D9728 PDF

SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT OF
JAGGERY IN ANALKAPALLI REGION

OF ANDHRA PRADESH
M.KAVITHA
B.Sc. (CA&BM)
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

(AGRIBUSINESS MANAGEMENT)
2014
SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT OF JAGGERY
IN ANALKAPALLI REGION OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
BY
M.KAVITHA
B.Sc. (CA&BM)
PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED TO

PROFESSOR JAYA SHANKAR TELANGANA STATE
AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

(AGRIBUSINESS MANAGEMENT)
CHAIRPERSON: Dr. P. RADHIKA
SCHOOL OF AGRIBUSINESS MANAGEMENT

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE
RAJENDRANAGAR, HYDERABAD-500 030
PROFESSOR JAYA SHANKAR TELANGANA STATE
AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
2014
CERTIFICATE
MS M.KAVITHA has satisfactorily prosecuted the course of project and that project
report entitled SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT OF JAGGERY IN
ANALKAPALLI REGION OF ANDHRA PRADESH submitted is the result of
original research work and is of sufficiently high standard to warrant its presentation to the
examination. I also certify that neither the project report nor part thereof has been
previously submitted by her for a degree of any university.
(Dr. P. RADHIKA)
Date: Chairperson
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the project report entitled SUPPLY CHAIN

MANAGEMENT OF JAGGERY IN ANALKAPALLI REGION OF ANDHRA
PRADESH submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Business Administration (Agribusiness management) of the PROFESSOR
JAYA SHANKAR TELANGANA STATE Agricultural University, Hyderabad, is a
record of the bonafide work carried out by MS M.KAVITHA under our guidance and
supervision.
No part of the project report has been submitted by the student for any
other degree or diploma. The published part and all the assistance received during the
course of the investigations have been duly acknowledged by the author of the
project report.
(Dr. P. RADHIKA)
Chairman of the Advisory Committee
Project report approved by the Student Advisory Committee
Chairperson : Dr. P. RADHIKA

Associate Professor
School of Agribusiness Management
College of Agriculture
Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500030
Member : Dr. ALDAS JANAIAH

Associate Professor &
Associate Dean
Jagital, Karim Nagar 505327
Member : Shri M.H.V.BHAVE

Associate Professor & Head
Department of Statistics & Mathematics
Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500030
Date of final viva- voce

LIST OF CONTENTS
Chapter No. Title Page No.
I INTRODUCTION
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE
III MATERIAL AND METHODS
IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
LITERATURE CITED
DECLERATION
I MS M.KAVITHA, hereby declare that the thesis entitled SUPPLY CHAIN
MANAGEMENT OF JAGGERY IN ANALKAPALLI REGION OF ANDHRA
PRADESH submitted to Professor Jaya Shankar Telangana State Agricultural
University for the degree of Master of Business Administration in the school of
Agribusiness Management in the major field of Agribusiness Management is the result of
the original research work done by me. I also declare that no material contained in the
report has been published earlier in any manner.
Place: Hyderabad (M.KAVITHA)

Date: I.D. NO. RMBA/12-06
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It is by the lavish and boundless blessing of the Almighty that I have been able to
complete my studies successfully hitherto and present this humble piece of work for which I
am eternally indebted.
Fervently and modestly, I extol the genuine cooperation, inspiration, advice and
affection offered to me by the Chairman of my Advisory Committee
Dr.P.Radhika, Associate Professor, School of Agribusiness Management, College of
Agriculture, Rajendranagar, PJTSAU, Hyderabad right from the initiation of the work to
shaping of the manuscript.
I am greatly beholden beyond words to express my deep sense of gratitude and a
great privilege to work under the able and highly exceptional guidance of Dr. Aldas
Janaiah, Professor and Associate Dean of Jagital, College of Agriculture, Karimnagar, for
his brilliant counsel, constructive suggestions.
I equally owe my deep sense of gratitude to Sri. M.H.V.Bhave, Professor & Head
of Department of Statistics and mathematics and member of my Advisory Committee for his
invaluable guidance, suggestions and support during my course of study.
I feel immense pleasure in extending my deep sense of gratitude to Agricultural
Research Station staff of Anakapalli and Agricultural Market Committee staff of
Anakapalli for their cooperation.
I express my heartfelt love and affection from the inner core of heart to my beloved
parents Shri Sree Rama Murthy and Smt. Manikyam, for their blessings, inspiration,
encouragement and moral support throughout my educational career. It remains less even
if i say a lot about them.
I owe much to my loving siblings Divya and Praveen for their everlasting affection,
co-operation and encouragement in my life. They have been my source of confidence and
motivation all through my life.
It is time to surface out genuflect love and affectionate gratitude to my dearest friends,
Chan, Madhavi, Karthik, Radha Priyanka, Zaineb and Chaitanya Bhavani for their blessings,
inspiration, encouragement and moral support throughout my educational career.
Finally I am very much thankful to all the authorities and staff of Professor Jaya
Shankar Telangana State Agricultural University, who provided me an opportunity to
undertake the course and those who directly and indirectly helped me in all my endeavours.
Date: (M.KAVITHA)
Place:Hyderabad I.D.No.RMBA/12-06
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title Page No.
4.1 Percentage change and growth rate in area, production and

productivity of Sugarcane in India (2000-01 to 2011-12)
productivity of Sugarcane in Andhra Pradesh (2000-01 to 2011-12)

productivity of Sugarcane in Anakapalli (2000-01 to 2011-12)
4.4 Educational status of the sample farmers
4.5 Age profile of the sample farmers
4.6 Family size of the sample farmers
4.7 Sugarcane land holdings of respondents
4.8 Investment for establishment of jaggery production unit ( one tonne

capacity per day)
4.9 Cost and returns in jaggery production (Rs per tonne)
4.10 Price spread of jaggery marketing through channel I
4.11 Price spread of jaggery marketing through channel II
4.12 Price spread of jaggery marketing through channel III
4.13 Constraints faced by farmers in processing and marketing of

jaggery
4.14 Constraints faced by market intermediaries and traders in
processing and marketing of jaggery
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Fig No. Title Page No.
1.1 Sugarcane production (percentages) in the world for 2011-12
1.2 State wise Sugarcane production (percentages) for 2011-12
1.3 State wise yield of Sugarcane in India
3.1 Map of Anakapalli
4.1 Marketing of jaggery- channel-I
4.2 Marketing of jaggery- channel-II
4.3 Marketing of jaggery- channel-III

LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVATIONS
& : And
% : Per cent
Rs. : Rupee
i.e., : That is
et al. : and other people
etc. : and so on
t/ha : Tonne per hectare
kg : Kilogram
viz. : namely
qtl : quintal
CAGR : Compound Annual Growth Rate
mg : milligrams
AUTHOR : M. KAVITHA
I.D. No. : RMBA/12-06
TITLE OF THE SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT OF JAGGERY IN

:
PROJECT WORK ANAKAPLLI REGION OF ANDHRA PRADESH
DEGREE : MBA (ABM)
FACULTY : AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT : SCHOOL OF AGRIBUSINESS MANAGEMENT
MAJOR ADVISOR : DR. P. RADHIKA
UNIVERSITY : ACHARYA N.G. RANGA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
YEAR OF
: 2014
SUBMISSION
ABSTRACT
Jaggery is a natural, traditional product of Sugarcane. Its color varies from honey
brown color to dark yellow. Anakapalli region of Andhra Pradesh has large number of
jaggery manufacturing units, mostly located in rural areas and the processors are following
conventional methods for producing this. Jaggery is the main source of income generator in
most of the rural areas in and around Anakapalli region. The study was conducted in three
sub divisions of Anakapalli region. . A total number of 180 farmers were selected, of which
100 are small farmers, 50 are medium and 30 are large farmers. Fifteen processing units, 20
traders and 20 market intermediaries were selected to study the marketing costs and
margins involved at various level of marketing of jaggery. . The paper examines the trends
in area, production and productivity of India, Andhra Pradesh and Anakapalli region, it
deals with the various supply chains associated with jaggery and constraints faced by
farmers, processors and market intermediaries.
The Compound Growth Rate for area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in
India during 2000-01 to 2011-12 were 1.37 per cent, -1.47 per cent and -0.29 per cent
respectively. Growth rate is not significant for all three variables. The Compound Growth
Rate of area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in Andhra Pradesh during 2000-01
to 2011-12 were estimated to be 2.06, -1.09 and 3.94 per cent respectively. Among the all
three variables, only the growth rate of productivity is significant. The Compound Growth
Rate of area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in Visakhapatnam during 2000-01
to 2011-12 were estimated to be 0.67, 0.37 and 4.2 per cent respectively. Among the all
three variables, only the growth rate of productivity is significant.
Three marketing channels were identified in jaggery marketing in the study area. They are
Channel I: Producer-Commission agent-Wholesaler-Retailer-Consumer
Channel II: Producer-Wholesaler-Retailer-Consumer
Channel III: Producer-Retailer- Consumer
Among the market channels adopted for marketing jaggery the farmers share in consumer
rupee is maximum in channel III (farmer-retailer-consumer). Transportation and hamali
charges are major cost items in marketing of jaggery. The efficiency of channel III is 5.63
which is highest than the remaining two marketing channels. In channel-I and channel-II
marketing efficiency is 3.66 and 4.86 respectively. As the number of intermediaries
increases in the channel, efficiency of channel decreases.
Constraints perceived by farmers in processing and marketing of jaggery have been

studied. Market holidays are considered as major constraint faced by farmers with highest
Garret score of 70.67. The major constraints faced by farmers were high labour costs,
fluctuation in jaggery prices, forced sale due to repayment of loan, lack of transport
facilities with Garret ranking are 69, 65.44, 56 and 55.89 respectively. The minor
constraints faced by farmers were high commission charges and transportation charges with
Garret rankings, 34 and 32.22 respectively. In case of market intermediaries and traders the
major constraint faced was fluctuation in jaggery price is expressed by 82.41 percent of
traders. Failure in time payment by the farmer expressed as constraint by 80.23 per cent of
traders and market intermediaries. The remaining constraints quoted were lack of adequate
processing units, lack of transportation facilities and lack of storage facilities with 78.54
per cent, 76 per cent and 71 per cent respectively.
Keywords: Jaggery, Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR), marketing channels,

Garrett ranking, constraints.
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Sugarcane plant is a coarse grass which is quite tall about 10-20 feet and belongs to
the family Poaceae. A single plant bears many stems in a tuft. It is a rhizomatous, perennial
plant with thick Solid, aerial stem. The stem color is variable from white, yellow, black,
dark green, purple and red or violet. It is jointed and inter nodes are smaller at the base and
increase in length, until it terminates in inflorescence. There are present prop roots at the
lower nodes which provide mechanical strength to the stem, on the nodes axial buds are
present. Stem contains colored tissues in which many fibro vascular bundles are placed.
The inflorescence is called an arrow or tarsal. Five different species of saccharum have
been identified, which are important in cane breeding. All of these are indigenous and they
are Saccharum officinarum, Saccharum baberi, Saccharum sinense, Saccharum spotaneum
and Saccharum robustum of which last two species are wild. Sugarcane is the main sugar
producing crop that contributes nearly 95 per cent to the global sugar pool. Sugarcane is the
native of India. Besides India which is major producer of sugarcane (14.75 %) and sugar in
the world, it is grown mainly in Brazil, China, Thailand, Mexico, Pakistan, Philippines,
Argentina, Colombia, Indonesia and South Africa. India is second largest country after
Brazil in sugar production and contributes about 17 percent of world Sugarcane production.
Figure 1.1. Sugarcane production (percentages) in the world for 2011-2012
E.U,
10.3
Brazil, 21.94
Rest world,
24.37 India , 14.75
Russia, 2.36
China, 8
pakistan,
2.65 U.S.A, 4.45
Mexico, 3.27 Australia ,
Thailand, 5.3 2.6
(Source: www.vsisugar.com, 2011-12)
In India the area, production and productivity were 5.35 Mha, 355 Mt and 66.35
t/ha respectively and jaggery production was 72.40 Mt where as sugar production was 232
Mt for the year 2012-2013 (www.Fmongabay.com). Indian sugarcane industry is very vast
and it contributes three percent of the total cropped area and around two percent to the
national Gross Domestic Product. The sugarcane growing regions may be broadly
classified into two agro climatic regions subtropical and tropical. About seven million
sugarcane farmers and large number of agricultural labourers are involved in sugar cane
cultivation and ancillary activities. Apart from this, the sugar industry provides
employment to five lakh skilled and semi skilled workers in rural areas. The subtropical
zone includes four states: Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Punjab and Haryana. The tropical zone
includes five States. These are: Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat and
Karnataka. These nine are most important sugarcane producing states. Uttar Pradesh leads
among these states in both area and production followed by Maharashtra. Tamilnadu stands
first in productivity wise with 100 tonnes per hectare. The sugar industry is the second
largest agro-based industry next to textile industry and it plays a major role in the
development of both agricultural and industrial sector.
Figure 1.2. State wise Sugarcane production (percentages) for 2011-2012
Uttarakhad,
Haryana , Bihar, Punjab, 1.26
1.87 1.71 1.48 other states,
Andhra Gujarat, 3.8 1.29
Pradesh ,
4.31
Tamil Nadu,
Maharashtra
9.03
, 34.09
Karnataka ,
14.7
Uttar
Pradesh,
26.47

Figure 1.3. State wise yield of sugarcane in India (tonnes per hectare) for 2011-2012
Sugar has historically been classified as an essential commodity and has been
regulated across the value chain. The heavy regulations in the sector artificially impact the
demand and supply forces resulting in market imbalance. Sensing this problem, since 1993
the regulations have been progressively eased. The key regulatory measures include de-
licensing of the industry in 1998 and removal of control on storage and distribution in
2002. Each sugar mill has a command area which binds cane farmers and sugar mills to
maintain a balance trade. Sugar mills have to purchase all the cane that is sent to them,
even if it exceeds their requirement. As far as sugarcane pricing is related, government
administered Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) which acts as a floor. States like Uttar
Pradesh, Haryana and Punjab fixed a higher price for cane, called State Advise Price
(SAP), the SAP has been as high as 20-30 percent above SMP. Government mandates ten
percent of sugar to be sold as levy quota sugar at prices much lower than the market.
Government also specified monthly release quotas for free sale of sugar. As per
government regulations, farmers are eligible to sell their crop at SMP. Hence, their profit is
impacted by differential between SMP and the cost of cultivation, harvesting and
transportation, which are in turn depend on farm productivity, labour availability, distance
between farm and market, mode of transport etc., Any price offered to farmers over and
above SMP is additional profit to them.
The second way of cane marketing is processing the cane into jaggery. The
processing of sugarcane into jaggery depends on the cane price offered by the sugar mills
operating in the area and prices of jaggery. The processors preferred to crush cane into
Jaggery at times of attractive jaggery prices coupled with low prices offered by sugar mills.
Thus, in India, two important marketing channels for sugarcane have been identified. They
are:
Channel 1: Producer - Sugar factory - Wholesaler - Retailer Consumer

Channel 2: Producer - Processor (Gur) - Wholesaler - Retailer Consumer
Government policies affect sugarcane cultivation in numerous ways. It is

unfortunate that the policies of the government are benefiting the big farms, though the
losses are maintaining to both sugarcane farmers and industries. This is due to the entire
sugar price control system which is in the hands of the central government, which is
curtailing the price rise. The household consumption of sugar is only 23 percent while the
rest is meant for sweets, cool drinks, ice creams, biscuits and chocolates. The government
is against price rise due to this heavy industrial use. The rise in price has meager affect on
common man and benefits the farmer. Yet the government is against prices which benefit
the farmer. This affects the income of sugarcane farmers.
In India agriculture has undergone spectacular technological changes during the

last four decades. These changes have been boon to farmers so far as agriculture output and
productivity are concerned. However, this has been unable to ensure stable income to
farmers. The benefits of new production technology will not sustain for a longer period
unless simultaneous efforts are made in improving the marketing system as a whole. The
basic function of marketing is not only to bring about synchronization between the demand
and supply of agricultural commodity but also to ensure reasonable prices for both
producers and the consumers. Marketing of agricultural commodities has assumed a greater
importance with gradual switching over from subsistence farming to commercial farming.
No incentive to increase production will attract the farmers without improving marketing
system. Only stable farm prices, better returns and attractive terms of trade would motivate
farmers to produce more and promote larger proportion of their produce to the market.
Anakapalli region of Andhra Pradesh is known for its sugarcane production and
around 70 percent of the farmers cultivate this crop. Sugarcane is grown in Anakapalli,
Munagapaka, Chodavaram and Narsipatnam areas. The farmers prefer to produce jaggery
instead of selling sugarcane to sugar factories. The main reason for majority of farmers
preferring to process jaggery or sell sugarcane for jaggery production is the easy
availability of credit which is provided by local commission agents for the cultivation of
the crop on installment basis where as the sugarcane mills are not able to pay the dues in
time to the farmers. Hence, many farmers in Anakapalli region have taken up the
production of jaggery. Another reason is also quoted that the crushing of the sugarcane has
to be done immediately after few hours of harvesting which is a major constraint to the
farmer in transporting the cane to the nearby mill, if also transported within the time the
farmer has to wait till his chance comes at the crushing yard. This seriously affects the
cane juice percent which decreases with the passing of time and results in least returns to
the farmers. The area under sugarcane cultivation in and around Anakapalli has declined
due to farmers opting for cultivating other crops with the hope of earning more instead of
sugarcane because the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) is not remunerative and input costs
are high especially for hired human labour for carrying out various operations in
cultivation. Anakapalli is equipped with regulated market for jaggery, which is second
largest regulated market for jaggery after Hapur, Uttar Pradesh in India.
Nutritional and medicinal value of jaggery

Jaggery, which is rich in important minerals (Calcium-40-100 mg, Magnesium-70-
90 mg, Potassium-10-56 mg, Phosphorus-20-90 mg, Sodium-19-30 mg, Iron-10-13 mg,
Manganese-0.2-0.5 mg, Zinc-0.2-0.4 mg, Copper-0.1-0.9 mg, and Chloride-5.3 mg per 100
g of jaggery), and vitamins (viz Vitamin A-3.8 mg, Vitamin B1-0.01 mg, Vitamin B2- 0.06
mg, Vitamin B5-0.01 mg, Vitamin B6-0.01 mg, Vitamin C-7.00 mg, Vitamin D2-6.50 mg,
Vitamin E-111.30 mg, Vitamin PP-7.00 mg, and protein-280 mg per 100 g of jaggery)
forms a important elements in Indian diet. (Jaswant et al., 2013)
Export potential
Per capita consumption of sucrose in India is much lower (15 kg) compared to that
in developed countries (50 kg), Major share (above 75%) of sucrose consumption in rich
countries has been through manufactured foods. But, excessive sucrose consumption leads
to a variety of problems such as dental curies and coronary thrombosis. To over-come these
problems many of these countries are serious by looking for alternative sweeteners from
sugarcane crop. India has one of such eco friendly sweetener, jaggery and contributes more
than 70 per cent to the production of the world. It is being exported to many countries like,
Bangladesh, Great Britain, Canada, Chili, Egypt, Fizzy, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Malaysia, Nepal
and USA.
Jaggery a cottage industry
The jaggery industry has been considered as one of the small scale and cottage
industries in India. From the time immemorial, the sugarcane crop has been known as cash
crop for Indian cultivators and so also the preparation of jaggery. As much as 45 to 50 per
cent of sugarcane crop has been processed annually in to jaggery or Khandsari. The
production of jaggery ranges between five million tons and seven million tons. It is
estimated that two third of the sweetening requirement in rural areas is met by jaggery. The
jaggery industry in the country has thus, been continued to be an industry of great
importance and relevance. The economy of the country is closely associated with this
industry.
The study on jaggery is taken up as it is produced in large quantities in Anakapalli

region. As farmers are producing jaggery and they are marketing it through different
channels. In order to know different marketing channels, net margins and constraints faced
by the farmers and other market intermediaries the study has been taken up. Now-a-days
jaggery is attaining a lot of attention due to its medicinal properties and its usage is
increased instead of sugar. It is creating a source of income to the farmers
Objectives of the investigation
1. To study the trends in area, production and yield of sugarcane in India, Andhra Pradesh
and Anakapalli of Visakhapatnam (2002-2012).
2. To analyze the supply chains adopted for jaggery and its major by-products in the study
area.
3. To study the constraints faced by farmers and other market intermediaries in supply
chain management and processing of jaggery.
Scope of the study

The study was conducted in Anakapalli region of Andhra Pradesh. The study
mainly concentrates on various supply chains and constraints involved in processing and
marketing of jaggery, hence costs, returns are studied. The results of the study would throw
light on profitability of jaggery processing and efficiency of marketing channels.
Limitations of the study

1. As there is no recent survey regarding the area under production of sugarcane done by
national level agency, the data regarding area and production is only estimated data given
by ARS, Anakapalli.
2. As most of the sugarcane cultivators and processors were illiterate, it was difficult to get
accurate data with regards to costs and revenues. The market functionaries also were not
maintaining any records, making the researcher mostly depend on the recall memory of the
sample.
3. The present study was undertaken in Anakapalli jurisdictions, as both qualitative and
quantitative data were collected from jaggery processing units in a very limited period of
time and for a limited sample size, generalization may not be possible.
Structure of the project report
The study is presented in six chapters as follows
Introduction: The importance of the study, problem setting and objectives are covered.
Review of literature: The available and relevant literature is thoroughly reviewed.

Material and Methods: The methods and materials encompassing sampling, data
collection, analytical tools, concepts and terms are explained.
Results and Discussion: The results and discussion covering the important aspects such as
costs and returns, constraints in processing are covered.
Summary and Conclusions: Summary and conclusions are presented along with
suggestions for improving the economic viability of jaggery units.
Chapter II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
An extensive survey of literature was undertaken in order to have in depth knowledge
about the various aspects related to the study. Careful study of the earlier studies conducted
in India and abroad on production, processing and marketing of sugarcane and jaggery
provided guidance and clarity. In this chapter an attempt has been made to review the
literature of the past research work. The review has been presented under the following
heads.
2.1 Trends in area, production and yield of sugarcane and costs and returns in production of
jaggery.
2.2 Supply chains adopted for jaggery and its major by-products in the study area.
2.3 Constraints faced by farmers and other market intermediaries in marketing and
processing of jaggery.
2.1 Trends in area, production and yield of sugarcane and costs and
returns in production of jaggery.
Ramarao and Sunil (2012) have studied economics of production and marketing of
jaggery in Andhra Pradesh. The study was conducted during 2009-2010 in Andhra Pradesh,
India. Multistage sampling technique was adopted in selecting the sampling units. Benefit
Cost Ratio, Breakeven Point, Payback Period and Responsive Priority Index were
employed as analytical tools. The major cost in jaggery production was cost of sugarcane
(76.65 per cent). The cost of cultivation of sugarcane per hectare was Rs. 1,51,558 where in
the variable cost was Rs. 1,04,087 and fixed cost was Rs. 47,471. These account for 68.7
per cent and 31.3 per cent of total cost respectively.
Kumar (2010) in his study titled an empirical study on Gur (jaggery) industry in Uttar
Pradesh examined the cost-return analysis, profitability and operational efficiency of Gur
manufacturing units in study area. The study revealed that units of medium and large sizes
were able to cover their operating expenses with significant level of profit but small size
units were earning a marginal profit.
Anjugam et al. (2007) in their study entitled value addition of sugarcane - a case of
jaggery production has analyzed the growth and performance of area, production and
productivity of sugarcane, comparative economics of sugarcane and jaggery production and
have identified the constraints in jaggery production. The net income realized from jaggery
production has been recorded as Rs 14,138, which is higher than that from the cane
produced for sugar factory. Delays in cutting of cane by the sugar factories and labour
problems during harvesting season have been found as the major reasons for jaggery
making. The introduction of modern technologies, creation of infrastructure and
formulation of appropriate price polices need be encouraged to enhance jaggery production
among the farmers and to get remunerative price for their produce.
Jagannath et al. (2007) in their study entitled jaggery- a traditional Indian sweetener
stated state wise area, production and utilisation of sugarcane, per capita consumption of
Indian sweeteners, state wise estimates of jaggery production and also stated status of
exports from India. Jaggery is sugarcane based traditional Indian sweetener. The study
mentioned that during the study period 24.5 per cent of the cane produced in India was
being utilized for producing jaggery. Jaggery is nutritious and easily available to the rural
people. Compared to white sugar, it requires low capital requirement in production and is
manufactured at the farmers individual units itself. Of the total world production, more
than 70 per cent of the jaggery is produced in India. To meet the future sweetener
requirement, the scope of jaggery seems to be promising.
Ravi et al. (1998) studied the factors influencing market arrivals of jaggery at regulated
market - Anakapalli by using Multiple Linear Regression model. The regression coefficient
of average price and production of jaggery were statistically significant where as the
regression coefficient of rainfall and area under sugar cane had no effect on market arrivals.
The R2 value showed that the regression model was statistically significant at five per cent
level.
Babar and Lohar (1994) studied trends in arrivals and prices of jaggery in Sangali
regulated market. Sangali regulated market is well known market for jaggery in Western
Maharastra. In the study, attempt was made to study the trends and seasonal fluctuations in
the arrivals and prices of jaggery. Trends in arrivals and prices of jaggery in Agriculture
Produce Market Committee, Sangli showed an increasing trend from the past ten years
(1981-1991). The seasonal indices of arrivals of jaggery were higher during the months of
August to January, while indices of prices were higher during the months of October,
August and September, respectively.
Grewal and Rangi (1983) conducted an analytical study of growth of Punjab agriculture
during the period 1960-61 to 1982-83. They reported a 3.48 per cent decrease in area, 3.67
per cent increase in productivity and 0.01 per cent decrease in production of sugar cane.
The negative growth rate of production had primarily resulted from decrease in acreage of
sugar cane.
Nandal et al. (1983) studied the changes in cropping pattern of Haryana agriculture. The
study revealed that there was an increase in area under sugar cane cultivation from 115.20
thousand hectares in 1957 to 158.33 thousand hectares in 1967. However, it decreased to
155.33 thousand hectares in 1980. The percentage share of sugar cane in the total gross
cropped area during the above period was 3.28, 4.06 and 3.35 respectively.
Naidu and Reddy (1981) in their study examined jaggery marketing at Anakapalli
regulated market. Immediately after manufacturing of jaggery, the cultivator brings it to the
market due to need of money or lack of storage facilities. The commodity is entrusted to a
commission agent. The jaggery brought to each shop in the market is differentiated into
three qualities and graded as no. 1, 2, 3 by the experienced hamal based on color, hardness
and crystalline texture. The retailers or the commission agents of wholesalers gather at each
shop where auction is being held under the supervision of a marketing committee official.
The highest bidder purchases the stocks and the bidding is done in terms of 10 kgs of
jaggery. The producers share in the consumers rupee was 82.72 per cent. The
wholesalers margin, brokerage and commission agents margin was 5.82, 2.74 and 2.64
per cent respectively.
2.2 Supply chains adopted for jaggery and its major by-products
Rao and Babu (2011) in their study made an attempt to work-out costs and returns in
value added products of Sugarcane viz., sugar, jaggery and Sugarcane juice, in order to
suggest the sugarcane growers the profitable and sustained way to deal with sugarcane.
Multistage sampling technique was adopted in selecting the sampling units at various levels
during 2010-11. Analytical tools like tabular analysis and Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) were
employed to achieve the objectives. The results revealed that cost of cultivation of
sugarcane is the prime factor in the various value added products. Among the value added
products, sugarcane juice production was found more profitable, which needs further
investigation into technical and financial feasibility of to produce on large scale.
Deokate et al. (2009) have studied economics of production and marketing of jaggery
in Maharashtra. Profitability of enterprise depends upon the efficient marketing. The
jaggery processing units are less profitable, if only own sugarcane is processed. However, it
was more profitable when the jaggery processing unit prepares the jaggery of others on
rent basis. The most important marketing channels observed in the sale of jaggery are:
Channel- I comprising of Producer - Commission agent - Wholesaler - Retailer - Consumer
and Channel - II comprising of Producer - Co-operative sangh - Wholesaler - Retailer -
Consumer. The producers share in consumers rupee and channel wise Marketing
Efficiency Index was highest in Channel II.
Rao and Ravi (2002) have studied production and operation scenarios of jaggery in
India with reference to Andhra Pradesh. They analyzed the size, distribution of commission
agents handling jaggery, producers share in consumers price, market structure and price
spread for jaggery in Anakapalli market. The results of the analysis revealed that, there
exists a moderate degree of competitiveness for jaggery in Anakapalli market, as the value
of Gini coefficient is only 0.48. On the other hand, total marketing costs paid by the
producers, exporters, wholesalers and retailers was higher in channel I (Rs 190.62 that is
18.85 per cent of consumers price) when compared to channel II (Rs 148.96 that is 14.73
per cent of consumers price). As the total marketing costs are lower in channel II, the
producers share in consumers price is higher in channel II (85.27 per cent) when
compared to channel I (81.15 per cent).
Singh and Kishore (1998) studied marketable surplus, disposable pattern and
marketing of sugar cane in Sitapur district of Uttar Pradesh. The average production of
sugar cane on the selected farms was 346.70 quintals of which 30.84 quintals were utilized
for seed purpose and family consumption. The average marketable surplus of sugar cane on
the selected farms was 315.86 quintals (91.10%) per farm. Three marketing channels for
sugar cane have been identified. Channel I comprising of Producer - Sugar factory,
Channel II comprising of Producer - Khandsari unit and Channel III comprising of
Producer - Processor (Gur) - Wholesaler - Retailer - Consumer. On an average 59.92, 15.73
and 24.35 per cent marketable surplus moved through channel I, II and III respectively. The
total marketing cost of Gur in channel III was Rs. 154.22 which included Rs.94.22
processing cost per quintal borne by processor of Gur. The marketing cost paid by the
processor, wholesaler and retailer was Rs. 108.22, Rs. 33.50 and Rs. 12.50 per quintal
respectively. The producers share in consumers price was 62.68 per cent. The marketing
margins of wholesaler and retailer were 6.64 and 6.00 per cent respectively. This study
pointed out the existence of more than one marketing channel of jaggery in traditional
jaggery producing areas. The producers share in consumers rupee was considerably high
in all channels. The produce was disposed immediately due to lack of funds and storage
facilities.
Teggi et al. (1996) analyzed the marketing of jaggery in Ghataprabha command

area of Karnataka. Mudhol and Jamakhandi jaggery markets were selected. The jaggery
processors were selling jaggery immediately after manufacturing due to need of funds or
due to lack of storage facility. Three major marketing channels were identified. Channel I
comprising of Producer - Commission agent - Wholesaler - Retailer - Consumer, channel II
comprising of Producer - Wholesaler - Retailer Consumer and channel III comprising of
Producer - Retailer - Consumer. In case of Jamakhandi market, 62 per cent of the
processors sold 77 per cent of their produce through channel II and in Mudhol market, 25
per cent of the processors disposed 76 per cent of the produce through channel II. This was
due to high price realized by processors in respective channels. The producers share in
consumers rupee in channel I at Mudhol and Jamakhandi markets was Rs. 86.55 and Rs.
87.36 per quintal respectively. In channel II it was Rs. 88.69 and Rs. 89.04 in the above
order of markets.
Rohal et al. (1990) in their study identified two marketing channels of Gur at
Muzaffar Nagar regulated market, U.P. They are Channel I comprising of Producer -
Processor - Primary wholesaler - Secondary wholesaler - Retailer - Consumer, Channel II
comprising of Producer -Primary wholesaler - Secondary wholesaler - Retailer - Consumer.
In channel I, the producers share in consumers rupee was 66.96 per cent. The marketing
expenses incurred by the producer, processor, secondary wholesaler and retailer were 2.55,
12.50, 11.35 and 0.40 per cent respectively. The marketing margins of processor, secondary
wholesaler and retailer were 4.03, 1.04 and 0.94 per cent respectively. The processing cost
incurred by the processor was Rs. 41.75 per quintal. In channel II, the producers share in
consumers rupee was 73 per cent. The expenses incurred by the producer, secondary
wholesaler and retailer were 12.92, 11.54 and 0.40 per cent respectively. The marketing
margins of secondary wholesaler and retailers were 1.14 and 1.00 per cent respectively.
The processing cost of Gur was Rs. 43.00 per quintal. Channel II was more efficient than
channel I as the producers share in Consumers rupee was high.
Azad et al. (1989) in their study stated that the net returns per quintal were
significantly higher in crystal sugar than in Khandsari sugar and Gur in U.P. The share of
sugar cane growers in the price paid by the consumers price was found to be highest for
Khandsari sugar which is 58.6 per cent followed by Gur which is 53 per cent and then
followed by levy sugar 44 per cent and free sale of crystal sugar is 38 per cent. The profit
of the manufactures of crystal sugar, Gur and Khandsari sugar was 23, 13 and 5 per cent of
the consumers price respectively.
Raju and Ramesh (1989) in their study analyzed the costs and returns of jaggery
production and marketing in East Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh. The cost of
production of jaggery per hectare of sugar cane was Rs. 28,497. Among this, the cost of
production of sugar cane accounted for 70 per cent cost followed by human labour cost,
crusher rent charges, chemical ingredient charges. The average physical returns of jaggery
was 93.28 quintals from one hectare of sugar cane amounting to Rs. 33,724. The net returns
were Rs. 5227 per hectare. Two marketing channels were identified, Channel I comprising
of Farmers - Commission agents at regulated market Wholesaler - Retailer - Consumer
and Channel II comprising of Farmer - Village merchant - Wholesaler at unregulated
market - Retailer - Consumer. The producers share in consumers rupee was more in
channel I i.e. 87 per cent. The input-output ratio, when cane was sent to sugar factory and
converted to jaggery was 1:1.10 and 1:1.8 respectively. The study concluded that the
jaggery preparation was more profitable than selling cane to sugar factory.
Verma (1989) in his study found that the average cost of processing of sugar cane
under power kohlu units of Gur was Rs. 6.80 per quintal in Indore district of Madhya
Pradesh. It varied from mill to mill according to the level of capital investment, power and
sugar cane crushed during the year by the mill. In Gur marketing the producers share in
consumers rupee was 60 per cent. The study indicated that the provision of adequate
facilities for quick and cheaper transport and timely supply of cheaper credit by the
financing institutions to the producers, processors and traders will help in increasing the
productivity and efficiency of marketing of the produce.
Rohal et al. (1985) studied the processing and marketing of Gur in Muzaffar Nagar
district of Uttar Pradesh. The average cost of processing of sugar cane per quintal was Rs.
4.20.The producers share in the consumers price in channel I (producers to processors)
and channel II (producers processed channel) was 65.79 and 73.57 per cent respectively.
The middlemens margin was high in channel I, being 8.20 per cent and in channel II it was
only 2.93 per cent. Channel II was found to be more efficient than channel I because of
high producers share in consumers rupee and also low consumers price.
Lal (1980) in his study analyzed costs, margins and price spread of Gur and
Khandsari in three different markets of Uttar Pradesh. The investigation revealed three
important channels of trade. Channel I comprising of sugar cane producers - Gur and
Khandsari producers Retailers in villages - Consumers in villages, Channel II comprising
of sugar cane producers - Gur/Khandsari producers Wholesalers in Lucknow - Retailers
in Lucknow - Consumers in Lucknow and Channel III comprising of sugar cane producers
- Gur/Khandsari producers - Wholesalers in Lucknow - Wholesalers in Calcutta - Retailers
in Calcutta - Consumers in Calcutta. Due to difficulty in obtaining factory purchasing slip,
urgent cash needs, late payments by factories and transportation problems, the farmers were
selling their produce to either Gur or Khandsari unit at a lesser price than that paid by the
factories. The producers share in consumers rupee in channel I, II & III for Gur and
Khandsari were 71.11, 60.00, 52.32, 75.00, 67.41 and 60.00 per cent respectively. The
share of manufacturing costs of Gur and Khandsari in the above channels was 9.99, 10.46,
9.13, 7.98, 8.58 and 7.63 per cent respectively in the same order. The margins of Gur and
Khandsari producers were 8.11, 7.05, 6.15, 8.30, 7.60 and 6.76 per cent respectively in the
above order of channels.
2.3 Constraints faced by farmers and other market intermediaries in

marketing and processing of jaggery
Ramarao (2011) studied various facets of economics involved in Jaggery

manufacturing and marketing and constraints faced by jaggery manufacturers in Andhra
Pradesh. Lack of infrastructural facilities in jaggery production and insufficient price
dissemination in jaggery marketing were major constraints. Market concentration among
whole sellers was moderately high (Gini coefficient = 0.59) and among commission agents
was medium (Gini coefficient = 0.45). The study has suggested that for profitable and
sustained way of jaggery manufacturing and marketing these constraints should be
addressed.
Rajayan and Aruputhraj (1988) studied the marketing problems of sugar cane
growers of Tamilnadu. The non-registered growers were spending 31 per cent of total cost
on jaggery manufacturing and marketing. In jaggery marketing, ten per cent of the gross
sale proceeds were taken away by traders/commission agents. There was a mutual
agreement to sell the entire produce to them or through them at the time of drawing loans.
The producers were exploited in grading and weighing as the marketing cannot be delayed
due to lack of storage facilities, short production period, heavy arrivals and disorderly
marketing.
Singh and Kishore (1998) studied marketable surplus, disposable pattern and
marketing of sugar cane in Sitapur district of U.P. The produce was disposed immediately
by the farmers due to lack of funds and storage facilities, which are considered as main
constraints.
Verma (1989) study found that the average cost of processing of sugar cane under
power-kohlu units of Gur was Rs. 6.80 per quintal in Indore district of M.P. In Gur
marketing the producers share in consumers rupee was 60 per cent. The study indicated
that the provision of adequate facilities for quick and cheaper transport and timely supply
of cheaper credit by the financing institutions to the producers, processors and traders will
help in increasing the productivity and efficiency of marketing of the produce.
Amin (1984) in his study focuses attention on the cultivation of sugarcane by small
farmers in Gorakhpur region. He analyses the socio-economic and cultural conditions,
under which these small farmers became dependent upon traders, landlords and other
intermediaries for marketing sugarcane for the production of crystal sugar.
Chapter III
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The present study was carried out in Anakapalli region of Andhra Pradesh. The study
pertains to understanding the costs and profits and constraints involved processing and
marketing of jaggery. This chapter presents the sampling design, nature and methods of
data collection and analytical tools applied in attaining the specific objectives of the study.
The chapter is presented under the following sub heads.
3.1 Sampling procedure
3.2 Collection and sources of data
3.3 Details of estimation
3.4 Tools and techniques used for analysis
3.5 Description of study area
3.1 SAMPLING PROCEDURE

Purposive and random sampling techniques were used to select villages, farmers
and market functionaries.
3.1.1. Selection of District

The present study was conducted in Anakapalli region of Visakhapatnam district.
Anakapalli was purposively selected for the study as it stands first in area under sugarcane
cultivation and production in Andhra Pradesh.
3.1.2. Selection of Subdivisions

In Anakapalli region, there are three sub-divisions. Sugarcane is grown in all three
sub-divisions. All the three sub-divisions viz., Munagapaka, Kasimkota and Anakapalli
were selected for conducting the study.
3.1.3. Selection of Villages
From each of the subdivisions, villages were selected randomly. Seven villages each
from Anakapalli and Munagapaka sub-divisions and six villages from Kasimkota sub-
division were selected based on the production of jaggery. The following table shows the
villages selected from each sub-division.
Table 3.1. Selected sub divisions and villages for the study
S. No. Sub-division Villages

1. Munagapaka Ummalada, Munagapaka, Thimmarajupeta,
Nagulapalli, Anandapuram, Ganaparthi and Melipaka.
2. Anakapalli Thummapala, Jagannatahapuram, Pisinikada,
Tagarampudi, Bowluwada, Ooderu and Tagarampudi.
3. Kasimkota Sundarayyapeta, Chintapalem, Visanna peta,

Kothapalli, Jamudulla palem and Tegada.
3.1.4. Selection of Farmers

For the study, top 20 sugarcane cultivating villages in Anakapalli region were
selected. From each village nine sugarcane growing farmers were selected proportionately
from small, medium and large farmers. A total sample size of 180 farmers were selected
randomly for conducting the study.
3.1.5. Selection of Sugarcane Processors
Seven processing units from Munagapaka sub-division, five processing units from
Anakapalli sub-division and three processing units from Kasimkota sub-division have been
selected randomly for the study. Hence 15 processing units were surveyed to collect the
data.
3.1.6 Selection of market Intermediaries
The study also intended to identify various marketing channels adopted for marketing
jaggery and marketing costs and margins involved at various levels of marketing. Twenty
traders i.e. seven from each sub-division were selected as sample except for Kasimkota
sub-division where only six were considered as sample. 20 market intermediaries from
Agricultural Market Committee and nearby retail shops were selected randomly for the
study. A total sample size of 40 was selected randomly for conducting the study.
3.2 COLLECTION OF DATA
Primary data was collected from the selected sugarcane growers, processors and market
intermediaries from the study area through survey method with the help of pre-tested
schedule in Munagapaka sub-division specially designed for the purpose. Secondary data
was collected from Agriculture Research Station in Anakapalli, journals, magazines and
Government or authentic websites.
3.3 DETAILS OF ESTIMATIONS
3.3.1 Estimation of Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR):
Compound Growth Rate is used to analyze temporal changes in area, production and yield
of sugarcane during the period 2000-2012, the formula is given below. Keeping in view the
objective of the study, growth rates of area, production and productivity of sugarcane in
India, Andhra Pradesh and Anakapalli region were calculated by fitting exponential
function of the form
Y=ABt
(or)
Log Y= Log A + Log B
Where,
Y = Area under cultivation
t = Time in years (1, 2, 3. 6)
A = Constant and
B = Regression coefficient
The above equations can be fitted by using the least squares method of estimation. That
equation also enables to obtain the Compound Growth Rate (CGR in %) as follows
Compound Growth Rate= (Antilog of B-1) * 100
3.3.2 Marketing aspects of jaggery
The information pertaining to marketing aspects of jaggery was collected from

producers, processors, commission agents, wholesalers and retailers, on the quantity sold or
purchased, the price paid or received, expenditure on labour, transport, taxes and other
incidental charges. Gross marketing margin includes the sum of margins of the various
intermediaries involved in jaggery marketing.
3.3.3 Marketing Costs
These include weighing, loading, unloading, commission of the commission agent,

market fee etc., which were paid by the marketing functionaries. The total cost incurred on
marketing, in cash or in kind, by the producer-seller and by various intermediaries involved
in the sale and purchase of the commodity till the commodity reaches the ultimate
consumer was computed as follows.
C = Cf + Cm1 + Cm2 + Cm3 + .Cmn
Where,
C = total cost of marketing of the commodity
Cf = cost paid by the producer from the time, the produce leaves the farm till sale.
Cmn = cost incurred by the nth middleman in the process of buying and selling the product.
3.3.4 Market margins
Marketing margin of a market intermediary is the difference between the price paid
(marketing cost plus purchasing price) by the intermediary and the sale price for same
amount of the produce.
Absolute margin of the ith middleman (Ami)
(Ami) = PRi (Ppi + Cmi)
Where,
PRi = Total value of receipts per unit (sale price)
Ppi = Purchase value of goods per unit (purchase price)
Cmi = Cost incurred on marketing per unit
3.3.5 Price spread
Price spread is the difference between the price paid by the consumer and the price
received by the producer. The price spread was worked out by using following method
Price spread = Pp - Pf
Where,
Pp = price paid by the consumer
Pf = price received by the farmer
3.3.6 Middlemen
In this study, different types of middlemen were considered. They are
(i) Processors: The processors are skilled labours who convert the sugarcane juice into
edible jaggery.
(ii) Wholesalers: The merchant middlemen who buy and sell agricultural commodities in
large quantities. They may buy either directly from processors or from other intermediaries
in the channel.
(iii) Retailers: Retailers buy goods from processors or wholesalers and sell them to
consumers in small quantities.
(iv) Commission agent: The commission agents are the ones who act as an agent between
one intermediary and the other.
3.4 TOOLS OF ANALYSIS

For analyzing the data collected the following tools and techniques were used.
3.4.1 Tabular Analysis
This was done by working out simple averages and percentages. Simple averages
were used to estimate cost of cultivation of sugarcane, average quantity sold, marketing
costs, profit margin, and margins of various intermediaries under different marketing
channels. Comparisons were made based on the percentages calculated.
3.4.2Marketing Efficiency
Marketing efficiency is a measure of market performance. The movement of goods

from producers to the ultimate consumers at the lowest possible cost consistent with the
provision of service desired by the consumers is termed as efficient marketing. Marketing
efficiency is essentially the degree of market performance.
According to Kohls and Uhl (1980), marketing efficiency is the ratio of market
output (satisfaction) and marketing input (cost of resources). An increase in the ratio
indicates an increased efficiency and a decrease represents a decreased efficiency.
An alternative measure was suggested by Acharya. He suggested that an ideal
measure of efficiency particularly for comparing the efficiency of alternate marketing
channels, should include,
Total marketing costs (MC)
Net marketing margins (MM)
Net prices received by the farmer (FP)
Price paid by the consumer (CP)
Here the marketing efficiency is calculated using the following formula,
MME = FP/ (MC+ MM)

Where, MME is modified marketing efficiency.
3.4.3 Garrett Ranking Method
The Garrett ranking technique was used to study the opinion of the farmers, processors and
market intermediaries regarding the constraints faced by them in production and marketing
of jaggery.
The ranking given by the respondents to various attributes has been subjected to
Garrett ranking. Garrett percentages were calculated by using the following formulae.
Per cent position = 100 (Rij - 0.5)
Nj
Where,
Rij = Rank given for the ith items by the jth individual.
Nj = Number of items ranked by the jth individual.
By using score card prepared by Garret, scores were allocated to the percentage
values. Mean of Garret scores was calculated for each attribute. Attribute with highest
mean score is considered as a major constraint faced by the farmers.
3.5 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA

The study was done in the Anakapalli region of Andhra Pradesh.
3.5.1 Description of Anakapalli region
Anakapalli is renowned all over India for its jaggery production. The place provides largest
source of jaggery for southern India. Anakapalli, Munagapaka and Kasimkota are the major
producers of jaggery. Among these, the major contribution is credited from Munagapaka
and Anakapalli.
3.5.1.1 Location:
Anakapalli is situated at 17.68N longitude and 83.02E latitude.

3.5.1.2 Demographics:
Anakapalli had a population of 84,523. Males constitute 50 per cent of the population and
females 50 per cent. Anakapalli has an average literacy rate of 67 per cent, higher than the
national average of 59.5 per cent, where 54 per cent of the males and 46 per cent of females
are literate and 10 people of the population is under six years of age.
3.5.1.3 Geography:
Anakapalli had an area of 297 square miles (770 sq km) containing 143 villages according
to the census of 2001. It is located on the banks of river Sarada .It has an average elevation
of 26 meters (85 feet).
3.5.1.4 Climate:
Anakapalli region is characterized by moderate and healthy climatic conditions, which has
three well marked seasons, namely a pleasant cold season, a hot dry summer and the rainy
season. Rains set in the first week or fortnight of June when the temperature falls and
humidity rises. This continues till fortnight of October. During summer the maximum
temperature ranges in between 400C and 450C.The cold weather begins in November and
continues up to February or March.
3.5.1.5 Land and Land Use Pattern:
As far as the agriculture production is concerned, the region is mainly a sugarcane, paddy,
corn and vegetables growing area. It is dependent for irrigation of crops on the local
rainfall. However, a considerable part of the area is flood prone due to Sarada and Nagavali
rivers.
3.5.1.6 Economy:
The economy is mainly dependent on Agriculture. A few industries like steel mill, rice
mills are also present. It is also centre for retailing, jaggery production is also major
economic activity because of presence of many wholesalers and retailers.
3.5.1.7 Major Local Markets for jaggery:
Anakapalli is major trading center for jaggery clusters with presence of major wholesalers
and Agriculture Marketing Committee (2013). Approximately 589685 qtls of jaggery
arrived in the market in the previous year. The jaggery is transported to other states through
trucks mainly to Orissa, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Maharastra, Jharkhand, Kerala,
Karnataka and Bihar.
Fig.3.1 Map of Anakapalli

Chapter IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In accordance with the determined objectives of the study, this chapter deals with
the presentation and description of results of the study. For easy understanding and
convenience this chapter is presented under the following sub-heads
4.1 Trends in area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in India, Andhra Pradesh and
Visakhapatnam.
4.2 Socio economic characteristics of the farmers.
4.3 Cost of establishment of a jaggery unit and cost and returns in jaggery production.
4.4 Analysis of marketing aspects of jaggery.
4.5 Constraints in processing and marketing of jaggery.
4.1 Trends in area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in India,

Andhra Pradesh and Visakhapatnam
4.1.1 Trends in area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in India
In this section an attempt has been made to analyze the Compound Growth Rate
(CGR) and per cent change in area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in India and
the data pertaining to it was accessed from the secondary source for a period of twelve
years (2000-01 to 2011-2012).
The area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in India from 2000-01 to 2011-
2012 has been presented in the Table 4.1. The area under cultivation in 2001-2002 is seen
as 4412 thousand hectares i.e. 2.2 per cent increase over the previous year and it further
increased to 4520 thousand hectares (2.45 per cent) in the subsequent year. In 2003-2004,
the area decreased to 3938 thousand hectare (-12.88 per cent) and again it further decreased
to 3661 thousand hectare (-7.03 per cent) in the year 2004-2005. In 2005-2006 year there is
further increase in area to 4202 thousand hectare (14.78 per cent) and it further increased to
5151 thousand hectare (22.58 per cent) in the subsequent year and further the area
decreased to 5055 thousand hectare (-1.86 percent) in the year 2007-2008. In years 2008-
2009 and 2009 -2010 the area further decreased to 4415 thousand hectare (-12.66) and
4175 thousand hectare (-5.44 percent) respectively. In 2010-2011 there is increase in area
over the previous year by 17.01 per cent and it further increased to 5086 thousand hectare
(4.11 per cent) in the subsequent year which may be due to remunerative price of
Sugarcane.
The production of Sugarcane in India is seen as 296 million tonnes in 2000-2001. In

2001-2002 production slightly increased to 297 (0.33 per cent) but it further decreased to
287 million tonnes (-3.36 per cent) in the subsequent year. In 2003-2004, it further
decreased to 234 million tonnes (-18.46 per cent) and in subsequent year it slightly
increased to 237 million tonnes (1.28 per cent). There is drastic increase in production from
281 million tonnes (18.56 per cent) to 356 million tonnes (26.69 per cent) in 2005-2006
and 2006-2007 years respectively. In 2007-2008, the production slightly decreased to 348
million tonnes (-2.24 per cent) and further decreased to 285 million tonnes (-18.1 per cent)
in the subsequent year. In the year 2009-2010 the production was 292 million tonnes (2.45
percent) and in 2010-2011 there is drastic increase in production i.e. 342 million tonnes
(17.12 per cent) over the previous year and finally, it went upto 358 million tonnes (4.67
per cent) in the year 2011-2012.
The productivity of Sugarcane in India in 2000-2001 is seen as 686 qtls/ha which

decreased to 674 qtls/ha (-1.75 per cent) in 2001-2002 and further decreased to 636 qtls/ha
(-5.64 per cent) in the year 2002-2003. In 2004-2005 the productivity increased to 648
qtls/ha an increase of 9.09 per cent over previous year productivity which is 594 qtls/ha. In
2006-2007 the productivity slightly increased to 690 qtls/ha a decrease of 3.24 per cent
over the previous year which is 669 qtls/ha and it further decreased to 688 qtls/ha (-0.29 per
cent) in the subsequent year. In 2009-2010 the productivity further increased from 646
qtls/ha (-6.10 per cent) to 700 qtls/ha (8.36 per cent). In years 2010-2011 and 2011-12 the
productivity jumped from 701 qtls/ha (0.14 per cent) to 703 qtls/ha (0.29 per cent)
respectively due to better management practices.
The Compound Growth Rates for area, production and productivity were 1.37 per
cent, -1.47 per cent and -0.29 per cent respectively. For the all three variables, the growth
rate is not significant.
Table 4.1. Percentage change and growth rates in area, production and
productivity of Sugarcane in India (2000-01 to 2011-12)
% %
% change
change Production change
Area in over Productivity
Year over in 000000 over
000 ha previous in Qtls/ha
Sl.No previous tonnes previous
year
year year
1 2000-01 4316 - 296 - 686 -
2 2001-02 4412 2.22 297 0.33 674 -1.75
3 2002-03 4520 2.45 287 -3.36 636 -5.64
4 2003-04 3938 -12.88 234 -18.46 594 -6.60
5 2004-05 3661 -7.03 237 1.28 648 9.09
6 2005-06 4202 14.78 281 18.56 669 3.24
7 2006-07 5151 22.58 356 26.69 690 3.14
8 2007-08 5055 -1.86 348 -2.24 688 -0.29
9 2008-09 4415 -12.66 285 -18.1 646 -6.10
10 2009-10 4175 -5.44 292 2.45 700 8.36
11 2010-11 4885 17.01 342 17.12 701 0.14
12 2011-12 5086 4.11 358 4.67 703 0.29
13 %
change
in 2011- 17.84 20.94 2.92
12 over
2000-01
14
1.37 -1.47 -0.29
CGR
(1.64) (1.39) (0.64)
(Source: Indian Sugar, September, 2013)

Note: *Significant at 1 per cent level of probability
Figures in parentheses are t values;
4.1.2 Trends in area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in
Andhra Pradesh
In this section an attempt has been made to analyze the Compound Growth
Rate (CGR) and per cent change in area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in
Andhra Pradesh and the data pertaining to it was accessed from the secondary source for a
period of twelve years (2000-01 to 2011-2012).
The area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in Andhra Pradesh from 2000-
01 to 2011-2012 has been presented in the Table 4.2. The area under cultivation in 2001-
2002 is seen as 218 thousand hectares i.e. 0.46 per cent increase over the previous year and
it further increased to 233 thousand hectares (6.88 per cent) in the subsequent year. In
2003-2004, the area decreased to 209 thousand hectare (-10.3 per cent) and slightly
increased to 210 thousand hectare (0.47 per cent) in the year 2004-2005. In 2005-2006 year
there is further increase in area to 230 thousand hectare an increase of 9.52 per cent over
the previous year and it further increased to 264 thousand hectare (14.7 per cent) in the
subsequent year and further the area decreased to247 thousand hectare (-6.43 percent) in
the year 2007-2008. In years 2008-2009 and 2009 -2010 the area further decreased to 196
thousand hectare (-20.64) and 158 thousand hectare (-19.38 percent) respectively. In 2010-
2011 there is increase in area over the previous year i.e. 192 thousand hectare (21.51 per
cent) and finally the area increased to 204 thousand hectare (6.25 per cent) in the
subsequent year which may be due to remunerative price of Sugarcane. However it can be
noticed that overall when compared to the beginning of the period to end of the period of
study, there is decrease in area.
The production of sugarcane in Andhra Pradesh is seen as 17.69 million tonnes in
2000-2001. In 2001-2002 it slightly increased to 18.06 (2.1 per cent) but it further
decreased to 15.38 million tonnes (-14.38 per cent) in the subsequent year. In 2003-2004, it
further decreased to 15.07 million tonnes (-2.06 per cent) and in subsequent year it slightly
increased to 15.73 million tonnes (4.43 per cent). There is drastic increase in production
from 17.66 million tonnes in 2005-2006 (12.24 per cent) to 21.69 million tonnes (22.78 per
cent) in 2006-2007 years respectively. In 2007-2008, the production slightly decreased to
20.29 million tonnes (-6.43 per cent) and further decreased to 15.38 million tonnes (-24.22
per cent) in the subsequent year. In the year 2009-2010 the production was 11.70 million
tonnes (-23.8 percent). In 2010-2011 there is drastic increase in production to 14.96 million
tonnes an increase of 27.8 per cent over the previous year and finally, it went upto 16.72
million tonnes (11.78 per cent) in the year 2011-2012.
productivity of Sugarcane in Andhra Pradesh (2000-01 to 2011-12)
% %
% change
Area in over Productivity
000 ha previous in Qtls/ha
Sl.No previous tonnes previous
year
year year
1 2000-01 217 - 17.69 - 814.7 -
2 2001-02 218 0.46 18.06 2.1 829.4 1.93
3 2002-03 233 6.88 15.38 -14.81 661.8 -20.2
4 2003-04 209 -10.3 15.07 -2.06 721 8.94
5 2004-05 210 0.47 15.73 4.43 749.4 3.94
6 2005-06 230 9.52 17.66 12.24 767.6 2.42
7 2006-07 264 14.7 21.69 22.78 821.6 7.03
8 2007-08 247 -6.43 20.29 -6.43 821.7 3.65
9 2008-09 196 -20.64 15.38 -24.22 784.6 -4.5
10 2009-10 158 -19.38 11.70 -23.8 741 -5.56
11 2010-11 192 21.51 14.96 27.8 779.3 5.17
12 2011-12 204 6.25 16.72 11.78 820 5.21
13 %
change
in 2011- -5.99 -5.43 0.77
12 over
2000-01
14 2.06 -1.09 3.94*
CGR
(1.89) (0.80) (2.5)
(Source: Indian Sugar, September, 2013)
The productivity of sugarcane in Andhra Pradesh in 2000-2001 is seen as 814.7
qtls/ha which increased to 829.4 qtls/ha (1.93 per cent) in 2001-2002 and further decreased
to 661.8 qtls/ha (-20.2 per cent) in the year 2002-2003. In 2004-2005 the productivity
increased to 749.4 qtls/ha, 3.94 per cent over previous year productivity which was 721
qtls/ha. In 2006-2007 the productivity slightly increased to 821.6 qtls/ha (7.03 per cent)
over the previous year which is 767.6 qtls/ha (2.42 per cent) and it slightly increased to
821.7 qtls/ha (3.65 per cent) in the subsequent year. In 2009-2010 the productivity
decreased from 784.6 qtls/ha (-4.5 per cent) and further to 741 qtls/ha (5.56 per cent) in the
subsequent year. In years 2010-2011 and 2011-12 the productivity increased to 779.3
qtls/ha (5.17 per cent) and 820 qtls/ha (5.21 per cent) respectively due to better
management practices and high yielding varieties.
cent, -1.09 per cent and 3.94 per cent respectively. Among all the three variables, the
growth rate of productivity is significant.
4.1.3 Trends in area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in

Visakhapatnam
In this section an attempt has been made to analyze the Compound Growth Rate
(CGR) and per cent change in area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in
Visakhapatnam and the data pertaining to it was accessed from the secondary source for a
period of twelve years (2000-01 to 2011-2012).
The area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in Visakhapatnam from 2000-01

to 2011-2012 has been presented in the Table 4.3. The area under cultivation in 2001-2002
is seen as 36135 hectares i.e. -15.22 per cent decrease over the previous year area 42620
hectare and it further increased to 44090 hectares (22.01 per cent) in the subsequent year.
In 2003-2004, the area decreased to 39000 hectare (-11.54 per cent) and increased to 42000
hectare (7.69 per cent) in the year 2004-2005. In 2005-2006 there is further decrease in area
to 41535 hectare -1.11 per cent decrease over the previous year and it further increased to
42589 hectare (2.54 per cent) in the subsequent year and further the area decreased to 4111
hectare (-3.47 percent) in the year 2007-2008. In years 2008-2009 and 2009 -2010 the area
further decreased to 39315 hectare (-4.37) and 39478 hectare (0.41 percent) respectively. In
2010-2011 there is slight decrease in area over the previous year and it was 39315 hectare
(-0.41 per cent) and finally the area increased to 39478 hectare (0.47 per cent) in the
subsequent year which may be due to remunerative price of Sugarcane.
productivity of Sugarcane in Visakhapatnam (2000-01 to 2011-12)
% %
% change
Sl.No Area in over Productivity
ha previous in Qtls /ha
previous tonnes previous
year
year year
1 2000-01 42620 - 25.89 - 608 -
2 2001-02 36135 -15.22 21.67 -16.31 600 -1.32
3 2002-03 44090 22.01 15.88 -26.70 360 -40.00
4 2003-04 39000 -11.54 19.84 24.87 509 41.39
5 2004-05 42000 7.69 21.19 6.82 504 -0.98
6 2005-06 41535 -1.11 20.43 -3.56 492 -2.38
7 2006-07 42589 2.54 24.91 21.89 585 18.90
8 2007-08 41111 -3.47 34.45 38.29 838 43.25
9 2008-09 39315 -4.37 31.84 -7.56 810 -3.34
10 2009-10 39478 0.41 27.23 -14.46 690 -14.81
11 2010-11 39315 -0.41 28.30 3.92 720 4.35
12 2011-12 39478 0.41 28.02 -0.98 710 -1.39

%
change
13 in 2011- -7.37 8.22 16.77
12 over
2000-01 -
0.67 0.37 4.2 *
14 CGR
(1.7) (0.6) (2.5)
(Source: Regional Agricultural Research Station, Anakapalli)
The production of Sugarcane in Visakhapatnam is seen as 25.89 million tonnes in

2000-2001. In 2001-2002 the production of sugarcane decreased to 21.67 lakh tonnes (-
16.31 per cent) and it further decreased to 15.88 lakh tonnes (-26.70 per cent) in the
subsequent year. In 2003-2004, it increased to 19.84 lakh tonnes (24.87 per cent) and in
subsequent year, it further increased to 21.19 lakh tonnes (6.82 per cent). There is decrease
in production in 2005-2006 to 20.43 lakh hectares (-3.56 per cent) and an increase in
production to 24.91 lakh hectares (21.89 per cent) in 2006-2007. In 2007-2008, the
production increased to 34.45 lakh tonnes (38.29 per cent) and it further decreased to 31.84
lakh tonnes (-7.56 per cent) in the subsequent year. In 2009-2010 the production was 27.23
lakh tonnes (-14.46 percent).In 2010-2011 there is slight increase in production i.e. 28.30
lakh tonnes an increase of 3.92 per cent over the previous year and finally, it slightly
decreased to 28.02 lakh tonnes (-0.98 per cent) in the year 2011-2012.
The productivity of Sugarcane in Visakhapatnam in 2000-2001 is seen as 608

qtls/ha which decreased to 600 qtls/ha (-1.32 per cent) in 2001-2002 and drastically
decreased to 360 qtls/ha (-40 per cent) in the year 2002-2003. In 2004-2005 the
productivity decreased to 504 qtls/ha a decrease of -0.98 per cent) over previous years
productivity, which was 509 qtls/ha (41.39 per cent). In 2006-2007 the productivity
increased to 585 qtls/ha (18.90 per cent) over the previous year i.e. 492 qtls/ha (-2.38 per
cent) and it drastically increased to 838 qtls/ha (43.25 per cent) in the subsequent year. In
2009-2010 the productivity drastically decreased to 690 qtls/ha a decrease of -14.81 per
cent over the previous year productivity i.e. 810 qtls/ha (-3.34 per cent). Productivity in
2010-2011 slightly increased to 720 qtls/ha (4.35 per cent) and finally, in 2011-12, the
productivity decreased to 710 qtls/ha (-1.39 per cent).
cent, 0.37 per cent and 4.2 per cent respectively. Among all the three variables, the growth
rate of productivity is significant.
4.2 SOCIO ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FARMERS
The socio- economic characteristics of the farmers include educational status,

family size and land holding of the farmers. Analysis of socio economic characteristics is
required to have comprehensive view about the farmers and it may also be useful to the
policy makers to formulate policies suitable to the farmers.
4.1.1 Educational Status of the Farmers
Particulars regarding the educational status are presented in the table 4.4. It is
observed that out of 180 farmers 54 farmers are illiterate, of which 34 (63 per cent) are
small, 12 (22 per cent) are medium and 8 (15 per cent) are large farmers. The number of
farmers who pursued primary education are 50, of which 30 (60 per cent) are small, 14 are
medium (28 per cent) and 6 (12 per cent) are large farmers. The total number of farmers
who pursued secondary education are 32, of which 24 (75 per cent) are small, 16 (2 per
cent) are medium and 11 (35 per cent) are large farmers. The total number of farmers who
pursued higher education is 25, of which 12 (48 per cent) are small, 8 (32 per cent) are
medium and 5 (20 per cent) are large. The total number of farmers who are either illiterate
or having primary education are 104 in number which is about 58 per cent of the total
population. So the level of education is very less among sugarcane growing farmers of the
study area.
Table 4.4. Educational Status of the Farmers
Sl.N No. of respondents Percentage

Particulars
o. Small Medium Large Total Small Medium Large
1 Illiterate 34 12 8 54 63 22 15
2 Primary(1st to 7th ) 30 14 6 50 60 28 12
3 Secondary (8th to 10th) 24 16 11 32 75 2 35
4 Higher ( Above 10th) 12 8 5 25 48 32 20
Total 100 50 30 180
(Source: Estimates from the survey data of the study, 2014)
4.2.2. Age Profile of the Farmers

It is observed from the table 4.5, that among the total number of farmers 100
farmers are small, 50 are medium and 30 are large farmers. A total number of 17 farmers
fall in between 25-30 age group, of which 10 (59 per cent) are small, 5 (29 percent) are
medium and 2 (12 per cent) are large farmers. A total of 30 farmers fall in the range of 31-
35 age group, of which 22 (58 per cent) are small, 9 (24 per cent) are medium and 7 (18 per
cent) are large farmers. A total of 70 farmers fall in the age group of 36-40, of which 38 (54
per cent) are small, 18 (26 per cent) are medium and 14 (20 per cent) are large. In case of
age group of 41-45, 39 farmers fall under this, of which 22 (56 per cent) are small, 6 (38
per cent) are medium and 2 (12 per cent) are large farmers. Farmers in the age group of 36-
40 are more and constitute nearly 62 per cent. Hence most of the farmers are middle aged
having good number of years of experience in Sugarcane cultivation.
Table 4.5. Age profile of sample farmers
particulars No. of respondents Percentage

Sl.No.
Small Medium Large Total Small Medium Large
1 25-30 10 5 2 17 59 29 12
2 31-35 22 9 7 38 58 24 18
3 36-40 38 18 14 70 54 26 20
4 41-45 22 12 5 39 56 31 13
5 46 and above 8 6 2 16 50 38 12
Total 100 50 30 180
4.2.3. Family Size

Particulars regarding the family size are presented in the table 4.6. In case of family
size of less than 4 members, small farmers are 56 per cent, 25 per cent are medium and 19
per cent are large farmers. In 4 to 6 members in a family, small, medium and large farmers
accounts for about 65 per cent, 22 per cent and 13 per cent respectively. In family size of 7
to 9 members, small farmers account for 35 per cent, medium farmers account for 41 per
cent and large farmers account for 24 per cent. In case of family size of 10 and above,
majority are small farmers who account for 45 per cent when compared to medium (33 per
cent) and large farmers (22 per cent). Thus it can be noticed that most of the farmers have
families consisting of 4 to 6 members.
Table 4.6. Family size of respondents
No. of respondents Percentage

Sl.No. Particulars
Small Medium Large Total Small Medium Large
1 Less than four 18 8 6 32 56 25 19
2 4-6 62 22 12 96 65 22 13
3 7-9 12 14 8 34 35 41 24
4 10& above 8 6 4 18 45 33 22
Total
4.2.4 Land holdings
Particulars regarding the land holdings are presented in the table 4.7. Small farmers are
having a average land of 2.51 acres, where as medium farmers has an average land of 5.32
acres and the large farmers are having an average land of 8.26 acres. The total land of
(owned and leased) small farmers was about 251 acres, medium farmers was 266 acres and
in the case of large farmers, the total land was 248 acres.
Table 4.7.Sugarcane land holdings of respondents
Sl.No Small Medium Large

Particulars
. (100 farmers) (50 farmers) (30 farmers)
1 Irrigated 215 211 210
Owned
land Unirrigated 14 23 12
(acres) Total
229 234 232
2
Irrigated 22 32 16
Leased
Unirrigated
land - - -
(acres)
Total 32 16
22
Average land holding 2.51 5.32 8.26
4.3 Cost of establishment of a jaggery unit and cost and returns in
jaggery production
4.3.1. Cost of establishment of a jaggery unit
The establishment of a jaggery production unit involves considerable costs.

From the table 4.8 it is clear that investment required for establishing jaggery production
unit was Rs 197430. Minimum land of 0.25 acre is required whose value Rs 90000 is
estimated to be which constitutes 45.58 per cent of total cost. The establishment cost of
shed was Rs 9650 (4.89 per cent), furnace was Rs 8000 (4.05 per cent) and pan was Rs
6000 (3.04 per cent). The cost of cane crusher was Rs 52000 which is 26.34 per cent of the
total cost and electric motor is Rs 23000 which constitutes 11.65 per cent of the total cost.
Two filter plates and two ash spades accounting to a value of Rs 450 (0.23 per cent) and Rs
1050 (0.53 per cent) respectively are also required for jaggery production. Twelve buckets
are required, which account to Rs 3000 (1.52 per cent). Miscellaneous costs account for Rs
4280 (2.17 per cent). From the analysis of costs it can be seen that acquiring the land is the
prime factor in establishment of jaggery production unit.
Table 4.8. Investment for establishment of jaggery production unit (one tonne
capacity per day)
Sl.No. Particulars Number costs

Value(Rs.) %
1 Land 0.25 acre 90000 45.58
2 Shed 1 9650 4.89
3 Furnace 1 8000 4.05
4 Pan 1 6000 3.04
5 Cane crusher 1 52000 26.34
6 Electric motor 1 23000 11.65
7 Filter plates 2 450 0.23
8 Ash spades 2 1050 0.53
9 Buckets/moulds 12 3000 1.52
10 Miscellaneous - 4280 2.17
11 Total - 197430 100.00
4.3.2. Cost and returns in jaggery production
Anjugam et al., (2007) estimated that the net income realized from
jaggery production was Rs. 14,138 in western zone of Tamilnadu, which was higher than
that of the cane sold to the sugar factories. In the same manner, it is observed from table
4.9. the cost of raw material i.e., Sugarcane is the prime variable cost Rs 3000 (59.64 per
cent) of the total cost of jaggery production. Sugarcane is the key factor in deciding the
price of jaggery for preparing one quintal of jaggery the total cost incurred were Rs 5030,
out of which 64.7, 8.6, 1.7, 4.3 and 3.2 per cent costs were incurred on Sugarcane,
chemicals, labour, fuel and interest respectively. Chemicals include sodium Hydrosulphate,
Lime Super Phosphate, Super Phosphate, Bhendi extract, Sunflower oil and Soda powder,
are used in preparation of jaggery. The total returns was Rs 4980, out of which net returns
are Rs 350. Farmers are not able to establish a jaggery production unit due to high
investment cost, production of jaggery is done in jaggery units on rent basis to quantity of
jaggery produced. Farmers themselves process Sugarcane into jaggery.
Table 4.9. Cost and returns in jaggery production (Rs per quintal)
Sl.No. Particulars costs

I COST Value(Rs.) %
1 Sugarcane 3000 64.7
2 Chemicals 400 8.6
3 Labour 800 1.7
4 Fuel 200 4.3
5 Interest 150 3.2
6 Miscellaneous (rent) 80 1.7
Total cost 4630 100.00
II RETURNS Value(Rs.)
1 Total returns 4980
2 Net returns 350
Note: The bagasse which comes out from crushing of sugarcane was used as fuel. So, its
cost was minimum.
4.4 ANALYSIS OF MARKETING ASPECTS OF JAGGERY
The success of any enterprise depends on how efficiently the ultimate products are
marketed. In an unorganized market the interests of both the producers and consumers
suffer, while those who dominate the marketing activity will immensely benefit. In the
study area, there are institutional agencies to market the jaggery produced by the farmers.
The entire marketing activity is in the hands of both public and private traders. Based on
their operations, the traders are categorized into wholesalers, commission agents and
retailers.
4.4.1 Marketing channels of jaggery in study area
Marketing channel refers to the way through which the goods move from the
producers level to the ultimate consumers. It involves various trade practices and
middlemen who facilitate the flow of goods and services from the point of production to
the point of consuming centres. The channels are linked with the chains of intermediaries
involved at various levels of marketing for smooth distribution of the products. The
channels adopted are generally influenced by the factors like location of the growers,
distance of the market centres, townships, processing units etc. Three marketing channels
were identified in jaggery marketing in the study area
Channel - I
FARMER
COMMISSION
AGENT
WHOLESALER
RETAILER
CONSUMER
Figure 4.1. Marketing of jaggery channel-I
This channel I includes farmer, commission agent, wholesaler, retailer and

consumer. In this channel commission agent procures jaggery from farmer by providing
credit for the cultivation of sugarcane prior to the harvesting season. Wholesalers purchase
jaggery from commission agents and then wholesalers sells jaggery to retailers in bulk
quantities. Retailers sell jaggery to consumers in small quantities of 500 gm, 1kg and in
multiples of 1 kg.
Channel II
The second channel adopted in marketing of jaggery is depicted in the 4.2
Channel II consists of farmer, wholesaler, retailer and consumer. In this channel

farmer directly sells jaggery to wholesaler without the intervention of commission agent.
The wholesaler looks after the grading and packaging of jaggery in baskets or in gunny
bags which holds a weight of 10 kg to 15 kg. They sell to the retailers and the retailers in
turn sell to the consumers. But farmers face difficulties in this supply chain because the
wholesalers are placed at distant places.
FARMER
WHOLESALER
RETAILER
CONSUMER
Figure 4.2. Marketing of jaggery channel-II

Channel III
In this market channel farmers are benefitted more when compared to the remaining
channels. Retailers reap more benefits when compared to the farmers as high margins are
obtained by the retailers. Channel III is depicted in the following figure.
FARMER
RETAILER
CONSUMER
Figure 4.3. Marketing of jaggery channel-III
4.4.2 Marketing Costs, Margins and Price Spread Analysis
Channel I: This channel is comprised of farmer, commission agent, wholesaler,

retailer and consumer. Net price received by farmer in channel I is Rs 2823 which is 78.55
per cent of consumer rupee. The farmer incurred transportation cost of Rs 18 and on hamali
charges of Rs 6.4 per quintal of jaggery. These two costs accounted to Rs 24.4 per qt of
jaggery which is 0.68 per cent of consumer rupee. The selling price of farmer to
commission agent is Rs. 2847.4 which is 79.23 per cent of consumer rupee. The margin of
commission agent is Rs 185.2 which is 5.15 per cent of consumer rupee. Market cost
accounted by commission agent included weighing charges (Rs 8.2), transportation charges
(Rs 28.75), hamali charges (26.2 per cent), stitching of covers (Rs 42.6), market fee (Rs
8.7) and miscellaneous (Rs 9.25). The total market cost accounted by commission agent is
Rs 123.7 which is 3.48 per cent of consumer rupee. The margin obtained by commission
agent is Rs185.2 which is 5.15 per cent of consumer rupee. The selling price of commission
agent is Rs 3156.7 which is 87.83 per cent of consumer rupee. Market cost accounted by
wholesaler included transportation charges (Rs 19.62), hamali charges (Rs 26.7) and
miscellaneous (Rs 7.3). The total market cost accounted by wholesaler is 53.62 which is
1.49 per cent. The margin obtained by wholesaler is Rs 135.7 which is 3.78 of consumer
rupee. The selling price of the wholesaler is Rs 3346.02 which accounts to 93.10 per cent
of consumer rupee. Market cost incurred by retailer included hamali charges (Rs 19.6) and
transportation cost (Rs 13.5). The total market cost incurred by retailer is Rs 33.1 which is
0.92 per cent of consumer price. The margin obtained by the retailer is Rs 214.94 which is
5.98 per cent of consumer rupee. Total marketing cost involved in entire channel is Rs
234.82. The price spread in channel I is Rs 771.06 per qt of jaggery. Marketing efficiency
of channel I is 3.66 which is lowest than the remaining two marketing channels.
Table 4.10. Price spread of jaggery marketing through channel-I
Sl.No. Particulars Rs/qt %

0f jaggery consumers
price
Net price received by the farmer 2823 78.55
A Costs incurred by farmer

1 Transportation charges 18 0.50
2 Hamali charges 6.4 0.18
3 Total cost incurred 24.4 0.68
4 Selling price of farmer/ purchase price of 2847.4 79.23
commission agent
B Cost incurred by commission agent
1 Weighing charges 8.2 0.23
2 Transportation charges 28.75 0.80
4 Stitching of covers 42.6 1.19
5 Market fee 8.7 0.24
6 Miscellaneous 9.25 0.26
7 Purchase price 2847.8 79.2
9 Margin of commission agent 185.2 5.15
10 Selling price of commission agent / purchase 3156.7 87.83
price of wholesaler
C Costs incurred by wholesaler
6 Margin of wholesaler 135.7 3.78
7 Selling price of wholesaler /purchase price of 3346.02 93.10
retailer
D Costs incurred by retailer
2 Transportation 13.5 0.38
4 Total costs incurred 3379.12 94.02
5 Margin of retailer 214.94 5.98
6 Selling price of retailer/purchase price of 3594.06 100
consumer
Total marketing cost 234.82
Total marketing margin 535.84
Price spread 771.06
Marketing efficiency (Acharya approach) 3.66
Channel II: This channel comprised of farmer, wholesaler, retailer and consumer.
Net price received by farmer in channel II is Rs 2823 which is 78.55 per cent of consumer
rupee. The farmer incurred a transportation cost of Rs 38 and hamali charges of Rs 16.4.
All these costs accounted to Rs 54.4 per qt of jaggery which is 0.48 per cent of consumer
rupee. The selling price of farmer is Rs 2877.4 which is 84.53 per cent of consumer rupee.
Market cost accounted by wholesaler included transportation charges (Rs 19.62), hamali
charges (Rs 29.7) and miscellaneous (Rs 8.3). The total market cost accounted by
wholesaler is Rs 57.62 which is 1.69 per cent of consumers rupee. The margin obtained by
wholesaler is Rs 135 which is 3.97 per cent of consumer rupee. The selling price of the
wholesaler is Rs 3070.02 which accounts 90.19 per cent of consumer rupee. Market cost
incurred by retailer included hamali charges (Rs 21.6), and transportation cost (Rs 14.5).
The total market cost accounted by retailer is RS 36.1 which was 1.06 per cent of consumer
price. The margin obtained by the retailer is 297.94 which accounts to 8.75 per cent of
consumer rupee. Total marketing cost involved in entire channel is Rs 432.94. The price
spread in channel II is Rs 526.66 per quintal of jaggery. Marketing efficiency of channel II
is 4.86 which is higher than the marketing channel I.
Table 4.11. Price spread of jaggery marketing through channel-II
Sl.No. Particulars Rs/qt % consumer

0f jaggery price


wholesaler
B Costs incurred by wholesaler

6 Margin of wholesaler 135 3.97
7 S.P. of wholesaler /purchase price of retailer 3070.02 90.19
C Costs incurred by retailer


6 Selling price of retailer/purchase price of 3404.06 100.00

consumer
Price spread 526.66
Table 4.12. Price spread of jaggery marketing through channel-III
Sl.No. Particulars Rs/qt % consumer

0f jaggery price


retailer
B Costs incurred by retailer
6 Selling price of retailer/purchase price of 3324.06 100.00

consumer
Price spread 501.06
Channel III: This channel comprised of farmer, retailer and consumer. Net price
received by farmer in channel III is Rs 2823 which is 84.93 per cent of consumer rupee.
The farmer incurred transportation cost of Rs 45 and on hamali charges of Rs 29.32. All
these costs accounted to Rs 74.32 per qt of jaggery which is 2.24 per cent of consumer
rupee. The selling price of farmer is Rs 2897.32 which is 87.16 per cent of consumer rupee.
Market cost incurred by retailer included hamali charges (Rs 22.6) and transportation cost
(Rs 26.4). The total market cost accounted by retailer is Rs 49 which is 1.47 per cent of
consumer price. The margin obtained by the retailer is Rs 377.74 which is 11.36 per cent of
consumer rupee. Total marketing cost involved in entire channel is Rs 123.32. The price
spread in channel III is Rs 501.06 per qt of jaggery. Marketing efficiency of channel III is
5.63 which is highest than the remaining two marketing channels.
4.5 Constraints in processing and marketing of jaggery
Farmers and market intermediaries faced some problems while dealing with jaggery
at their level of operation. Survey has been done to identify these constraints.
4.5.1 Constraints faced by farmers in processing and marketing of

jaggery
Constraints in jaggery production and marketing were identified after discussion

and interaction with the farmers. The thirteen identified constraints were incorporated in
the schedule for preferential ranking by farmers. Garret Ranking Technique has been used
for quantification of rank and overall rank are presented in the table 4.13.
Seventy one per cent of total respondents considered market holidays as major
constraint. During the festival seasons the market is closed and farmers faced difficulty to
sell their produce in the market. Many of the farmers were not aware of local holidays, and
without this information when they come from distant places, they are facing many
hardships.
Sixty nine per cent of total respondents mentioned that high labour charges during
processing of sugarcane is a major constraint. Since labour are demanding wages on hourly
basis rather than on work basis and since jaggery processing is a time consuming activity
the labour costs are high.
Sixty five per cent of total respondents considered fluctuation of jaggery prices as
constraint. During the festival time like Diwali, Pongal and Dusshera the price of jaggery
increase sharply and falls down during off season.
Fifty six per cent of total respondents considered forced sale due to repayment of
loan and lack of transportation as major constraints. Many small and medium farmers are
selling the jaggery in order to repay the loan on time. Logistics is the major constraint for
jaggery industry to supply to distant markets.
Fifty five per cent of total respondents quoted that untimely payment by the
marketing channel members as constraint. Sometimes delay in the payment by the
intermediaries is due to lack of cash in hand or lack of bank accounts to the farmers.
Table 4.13. Constraints perceived by farmers in processing and

marketing of jaggery
Sl.No. Constraints Score Garret

Ranking
1 Market holidays 70.67 I
2 High labour costs incurred in processing 69.00 II
3 Fluctuation in jaggery prices 65.44 III
4 Forced sale due to repayment of loan 56.00 IV
5 Lack of transportation facilities 55.89 V
6 Untimely payment by the marketing channel 55.56 VI
members
7 Lack of credit facility 52.56 VII
8 Distress sale 51.67 VIII
9 Lack of storage facilities 47.22 IX
10 Defective and faulty weighing 45.33 X
11 High harvesting charges 44.00 XI
12 High commission charges 34.00 XII
13 High transportation charges 32.22 XIII
Fifty one per cent of total respondents considered distress sale as constraint.
Because of health issues or due to any unexpected situations, the farmer is forced to sell
jaggery at lower price.
Forty seven per cent of total respondents considered lack of storage facilities as
constraint. The storage charges are high for jaggery which is around Rs 15000 for 1 qt of
jaggery for three months period, because of this farmers are of the opinion that it would
heavily add to their costs.
Forty five per cent of total respondents reported defective and faulty weighing as
constraint. Despite having electric weighing machines which are more accurate in weighing
jaggery, some commission agents are deceiving the farmers by means of faulty weighing.
Thirty four per cent of total respondents considered high harvesting costs as a constraint.
The farm labours are demanding more wages due to scarcity of labour.
Thirty four per cent of total respondents considered high commission charges as
constraint. For every Rs 100 commission agents in Anakapalli are charging Rs 5 as
commission charges i.e. about 5 per cent.
Thirty two per cent of total respondents considered high transportation charges as
constraint. It is considered as a minor constraint.
4.5.2. Constraints faced by traders and retailers in marketing of jaggery

During the survey, the problems associated with marketing of jaggery have been
identified. An opinion survey was conducted among the selected 20 traders and 20 retailers
in the study area to identify the problems faced by traders and retailers in marketing of
jaggery and the results are presented in table 4.14.
Table 4.14. Constraints faced by market intermediaries and traders in
marketing of jaggery
Sl.No. Constraints Score Garret

Ranking
1 Fluctuation in jaggery prices 82.41 I
2 Failure by the farmers to pay in time 80.23 II
3 Lack of adequate processing units 78.54 III
4 Lack of transportation facilities 76.00 IV
5 Lack of storage facilities 71.00 V
Eighty two per cent of total respondents considered fluctuation in jaggery prices as
constraint. During festival season, the price rises and falls in the off season. Wholesaler
purchase jaggery at high price and sell it either to retailer or a customer by adding a meager
margins.
Eighty per cent of total respondents considered on part of the farmers to pay in time
as constraint. Sometimes farmers delay payment to the commission agents due to major
reasons like crop failure and climatic variations which affect the crop.
Seventy eight per cent of total respondents considered lack of adequate processing
units as constraint. Processing units are limited in number market intermediaries face
difficulties in processing jaggery when demand is high.
Seventy six per cent of total respondents considered lack of transportation facilities
as constraint. Mainly auto rickshaws are used for transportation for small quantities of
jaggery. High fuel costs and improper roads are adding more to the transportation costs. For
transportation of bulk quantities, trucks are mandatory but their availability is less.
Seventy one percent of total respondents considered lack of storage facilities as

constraint. Only three cold storage units are located in and around Anakapalli.
Chapter V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
5.1 SUMMARY
Sugarcane plant is a coarse grass which is quite tall about 10 to 20 feet and belongs
to the family Poaceae. Sugarcane is an important cash crop in India and used as raw
material in the preparation of sugar and jaggery. India is the largest producer of the sugar
and jaggery in the world. The sugarcane cultivating areas may be broadly classified into
two agro climatic regions-tropical and sub tropical. The sub-tropical zone includes four
states, i.e. Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Punjab and Haryana. The tropical zone includes five states,
i.e. Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Tamilnadu, Gujarat and Karnataka. Since ancient times,
jaggery has been an important item of food and even today jaggery manufacturing
continues to be the most important cottage industry in India. Jaggery is well known for its
medicinal value.
Marketing is one of the important activities in the production process of jaggery,

which facilitates the movement of goods from site of production to ultimate consumer
through various channels and by the involvement of different intermediaries within the
minimum period. Marketing involves various services like grading, packing and
transportation. Profitability of enterprise depends upon the efficient marketing. Supply of
sugarcane to sugar mills does not involve any responsibility of producers and it is the
responsibility of sugar mill to harvest and transport from producers field to sugar factory.
But on the other hand, the marketing of the jaggery is a complicated one involving a long
marketing channel, number of middlemen and time-consuming process. Anakapalli is a
major sugar cultivating area and is a jaggery processing centre with many small processing
units located farmers of Sugarcane in this area themselves manufacture jaggery and market
it by using different channels. However the farmers as well as market intermediaries face
many problems in marketing jaggery. Hence the study was undertaken with the following
specific objectives-to estimate the cost and returns structure in jaggery production, to study
the marketing channels involved in marketing of jaggery, to estimate cost of marketing,
price spread and marketing efficiency in the marketing of jaggery through different
marketing channels.
Both purposive and random sampling techniques were used to select villages,
farmers and market intermediaries. The study was conducted in Anakapalli region of
Visakhapatnam district. Three sub-divisions viz. Munagapaka, Kasimkota and Anakapalli
were selected for study. From each sub-division seven villages were selected but in the case
of Kasimkota sub-division only six villages were selected. A total number of 180 farmers
were selected, of which 100 are small farmers, 50 are medium and 30 are large farmers.
Fifteen processing units, 20 traders and 20 market intermediaries were selected to study the
marketing costs and margins involved at various levels of marketing of jaggery.
Analysis of collected data was done by various tools and techniques. Tabular
analysis was done by working out simple averages and percentages. Marketing efficiency
was calculated by Acharya method. Marketing cost, marketing margin and price spread of
different channels were calculated. Garrett ranking method was used for constraints in
processing and marketing of jaggery.
MAJOR FINDINGS OF THE STUDY
Trends in area, production and productivity of Sugarcane
The Compound Growth Rate for area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in India
during 2000-01 to 2011-12 was 1.37 per cent, -1.47 per cent and -0.29 per cent respectively.
Growth rate is not significant for all three variables.
The Compound Growth Rate of area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in Andhra
Pradesh during 2000-01 to 2011-12 was estimated to be 2.06, -1.09 and 3.94 per cent respectively.
Among all the three variables, only the growth rate of productivity is significant.
The Compound Growth Rate of area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in

Visakhapatnam during 2000-01 to 2011-12 was estimated to be 0.67, 0.37 and 4.2 per cent
respectively. Among all the three variables, only the growth rate of productivity is significant.
Socio economic characteristics of farmers
The data was collected from 180 farmers, of which 54 farmers were illiterate, 50
farmers had their primary education. Only 25 farmers pursued higher education where as
32 farmers had secondary education. So the level of education was very less in case of
sugarcane growing farmers. Majority of the farmers are in the age group of 36 to 40.
Most of the farmers have moderate families. More than 50 per cent are having a family size
of 4 to 6 members. The least records were filed in the family of 10 and above than 10 family
members i.e. 10 per cent.
The total land under (owned and leased) small farmers was about 251 acres,
medium farmers was 266 acres and in the case of large farmers, the total land was 248
acres. The average land accounted for small, medium and large farmers was 2.51 acres,
5.32 acres and 8.26 acres respectively. More than 90 per cent of sugarcane growing lands
were irrigated, so there is a chance of high production of sugarcane, provided good
agronomical practices are followed.
Cost of establishment of a jaggery unit
The value of land is Rs 90000 which is 45.58 per cent of total cost. The
establishment cost of shed, furnace and pan were 4.89, 4.05 and 3.04 per cents respectively.
A cane crusher and electric motor accounted for 26.34 and 11.65 per cent of total cost
respectively. Two filter plates and two ash spades accounting to 0.23 and Rs 0.53 per cent
of total cost are also required. Miscellaneous costs accounted to 2.17 per cent. It shows
acquiring the land is the prime factor in establishment of jaggery production unit.
Cost and returns in jaggery production (Rs per tonne)
It is noticed in the study area that Sugarcane farmers themselves process Sugarcane into
jaggery. Sugarcane is the key factor in deciding the price of jaggery for preparing one
quintal of jaggery the total cost incurred was Rs 4630, out of which 64.7, 8.6, 1.7, 4.3 and
3.2 per cent costs were incurred on Sugarcane, chemicals, labour, fuel and interest
respectively. The total returns was Rs 4980, out of which net returns are Rs 350. The
bagasse which comes out from crushing of sugarcane was used as fuel. So, its cost was
minimum.
Marketing channels
Three marketing channels were identified in jaggery marketing in the study area
Channel I: Producer-Commission agent-Wholesaler-Retailer-Consumer
Channel II: Producer-Wholesaler-Retailer-Consumer
Channel III: Producer-Retailer- Consumer
Total marketing cost involved in channel I is Rs 234.82. The price spread in this
channel is Rs 771.06 per qt of jaggery. Marketing efficiency of channel I is 3.66 which is
lower than the remaining two marketing channels.
Total marketing cost involved in entire channel II is Rs 432.94. The price spread in
this channel is Rs 526.66 per quintal of jaggery. Marketing efficiency of channel II is 4.86
which is higher than the marketing channel I but lower than the channel III.
Total marketing cost involved in channel III is Rs 123.32. The price spread in
channel III is Rs 501.06 per qt of jaggery. Marketing efficiency of channel III is 5.63 which
is highest among all the three channels of marketing adopted to market jaggery in the study
area.
Processing and marketing constraints

Constraints perceived by farmers in processing and marketing of jaggery have been
studied. Market holidays are considered as major constraint faced by farmers with highest
Garret score of 70.67. The major constraints faced by farmers were high labour costs,
fluctuation in jaggery prices, forced sale due to repayment of loan, lack of transport
facilities. The minor constraints faced by farmers were high commission charges and
transportation charges.
In case of market intermediaries and traders the major constraint faced was
fluctuations in jaggery price. Failure by the farmer to pay in time expressed as constraint by
80.23 per cent of traders and market intermediaries. The remaining constraints quoted were
lack of adequate processing units, lack of transportation facilities and lack of storage
facilities.
5.2 CONCLUSIONS
It may be concluded from the study that there is an immense scope for expansion of
area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in Andhra Pradesh as well as in other
suitable parts of India. The cost of establishment of jaggery unit is somewhat higher but
due to good demand in market, the returns are also good. The system of marketing reveals
that the farmers get good share of price paid by consumers. Out of the three channels of
jaggery marketing, III channel i.e. Producer-Retailer-Consumer was the more efficient
from producer as well as consumer point of view as the producer could get as high as 84.93
per cent of the consumers rupee. Further it is found that marketing channel efficiency index
was higher in channel III (5.63) than channel II (4.86) and channel I (3.66 per cent). In
establishment of a jaggery unit, acquiring the land is the prime factor. The net return in
jaggery production was Rs 5860 per tonne of jaggery. BCR was arrived at 1.42, which
means farmers processing Sugarcane into jaggery are getting profit of 42 paisa for every
rupee of investment, on jaggery processing.
The major constraints faced by farmers were high labour costs, fluctuation in
jaggery prices, forced sale due to repayment of loan, lack of transport facilities. The major
problems faced by market intermediaries are fluctuation in jaggery price, failure on part of
the farmer to pay in time, lack of adequate processing units, lack of transportation facilities
and lack of storage facilities.
SUGGESTIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

1. Creating awareness among jaggery processing units owners on technology up gradation
is desirable.
2. The trend in area, production and productivity of Sugarcane in India, Andhra Pradesh
and Anakapalli region has indicated fluctuations during the past few years but still there is
a lot of potential for increasing Sugarcane production. Therefore, there should be
encouragement and good support from research centers and the government bodies to the
growers and also to the processors.
3. Most of the Sugarcane producing areas of Anakapalli have poor electricity supply. State
electricity board and Central government should pay attention towards this. Wind energy
plants and solar power plants can be established to make available electricity supply to both
producers as well as processors.
4. Most of the times, producers are not aware of the prices existing in the market and
dispose off the produce at village level itself to intermediary. Adequate and timely
information about the market arrivals, varieties preferred, existing prices etc. will help in
forecasting the demand and plan accordingly.
5. Most of the producers are still using traditional cultivation practices in Sugarcane
production. There is a strong need to intensify the better extension services in order to
provide the better information about the new and improved cultivation practices to the
farmers.
6. Anakapalli market was classified as slightly concentrated oligopoly market. Hence,

suitable steps should be taken to promote the competitiveness of jaggery in Anakapalli
market.
.
7. Loans should be made liberal by the Government banks and even by the jaggery
commission agents to help farmers in purchase of better farm input and improve in
techniques of jaggery making. Societies should join hands with the jaggery producers to
improve both jaggery production and productivity.
8. Co-operative societies should join hands with the jaggery producers to improve both
jaggery production and productivity. Programmes on manufacturing practices, energy
conservation, storage, packaging and product diversification may be organised by the co-
operative society. This will enable sharing experience and overall improvement in
managing the industry.
9. Value addition at the farmers level can be encouraged, so that farmers not sell jaggery
but also different products of jaggery.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Amin, S. 1984. Sugarcane and Sugar in Gorakphur: An Inquiry into peasant Production for
Capitalist Enterprises in Colonial India. OUP: pp. XXII, 336.
Anjugam, M., Govindarajan, K and Suresh Kumar, D. 2007. Value addition of sugarcane
a case of jaggery production. Agricultural Economics Research Review. 20: 606.
Azad, M. P., Kaushik, D. C and Singh, S. K. 1989. Processing and marketing of Sugarcane
products in Uttar Pradesh. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics. 44(3): 322.
Babar, V. S and Lohar, N. S. 1994. Trends in arrivals and prices of jaggery in Sangli
regulated market. Indian Journal of Agricultural Marketing. 8(1): 123-125.
Deokate, T. B., Tilekar, S. N., Suryawanshi, S. D., Jadav, K. L and Nikam, A.V. 2009.
Economics of production and marketing of jaggery in Maharashtra. International
Journal of Commerce and Business Management. 2(2): 68-72.-72rnational l of
Commerce an
Dwivedi Kumar Amit. 2010. An empirical study on Gur (jaggery) industry. Indian
Institute of Management Ahmedabad Research and Publications.1-19.
FAOSTAT. World ranking: sugarcane by production (tonnes). 2012. http://mongabay.com/

commodities/data/category/1-Production/1-Crops/156Sugar+cane/51-Production+
(tonnes)
Rao Rama, I. V. Y and Babu Kumar Sunil, G. 2011. Indian Journal of Sugarcane Technology.
13( 3): 236-244.
Lal, J. 1980. Costs, margins and price spread of Gur and Khandsari. Agricultural Marketing
22(4): 1-3.
Narasimha Pusappa, K. 2013. Economics of sugarcane cultivation in Andhra Pradesh. Ph.D
Thesis. Andhra University, Visakhapatnam.
Rajayan, E. C and Arputhraj, C. 1988. Marketing problems of Sugarcane growers of Tamil

Nadu. Indian Journal of Agricultural Marketing. 2(1): 74.
Raju, V. T and Ramesh, M. V. 1989. Economics of agro-processing A case study of jaggery

production and marketing in East Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh. Indian
Journal of Agricultural Economics. 44(3): 317.
Rao Jagannadha, P. V. K., Das Madhusweta and Das, S. K. 2007. Jaggery-a traditional Indian
sweetener. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge. 6(1): 95-102.
Rao Rama, I. V. Y and Sunil Kumar Babu, G. 2012. An economic analysis of production and
marketing of jaggery in Andhra Pradesh. Indian Journal of Agricultural Marketing.
26(2): 54-63.
Rao Rama, I. V. Y. 2011. An economic appraisal of manufacturing and marketing of

jaggery in Andhra Pradesh state. India Sugar Tech. 13(3): 236-244.
Rao, K. P. C and Ravi Kumar, K. N. 2002. Production and operation scenarios of jaggery in
India with reference to Andhra Pradesh. Manage Extension Research
Review.3(2): 14-23.
Ravi, K. N., Raju V. T and Laxmi, K. S. 1998. Performance of regulated markets in

AndhraPradesh. The Bihar Journal of Agricultural Marketing. 6(4): 461-465.
Rohal, B. S., Singh, K. V and Chaudary, S. 1990. A critical review of Gur marketing at
Muzzalfar Nagar regulated market of Uttar Pradesh. Agricultural Marketing 33(2): 40
43
Singh Jaswant, Solmon, S and Dilip Kumar. 2013. Manufacturing jaggery, a product of
sugarcane, as health food. Agrotechnol. S11: 1-3.
Singh, T. R and Kishore, R. 1998. An enquiry into disposal pattern and marketing of
Sugarcane and its product (Gur) in Sitapur district of Uttar Pradesh. The Bihar
Journal of Agricultural Marketing. 6(1): 101-107.
Sugarcane Breeding Institute. Area, production and productivity of sugarcane in India.

2012.http://www.sugarcane.res.in/images/sbi/charts/statewisesugarcanestatisticspdf?
phpMyAdmin=11c501a2a5dt8788ed6
Teggi, M. Y., Basavaraja, H., Hiremath, G. K and Poddar, R. S. 1996. Marketing of

jaggeryin Ghata Prabha command area of Karnataka. The Bihar Journal of
Agricultural Marketing. 4(1): 51-55.
Verma, A. R. 1989. Economics of processing and marketing of Gur in district Indore of

Madhya Pradesh. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics. 44(3): 319.
Professor Jaya Shankar Telangana Agricultural University
Questionnaire for farmers
1. Name of the farmer:
2. Name of the village:
3. Age:
Age <20 20-30 31-40 41-50 >51&above
4. Educational qualifications:
Illiterate Primary Secondary Higher
5. Land particulars :
Owned land (ha) Leased land (ha)

irrigated unirrigated irrigated unirrigated
6. Area under sugarcane cultivation
Sl. no. Year Area under sugarcane cultivation

Owned land (ha) Leased land (ha)
irrigated unirrigated irrigated unirrigated
1. 2013
2. 2012
3. 2011
4. 2010
5. 2009
5. Varieties of sugarcane, area and quantities produced (t/acre) under each variety for the
past five years
Varieties of sugarcane, area and qty. produced under each
variety
Sl. no. Years Var. 1 Var.2 Var. 3 Var. 4
area t/acre area t/acre area t/acre area t/acre

2013
1.
2. 2012
3. 2011
4. 2010
5. 2009
6. Cost of cultivation of sugarcane per acre
Sl. no. Cost factor cost
1. Land preparation
2. Seed
3. Transportation
4. Irrigation
5. Fertilizers
6. Pesticides
7. Propping
8. Weeding
9. Harvesting
10. Labour cost
11. Transportation
12. Electricity
Total
7. Do you process sugarcane to produce jaggery? (Yes/no). If no mention the channel you
used to sell sugarcane
Sl. Tonnes variety Sold to whom

no. sold
1.
2.
3.
4.
If yes do you process jaggery in your own unit or leased unit
8. Investment cost (Rs) for establishment of jaggery production unit
S.No Investment item particulars Cost(Rs)

1. Land
2. Shed
3. furnace
4. Pan
5. Cane crusher
6. Electric motor
7. Filter plates
8. Ash spade
9. Buckets moulds
10. Drum/Barrel
11. Plastic pipes
12. Miscellaneous
13. If any other
specify
14.
15.
16.
Total
9. Do you own jaggery unit? yes/no

If yes, where do you avail credit facility to establish jaggery unit?
a) Banks b) Money lenders c) SHG groups d) own money e) co-operatives
If any other please specify

10. Kindly provide details about the jaggery processed by you in the last two seasons
Sl. no. Year Varieties Qty. produced Price per

(tonnes) kg
1. 2012-2013 variety 1
variety 2
2. 2013-2014 variety 1
variety 2
11. Cost and Returns in Jaggery production per unit:
Sl. no. Particulars Cost and Returns

COST Qty. value
1. Sugarcane(tonnes)
2. Chemicals
3. Labour (man-days)
4. Fuel (tonnes)
5. Miscellaneous
Total variable cost
6. Interest on investment
7. Depreciation (Rs)
7. Khadhi cloth (Mt)
8. Gunny bags(no.)
9. Polythene sheets(kgs)
Total fixed cost
Total cost
RETURNS
1. Net Returns
2. Benefit Cost Ratio
12. What is the market channel you follow to sell jaggery?
Sl. Channel Price received per Total kgs

no. Kg sold
1. Direct to retailer
2. Direct to
wholesaler
3. Middle man
4. Sale from home
5. In the open market
6. Any other
13. Marketing of jaggery:
Own consumption Quantity sold
Do you feel the price received by you is remunerative? Yes/no
If not what price do you expect?
Quantity Time Place Distanc Mode of Transp Baggin Loading Mark Total
of sale of sale of sale e of transpor ort g costs and eting marketi
sale t costs unloading fee ng cost
costs
14. Costs incurred in storage of jaggery before marketing
Sl. no. Costs Amount
1. Electricity
2. Labour
3. Disinfectants
4. Gunny bags
5. LDPE
6. polypropylene
7. Polyethylene tetraphthlate
8. Laminated aluminium film
packages
9. Specify if any other
10.
15. Marketing costs incurred in jaggery ( Rs/q)
Sl. Particulars Channel I Channel II Channel III

nono. no.
1. Farmers cost of
production
2. Packing
3. Loading/ unloading
4. Transportation
5. Others
6. Total marketing cost
7. Net price realized by
farmer
8. Purchase price of
wholesaler/traders
9. Market fee
10. Commission
12. Marketing margin
13. Purchase price of
retailers
14. Marketing cost
16. Consumer price
16. Constraints faced by the farmers in production and marketing of jaggery and its byproducts
Sl. Constraints J
no. Rank Remarks Rank Remarks
1. High commission charges
2. High transportation charges
3. Lack of credit facility
4. Leading to distress sale

5. Lack of storage facilities
6. Defective and faulty weighing
7. Nonpayment /untimely payment by the
market channel members
8. Lack of transportation facilities
9. Forced sale due to burden of
repayment of loan
10. Fluctuation in jaggery price
11. High harvest charges
12. High labour costs incurred in processing
13. Any other please specify
1- Strongly disagree 2-Disagree 3- Neither agree nor disagree 4-Agree 5-Strongly agree
Professor Jaya Shankar Telangana Agricultural University
Questionnaire for Middlemen/Broker/Traders
1. Name: Village/town:__________________
2. Block/taluka/mandal:_____________ District/division: _______________
3. Phone. No:_________________
4. Address of shop: _________________________________________
_________________________________________
5. Type of ownership : Individual/partnership / any other:

6. Years of experience in this field
7. What major commodities do you generally deal as a middleman/commission
agent/broker/trader?
(a) .. (b) . (c)
8. Provide the following details for jaggery and its by-products
Sl. jaggery By products
no. year Purchased Qty. Price of Purchased Qty. Price of
from whom purchase from whom purchase
1.
2.
3.
9. What is the quantity traded in an year

Quantity Average price
commodities
(Tons/year) (Rs/ton)
Jaggery
Other byproducts
a.
b.
c.
10. Details of villages covered and the time of placing order
Sl. no. Villages No. of Qty. from Time of
farmers each village placing order
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
11. Do you have any prior contractual or business relationship with the farmers? Yes/No
If yes, what are the facilities do you provide to the farmers?
(a) Credit_________ (b) inputs______ (c) storage_______ (d) others (specify) ______
12. What quality characteristics do you consider while buying jaggery from farmers?
Sl. no. characteristics Put a tick
mark
1. Color
2. Shape
3. Moisture content
4. Aroma
5. Texture
6. Specify if any
14. Do you pay the money to the farmers immediately after buying? Yes/No
If no, how many days do you settle the payment? ___________
15. Do you pay any interest on delayed payment? Yes/No

If yes, what is the rate of interest (annum) ____________
16. Marketing costs of the intermediaries (Middlemen/Broker/Traders) per Qtls.
Sl. no. particulars Traders cost Intermediaries cost

1. Purchasing price from farmer
2. Transportation
3. Bagging
4. Weighing charges
5. Labor expenses
6. License fee
7. Market fee
8. Others specify
9.
12. Purchasing price of retailers
Sales
Average price
Sold to whom Quantity (Qtls)
(Rs/qt)
Whole sale market
Retailers
Super markets
Consumers
Others
18. What are the most important constraints (problems) do you face in your business?
Sl. No Rank
Constraints Remarks
Low price for the produce at the time of
1
harvest
Failure of in time payment by the
2
farmers
3 Nonpayment/ untimely payment
4 Lack of transportation
5 Lack of storage facilities
6 Lack of adequate processing units
7 Too much price fluctuations
8 High tax payment
9 Others (specify)
1- Strongly disagree 2-Disagree 3- Neither agree nor disagree 4-Agree 5-Strongly

agree

D9728 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

D9728 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT OF

JAGGERY IN ANALKAPALLI REGION

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED TO

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

CHAIRPERSON: Dr. P. RADHIKA

SCHOOL OF AGRIBUSINESS MANAGEMENT

report entitled SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT OF JAGGERY IN

ANALKAPALLI REGION OF ANDHRA PRADESH submitted is the result of

previously submitted by her for a degree of any university.

This is to certify that the project report entitled SUPPLY CHAIN

Project report approved by the Student Advisory Committee

Chairperson : Dr. P. RADHIKA

Member : Dr. ALDAS JANAIAH

Member : Shri M.H.V.BHAVE

Date of final viva- voce

Chapter No. Title Page No.

III MATERIAL AND METHODS

IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

I MS M.KAVITHA, hereby declare that the thesis entitled SUPPLY CHAIN

MANAGEMENT OF JAGGERY IN ANALKAPALLI REGION OF ANDHRA

PRADESH submitted to Professor Jaya Shankar Telangana State Agricultural

University for the degree of Master of Business Administration in the school of

Agribusiness Management in the major field of Agribusiness Management is the result of

report has been published earlier in any manner.

Place: Hyderabad (M.KAVITHA)

Table No. Title Page No.

4.1 Percentage change and growth rate in area, production and

4.3 Percentage change and growth rate in area, production and

4.4 Educational status of the sample farmers

4.5 Age profile of the sample farmers

4.6 Family size of the sample farmers

4.7 Sugarcane land holdings of respondents

4.8 Investment for establishment of jaggery production unit ( one tonne

4.10 Price spread of jaggery marketing through channel I

4.11 Price spread of jaggery marketing through channel II

4.12 Price spread of jaggery marketing through channel III

4.13 Constraints faced by farmers in processing and marketing of

Fig No. Title Page No.

1.1 Sugarcane production (percentages) in the world for 2011-12

1.2 State wise Sugarcane production (percentages) for 2011-12

1.3 State wise yield of Sugarcane in India

3.1 Map of Anakapalli

4.1 Marketing of jaggery- channel-I

4.2 Marketing of jaggery- channel-II

4.3 Marketing of jaggery- channel-III

I.D. No. : RMBA/12-06

TITLE OF THE SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT OF JAGGERY IN

DEGREE : MBA (ABM)

DEPARTMENT : SCHOOL OF AGRIBUSINESS MANAGEMENT

MAJOR ADVISOR : DR. P. RADHIKA

UNIVERSITY : ACHARYA N.G. RANGA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY

Channel I: Producer-Commission agent-Wholesaler-Retailer-Consumer

Channel II: Producer-Wholesaler-Retailer-Consumer

Channel III: Producer-Retailer- Consumer

Constraints perceived by farmers in processing and marketing of jaggery have been

Keywords: Jaggery, Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR), marketing channels,

Figure 1.2. State wise Sugarcane production (percentages) for 2011-2012

(Source: www.vsisugar.com, 2011-2012)

(Source: www.vsisugar.com, 2011-2012)

Channel 1: Producer - Sugar factory - Wholesaler - Retailer Consumer

Government policies affect sugarcane cultivation in numerous ways. It is

In India agriculture has undergone spectacular technological changes during the