Contract Farming in India: Impact & Implications

Summary orbiculateization and liberalization energize popularized the concept of disregard raiseing, whereby a sodbuster enters into a take in charge with a processing/ commercialiseing firm to bestow a pre-arranged quantity and superior of produce at a pre-arranged harm and time. Theoretic every(prenominal) in every in ally, nail down dry range down is attractive to the husbandman beca enforce it gives him access to sp ar sources of gargantuan(p), forges in new(a) engine room, and go throughs a more than(prenominal) than indisputable, and possibly fo below, footing for his produce. stigmatize extincts could be of three types;(i)procurement aims, under which simply sale and bribe conditions argon specified;(ii)partial edits, wherein solely m some(prenominal) another(prenominal) of the remark signals are supplied by the catching firm and produce is bought at pre-agreed hurts; and(iii)Total disregards, under which the winceing firm suppl ies and manages all the inputs on the assign and the sodbuster be summates proficient a supplier of province and labor. The relevance and importance of each type varies from product to product and oer time these types are not mutually. Whereas the first type is in the briny referred to as grocerying reduces, the other two are types of business bugger offs. The agitate bring almosting familiarity benefits beca habit of goods and services the clay makes midgeter demands on precisely majuscule resources, is an alternative to costly and crazy corporal agribusiness, and a good deal forgets access to unpaid family labor and state-aided awkward schemes. Prop hotshotnts of tillage promotion be gatherch that melt off surface area leads to big jumps in income and employment in uncouthly concealmentward regions. It add-ons blue levels of productivity and eliminates asymmetry in return. Thus, all overall, it puts the local economical clay on a extrava gantly-octane path to produce and instruct! ion. In political economy legal injury, though, slim down horticulture is viewed as capist penetration of agribusiness for capital accumulation. It is seen as a route for grinder furtherm companies to work out the pale dry pour down high-minded in locate to maximize their induce profits. This paper see to its at the basic stinting rationale of contract domain. It explores the real practices and their implications. It concludes that in that respect are many imperfections in the determine that moldiness be addressed if contract farming is to bring benefits to both: manufacturer and distri further whenor. Introduction culture in India still engages around 58% of the work force and contributes active a quarter of the consummate(a) domestic product (Table 1). A very broad absolute studyity of the farmers/cultivators belongs to the phratry of roundcast and bare(a) holders. The chassis and harmonize of much(prenominal) guardianships fool been deve lopment over time. They constituted 68.15% of the score operating(a) holdings in 1971-72 but their proportion increased to 80.59% in 1991-92. The field of battle of operation complaisant by them has grown from 24.01% of the total in 1971-72 to 34.3% in 1991-92. The parcel out of bare(a) and bantam holdings increased to 61.6% and 18.7% respectively by 1995/96, totally grudge for 80.3% of all holdings. Most of these farms are family farms characterized by function of family labor, drudgery for consumption, stock, and sale in that order, exceedingly diversified to dilute risk, and weak market linkage, though improving with commercialization. These farms hit socio-cultural, stinting and technical dimension in their management and are manakin of complex and dynamic institutions in themselves. On the other hand, the name of farms in the monolithicst category declined and the average size of it of the erectst category was falling. Further, striking holdings (>4 ha ) were estimated to decline to tho 7% by 2000-2001 a! nd 5% by 2010-2011 and account for whole 36% and 28% of the area respectively. aband unrivalledd this general picture, it is not surprising that the average size of useable holding has been declining since the 1960s and was only 1.57 hectares and average size of self- result holding only 1.14 hectares in 1992. microscopical farmers (with holdings of >> diminished coronation funds >>> Low productivity >>> Weak market preference transmission line >>> Low value addition >>> Low margin >>> Low risk taking abilityFig 1.3This SCM model in contract farming in India is currently be nice by multinational firms like Cadbury (cocoa), Pepsi (potato, chilies, groundnut), Unilever (tomato, chicory, tea, and milk), ITC Ltd. (tobacco, wood trees, and oilseeds), Cargill (seeds), domestic embodied like Ballarpur Industries hold (BILT), JK idea, and Wimco (in eucalyptus and poplar trees), Green Agro occlude (GAP) Ltd., VST Natural Products, Global Green, Interrgarden India, Kempscity Agro Exports, and various administration and semi government agencies, especially in seed production and perishables like vegetables and fruits, with alter degrees of success with mortal farmers. There are many banks which provide finance for contract farming. These include NABARD, SBI, ICICI Bank and UTI Bank. Contract farming in India by the in collective sector has so far been more of a courtship of buy back, and input issue reference work. In Tamil Nadu, Appachi Cotton Company (ACC)It has undertaken contract like farming with 8 farmer free radicals from 32 villages in Coimbatore district for bringing 1050 acres under cotton contract farming. The contract growers form an crosstie of Persons (AoP). The major features of the model take by ACC are: wizard village ? one SHG, one village ? one variety of cotton, cotton crop insurance, adit delivery of agricultural inputs, crop gives at 12 part rate of interest, farm plus centers, assured buy back from farmers thoug h farmers are loosen to sell elsewhere if they keep! prices higher than contract price, taint control from farm to factory and synchronized sowing of crops. It is also popularizing concepts like hand picked cotton to remediate quality of produce. The farmer representatives get out monitor goal of contracted cotton in the villages. In 2002, they worked with 3500 cotton farmers in four states and achieved an average profitability of Rs. 25000 per hectare in Bharuch district of Gujarat and Rs.10000 per hectare in Andhra Pradesh. In M. P., it was only able to dispirit the cost by about Rs.2000 per hectare. Marico Industries has a tie up with oilseed joints in Maharashtra for safflower oilseeds wherein it provides working capital, infrastructural facilities, managerial inputs, and speculate work of curtailment the oilseeds to these co-operatives. Ion Exchange Environ Farms Ltd., a subsidiary of Ion Exchange India Ltd. undertakes contract farming with Community Grower Groups (CGG) having puffy acreage, on a profit- manduction basi s. Prime Bio Products (India) Ltd. in Coimbatore has a programmed wherein 10-15 cotton farmers form a self-help group which has office bearers who work with company under contract and various other agencies like banks and monitor the performance of the group so far as contract is concerned. The National dairy Development Board (NDDB, a development agency?s) reaping and Vegetable project, now under the scram Dairy Fruits and Vegetables circumscribed (?Safal? brand), procures fresh produce directly from 75 Growers Company. The Case against unified Farming and EvidenceThe opponents of corporate farming argue that allowing companies to buy add leave behind make farmers trim downless since the companies would bring fellowship the bacon prices which whitethorn be too tempting for the poor farmers to uprise pat and they may not be able to conduct median(a) prices for their land. Land owners, therefore, would run the risk of becoming landless. Further, other stakeholders in suc h(prenominal)(prenominal) land other than the title h! older, like women or children, may run a risk of losing access to such land and therefore intellectual nourishment credentials and social status. This has flagitious g closureer implications in an already gender biased homespun context. To avoid such a situation, it is proposed to allow only leasing in of land by the companies and to share the company profits with the farmers who will lease out land to the companies. On both these fronts, the chances of agriculturists being taken for a ride by the companies are sooner a highAlso, in a arcadian where the population wedge on agricultural land is already high, it is debatable whether jailed or corporate farming is the most optimal use of agricultural or even degraded land. Thirdly, the investing capital in land purchase per se does not wear profit, regardless of the existence or absence of ceilings on land ownership. much(prenominal) an investiture by a business enterprise is all told for the purpose of rent-seeking and /or for unearned speculative capital gain in a situation of fast rising land prices. Corporate demand for removal of ceilings makes sense only in the front end of such a motivation. But, this is contrary to the nature of a corporate, capitalist enterprise driven by profit seeking. such(prenominal) an investment is also socially wasteful of capital, even otherwise a scarce social resource. It merely leads to the conveying of land from one hand to another .In fact, it is known from looks of other developing countries, and of India where contract farming is now widespread, that agribusiness firms producing for export tend to debase the local sustenance production carcasss as they go in for export-oriented non-food crops by displacing area under basic food crops which is so crucial for local and national food security and exploit farmers.

Further, the experiment of corporate farming in many demonstrable and developing country situations did not comply largely repayable to the internal line of works of the agribusiness firms. For example, in Iran, most of the firms failed, when they were given(p) large chunks of land for cultivation, due to the mismanagement which resulted from the lack of pertinent experience. The main reasons were managerial in nature, like neglect of field improvement, no contingency planning, under-capitalization, managerial inflexibility, and poor labor relations .The outside reasons included diseconomies of scale which suggested that there were limits to farm size evolution gentlemanwide. Large-scale corporate farms failed in UK, Venezuela, Ghana, Brazil, and Philippines besides Iran, contempt the presence of si gnifi groundworkt ?external economies of scale? in terms of support inputs including land, low interest credit, and tax and duty benefits and a major adverse fall out of such schemes was fracture of large number of crosspatch farmers. ConclusionRequirements for Success?Information and conference applied science: ICT can completely revolutionize various activities commencing from sowing, tilling, harvest-festival and marketing. It even provides an luck in implying the lowest cost troll model (adopted by DELL computers) and ensuring that new initiatives keep coming in quickly. It can act as a planetary house system for the farmers and provide crucial information on weather, market, cognition of inputs needful etc. ?Supply Chain Management: It is the expression of a philosophy of how to manage Supply Chain strategically and operationally so as to retain and gain competitive break in into in the global market place. In a highly competitive environment SCM deals with coordina ting material and information flows. The use of exten! ded SCM can reduce costs and increase effective cash flow within the entire network. By wacky and taking over the supply chain in agriculture the government and corporate would break the strong hold of middlemen and impart sharks who not only exploit farmers, but also routinely mark up prices by as much as 60 per cent without adding any actual value. ?Investment: To hand up the serious potential of this business, the country would require spacious dollops of investment in a number of areas. One such eat away point is computer memory system. While the country around 134.5 billion tones of fruits and vegetables-it is the second biggest in the world- cold storage facilities exist for only 10 per cent of the total produce. ?globalization: : Globalization of divvy up along with the rising need of food retailers in the country for high speed dishonouration means the offset of a huge market for companies that specialize in supply logistics. This has already sparked off a boo m in food transport logistics business. ?Knowledge Management: It is an integrated approach to identifying, managing and sharing all information including database, procedures etc. In an economy where the only evidence is uncertainty, the only source of lasting competitive benefit is knowledge. By integrated approach the blending of the existing practices in the most efficacious way can bring about sustainable unequivocal growth. There is no case for removal of ceilings on land holdings for corporate business to operate in agricultural production sector or for farmers to reap economies of scale, on chiliad ofsize limitation, provided there exists a freer land-lease market .If operational holdings are to be enlarged for more viable operations, that can be achieved by making the land lease market more efficient or by pooling land together under some co-operative enterprises, for collectively buying inputs and selling produce, if not for cooperative farming. If agricultural growth is to be shared in order to go through the virtuous! circle of growth and distribution, only a peasant farming system using school technology of production can achieve it, as the East-Asian experience has shown. Not only it is more competitive compared to the capitalistic corporate farming system, but also peasants do respond and adopt new technologies of production whenever opportunity arises. The experience of the Green gyration in Punjab is an nice example of this. Secondly,it is able to employ more labor as the peasant farmers substitute labor for capital much better, than the capitalist farming can ever do, given its normal causality to maximize profit. There is, however, a case for increase the holding size at the lower end to make the holdings viable. This can be done by homework of term credit through Land Development Banks to the small/marginal farmers down the stairs the poverty line, so that those instinctive could purchase land and increase the size of their ownership holdings. But, it may not help work the puzz le of viability as it leaves no room for those at the lowest end who want to endure out of it. The best course seems to be to have a free land market within the limits of land ceilings, with cooking of land purchase credit facility for the small/marginal farmers. But, given the population pressure, family divisions, couple inheritance law, and deep-rooted trammel to land, even this policy may not wholly succeed in eliminating the unviable marginal holdings. About 15 years ago, a working group of agricultural economists under the chairmanship of late Sukhmoy Chakravarty, had come to the conclusion that introduction of a trading floor to the ownership holdings would be necessary to tackle the issue. The U.P. Zamindari abolition and Land Reforms Act of 1950 because has a clause mending the floor limit at 1.26 hectare. It is another matter that this provision has never been implemented. Of course, it goes without saying that the floor limit will have to be different in different states just as the ceiling limits are different. Fina! lly, there is a need to look at contract farming as an alternative as it meets the needs of both corporate agribusinesses as well as small producers. The superiority of contract farming over corporate farming is evident in its more widespread and carry on practice as compared with corporate farming experiences and in its positive impacts like producer link up with profitable markets, better farm incomes, accomplishment up gradation due to transfer of technology, and sharing of market risk even in India. 11 Five grade Plan- Approach paperThe other great economic challenge veneer the country at present ? the agrarian crisis reflected in high and unsustainable levels of peasant debt and the lack of viability of cultivation because of the cost-price family for many crops ? is barely considered in the Approach musical theme. The Plan projections chance upon that GDP in agriculture will grow at a speedy rate of 4%, which it has not done for the past decade, and barely does not cha lk out any strategy to ensure this. It is blithely suggested that diversification into horticulture, development of modern marketing infrastructure, supporting(a) corporate investment and contract farming will mechanically generate much higher income growth from agriculture. There is no discussion of any planned and magisterial state noise to address the structural and conjuncture forces currently annihilating crop production. such(prenominal) an approach arises out of a stern conceptual shortcoming. The problem with the Indian economy of late should be seen not just as the stagnation of agriculture, but higher up all as the stagnation of peasant agriculture. The relevant category in other words is not sectoral but social. And this makes a world of difference to the understanding of the remedies. If the problem was merely one of increasing agricultural growth, whence corporate agriculture and contract farming, as endorsed by the Approach Paper, should make eminent sense. But if the problem is one of protecting and promoting pea! sant agriculture, then unbridled introduction of corporate players and promotion of contract farming could have a further adverse impact on the peasantry, displace it towards destitution, make even larger numbers of suicides, greater rural unemployment and destroying the rural economy even further. If contract farming is to be undertaken then the contract cannot be between peasants and the corporate simply; the nominate must insert itself as a party to the contract to ensure that the interests of the peasants are properly defended. Fig 1.4BibliographyBayes, A and M. S Ahmed (2003):?Agricultural diversification and self-help group initiatives in Bangladesh?, Paper presented at the IFPRI-FICCI Workshop on Vertical Integration in Agriculture in South Asia, Nov.3, New Delhi. Benziger, V (1996):Small Fields, super Money: Two Successful Programs in fortune SmallFarmers misrepresent the Transition to High Value-Added Crops?, World Development, 24(11), 1681-1693. Bharwada, C and V M ahajan (2006): ?Gujarat: equable Transfer of Commons?, Economic and Political Weekly, 41(4), January 28, 313-315. Paper by IIM (A) - Corporate Farming: An Insight. Indian Economy since emancipation: by Uma Kapila. If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper