IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i2p980-d483034.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability of Traditional Rice Cultivation in Kerala, India—A Socio-Economic Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Jayasree Krishnankutty

    (Communication Centre, Kerala Agricultural University, Mannuthy, Kerala 680656, India)

  • Michael Blakeney

    (Faculty of Law, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia)

  • Rajesh K. Raju

    (Communication Centre, Kerala Agricultural University, Mannuthy, Kerala 680656, India)

  • Kadambot H. M. Siddique

    (The UWA Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA 6001, Australia)

Abstract

Traditional rice cultivars and cultivation are on the decline in most rice-growing areas, mainly as a result of their low productivity. Packed with nutritionally, environmentally and locally superior qualities, traditional cultivars hold the key for sustainability in rice cultivation. This study explored the dynamics of traditional rice cultivation in Kerala, India. It examined the economic, institutional and socio demographic factors involved in the production and marketing of traditional rice. We employed a multinomial logit model and discriminant function analysis to extract the key factors governing farmers’ marketing behaviour, and various cost measures to study the economics of rice enterprises. The socio-demographic factors were analysed using descriptive statistical tools. Holding size and institutional support were the main factors governing the marketing behaviour of farmers. Even though traditional rice farming was not found to be cost-effective in implicit terms, it was remunerative when imputed personal labour and owned land costs were not considered. The study found that traditional farmers are ageing, have a lower education and use limited marketing channels. However, the majority of them were satisfied with their farm enterprise. By streamlining the market support mechanism and processing facilities, traditional rice would most likely gain momentum in key areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Jayasree Krishnankutty & Michael Blakeney & Rajesh K. Raju & Kadambot H. M. Siddique, 2021. "Sustainability of Traditional Rice Cultivation in Kerala, India—A Socio-Economic Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:980-:d:483034
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/980/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/980/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Walter, Christof & Stützel, Hartmut, 2009. "A new method for assessing the sustainability of land-use systems (I): Identifying the relevant issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1275-1287, March.
    2. Naresh Soora & P. Aggarwal & Rani Saxena & Swaroopa Rani & Surabhi Jain & Nitin Chauhan, 2013. "An assessment of regional vulnerability of rice to climate change in India," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 683-699, June.
    3. Dongyang Xiao & Haipeng Niu & Liangxin Fan & Suxia Zhao & Hongxuan Yan, 2019. "Farmers’ Satisfaction and its Influencing Factors in the Policy of Economic Compensation for Cultivated Land Protection: A Case Study in Chengdu, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.
    4. Matthias Koesling & Ola Flaten & Gudbrand Lien, 2008. "Factors influencing the conversion to organic farming in Norway," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(1/2), pages 78-95.
    5. Singh, Kuntal & McClean, Colin J. & Büker, Patrick & Hartley, Sue E. & Hill, Jane K., 2017. "Mapping regional risks from climate change for rainfed rice cultivation in India," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 76-84.
    6. Bongiwe Porrie Dlamini-Mazibuko & Stuart Ferrer & Gerald Ortmann, 2019. "Factors affecting the choice of marketing outlet selection strategies by smallholder farmers in Swaziland," African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(5), pages 569-577, July.
    7. Anoush Ficiciyan & Jacqueline Loos & Stefanie Sievers-Glotzbach & Teja Tscharntke, 2018. "More than Yield: Ecosystem Services of Traditional versus Modern Crop Varieties Revisited," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, August.
    8. Desmond McNeill, 2019. "The Contested Discourse of Sustainable Agriculture," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 10(S1), pages 16-27, January.
    9. Luong Van Pham & Carl Smith, 2014. "Drivers of agricultural sustainability in developing countries: a review," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 326-341, June.
    10. Manel Ben Hassen & Federica Monaco & Arianna Facchi & Marco Romani & Giampiero Valè & Guido Sali, 2017. "Economic Performance of Traditional and Modern Rice Varieties under Different Water Management Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-10, February.
    11. Jikun Huang & Carl Pray & Scott Rozelle, 2002. "Enhancing the crops to feed the poor," Nature, Nature, vol. 418(6898), pages 678-684, August.
    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. Maria G. Lampridi & Claus G. Sørensen & Dionysis Bochtis, 2019. "Agricultural Sustainability: A Review of Concepts and Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-27, September.
    2. Songqing Jin & Scott Rozelle & Julian Alston & Jikun Huang, 2005. "Economies Of Scale And Scope And The Economic Efficiency Of China'S Agricultural Research System," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 46(3), pages 1033-1057, August.
    3. Gupta, Rishabh & Mishra, Ashok, 2019. "Climate change induced impact and uncertainty of rice yield of agro-ecological zones of India," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 1-11.
    4. Cuong Le Van & Nguyen To The, 2019. "Farmers’ adoption of organic production," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 33-59, February.
    5. Paresh B. Shirsath & Vinay Kumar Sehgal & Pramod K. Aggarwal, 2020. "Downscaling Regional Crop Yields to Local Scale Using Remote Sensing," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, March.
    6. Singh, Kuntal & McClean, Colin J. & Büker, Patrick & Hartley, Sue E. & Hill, Jane K., 2017. "Mapping regional risks from climate change for rainfed rice cultivation in India," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 76-84.
    7. Thor Olav Iversen, 2023. "Boundary experts: Science and politics in measuring the Sustainable Development Goals," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(4), pages 600-610, September.
    8. Wollni, Meike & Andersson, Camilla, 2014. "Spatial patterns of organic agriculture adoption: Evidence from Honduras," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 120-128.
    9. Hu, R. & Deng, H., 2018. "A Crisis of Consumers’ Trust in Scientists and Influence on Consumer Attitude," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 276047, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Beatrice Dingha & Leah Sandler & Arnab Bhowmik & Clement Akotsen-Mensah & Louis Jackai & Kevin Gibson & Ronald Turco, 2019. "Industrial Hemp Knowledge and Interest among North Carolina Organic Farmers in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, May.
    11. Hermann, Daniel & Musshoff, Oliver & Agethen, Katrin, 2014. "I will never switch sides: an experimental approach to determine drivers for investment decisions of conventional and organic hog farmers," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183084, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Lauterbach, Josephine & Risius, Antje & Bantle, Christina, 2020. "Communicating the Benefits of Agrobiodiversity Enhancing Products - Insights from a Discrete Choice Experiment," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305625, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    13. Ranjan Roy & Ngai Weng Chan, 2012. "An assessment of agricultural sustainability indicators in Bangladesh: review and synthesis," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 99-110, March.
    14. Ratana Sapbamrer & Ajchamon Thammachai, 2021. "A Systematic Review of Factors Influencing Farmers’ Adoption of Organic Farming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-28, March.
    15. Richard A. Niesenbaum, 2019. "The Integration of Conservation, Biodiversity, and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-11, August.
    16. Chen, Xiaoguang, 2016. "Economic potential of biomass supply from crop residues in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 141-149.
    17. Sangam Shrestha & Proloy Deb & Thi Bui, 2016. "Adaptation strategies for rice cultivation under climate change in Central Vietnam," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 15-37, January.
    18. Briones, Roehlano & Felipe, Jesus, 2013. "Agriculture and Structural Transformation in Developing Asia: Review and Outlook," ADB Economics Working Paper Series 363, Asian Development Bank.
    19. Solomon Eghosa Uhunamure & Zongho Kom & Karabo Shale & Nthaduleni Samuel Nethengwe & Jacobus Steyn, 2021. "Perceptions of Smallholder Farmers towards Organic Farming in South Africa," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, November.
    20. Prabhu Pingali & Anaka Aiyar & Mathew Abraham & Andaleeb Rahman, 2019. "Transforming Food Systems for a Rising India," Palgrave Studies in Agricultural Economics and Food Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-3-030-14409-8.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:980-:d:483034. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.