Kone, Abdoulaye, 2018. "Les facteurs de l’adoption des nouvelles technologies en agriculture en Afrique Subsaharienne: une revue de la littérature," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 13(2), June.
    12. Llewellyn, Rick S. & Lindner, Robert K. & Pannell, David J. & Powles, Stephen B., 2002. "Adoption of herbicide resistance management practices by Australian grain growers," 2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra, Australia 179527, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    13. Caviglia-Harris, Jill L. & Kahn, James R. & Green, Trellis, 2003. "Demand-side policies for environmental protection and sustainable usage of renewable resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 119-132, April.
    14. J. Bidogeza & P. Berentsen & J. Graaff & A. Oude Lansink, 2009. "A typology of farm households for the Umutara Province in Rwanda," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 1(3), pages 321-335, September.
    15. Phu Nguyen-Van & Cyrielle Poiraud & Nguyen To-The, 2017. "Modeling farmers’ decisions on tea varieties in Vietnam: a multinomial logit analysis," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(3), pages 291-299, May.
    16. Amogne Asfaw & Belay Simane & Amare Bantider & Ali Hassen, 2019. "Determinants in the adoption of climate change adaptation strategies: evidence from rainfed-dependent smallholder farmers in north-central Ethiopia (Woleka sub-basin)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 2535-2565, October.
    17. Ayuk, Elias T., 1997. "Adoption of agroforestry technology: The case of live hedges in the central plateau of Burkina Faso," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 189-206, June.
    18. Somda, Jacques & Nianogo, A. Joseph & Nassa, Suleymane & Sanou, Seydou, 2002. "Soil fertility management and socio-economic factors in crop-livestock systems in Burkina Faso: a case study of composting technology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 175-183, December.
    19. Thuo, Mary & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Hathie, Ibrahima & Obeng-Asiedu, Patrick, 2011. "Adoption of chemical fertilizer by smallholder farmers in the peanut basin of Senegal," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 6(1), pages 1-17, March.
    20. Zahidul Islam, K.M. & Sumelius, John & Bäckman, Stefan, 2012. "Do differences in technical efficiency explain the adoption rate of HYV rice? Evidence from Bangladesh," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:inijae:206339. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isaeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.