PROJECT FINDINGS

A
DISSERTATION REPORT
ON

AWARENESS AND SATISFACTION OF FARMERS

REGARDING PARDHAN MANTRI FASAL BIMA
YOJANA; A STUDY OF REWARI DISTRICT

FOR THE PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF DEGREE OF

MBA 5 YEAR (IPOP)
SUBJECT: RESEARCH PROJECT (IMS-1002)

SUBMITTED BY:-
Rajat kumar(15UIM)
SEMESTER 10TH, BATCH: 2015-20
CLASS ROLL NO.33
EXAM ROLL NO.

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF:-

DR. RAJAN SHARMA
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES

KURUKSHETRA UNIVERSITYKURUKSHETRA
(MAY 2020)

CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION
 PROJECT FINDINGS

IRAJAT KUMAR hereby declare that the work present in the Dissertation entitled

“Awareness and Satisfaction ofrewari District Farmers about Pardhan Mantri

Fasal Bima Yojana” in the partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of

MBA 5 YEAR (IPOP) degree, submitted in the INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT

STUDIES, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra is an authentic record of my own

work done under the supervision of DR. Rajan Sharma.

The work done in the Dissertation has not been submitted for the award of any
other degree to the best of my knowledge and belief.

(RAJAT KUMAR)
Candidate

Kurukshetra University Kurukshetra

Established under State Legislature Act XII of 1956
(NAAC accredited Grade A+)
 PROJECT FINDINGS
www.kuk.ac.in+91-1744-238258, +91-8295989075
........................................................................................................
DR. RAJAN SHARMA
IMS/RS/2020/..........
Dated: ...................

SUPERVISOR’S CERTIFICATE

It is certified that the dissertation entitled ‘AWARENESS AND SATISFACTION OF FARMERS

REGARDING PARDHAN MANTRI FASAL BIMA YOJANA; A STUDY OF REWARI DISTRICT..’
submitted by.....RAJAT KUMAR...., MBA Semester 10 th, Roll No. ..33., Regn. No. ..15-
UIM-.., Batch: 2015-20in the Institute of Management Studies, Kurukshetra University,
Kurukshetra for the partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of MBA-5 YEAR
(IPOP)degree, is an authentic work done under my supervision and is plagiarism free as
per rules and regulations of Kurukshetra University.

The work done in the dissertation has not been submitted by the student for the award of
any other degree to the best of my knowledge and belief.

(DR. RAJAN SHARAMA)

Supervisor

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
 PROJECT FINDINGS
Working on my research project entitled “Awareness and Satisfaction of
rewariDistrict Farmers about Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana” has been an
enriching experience for me. It gave me an opportunity to explore the different
locations. I take this opportunity to thank all the people without whom this project
would not have been possible.
I am deeply indebted to my supervisor Dr. Rajan Sharmafor their patience,
dedication and critical guidance throughout the whole dissertation work.
Dr. Rajan Sharma who guided me and monitored my work throughout the way,
deserves special recognition for his highly competent remarks and suggestions and
particular praise for his calm and friendly manner which allowed him to convey
everything most graciously and helped in the successful completion of this project.
I also thank all the respondents who have gave their time, views and authentic
information for this research.

(RAJAT KUMAR)
candidate

Contents

Chapter: 1 Agriculture Sector in Haryana and Crop Insurance

1.1 Introduction
1.2 ….
1.3 …
1.4 …
 PROJECT FINDINGS
1.5 …
1.6 …

Chapter: 2 Review of the Literature

2.1 Introduction

2.2 Studies related to Agriculture in Haryana

2.3 Studies related to crop insurance

2.4 Studies related to awareness of farmers

2.5 Studies related to satisfaction of farmers

Chapter: 3 Research Methodology

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Need/Rationale of the Study

3.4 Objectives of the Study

3.6 Data Collection Methods and Sources

Chapter: 4 Analysis and Discussion

4.1 Introduction

4.2 Objective1: Status of the Farmer

4.3 Objective 2: Awareness of Crop Insurance Schemes

4.4 Objective 3: Awareness of PMFBY

4.5 Objective 4: Claim Procedure

4.6 Objective 5: Satisfaction of Farmers regarding crop insurance

Chapter: 5 Findings and Suggestions

5.1 Positive Findings

5.2 Negative Findings

 PROJECT FINDINGS
5.3 Suggestions

5.4 Concluding Observation

Chapter: 6 Conclusion of the Study

Paste all chapters’ concluding observation here and then further concise. Brief of all the chapters
must be written here.

References

Annexure

A. Questionnaire

Chapter 1

Agriculture sector in Haryana and crop insurance

1.1 Introduction of agriculture sector in India

In India approximately 58 percent population based upon agriculture for their livelihood. Gross
Value Added by agriculture, forestry and fishing is estimated at 18.55 lakhcrore in FY19. Growth
in Gross Value Added by agriculture and allied sectors stood at 2.1 per cent in H1 2019-20.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
The Indian food industry is on way of huge growth, increasing its contribution to world food trade
every year due to its immense potential for value addition, particularly within the food processing
industry. The Indian food and grocery market are the world’s sixth largest with retail contributing
70 per cent of the sales. The Indian food processing industry accounts for 32 per cent of the
country’s total food market which is one of the largest industries in India and is ranked fifth in
terms of production, consumption, export and expected growth. It contributes around 8.80 and 8.39
per cent of Gross Value Added in Manufacturing and Agriculture respectively which is 13 per cent
of India’s exports and 6 per cent of total industrial investment.

Market size

During 2018-19 crop year food grain production is estimated at record 283.37 million tonnes. In
2019-20, Government of India is targeting foodgrain production of 291.1 million tonnes. By
November 2019, total area sown with Rabi crops in India reached 95.35 million hectares.

India is on second position in fruit production in world. Production of horticulture crops is

estimated at record 313.9 million metric tonnes in 2018-19 as per third advance estimates. Milk
production in the country stood at 187.7 million tonnes in 2018-19 and registering a growth of 6.5
per cent. Total agricultural exports from India grew at a CAGR of 14.61 per cent over FY10-19 to
reach US$ 38.54 billion in FY19. In FY20 agriculture exports were US$ 22.69 billion.
The organic food segment in India is expected to grow at a CAGR of 10 per cent during the period
2016-21 and reach Rs 75,000 croremark by 2025 from Rs 2,700 crore in 2015.

Road ahead

India has target of doubling farmers income by 2022. The agriculture sector in India is expected to
generate better momentum in the next some years due to increased investments in different
agricultural infrastructure such as irrigation facilities, warehousing and cold storage. The use of
genetically modified crops is continuously increasing, this will also give boost to the yield for
Indian farmers. Scientists are working to get early-maturing varieties of pulses and government
will increase the minimum support price so that Indian could become self-sufficient in pulses.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
By adopting the food safety and quality assurance mechanisms such as Total Quality Management
including ISO 9000, ISO 22000, Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points, Good
Manufacturing Practices and Good Hygienic Practices by the food processing industry will offer
several benefits. The agriculture exports target of US$ 60 billion by the year 2022 from India are
likely to achieve.

1.2 Agriculture sector in Haryana

Industrial development in recent time is high but sill Haryana is primarily an agricultural state.
In Haryana about 70 per cent of residents are engaged in agriculture. Position ofHaryana is
Second in food grain production in the country.Major crops are Wheat and Rice. Haryana is a
self-sufficient state in food production and also the second largest contributor to India's central
pool of food grains. All the main crops of Haryana are Wheat, Rice, Sugarcane, Coton,
Oilseeds, Corn, Millet etc. There are two main season of crops in Haryana: Rabi and Kharif.
Main Kharif crops of Haryana are rice, lowar, bajra, maize, cotton, jute, sugarcane and
groundnut. For these crops the time of ground preparation is April and May and the seeds are
sown at the commencement of rains in June. The crops are ready for harvesting time is by the
beginning of November. The major Rabi crops are Wheat, tobacco, gram, linseed, rapeseed
and mustard. The ground is prepared by the end of October or the beginning of November and
the crops are harvested by March.

About 86% of the area is arable, and of that 96% is cultivated. About 75% of the area is
irrigated, through tubewells and an extensive system of canals. Haryana contributed
significantly to the Green Revolution in India in the 1970s that made the country self-sufficient
in food production. The state has also significantly contributed to the field of agricultural
education in the country. Asia's biggest agricultural University - Chaudhry Charan Singh
Haryana Agricultural University is located at Hisar, which has already made a significant
contribution in ushering 'Green Revolution'.

Haryana has a tremendous irrigation infrastructure. Irrigation in Haryana uses water either
from underground or from surface through canals. Numerous canals have been dug and pumps
put up to make sure that the farmer doesn't pack up and leave in times of drought. Currently in
 PROJECT FINDINGS
Haryana, the most important technology for groundwater irrigation is the use of tubewells with
pump.
1.3 Need of Crop insurance in india.
Every year, in one part of India or the other food crops are affected by natural calamities,
“Crop yield instability is the normal condition and agriculture continues still to be which the
farmer’s fortunes are exposed, is practically the same as before. In fact, good years and bad
years, wet weather and drought or floods and frost, low yields and bumper crops are to be
expected in mixed succession. The total loss due to natural calamities (like flood, drought and
plant diseases) is estimated as high as Rs. 1,000 crores every year. The man behind the plough
has to be assured that he will be compensated for such loss in crops. Otherwise, he cannot be
drawn into the campaign to increase productivity of land under his plough,”

The fear of loss is so overwhelming that even when convinced of the gain accruing from the
application of science and technology, they prefer to go along the traditional track of low
productivity. Once freed from fear by crop insurance they can quicken the pace to high
productivity.

The Fourth Plan observed, “Severe distress is caused to the farmers by crop failure resulting from
drought, floods and other natural calamities. This risk is likely to get accentuated under conditions
of large investments in fertilizers, pesticides, improved seeds and other inputs which are proposed
to be used on a large scale during the Fourth Plan. One of the important means of alleviating
distress arising out from natural calamities could be the organisation of crop insurance.”

Agriculture production and farm incomes in India are frequently affected by natural disasters such
as droughts, floods, cyclones, storms, landslides and earthquakes. Susceptibility of agriculture to
these disasters is compounded by the outbreak of epidemics and man-made disasters such as fire,
sale of spurious seeds, fertilizers and pesticides, price crashes etc. All these events severely affect
farmers through loss in production and farm income, and they are beyond the control of the
farmers. With the growing commercialization of agriculture, the magnitude of loss due to
unfavorable eventualities is increasing. The question is how to protect farmers by minimizing such
losses. For a section of farming community, the minimum support prices for certain crops provide
a measure of income stability. But most of the crops and in most of the states MSP is not
implemented. In recent times, mechanisms like contract farming and future‟s trading have been
established which are expected to provide some insurance against price fluctuations directly or
 PROJECT FINDINGS
indirectly. But, agricultural insurance is considered an important mechanism to effectively address
the risk to output and income resulting from various natural and manmade events. Agricultural
Insurance is a means of protecting the agriculturist against financial losses due to uncertainties that
may arise agricultural losses arising from named or all unforeseen perils beyond their control
(AIC, 2008). Unfortunately, agricultural insurance in the country has not made much headway
even though the need to protect Indian farmers from agriculture variability has been a continuing
concern of agriculture policy. According to the National Agriculture Policy 2000, “Despite
technological and economic advancements, the condition of farmers continues to be unstable due
to natural calamities and price fluctuations”. In some extreme cases, these unfavorable events
become one of the factors leading to farmers‟ suicides which are now assuming serious
proportions (Raju and Chand, 2007). Agricultural insurance is one method by which farmers can
stabilize farm income and investment and guard against disastrous effect of losses due to natural
hazards or low market prices. Crop insurance not only stabilizes the farm income but also helps the
farmers to initiate production activity after a bad agricultural year. It cushions the shock of crop
losses by providing farmers with a minimum amount of protection. It spreads the crop losses over
space and time and helps farmers make more investments in agriculture. It forms an important
component of safety-net programmes as is being experienced in many developed countries like
USA and Canada as well as in the European Union. However, one need to keep in mind that crop
insurance should be part of overall risk management strategy. Insurance comes towards the end of
risk management process. Insurance is redistribution of cost of losses of few among many, and
cannot prevent economic loss.

There are two major categories of agricultural insurance:

a. Single peril coverage

b. Multi-peril coverage.

Single peril coverage offers protection from single hazard while multiple – 2 peril provides
protection from several hazards. In India, multi-peril crop insurance programme is being
implemented, considering the overwhelming impact of nature on agricultural output and its
disastrous consequences on the society, in general, and farmers, in particular.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
a.  Besides droughts and floods, locusts, plant diseases have always been a serious enemy to
our agriculture by destroying standing crops and thereby reducing farmers’ income.
b. Majority of the holdings are tiny, form which the farmers get marginal surplus in good
years and incur heavy deficits in the bad ones.
c.  Farming is more hazardous than any other enterprise. The weather can make all the
difference between success and failure. Consequently, many farmers, particularly the small
ones, feel shy of adopting new techniques.
d. It provides protection to farmers against losses caused by crop failure and thereby ensures
stability in farm income
e. By protecting the economic interest of the farmers against possible risk or loss, it
accelerates adoption of new agricultural practices,
f.  It minimizes the problem of rural indebtedness, which is traceable to the frequent failure of
crops.

1.4 Crop insurance schemes in india

Crop insurance in general has not been so successful across the globe in different countries.
Policy makers have unrolled various avatars of crop insurance in different times. Considering
the unique nature of Indian agriculture and inequitable socio-economic status of Indian
farmers, crop insurance has remained a failed attempt in general. Even after repeated revision
of the schemes and huge support in the form of premium subsidies for the farmers, crop
insurance has failed to produce the desired results. Even after more than decades of existence
of crop insurance in some form or the other, it has only reached just a small percentage of the
farmers.

Different crop insurance schemes

Sr. No. Time Period Schemes

1 1971-78 First Individual Approach Scheme
2 1979-84 Pilot Crop Insurance Scheme (PCIS)
3 1985-99 Comprehensive Crop Insurance Scheme (CCIS)
 PROJECT FINDINGS
4 Rabi 1999-2000 National Agriculture Insurance Scheme (NAIS)
to rabi 2013-14

5 Rabi 2010-11 Modified National Agriculture Insurance Scheme

season (MNAIS)
6 2007-08 Weather Based Crop Insurance Scheme (WBCIS)
7 2009-10 Coconut Palm Insurance Scheme (CPIS)

8 2016 Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)

Brief explanationof crop insurance schemes

1. National Agriculture Insurance Scheme :

The Scheme was introduced during Rabi 1999-2000 season replacing Comprehensive Crop
Insurance Scheme (CCIS). The Scheme was implemented by Agriculture Insurance
Company of India limited, on behalf of Ministry of Agriculture. The main objective of the
Scheme was to protect the farmers against the losses suffered by them due to crop failure
on account of natural calamities, such as drought, flood, hailstorm, cyclone, fire, pest/
diseases, etc., so as to indemnify the losses and restore their credit worthiness for the
ensuing season. The scheme was available to all the farmers both, loanee and non loanee
irrespective of the size of their holding. The Scheme envisages coverage of all crops
including cereals, millets, pulses, oilseeds and annual commercial and horticultural crops in
respect of which past yield data is available.

Under National Agri Insurance Scheme, except forRabi season of 2013-14, the number of
farmers covered by the scheme witnessed consistent growth, and during Rabi 2014-15, a
total of 7 million farmers were brought under the crop insurance scheme and the total sum
insured during this season was Rs. 213.80 billion. The coverage of Kharif crops exhibited
rapid growth as during Kharif season of 2012, about 10.6 million farmers were covered
with a total sum insured of Rs.271.99 billion. The number of farmers covered almost
doubled to 2 million during Kharif 2015 with Rs.518.48 billion as the total sum insured. As
per administrative approval from GOI, 10% subsidy is to be provided to small & marginal
 PROJECT FINDINGS
farmers in premium amount in Rabi-Summer, 2015-16 season shared equally by State and
Central Government.
Every year since its launch, huge amount of claims were made as losses caused to
agricultural production by farmers. Premium collected for Rabi 2014-15 season was
Rs.5.51 billion and the total claims during the same season was a staggering Rs.15.12
billion.
When premium collected and total claims are compared to the number of farmers being
covered and the area covered, it reveals quite an interesting trend. The area covered under
the scheme decreased from 15.69 million hectare in Kharif 2012 to 11.55 million hectare in
Kharif 2014,while the claims increased from a total of Rs.27.86 billion in Kharif 2012 to
Rs.29.20 billion in corresponding Kharif season of 2014. This indicates at several
possibilities like severe weather failure during 2014 in general, severe weather failure in
some pockets and can also include possibilities of corruption and fraud where there have
been illegitimate claims.

2. Modified National Agriculture Insurance Scheme:

The Scheme before incorporation in NCIP was piloted from Rabi 2010- 11 to Kharif 2013.
The modified version has many improvements viz., Insurance Unit for major crops are
village Panchayat or other equivalent unit; in case of prevented / failed sowing claims up to
25% of the sum insured is payable, post-harvest losses caused by cyclonic rains are
assessed at farm level for the crop harvested and left in ‘cut & spread’ condition up to a
period of 2 weeks in coastal areas; individual farm level assessment of losses in case of
localized calamities, like hailstorm and landslide; on-account payment up to 25% of likely
claim as advance, for providing immediate relief to farmers in case of severe calamities;
threshold yield based on average yield of past seven years, excluding up to two years of
declared natural calamities; minimum indemnity level of 80% is available (instead of 60%
in NAIS); and premium rates are actuarial supported by up-front subsidy in premium,
which ranges from 40% to 75%, equally shared by Centre and States.
The study of figures about number of farmers covered and sum insured under the Modified
National Insurance Scheme reveals that the highest increase was witnessed in Rabi 2014-
15 when the number of farmers opting for the insurance scheme was 3.21 million and sum
insured was Rs.91.08 billion. The figures for Kharif farmers showed a similar trend.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
However, the figures fell down to 4.81 million farmers and Rs.78 billion as sum assured
during the Kharif season of 2015.
A study in terms of premium v/s claims reported reveals that farmers are perhaps realizing
the benefit of agriculture insurance schemes and perhaps getting used to insurance, even if
it means later that no crop loss or damage occurred due to any natural or biological
disasters.
While number of Kharif farmers have benefitted from the scheme have always been higher
when compared to the Rabi season. However, 2014-15 was an exceptional one when
perhaps due to extreme weather calamity, the number of claims were more from the Rabi
season farmers than the Kharif season ones.

3. Weather Based Crop Insurance scheme:

Weather Based Crop Insurance that was introduced in 2011-12 on a pilot basis with an aim
to make it more convenient for the farmers to avail crop insurance appeared to have
received good response from the farmers. The following graph depicts the number of
farmers insured along with the sum insured during each cropping season.
Gross premium and claims reported continued to increase till Kharif 2014 when the gross
premium and the total claims reported for this season was Rs.15.66 billion and Rs.12.35
billion respectively. However, Rabi 2014-15 and Kharif 2015 witnessed a drastic decline in
terms of both gross premium collected and claims reported.
During 2012-13 including both Kharif and the Rabi seasons, total area covered by this
pilot scheme was 17.69 million hectare and total number of farmers benefited was 10.81
million. The area increased to 14.39 million hectare benefitting 9.61 million farmers during
2014-15 seasons of Rabi and Kharif.

4. Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana:

Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)-2016 has been the most recent version of
crop insurance in the country. Pooling in the important learning from all the earlier
schemes and taking into consideration of access to technology in the recent days, Pradhan
Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana promises to take care of the loopholes of earlier schemes. The
Nodal Banks intermediaries may collect the list of individual insured farmers (both loanee
and nonloanee) with requisite details like name, fathers’ name, Bank Account number,
village, categories - Small and Marginal group, Women, insured holding, insured crops,
 PROJECT FINDINGS
sum insured, premium collected, Government subsidy etc., from concerned branch in soft
copy for further reconciliation. This will be done online once the E platform is put in the
place. Like other agriculture related schemes ranging from fertilizer subsidies to subsidised
loans and loan waiver for farmers, crop insurance schemes were also observed to be highly
skewed in favour of just few states and only the large and wealthy farmers. Number of
farmers covered by crop insurance is more in states like Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and
Andhra Pradesh. Within these states too, it was mostly the large farmers who reaped the
benefits of the insurance schemes. Interestingly Uttar Pradesh which has the highest
farming population, has the least numbers of farmers covered by crop insurance.

Limitations of indian crop insurance schemes:

The purpose of crop insurance schemes is very clear to save the farmers from different types of
disasters. But still there are some loopholes in the insurance schemes. Some of those are
explained below:

 .FRAUD :Maharashtra (Aurangabad and Jalgaon), Gujarat (Saurashtra), Andhra Pradesh

(Rayalaseema), Karnataka (Dharwad and Haveri), Tamil Nadu (Nagapattinam and
Sivaganga) and Telangana (Mahbubnagar)

- Coverage in these regions is high and so is fraudulence

- In some districts hundreds of farmers are literally living off fraudulent claims
 LESS COVERAGE: Punjab, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Western Uttar Pradesh

- Farmers here don’t have any knowledge about insurance and remain without cover

- Small farmers have no incentive as they have to pay the premium

- In many cases farmers have written to banks saying they do not want
 Awareness: the awareness about crop insurance schemes is less in some a
 PROJECT FINDINGS
 Data constraints: With just around 45% of the claims made by farmers over the last
three crop seasons data for the last rabi season is not available ms: le paid by the
insurance companies.
 Low payout of claims: reason for the very low payout of claims is that only few
state governments are paying their share of the premiums on time and till they do,
the central government doesn’t pay its share either. Till they get the premium,
insurance companies simply sit on the claims.
 Gaps in assessment of crop loss: There is hardly any use of modern technology in
assessing crop damages. There is lack of trained outsourced agencies, scope of
corruption during implementation and the non-utilisation of technologies like smart
phones and drones to improve reliability of such sampling
 Less number of notified crops: than can avail insurance, Inadequate and delayed
claim payment.
 High actuarial premium rates: Insurance companies charged high actuarial
premium rates.
 If states delay notifications, or payment of premiums, or crop cutting data,
companies cannot pay compensation to the farmers in time.
 Poor capacity to deliver: There has been no concerted effort by the state
government and insurance companies to build awareness of farmers on PMFBY.
Insurance companies have failed to set-up infrastructure for proper Implementation
of PMFBY.
PMBY is not beneficial for farmers in vulnerable regions  as factors like low
indemnity levels, low threshold yields, low sum insured and default on loans make it
a poor scheme to safeguard against extreme weather events.
 PROJECT FINDINGS

Chapter 2
Review of the literature
 PROJECT FINDINGS

1.1 Introduction

Studies related to agriculture in Haryana

There are various studies and researches done by various scholars. Some of them are discussed
below:

A.Make in Haryana and sustainable agriculture development : By SumitTripathi,

ShivanshuAgarwal, RohitBhanushali (M.Sc. Agribusiness Economics, Gokhale Institute of
Politics & Economics,

Shivaji Nagar, Pune). The studies says that although Haryana is one of the leading producer states
for food

crops, there is a wide scope of improvement in the areas of crop yield, efficient water

management, reach of agricultural credit, provision of warehousing facilities and development of

processing centers. Under the „Make in Haryana‟ banner, a huge amount of investments have

been realized and it is evident that there is a magnanimous potential for further future

investments in the above sectors. Only then can Haryana match itself with the global standards of

agrobusiness.

B. Study on awarenesss level of smart agriculture practice in Haryana: by AK Rohilla and

Ajay Kumar of CCS Haryana Agriculture University, Hisar
Farmers’ awareness towards agro-processing, Farmers’ awareness towards protected
cultivationFarmers’ awareness towards water harvesting

Present study concluded that there was a gap inawareness level of

SAPs in farming community. It can increase through organizing continuous trainings, campaigns,
lectures and demonstrations. In addition, a well-structured and sound national level planning can
definitely enhance the farmers’ awareness level regarding SAPs.
 PROJECT FINDINGS

a. Agricultural Scenario and Issues:

By Amarjeet Singh and Jaspal Singh, consultant of NITI aayog

The agriculture sector of Haryana is growing with healthier growth rate as compared to
Punjab. The sheen of green revolution practices has petered out in Punjab. The negative
growthof crop sector has been estimated in both states. Lives stock sector share has risen to
36 percent in agricultural GSDP in Haryana and 28 percent in Punjab in 2014-15. There is
need to improve the growth rate of crop sector because this sector is playing a lead
role in agricultural GSDP.This sector jerks the growth of agricultural sector. For the
policy implication, the study is suggesting that need to increase the budget in R&D of
agriculture institutes which are engaged in high yielding varieties and other inputs. To
push the agriculture growth of crop sector, government needs to recognize the role of
research institute in addition, to streamline the existing system. Furthermore, it needs to
develop food processing unit which save the wastage of vegetables, fruits and commercial
crops. There is prerequisite of government interference for altering the framers to high
value crops with benefactor of appropriate market facility as well as price of the produce. It
is required to re-distribute an area for crop as per availability of natural resources to ensure
market facilities which leads to match demand supply concept which could help to farmers
to get the remunerative price of their product. We strongly feel that only a well-conceived,
meticulously designed, and thoughtfully implemented growth strategy along the lines
suggested in the present study can make an appreciable contribution towards enabling the
agricultural sector experience accelerated growth and thereby once again redirecting it
to the path of higher growth trajectory.

1.2 Studies related to crop insurance:

a. Growth of NAIS: A study of crop insurance in india, By Shree Krishna S. Mahajan

Since 1972 so many schemes of crop insurance have been launched in the country
but they failed to influence the farmers and share the risk of farmers. Now days
some farmers are committing suicide due to lack of risk management. And they are
 PROJECT FINDINGS
selecting the option of suicide rather than crop insurance. Hence there is need of
serious concern of this problem of sharing the risk of farmers and protecting their
crops against adverse weather and natural calamities. On this background, NAIS has
been introduced since Rabi 1999-2000. There are so many expectations from NAIS but
it also failed to meet farmer’s expectations.

Government of India constituted a joint group to overcome shortcomings of

NAIS. The group made in-depth study and made important recommendation like
reduction in the unit area of insurance to gram Panchayat for major crops,
improving the basis of calculation of threshold yield, higher indemnity level of 80
per cent and 90 per cent coverage of pre-sowing / planting risk and post-harvest
losses. Personal accident insurance cover and package insurance policy etc. based on
the recommendation of joint group and views/comments of various stake -holders,
proposal of Modified National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (MNAIS) was
prepared and sent to the Planning Commission. Planning Commission was decided that
the MNAIS will be implemented on non-plan side. But all these recommendations are
remain on the paper and once again government failed to improve crop insurance
program.

EISSN 2277-4955BAUDDHIK VOLUME-3, NO.-1, JAN-APRIL-2012 14AIC started

operation from 2003 took over theimplementation of NAIS has performed
creditabilityin this area. It had also shown dynamism withexperimenting with
new methods and approaches.However several improvements are needed both
atthe organizational and the functioning level. Twomain important things are
needed one is that propercoordination between at all stakeholders at statelevel,
there is need to active state level advisorybody? Another important thing is that the
presence ofAIC at district level. The person recruiting at districtlevel should be
carefully selected and properlytrained who can play an important role
forcoordinating at district level.

NAIS is showing deficit on the ground that thepremium received is always less
than claims underNAIS. The premium rates are needed to cover purerisk,
administrative cost and reasonable returns.Private sector insurer may also involve
 PROJECT FINDINGS
in cropinsurance to broad coverage of farmers as well asimproving viability in
crop insurance. Insuranceproduct at village level should be simple in
designpresenting so farmers easily understand. ThroughSHGs of farmers this
scheme may be made costeffective at grass-root level. Hence proper knowledgeand
implementation of crop insurance scheme canincrease the food grain production
in India and canreduce the risk of crop losses.

Status of Crop Insurance in India: study done by DipankarMalakar of K K HANDIQUI

STATE OPEN UNIVERSITy

There are about 119 millions farmer in our country who work hard to live their life and
feed thecountry and yet they suffer most. Indian farmers live in the mercy of nature,
there is no properand adequate provision of security for crops grown by Indian farmers.
Government measures areseem to be inadequate to protect and encourage farmers. It
was only in 2003 that the GovernmentofIndia established a special insurance company
i.e. Agriculture Insurance Company of IndiaLtd.(AIC) for crop insurance. Following
are the most common challenges of crop insurance inIndia:Lack of Comprehensive
Model: Though the government has piloted and introducesmany crop insurance
schemes there is no such scheme which can protect or indemnify the
loss of farmers growing crops in different parts and different climate in the
country.Again where the loanee farmers get automatic insurance coverage for the crops
for whichhe has taken the loan non-loanee farmers are not getting automatic
coverage for theircrops.Out Dated Models: The technique used in various crop
insurance schemes for estimationof crop yield, loss assessment and claim payout is
outdated and not all-inclusive, due towhich the farmers who actually suffers are not
indemnified properly and on the otherhand the farmers who are not suffering get
indemnified at par with the suffering farmers,which is very discouraging. Though
the newly launched WBCIS seems to be littlecomprehensive but it needs a
proper infrastructure i.e. whether stations in all “ReferenceUnit Area” which involve
moderate cost and requires maintenance and expertise.Delay in Claim Payout:
Claim payout procedure of crop insurance is very lengthy.Farmers need to wait 11
to 12 months to get their claim. Due to which the farmer cannotinitiate new cropping
activity or it is delayed. Lack of Awareness: Since most of the Indian farmers are
 PROJECT FINDINGS
illiterate and villages in Indiaare very remote, the farmers are not aware about crop
insurance, crop loan and othergovernment schemes and those who know they hesitate
to enter in to official red tapes. Negligence of Government: Agriculture is the area
in which the governments (both state& central) in India should have given the most
importance but unfortunately governmentsneglect this area most. There is no campaign,
awareness programmes so as to make croploan and crop insurance popular among the
India. Low motivation: All above discussed reasons club with some other
reasons likeeducation, confidence etc. lead to low penetration of crop insurance.
Low Participation of Private Sector: Entry of private sector in crop
insurance isrestricted. Only in MNAIS and WBCIS they are allowed, in other crop
insurance schemesthey are not allowed.

2.4 studies related to awareness of farmers

Some of the studies happened on awareness of farmers are below

a. Awareness on Agricultural Insurance Schemes in Southern Haryana : By MS Nain,

Rashmi Singh and JyotiRanjanMishra of Indian Agriculture research Institute

The study brought out various issues related toawareness level of the farmers
regarding components ofnewly launched insurance scheme popularly known
asPMFBY(Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna). The lowlevel of awareness regarding
various components clearlyimplies that all the stakeholders along with the
serviceprovider should be actively engaged in public awarenessand capacity
building campaign for farmers through bankpersonnel, agricultural department and
village administrativeoffices. The farmers were sensitive to different
constraintsincluding premium rate, timely returns andassessmentprocedures. The
service providers have to concentrate asa whole. It will greatly help the farmers to
recover frombad agricultural years. This will influence other nonsubscriber to
subscribe agricultural insurance and finallymitigate the agricultural risks.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
b. FARMERS’ AWARENESS TOWARDS INTEGRATED NUTRIENT
MANAGEMENT (INM: By KrishanYadav, Anil Kumar Rohilla and JS Malik of
CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar

The present research was undertaken to study the awareness of farmers‘

awareness towards integrated nutrient management (INM). Present study was
conducted in Haryana state in 2017. Total 180 respondents were interviewed for the
study. Present study concluded that farmers‘ awareness level was high in case of
‗do you know INM increase the crop yield?‘ with weighted mean score (WMS)
2.02 and rank order 1st followed by ‗do you know that ‗INM sustain the soil
health?‘ and ‗do you know about organic manures and fertilizers?‘ with
WMS 1.96 and 1.93 and 2nd and 3rd rank orders. ‗Do you know about
balanced use of fertilizers?‘, ‗do you know time and method of application of
manures and fertilizers?‘, ‗INM increase the organic matter‘ with rank orders
4th, 5th and 6th and WMS 1.93, 1.86 and 1.82, respectively. ‗Do you know
percentage of N/P/K in different fertilizers?‘, ‗are you aware from bio fertilizers i.e.
Rhizobium, Azotobacter, Azospirilium?‘ and ‗do you know about primary and
secondary nutrients?‘ with WMS 1.59, 1.32 and 1.31 while rank orders were 7th,
8th and 9th, respectively. Awareness level was low in case of ‗do you know about
essential micronutrients?‘ with WMS 1.30 and rank order 10th. Independent
variables such as age, education, land holding, farming system, farm power,
mass media exposure, extension contact, innovation proneness were significant
correlated with dependent variable. Cropping system, irrigation facilities and
economic motivation were not significant with dependent variable whereas R-
square value was 0.46.

2.5 studies related to farmers satisfaction

Agriculture development in India should be put on a fast track by making farmers aware of the
newtechnological advancements and different sources of information in this field. It is concluded
fromquestionnaire-based survey that the elder / family members and friends/ neighbors/ relatives
are twomost important and common sources of information for the farmers under personal contact
category.This indicates that the farmers rely for information on their known persons. The study
 PROJECT FINDINGS
reveals thatmaximum farmers get below average satisfaction from RAEOs/ Gramsevaks, Public
libraries/Community Information Centers, Block Panchyat Offices, University Specialists,
Minikits,Meetings, Field days and Agriculture tours. It must be necessary that the above sources
should bemore approachable and project their services in such a way that the farmers can easily
avail them fortheir needs accordingly. Radio and television are cheap, popular and common
resource in rural Indiashould be used as an effective means of dissemination of agricultural
information. Thus improvingour agricultural information systems will be helpful for our farmers to
be well informed and tomotivate them toward using current technology for agricultural benefits.
This turn will lead to betteragricultural production and improve economics status of the farmers
and country.

c. Satisfaction with the Public Agricultural Extension Services in Tripura State: By

AmitDebnath, JayshreeDatta and Saravanan Raj of Department of Agriculture,
Government of Tripura.

From the results of the study it can be concluded that a majority of the clientele had
perceived medium level of relevancy, quality, usefulness and customer service of
extension services. Still the department can improve theclientele satisfaction by
providing more relevant, quality and useful services and by upgrading the customer
services of the department. The department should put more aention on
providing market information, input supply in time, farmers’ group formation,
need based and exible services; whereas the extension personnel should be
equipped with recent teaching materials and they should get proper incentives or
rewards for their job performance. Cropping intensity as well as irrigation
intensity of the farmers’ eld can be improved to increase the farmers’ over-all
income. The farmers’ should be encouraged to become more innovative and they
should be regularly kept informed about the recent developments. The extension
service commitment of the farmers can be improved through proper advisory
services on time. Major problems faced by most of the clientele were timely
availability of extension personnel, lack of inter-agency cooperation both in
program planning & implementation and lack of use of mass media channel by the
extension personnel etc. can be reduced for providing need based advisory services.
 PROJECT FINDINGS

Chapter 3

Research Methodology
 PROJECT FINDINGS
3.1 Introduction

Research may be very broadly defined as systematic gathering of data and information
and its analysis for advancement of knowledge in any subject.

Research attempts to find answer intellectual and practical questions through application
of systematic methods. Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary defines research as "studious
inquiry or examination; esp: investigation or experimentation aimed at the discovery and
interpretation of facts, revision of accepted theories or laws in the light of new facts, or
practical application of such new or revised theories or laws". Some people consider
research as a movement, a movement from the known to the unknown.

It is actually a voyage of discovery. We all possess the vital instinct of inquisitiveness for,
when the unknown confronts us, we wonder and our inquisitiveness makes us probe and
attain full and fuller understanding of theunknown. This inquisitiveness is the mother of
all knowledge and the method, which man employs for obtaining the knowledge of
whatever the unknown, can be termed as research.

Research is an academic activity and as such the term should be used in a technical sense.
According to Clifford Woody research comprises defining and redefining problems,
formulating hypothesis or suggested solutions; collecting, organizing and evaluating data;
making deductions and reaching conclusions; and at last carefully testing the conclusions
to determine whether they fit the formulating hypothesis. D. Steiner and M. Stephenson in
the Encyclopedia of Social Sciences define research as “the manipulation of things,
concepts or symbols for the purpose of generalizing to extend, correct or verify
knowledge, whether that knowledge aids in construction of theory or in the practice of an
art.”

Research is, thus, an original contribution to the existing stock of knowledgemaking for
its advancement. It is the pursuit of truth with the help of study, observation, comparison
and experiment. In short, the search for knowledge through objective and systematic
method of finding solution to a problem is research. The systematic approach concerning
generalization and the formulation of a theory is also research. As such the term ‘research’
 PROJECT FINDINGS
refers to the systematic method consisting of enunciating the problem, formulating a
hypothesis, collecting the facts or data, analyzing the facts and reaching certain
conclusions either in the form of solutions(s) towards the concerned problem or in certain
generalizations for some theoretical formulation.

3.2 VALUE

Many numbers of researches have been done before related to the Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima
Yojna. Most of the research is also done with the objective to assess farmer satisfaction from this
scheme. From 2016 many researchers concluded that there are still problems persisting in this
scheme and pointed it out and have given number of recommendation to solve the problem.
This research will be based on whether those problems are still there or whether any steps are
taken to resolve those problems. It will also determine the view of the farmers toward this scheme
and any other issues that are left in this scheme and not solved at all. This research will also
recommend solution for the problems and help reach a conclusion for the insurance scheme.

3.3 AIM

The aim of this study is to determine as to whether insurance scheme PMFBY has proved to be
successful.
3.4 THE OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

 Primary objective of the study is to assess farmer satisfaction and awareness towards
PMFBY.

 Secondary objective is to study problems in PMFBY from farmer’s viewpoint.

3.5 DATA COLLECTION

 PROJECT FINDINGS
Primary data was collected with the help of a survey. This survey is focused on the farmers who
have either taken crop insurance i.e. Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna, or they have taken any
loan in regard to the agriculture purpose. The personal interview approach was selected so that
data can be collected efficiently. One on one approach was needed for successful data collection.
Questionnaire was designed for collecting the information about farmer in number of section. This
section consists of general information, status of farmer, information regarding crop insurance,
awareness about Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna, satisfaction about Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima
Yojna. Copy of the questionnaire is attached in annexure.
Secondary data has been collected from different sites, journals, articles, official sites etc.

3.6 SAMPLING SELECTION

Sample selection determines how a person needs to be selected for the fulfilment purpose of the
research. From the population of Haryana district farmers, those farmers were selected which
either have crop insurance i.e. Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna or those who have taken loan for
agriculture purpose.
These samples determine that the farmer owned a crop insurance policy, Pardhan Mantri Fasal
Bima Yojna.
3.7 SAMPLE SIZE

3.8 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

The sampling techniques which were used were convenience sampling and purposive sampling.
These two helped to sample the population in a much efficient way. On the one hand, convenience
sampling helped to sample population in an easy way by providing sample which can be easily
contacted. On the other hand purposive sampling helped to contact only those which are proved
useful for the research. These two were selected as it can help in time constraint as well as
economy.
3.9 INSTRUMENTS OF DATA COLLECTION

Instrument that was used to collect data is made by finding a problem and trying to find its
solution. The instrument was a questionnaire which is utilized to collect data.
3.10 DATA COLLECTION METHOD
 PROJECT FINDINGS
The data was collected with the means of personal contact whether it is by face to face, or over
telephone to fill the questionnaire.

Sample size determines how many persons have been selected for the purpose of the
research project. For this purpose the sample size 71 was selected

CONCLUSION

No doubt that the PMFBY is very fruitful for farmers to protect them from loss of crops on
account of occurrence of natural calamities, and attack of pests /insects and diseases. Agriculture is
still a gamble of monsoon. These are main causes of failure of crops. Millions of tonnes of
agricultural produce are damaged/destroyed by these adversities each year across the country. On
account of failure of crops, indebtedness, illness, frustration, family dispute etc are also increasing
among the farmers. The failure of crops and indebtedness are major cause of farmers’ suicide
across the country. Since, agriculture is highly susceptible to natural calamities such as floods,
droughts, heavy rains, hail-storm, pests/insects diseases etc., it is necessary to protect the farmers
from the adversities which occur frequently across the country. The UPA Government of India had
introduced National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIs) in 1999-2000 to protect the farmers by
compensating the loss of crops due to occurrence of natural calamities. There were many lacuna
and loopholes in NAIs. It was not implemented properly and effectively. The premium rate was
also very high. The compensation had not been given properly, adequately and timely to the
affected farmers. On account of these drawbacks, it could not get popularized among the farmers.
Since, NAIs did not get success at ground level, so it required much modification to protect the
farmers in a better way. The NAIs has been replaced by Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana
(PMFBY) in February 2016 across the country. This compulsorily covers the farmers that avail the
seasonal crops loan (loanee farmers). The non-loanee farmers can also be covered under PMFBY,
if they are interested to come under PMFBY. Almost all Kharif and Rabi season crops are notified
under PMFBY. The premium rate of Kharif crops is fixed i.e. 2% of sum insured to be paid by
farmers, while it is 1.50% of the value of sum insured for Rabi crops. 76 In case of commercial
and horticultural crops, 5% of the sum is insured to be paid by the farmers. From sowing to
threshing of crops, everything is covered under PMFBY. It is a new scheme which had been
uniformly started throughout the country. A number of agencies are involved in the process of
PMFBY. Two insurance companies namely Agricultural Insurance Company (AIC) and ICICI
Lombard were involved in U.P. for Kharif-2016 and Rabi-2017. Out of 75 districts of U.P., 69
districts were covered by Agricultural Insurance Company (AIC) while 6 districts were under the
preview of ICICI Lombard during the corresponding season. The transaction costs of insurance are
rather very high, so some efforts should be made to reduce the transaction costs. The share of
premium is not properly and adequately contributed to insurance companies. It has a lot of
bottlenecks, and constraints, such as lack of awareness among the farmers about PMFBY and lack
of willingness to pay a very marginal amount of premium. These were major constraints in the way
of proper implementation of PMFBY. Apart from these constraints, unawareness, lack of
 PROJECT FINDINGS
understanding of insurance process, non access to insurance providers, untimely receipt of
insurance claims and unwillingness of the state government to share the burden of subsidy on
premium was also major hurdles in the success for implementation of PMFBY.

Policy Recommendations

On account of failure of NAIs, the PMFBY had been introduced across the country in year 2016.
It is much better than NAIs. The PMFBY has been initiated in a well planned manner and has
been getting more popular among the farmers since its inception. Even then, the following
Recommendations have been given for its betterment. The recommendations are based on the
Perception of stakeholders.

1. The mixed crops are not included in the list of notified crops under PMFBY in Uttar
Pradesh. Therefore, it is suggested that the area of the mixed crops should also be
considered under PMFBY.

2. The share croppers and tenants were not enrolled under PMFBY in Kharif-2016 and
Rabi-2017. It is suggested to agriculture department and insurance companies that a
sincere effort should be made to link share croppers and tenants with PMFBY.

3. The premium had been deducted by banks without taking the consent from loanee
farmers. The loanee farmers were very much frustrated from the compulsory deduction of
82premium from the amount of their loan. The compulsory deduction of premium from the
amount of loan of loanee farmers should be stopped. The deduction of premium should
be made after getting the consent from loanee farmers. The amount of premium should be
made publically through mass media communication. It should not be compulsory. It
should be voluntary.

4. The non- loanee insured farmers were limited in numbers across the state. Out of total
insured farmers of 62.71 lakh in Kharif-2016 and Rabi-2017, the non-loanee insured
farmers accounted for only 0.48%. Therefore, it is suggested that joint efforts be made by
Agriculture Department and Insurance Companies to pursue the non-loanee farmers for
linking themselves with PMFBY. The benefit of PMFBY should be popularized by
organizing farmer fairs, seminar and public meeting at panchayat level. The pamphlets,
leaflets, published material in newspapers, etc. should be distributed among the farmers
 PROJECT FINDINGS
for knowing the benefit of PMFBY at the time of failure of crops.

5. The meeting of SLCCCI and DLTC should be held at stipulated time. The selection of
insurance companies should be done as per operational guidelines. The overall
supervision on PMFBY should be done by SLCCCI and DLTC at state and district levels
respectively. It will create transparency at each and every step during the implementation
of PMFBY.

6. A separate budget should be allotted for disseminating the scheme in a bigger way. The
seminars, meeting etc. could be organized on a large scale to popularize this scheme and
motivate the non-loanee farmers to link them with PMFBY.

7. The payment of compensation should be made within 15 days. Hence, sincere efforts
should be made to pay prompt payment of compensation to beneficiary farmers.

8. The role of Crop Cutting Experiments (CCEs) is very important in the context of
PMFBY. Therefore, it is suggested to inform the farmers through proper publicity in
newspapers, etc that the CCEs will be held in a particular village on such date.

9. The estimation of loss of crops of individual insured farmer is rather very difficult and
troublesome. A number of formalities have to be done which is beyond the capacity of a
farmer. Therefore, the compensation is not timely available to him. A number of inquires
have to be made to assess the loss of crops. It requires much time to settle the 83 compensation.
Therefore, it is suggested to modify the prescribed procedure in theinterest of farmers to get
compensation easily.

10. The use of remote sensing satellite, imagery and digitalization of land record should be
promoted to minimize area discrepancies.

11. Sampling of CCEs should be based on consensus of all stakeholders. It should be taken
into account during the CCEs to provide confidence among affected farmers.

12. The CCEs should also be conducted by the insurance units through technological
 PROJECT FINDINGS
interventions, such as automation, geo. location etc

13. The data of CCEs should be publically available

14. Auditing and multilevel checking of CCEs data should be made to prove sanctity and
creditability of CCEs.

15. To check the manipulation in CCEs at ground level, it is suggested that the involvement
ofPanchayat Raj Institutions is needed. The farmers should be present at the time of loss
assessment of crops during CCEs.

16. There is a need to improve the efficiency of staff involved in PMFBY to get better
success in the implementation of PMFBY across the state. Therefore, it suggested for
improving the capacity building of the staff of State Government.

17. The data related to CCEs, threshold yield, sum insured, amount of compensation and
premium should be available on public domain. This will increase transparency in
PMFBY.

18. In few cases, the higher premium is deducted from farmers account by mistake or for
other reasons, hence, it is suggested that the insurance companies should refund the
excess deduction of premium.

19. There should be a provision for financial benefit to efficient workers of PMFBY. This
will provide fruitful result in linking more non-loanee farmers with PMFBY. A separate
budget should be allotted to District Nodal Officers of PMFBY to organize seminar,
farmers fairs, etc., to motivate the non-loanee farmers.

20. Separate staff should be recruited for looking after only PMFBY. The present staff of
agriculture department is not sufficient for proper implementation of PMFBY.
 PROJECT FINDINGS

Chapter 4
 PROJECT FINDINGS

INTRODUCTION

The significance of performing a data analysis is to check whether the research

assumptions are correct or not, and to mark possible new perspectives on the
problem on which study is being done. The ultimate objective of data analysis is to
answer the questions outlined in the research project through the means of collected
data.
However, before interpreting the analysed data and the relation between different
variable, information obtained from the collected data on each variable should be
shortlisted in form of charts, graphs, figures or tables.

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

The survey was conducted on the topic - Assessment of crop insurance scheme
(Farmers) in Rewari District, Haryana. The questionnaire method of data collection
was adopted for this survey. The questionnaire is designed to determine the
respondent’s awareness and satisfaction towards ‘Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima
Yojana’. The questionnaire is framed into seven sub- categories which are classified
below.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
1) Residential status
90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Residential status RURAL URBAN

From the above data we can interpret that the residential status of the respondents who are
indulged in the farming business. This data represents that 85% respondents who are indulged in
farming are living in rural areas while other 15% respondent living in urban areas and are still
indulged in farming.

2. AGE

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
Age UP TO 30 UP TO 40 UP TO 50 UP TO 60

The above data show the parameter of age the respondents belong to. The data shows four
choices of ages. The highest numbers of respondents who are indulged in farming are 35% which
comes under the category of between 30-40 years of age, following with 25% respondents who
come in the category of below 30 years of age. The data also shows respondents of age between
40-50 years and above 50 to be 18% and 22% respectively.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
3. NUMBER OF FAMILY MEMBER

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
Number of family UP TO 3 UP TO 7 UP TO 10
members

From the above data we can interpret that not every family has same number of members. 45% of
respondents which is the largest percentage in the data has family member between 4 and 7. While
the number of family members between 7 and 10 covers to 25% and the smallest portion is 30%
which comes in the category of members between 1 and 3.

4. NUMBER OF FAMILY MEMBER

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Number of family members MALE FEMALE

The above data shows as to how many respondents which are indulged in the farming is male,
female or other gender. Graph with the 93% shows that male gender is dominating the farming
while the rest 7% represents female gender.

5. OCCUPATION
 PROJECT FINDINGS

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
OCCUPATION PRIMARY SECONDARY

The above data can be interpreted with the analysis that 80% of respondents prefer farming as
their main occupation with 80% and 20% are indulged in farming but as subsidiary occupation.

6. TYPE OF FARMING

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Type of farming OWNED TENANT

From the above data we can interpret that the most number of respondents have their own land for
the farming purpose which is 68%, while tenant farming consist of 32% .

7. Number of family members dependent on agriculture

 PROJECT FINDINGS
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Number of family UP TO 3 UP TO 7 UP TO 10
members dependent
on agriculture

The above data shows that the most number of family members which are dependent on
agriculture is 45% which is between 4 and 7, 33% which consist of the members between 1 and 3
and the smallest is 22% which consists of members between 7 and 10.

8. EDUCATION

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
EDUCATION ILLITERATE 10TH 12TH GRADUATION

From the above data we can interpret that the maximum number of respondents are matriculate to
graduate with 31% of strength. While 35% of respondents are up to matriculate and following it is
post graduate which is 16.9%. The least number of respondents are illiterate which is consisting of
15%.

9. Land holding of farmer (in acre)

 35
PROJECT FINDINGS
30

25

20

15

10

0
Land holding of UP TO 3 UP TO 7 UP TO 10 MORE THAN 10
farmer (in acre)

From the above data we can interpret that the farmer who owns land between 1 & 3 acre is 26%, the
respondents who own land between 3 & 7 acre are 30%, and the farmer with the land holding
between 7 & 10 constitutes to 26% while the farmer who owns 10 or above acres of land consist of
18%.

10. ANNUAL INCOME

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Annual household 2 LAKH 5 LAKH 7 LAKH
income from
agriculture (Gross in
Rs.)

The above data shows that the income that farmer gets are categorized in four parts. The farmer
who gets income from agriculture below 2lakh is 56% and the farmer who earns between 2lakh &
5lakh are 32%. Farmers who earns between 5 & 7lakh are 12%.
11. EXPERIENCE
 PROJECT FINDINGS
40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
Years of 10 YEAR 15 YEAR 20 YEAR MORE THAN 20
experience in
farming of
respondent

The above data shows the years of experience that a respondent have in the farming business. The
farmers who are indulged in farming and have less than 10 year of experience constitutes to 28%,
whereas the farmer who have experience between 10 & 20 years are 18%, the farmer who have
experience of farming between 20-30 years consist of 35% and the those who have more than 30
years of experience are 19%.

12. USE OF MACHINERY

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Usage of agriculture machinery OWNED RENT

From the above data we can interpret that respondents are categorized in different categories on the
basis of agriculture machinery.
First category is owned machinery which corresponds to 45% of the total data and second
category is rented machinery which consists of 55

13. TYPE OF FARMER

 PROJECT FINDINGS
70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Type of farmer LOANEE NON LOANEE

From the above data we can interpret that what is the farmer status. The respondents who are
loanee consist of 65% while non loanee is 35%.

14. CROP INSURANCE TAKEN

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Any crop insurance taken by YES NO
farmer

From the above data we can interpret that respondents who have taken crop insurance are consists
of 71% while other 29% either don’t have crop insurance or don't possess any knowledge whether
they have taken it or not.

15. IRRIGATION SYSTEM

 80
PROJECT FINDINGS
70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Method of irrigation adopted SURFACE SPRINKLER
by farmer

From the above data it can be interpreted that a large no. of farmer utilize surface irrigation which
is 67%, and least used irrigation method is sprinkler which is 33%.

16. Does crop insurance protects revenue of the farmer

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Does crop insurance protects YES NO
revenue of the farmer

The above data shows whether respondents think crop insurance protect revenue of the farmer. 39%
of the respondents answered ‘No’ as crop insurance does not protects revenue of the farmer and the
other 61% thinks that ‘Yes’ it protects the revenue of the farmer.

17. USE OF LOAN WAIVER SCHEME

 80
PROJECT FINDINGS
70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Farmer using any loan waiver YES NO
scheme

The above data interprets that 74% of the respondents have not used or taken any type of loan
waiver scheme while other 26% have taken some kind of loan waiver scheme. Out of these 26%
respondents, 15 respondents don’t possess any knowledge about scheme amount that was waived.

18. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Farmer taken any technical YES NO
assistance/training related to
farming

The above data shows that 77% respondents have not taken any kind of technical assistance or
training for farming purposes while other 23% have taken assistance and training for farming
purposes.

19. Aware about any crop insurance scheme other than PMFBY
 PROJECT FINDINGS
90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Aware about any crop YES NO
insurance scheme other than
PMFBY

The data collected can be interpreted to define as how many respondents know about crop insurance
scheme other than PMFBY.
78% respondents don't know about other schemes while 22% of respondents know about crop
insurance schemes other than PMFBY.

20. Are all the required perils covered in the scheme taken by you

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Are all the required perils YES NO
covered in the scheme taken by
you

From the above data we can interpret about how many respondents have taken perils under this
scheme. 45% respondents have responded that they have not taken all the perils mentioned in the
scheme while other 55% responded with that they have taken all perils in the scheme.

21. Have information related to variety of crops covered in scheme/s

 PROJECT FINDINGS
70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Have information related to YES NO
variety of crops covered in
scheme/s

From the above data we can interpret as 60% of respondents are aware about the crops which
are notified under the scheme while other 40% of respondents have responded that they don't
know all the crops covered under this scheme.

22. Awareness about crop cutting experiment (CCE)

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Awareness about crop cutting YES NO
experiment (CCE)

From the above data we can interpret that how many respondents are aware about CCE. 38% of
the respondents are not aware about CCE while other 62 are aware about the CCE.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
23. Number of crop insurance provider known

30

25

20

15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6

From the above data we can interpret that 30.9% respondents don't know any crop insurance
provider. 2.9% know 5 number of crop insurance provider, 15.5% know 4 number of crop
insurance provider, 9.8% knows 3 number of crop insurance provider, 21.1% respondents knows
2 number of crop insurance provider,19.8% respondents knows only 1 number of insurance
provider.

24. The PMFBY was launched in 2016 :

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
The PMFBY was launched in YES NO
2016 :

From the data collected we can interpret that 58% of respondents stated that PMFBY was
launched in 2016 while other 42% don't know that it was launched in 2016.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
25. In which cluster does respondent belongs :

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1 2 3 4

From the above data we can interpret that respondents who have knowledge of the cluster are
80% while other 9% does not have knowledge about cluster they come in.

26. Can one insurance company cover more than one cluster :

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Can one insurance company YES NO
cover more than one cluster :

From the above data we can interpret whether the respondents have knowledge that one
insurance company can work in two and more clusters. 61% respondents have agreed that a
single insurance company cannot work in two or more clusters to provide crop insurance while
other 39% think it can work in other cluster also.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
27. Are you aware about insured crop/s under PMFBY :

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Are you aware about insured YES NO
crop/s under PMFBY :

From the above data we can interpret that 35% respondents are not aware about the notified
crops under the PMFBY while 65% are aware about the notified crops under PMFBY.

28. Awareness about premium distribution between government and

farmers

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Awareness about premium YES NO
distribution between
government and farmers

From the above data we can interpret whether respondents know about premium distribution.
The premium is distributed between government and farmer. 55% respondents stated that they
know about premium distribution between farmer and government while other 45% responded
they don't know about premium distribution.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
29. Are there proper means to provide information related to PMFBY to
farmers

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Are there proper means to YES NO
provide information related to
PMFBY to farmers

The above data shows that 64% of the farmers are not satisfied with the information provider
while other 36% are satisfied with the information.

30. Is there any need to organize program related to PMFBY for

farmers

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1 2

The above data can be interpreted to provide information whether there is a need for organizing
programs. 72% respondents thinks that current programs are not enough and there is a need for
organizing more programs for providing information while 28% think there is no need for such
programs.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
31. Do you know time period for claiming the PMFBY

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Do you know time period for yes no
claiming the PMFBY

The above data shows that 65% respondents are aware about the time period claim can be taken
and 35% are not aware about the time period.

32. Are you aware about the claim procedure

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Are you aware about the claim YES NO
procedure

The above interpreted data details how many respondents know about claim procedure. 32%
respondents are not aware about how claim procedure works while other 68% are aware about
claim procedure.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
33. Do you know about the timeline to apply for the claim

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Do you know about the YES NO
timeline to apply for the claim

The above data shows that how many respondents know about timeline to apply for claim and how
many don’t. 30% respondents are not aware about the timeline to apply for claim while other 70
know about timeline to apply for claim.

34. Do you know about the claim settlement procedure

51.5

51

50.5

50

49.5

49

48.5

48
Do you know about the claim YES NO
settlement procedure

From the above data we can interpret how many respondents are aware about claim settlement
procedure. The respondents who are not aware about the claim settlement procedure are 51%
while other 49% are aware about claim settlement procedure.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
35. Do you know how much time it takes for claim settlement

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Do you know how much time it YES NO
takes for claim settlement

From the above data we can interpret as how many respondents are aware and are not aware about time
of claim settlement. 67% respondents are not aware about time of claim settlement while other 33% are
aware about the claim settlement time.

36. Do you know about the peril of claims

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Do you know about the peril of YES NO
claims

The above data can be interpreted to provide details about the respondents whether they know
about all the perils for claims. 29% respondents are not aware about the perils for claims while
other 71% are aware about the perils for claim.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
37. Do you know about the documents required for claim settlement

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Do you know about the YES NO
documents required for claim
settlement

The above data can be interpreted to provide information as how many respondents know about and
don't know about documents required for the claim settlement.
38% respondents are not aware about the documents while other 62% are aware about the
documents required for claim settlement.

38. Do you know about the working of the yield and loss assessment

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Do you know about the YES NO
working of the yield and loss
assessment

The above data when interpreted can provide information about how many respondents are
aware and not aware about the working of yield and loss assessment. 64% respondents are not
aware about the working of the yield and loss assessment while 36% are aware about its working.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
39. Do you know about the risk period covered in crop insurance

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Do you know about the risk YES NO
period covered in crop
insurance

The above data provide insight when interpreted about the awareness of respondents about risk
period covered in PMFBY. 37% respondents are not fully aware about the risk period while
other 63% are aware about the risk period covered.

40. Do you know about the parties involved in claim process

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Do you know about the parties YES NO
involved in claim process

The above data when interpreted gives information about the respondent’s awareness about the
parties that are involved in crop insurance scheme. 43% respondents does not know about the
parties involved in PMFBY scheme while other 57% know about the parties that are involved in
the scheme.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
41. Are you satisfied with the claim amount provided

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Are you satisfied with the claim YES NO
amount provided

The above data will provide information about the satisfaction related to claim amount provided.
73% have proven dissatisfied with the claim amount that has been provided to them while 27%
are satisfied with the claim amount provided.

42. Are the campaigns or programs about PMFBY sufficient to

disseminate information

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Are the campaigns or programs YES NO
about PMFBY sufficient to
disseminate information

The above data will provide information about the programs and campaigns sufficiency for
providing information. 69% are not satisfied with the campaigns and programs that have been
organized to disseminate information. While 31% are satisfied with the programs and programs.
 PROJECT FINDINGS
43. Do you think claim procedure is an easy task

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Do you think claim procedure YES NO
is an easy task
 PROJECT FINDINGS

CHAPTER – 5
 PROJECT FINDINGS

PROJECT FINDINGS

 Respondents have enough experience in their field of work as farmers with more
than 30 years of experience are small in number while experience with 10-20
years is largest.
 Most of the farmers have taken loan for agriculture purpose which is determined
by 67% as loanee respondents.
 Respondents are using advanced machinery for farming whether by lending it or
they have their own.
 Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna has been taken by the farmer the most
followed by weather Based Crop Insurance Scheme.
 With common crops like wheat and paddy most number of farmer also started
growing maize and peas regularly.
 Surface irrigation is the common method used by farmer for the irrigation while
sprinkler and drip irrigation is not used by farmers much.

 Farmers do not think crop insurance is protecting revenue even after most
number o The farming is the main occupation for respondents as for 83% of the
respondents their main occupation is farming.
 Respondents are indulging in farming on owned lands as 88% respondents have
their own land for the farming.
 Majority of respondents are small farmers as 70.4% respondents have less than
10 acre land.
 Respondent’s income is low as largest number of percentage of farmer earning
from agriculture is earning between 3-5 lakh with 43% while 32% is largest from
other income between 1.5-3 lakh.
 Loan waiver scheme have not played any important role for respondents as it is
only used by 18% of farmer with no knowledge about its name and the amount
which was waived.
 Farmer which has taken training or technical assistance are 23%, and source of
training is generally family member.
 There is less information regarding crop insurance schemes with respondents as
86% of farmers don't know about any scheme other than Pardhan Mantri Fasal
Bima Yojna.
 Information about crop insurance scheme is collected by farmers by getting in
contact with government agencies, followed by gram Panchayati and bank from
which loan have been taken.
 Only a small number of farmers know how much percentage is contributed
between government and farmer in crop insurance scheme.
 More than 50% farmers are aware about the notified crops under insurance.
 Even after regular use for yield and loss assessment of crop damage only 60%
farmers know about the crop cutting experiment.
 Farmers have knowledge have Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna laughed in 2016.
 There are not proper means to provide information to farmer about Pardhan
Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna.
 77% Farmers need government to organize programs to provide information.
 More than 50% farmers are aware about claim process as how and when it
needed to be applied to claim amount.
 Farmers are lacking in information about insurance company which provide crop
insurance as 76% don't know which company is providing crop insurance in their
area.
 Farmers are less aware about the threshold limit, and yield and loss assessment.
 Claim settlement process is poorly managed as above 70% Farmers have borne
delays in settlement of claim.
 Claim amount for damaged crop is not proper as 63% are not even satisfied with
the amount they get.
 Farmers have determined that they are not satisfied with the government bodies
which consist of providing information, duties like assessment, claim settlement.
 Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna should not be compulsory for loanee farmers
as 52% farmer think Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna should not be compulsory
for loanee farmers while 48% think it should be.
 There are low numbers of incident where farmer got insured for wrong crop.
 Farmers don't think there is a language barrier.
 Even after many problems more than half farmers are ready to take Pardhan
Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna again because of compulsory need for loanee and other
as a means to protect revenue.
 Transparency is needed in process of Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna.
CHAPTER – 6

CONCLUSION

Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna is much more known compared to its
predecessor. Farmers have taken this crop insurance as it was compulsory for
a large number of loanee farmers and non loanee have tremendously reduced
to buy this insurance.
The awareness which the farmer have about the Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima
Yojana is due to the reason as it has been compulsory for the loanee farmers.
Due to this reason the farmer have the knowledge about different aspect of this
crop insurance. Even after so much time the farmer does not know about
percentage of premium between farmer and government, Threshold limit, yield
assessment and notified crop.
Farmer have been cultivating crops which he usually does and they are in
notified crop, other than this many farmer does not know other crops that come
under notified crops.
Farmer has got information about the things which he has gone through with
many difficulties. This information contains claim process, settlement and
documents required.
Government agencies have only provided assistance when they have any work
other than that no program or campaigns are hosted.
Farmer is in a need for steps which need to be taken to provide information
through different means and activities. Even after such events or campaigns
have been launched to provide information farmers are still unaware about
many things related to crop information.
Thus, concluding this, we can say that the awareness about the crop insurance
is as necessary as it is important for a loanee farmer.
References

Agricultural Finance Corporation Ltd. (2011), "Report on Impact Evaluation of Pilot Weather

Based Crop Insurance Study"

Aijaz, R. (2013), "Monsoon Variability and Agricultural Drought Management in India",

Retrieved from http://orfonline.org/cms/export/orfonline/modules/issuebrief/attach

ments/Issuebrief-51_1370080087866.pdf (Last accessed on April 7, 2015)

Balzer., N., Hess, U. "Climate change and weather risk management: evidence from index-based

insurance schemes in China and Ethiopia", Retrieved from

http://home.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/newsroom/wfp225958.pdf (Last accessed

on April 5, 2017)

Belete. N., Mahul. O., (2007), " China: Innovations in Agricultural Insurance", The World

Bank, 68607 v1

Cognizant. (2014), " Drones: The Insurance Industry’s Next Game-Changer?", Retrieved from

http://www.cognizant.com/InsightsWhitepapers/drones-the-insurance-industry's-next-game-

changer-codex1019.pdf (Last accessed on May 20, 2017)

Singh, G. (2010), "Crop Insurance in India", IIM Ahmedabad, Working Paper. No. 2010-06-01

Hazell, P., Pomareda, C., and Valdes, A. (1986), "Crop Insurance for Agricultural

Development", John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, USA

Harms, S.C, "History of Crop Insurance in the United States", Retrieved from

http://www.rainhail.com/pdf_files/rainhailcom/uscihistory.pdf (Last accessed on May 14, 2015)

Jain, R.C.A. (11th Plan) "Report of the Working Group on Risk Management in Agriculture",

Planning Commission of India

Kabuta. F. (2014),"Agriculture Disaster Compensation System in Japan", FFTC Agriculture

Policy Platform, Food and Fertilizer Technology Center for the Asia and Pacific Region (Last

accessed on April 15, 2015)

Kerer, J. (2013), "Situation of Agricultural Insurance in Kenya with Reference to International

Best Practices", Adaptation to Climate Change and Insurance

Krychevska, L., Shynkarenko, I., Shynkarenko R., (2017), “Agricultural Insurance in China:

History, Development and Success Factors. www.agroinsurance.com

Mishra, P.K. (2014), "Report of the Committee to Review the Implementation of Crop

Insurance Schemes in India", Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture

ANNEXURE I
As a part of my MBA Research Project I am gathering information regarding “the
assessment of crop insurance scheme in Haryana state: a study of Farmers”. Please
assist me by completing the survey. (All responses will be kept confidential and reported
in the aggregate only).
Part-A: General information
1. Name of the farmer : ______________

2. Contact no : ______________ email id.(if any):

3. Residential status :
a. Rural

b. Urban
4. Age (years) :
a. Below 30 years.

b. Between 30-40 years.

c. Between 40-50 years.

d. Above 50 years.
5. Number of family members ______________

6. Gender. : male/female/other

7. Occupation. :
a. Main

b. Subsidiary
8. Type of farming
a. Owned land

b. Tenant land
9. Number of family member dependent on agriculture ________.

10. Number of family member occupied in/ dependent on other occupation________.

11. Education. :
a. Illiterate

b. Up to Matriculate

c. Matriculate to Graduate

d. Post-graduate
12. Land holding of farmer (acre):
a. 1-2.5

b. 2.5-5

c. 5-10

d. More than 10
13. Annual household income from agriculture (gross in rs.) :
a. Below 1.5 lakh

b. 1.5-3 lakh

c. 3-5 lakh

d. above 5 lakh
14. Annual household income from other sources (gross in rs.) :
a. Below 1.5 lakh

b. 1.5-3 lakh

c. 3-5 lakh

d. above 5 lakh

e. Not applicable
15. Years of experience in farming of respondent :
a. Less than 10

b. 10-20

c. 21-30
d. More than 30
16. Usage of agriculture machinery
a. Owned

b. Rent

c. Other
Part-B: Status of farmer
17. Type of farmer. :
a. Loanee

b. Non loanee

c. If yes which bank?__________

d. Amount of loan taken__________

18. Has farmer taken any crop insurance?
a. Yes

b. No
19. Name of insurance company from where farmer has taken crop insurance?
a. ___________

b. ___________
20. Name of the insurance scheme taken by the farmer?
a. Weather based crop insurance

b. Power failure insurance

c. Varshabima

d. Farmer insurance

e. Plant insurance

f. Wheat insurance

g. Rabi weather insurance

21. Crop sown, cultivated, harvested by farmer:
a. In rabi season:________

b. In kharif season:________
22. Method of irrigation adopted by farmer:
a. Surface irrigation

b. Sprinkler irrigation

c. Drip irrigation
23. Do you think crop insurance protects revenue of the farmer?
a. Yes

b. No

24. What are the objectives to take crop insurance?

a. Stability of income

b. Minimize debt

c. Yield protection

d. Technology advancement
25. Have farmer used any loan waiver scheme?
a. Yes

b. No

c. If yes , then how much amount __________

26. Have farmer taken any technical assistance or training related to farming?
a. Yes

b. No
27. Did farmer status change from loanee to non-loanee after using loan waiver
scheme?
a. Yes

b. No
Part -C: Awareness of crop insurance scheme
28. Are you aware of any other crop insurance scheme other than PMFBY?
a. Yes If yes, name of scheme:____________,

Company:_____________
b. No
29. From where you got the information of crop insurance scheme?
a. Gram panchayat _______

b. NGO _______

c. Government agency _______

d. Private agent _______

e. Any other
30. Have you taken any scheme other than PMFBY?
a. Yes If Yes then which scheme and company ________________

b. No

31. Are all the required perils covered in the scheme taken by you?
a. Yes

b. no
32. Do you know about the ratio distribution of premium between centre-state
governments?
a. Yes

b. No
33. Do you have information related to variety of crops covered in this scheme/s?
a. yes

b. no
34. Amount of premium paid by you in this scheme/s?
a. Rupee ________
35. Are you aware of crop cutting experiment (CCE)?
a. Yes

b. no
36. Is loan waivers scheme of government affect the penetration of crop insurance?
a. Yes

b. no
37. Number of crop insurance provider do you know?
_____________________________
Part d awareness about PMFBY
38. The PMFBY was launched in 2016?
a. Yes

b. No, if No, then when _______

39. In which cluster you come : ______________

40. Can one insurance company cover more than one cluster?
a. Yes

b. No

41. Are you aware about insured crop/s?

a. Yes

b. No
42. Is there any support from government source?
a. Yes

b. No
43. Are you aware about premium distribution between government and farmer?
a. Yes

b. No
44. Percentage of premium farmer has to pay in
a. Rabi

b. Kharif

c. Horticulture
45. Are there proper means to provide information related to PMFBY to farmers?
a. Yes

b. No
46. Is there any need to organize program related to PMFBY for farmers?
a. Yes

b. No
47. Don’t you know time period time period for claiming the PMFBY?
a. Yes

b. No
48. Don’t you know which insurance company offer PMFBY in your area?
a. Yes

b. No
Part-E: Claim Procedure
49. Are you aware about the claim procedure?
a. Yes

b. No

50. Do you know about the timeline to apply for the claim?
a. Yes

b. No

51. Do you know where to apply for claim?

a. Yes

b. No
52. Do you know how to apply?
a. Yes

b. No
53. Do you know about the claim settlement procedure?
a. Yes

b. No
54. Do you know how much time it takes for claim settlement?
a. Yes

b. No
55. Do you know about the peril of claims?
a. Yes

b. No
56. Do you know about the documents required for claim settlement?
a. Yes

b. No
57. Do you know about the working of the yield and loss assessment?
a. Yes

b. No
58. Do you know about the threshold limit?
a. Yes

b. No
59. Do you know about the risk period covered in crop insurance?
a. Yes

b. No

60. Do you know about the parties involved in claim process?

a. Yes
b. No
61. Have you borne any delay in settlement of claim?
a. Yes

b. No
62. Are you satisfied with the with the claim amount provided?
a. Yes

b. No
Part-F : Satisfaction level
63. Are the campaigns or programs about PMFBY sufficient to disseminate information?
a. Yes

b. No
64. Do you think CCE is working efficiently in PMFBY claim process?
a. Yes

b. No
65. Do you think threshold limit that is decided carry out its function?
a. Yes

b. No
66. Do you think claim procedure is an easy?
a. Yes

b. No
67. Are government bodies working under PMFBY fulfilling their duties properly?
a. Yes

b. No
68. Do you think PMFBY should be compulsory for loanee farmers?
a. Yes

b. No

69. Have you noticed any incident where farmer was insured for the wrong crop?
a. Yes if yes, where __________ which crop_________

b. No
70. Do you think there is language barrier in providing information about PMFBY?
a. Yes

b. No
71. Has insurance company directly contacted you for crop insurance?
a. Yes

b. No
72. Has PMFBY fulfilled its objective? If yes, then which one in the following:
a. Stability of income

b. Minimize debt

c. Technology advancement

d. Yield protection

e. All above
73. Do you think time to apply for claim to be extended?
a. Yes

b. No
74. Do you think claim settlement timeline to be long?
a. Yes

b. No
75. Will you also buy crop insurance in future also?
a. Yes

b. No
76. Is there any need of transparency in crop insurance process?
a. Yes

b. No
77. Have you got cooperation from agriculture department regarding crop insurance?
a. Yes

b. No

78. Has insurance company hindered in providing claim amount?

a. Yes If yes, what type of hindrance?:_________________

b. No
79. Is there any need of more number of notified crops?
a. Yes

b. No
80. Is farmer ready to get insured in a group?
a. Yes

b. No
Part –G: Suggestions for improvement
81. Any suggestion related to-
a. Threshold limit

b. Notified crop

c. CCE

d. Agriculture department

e. Insurance company

f. Documentation

g. Claim process

h. Any other