See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/349493847

An economic analysis of different Rice varieties in Cauvery Delta region of

Tamil Nadu

Article  in  Indian Journal of Economics and Development · December 2020

DOI: 10.17485/IJED/v8.52

CITATIONS READS

0 24

4 authors, including:

Gurajapu Prema Sunandini Ramalingareddy Vijaya Kumari

PJTSAU Professor Jayashankar Telangana State Agricultural University
17 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION    118 PUBLICATIONS   50 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Market Reforms in Andhra Pradesh- A study on empowerment of farmers View project

R&D STRATEGIES TO MEET FUTURE CHALLENGES IN OILSEED SECTOR View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gurajapu Prema Sunandini on 22 February 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

INDIAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND DEVELOPMENT
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
An economic analysis of different Rice
varieties in Cauvery Delta region of
Tamil Nadu
OPEN ACCESS
Received: 16.10.2020
Accepted: 06.12.2020
Published: 18.12.2020
Editor: Dr. V Shanthi
Citation: Arun D, Sunandini GP,
Kumari RV, Meena A (2020) An
economic analysis of different Rice
varieties in Cauvery Delta region
of Tamil Nadu. Indian Journal of
Economics and Development, Vol.
8, Article ID: IJED-2020-52, Pages:
5.
Doi: https://doi.org/
10.17485/IJED/v8.52
∗
Corresponding author.
Tel: 9597299002
arungohul@gmail.com
Funding: None
Competing Interests: None
Copyright: © 2020 Arun et al. This
is an open access article
distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium,
provided the original author and
source are credited.
Published By Indian Society for
Education and Environment (iSee)
ISSN
Print: 2320-9828
Electronic: 2320-9836
https://ijed.in/
D Arun1 ∗ , G P Sunandini2 , R V Kumari3 , A Meena4
1 Research scholar, Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture,
Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, India. Tel.: 9597299002
2 Principal Scientist and Field Officier, Cost of Cultivation Scheme, Department of
Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, 30, India
3 Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture,
Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, 30, India
4 Assistant Professor, Department of Statistics and Mathematics, College of Agriculture,
Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, 30, India
Abstract
Objective: To study the economics of major rice varieties grown in the
Cauvery delta region of Tamil Nadu. Methods: Tiruvarur, Thanjavur, and
Nagapattinam districts of Tamil Nadu in India were selected purposively for
this study as it covers a major rice grown area in the Cauvery delta region
as well as in Tamil Nadu. From each district, one block was selected based
on major rice grown area and from each block three villages were selected
randomly. The cost of cultivation was worked out for two seasons in this
study. Findings: In Kuruvai season, the average cost of cultivation for ADT
43 was |76391.63/ha, which was higher than ASD16 (|75654.71/ ha) and CO
(R) 51 (|74817.12/ ha) varieties. The benefit cost ratio was observed 1.37,
1.32, and 1.29 for CO (R) 51, ADT 43, and ASD 16 varieties. The variety wise
cost of cultivation varied for BPT 5204, CR 1009 sub 1, and NLR 34449 which
were |75075.08, |73755.65, and |72495.60 per ha in samba. The benefit
cost ratio was observed to be 1.19, 1.30, and 1.28 for BPT 5204, CR 1009
sub 1, and NLR 34449 varieties. While comparing two seasons, the kuruvai
season average cost of cultivation was higher than the samba season due
to variable cost viz., manure, machine labour, seed cost. Application: In
Kuruvai season, benefit cost ratio of CO (R) 51(1.37) was higher than other
two varieties. In samba season, benefit cost ratio of CR 1009 sub 1(1.30)
was higher than other two varieties. The study suggested that to cultivate
CO (R) 51 variety during Kuruvai season and CR 1009 sub 1 variety during
samba season for increasing the net return to farmers.
Keywords: economic analysis; rice varieties; Kuruvai; samba; Cauvery
delta
1 Introduction
Rice is the most important human food crop in the world, directly feeding more
people than any other crop. It is also the staple food across Asia where around half of
the world’s poorest people live and is becoming increasingly important in Africa
and Latin America. In 2018, rice occupied 167.13 Mha with 782 Mt production
worldwide, of which 146.07 Mha with 705.39 Mt was produced in Asia – of which
1
Arun et al. / Indian Journal of Economics and Development. 2020; Doi: https://doi.org/10.17485/IJED/v8.52

62.41 Mha with 251.31 Mt was produced in Southeast Asia alone (FAOSTAT, 2018) (1) . Worldwide 90.2 per cent of rice is
being produced in Asia. The top three rice-producing countries are China, India, and Indonesia.
In India, rice is grown on 43.77 Mha, the production level is 112.76 Mt and the productivity is about 2578 kg/ha
(Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2018) (2) . Rice is grown in almost half the states, with West Bengal leading the way
in terms of production with 14.97 Mt, followed by Punjab 13.38 Mt and Uttar Pradesh (13.27 Mt) as per Agricultural
Statistics at a Glance 2018, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare of Government of India. However, low productivity
is a concern for India as India’s overall productivity is 2578 kg/ha, which is lower than the world average productivity (4678
kg/ha). Andhra Pradesh ranks second with a productivity of 3792 kg/ha after Punjab (4366 kg/ha), the highest productivity
in India. Uttar Pradesh state which, despite being the third-largest rice producing state has a productivity of 2283 kg/ha,
which was less than the national average.
Green revolution
The Green Revolution in India was initiated in the 1960s by introducing high-yielding varieties of rice and wheat to
increase food production in order to alleviate hunger and poverty. Post-Green Revolution, the production of wheat and rice
doubled due to the initiatives of the government, but the production of other food crops such as indigenous rice varieties
and millets declined. This led to the loss of distinct indigenous crops from cultivation and also caused extinction. The
availability of local rice varieties decreased to 7000 and not all of these varieties are under cultivation. Thus, India has lost
more than one lakh varieties of indigenous rice after 1970s that took several thousand years to evolve (3) . This loss of species
mainly due to the focus given to the production of subsidized high yielding hybrid crops and the emphasis of monoculture
by the government. Sourirajan (4) reports as certain varieties of Tamil Nadu such as Kar arici and Vaikarai samba imports
strength, Karunguruvai act as an antidiuretic, Puzhulugu samba quenches intense thirst, Senchamba increase appetite and
Kodai samba reduces rheumatic pain. The food security must also ensure nutrition security of nation (5) .
In Tamil Nadu, total area under rice was about 18.29 Lha. Among the districts, Thiruvarur was at the top with an area
of 1.8 Lha followed by Thanjavur with 1.7 Lha and Nagapattinam with 1.63 Lha. Total rice production in Tamil Nadu
during the year 2017-18 was 266.38 lakh metric tonnes (https://www.tnagrisnet.tn.gov.in/) (6) . About 40 percent of the
paddy area is cultivated in delta districts comprising of Thanjavur, Nagapattinam, Tiruvarur, Trichy, Pudukkottai, Karur,
Ariyalur and Cuddalore. Paddy is cultivated in three major seasons viz., Kar/Kuruvai /Sornavari (April to July), Samba/
Thaladi/Pishanam (August to November), and Navarai/ Kodai (December to March). The Cauvery delta zone considered
to be a rice bowl of Tamil Nadu, contributes a major part of the rice production in the state. The cropping pattern in
the Cauvery delta zone was largely rice based. The green revolution has transformed the irrigated areas of this zone into
intensive double cropped rice-rice system and triple cropped rice-rice-rice system. Soil quality of Thanjavur district was
better for rice and sugarcane production (7) . The total rice area estimated for the Thanjavur district during samba season
(2015-2016) was 1, 09,799 ha (8) . Sharma et al., (2016) concluded that productivity and economic returns of rice-based
cropping systems can be increased by adopting the best management and conservation, agricultural practices in Cauvery
delta zone of Tamil Nadu (9) . To encourage the farmers towards rice cultivation and increase its production there is a need
to analyze the profitability of its cultivation. Under these circumstances, the present study was undertaken with the specific
objective to study the economics of major rice varieties grown in the Cauvery delta region of Tamil Nadu.

2 Materials and Methods

In Tamil Nadu, the Cauvery delta region was selected, because in this region rice has been grown in three seasons per year.
Nearly 40 percent of the paddy area is in the Cauvery delta region comprising the Thiruvarur, Thanjavur, Nagapattinam,
Trichy, Pudukkottai, Karur, Ariyalur, and Cuddalore districts. Among these, three major paddy growing districts Tiruvarur,
Thanjavur, and Nagapattinam were selected purposively. The second stage of sampling pertaining to the selection of
the blocks. One block from each district, namely Orathanadu, Mayiladuthurai, and Needamangalam were selected from
Thanjavur, Nagapattinam and Thiruvarur respectively based on the higher area of rice cultivation. The top three villages in
each of the selected block with the leading area under paddy were selected for the present study. About 20 farmers from
each of the selected villages were selected as sample farmers using simple random sampling technique. Thus, a total of 180
sample farmers was selected for this study. The required primary data on costs and returns of rice cultivation was obtained
through a pre-tested schedule using the interview method.
The cost concepts approach to farm costing is widely used in India (10) . The cost concepts approach to farm costing is
widely used in India. These cost concepts include Cost A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2, and C3.
Various costs have been worked out by applying the following methods:
Cost A1 = All actual expenses in cash and kind incurred in production
Cost A2 = Cost A1+ Rent paid for leased inland
Cost B1 = Cost A1+ Interest on value of owned capital assets (excluding land).
Cost B2 = Cost B1+ Rental value of owned land and rent paid for leased inland
Cost C1 = Cost B1+ Imputed value of family labour
Cost C2 = Cost B2+ Imputed value of family labour

https://ijed.in/ 2
Arun et al. / Indian Journal of Economics and Development. 2020; Doi: https://doi.org/10.17485/IJED/v8.52

Cost C3 = Cost C2+10% of Cost C2 on account of managerial functions performed by the farmer.

3 Results and Discussion

The cost of cultivation was worked out for two seasons (Kuruvai and samba) in the present study. In the Kuruvai season,
cost of cultivation worked out for three varieties viz., ADT 43, ASD 16, CO (R) 51 [ Table 1]. All three varieties, human
labour accounted major proportion to variable cost followed by machine labour, fertilizer cost. Proportion of variable and
fixed cost in total cost accounts 75.72 and 24.48 percent for ADT 43, 75.97 and 24.03 percent for CO (R) 51, 75.75 and
24.25 percent for ASD 16. Thus, it can be inferred from Table 1 that human labour and machine labour formed major
component of total variable cost. The variety wise cost of cultivation for Kuruvai varied for ADT 43, ASD16 and CO (R)
51. The average cost of cultivation for ADT 43 was |76391.63/ha, which was higher than ASD16 (|75654.71/ha) and CO
(R) 51 (|74817.12/ha) varieties. This was due to labour cost and fertilizer cost.

Table 1. Economics of majorrice varieties grown in the kuruvai (|/ha)

S. No Particulars ADT 43 CO (R) 51 ASD 16
1. Operational cost
Seed cost 2540.34 (3.59) 2540.34 (3.78) 2400.84 (3.44)
Hired human labour 23268.47(32.91) 22897.50 (33.06) 22794.57 (32.63)
Machine labour 18621.65 (26.34) 18591.27(26.84) 18849.63 (26.99)
Manures 2802.91 (3.96) 2385.66 (3.44) 2561.74 (3.67)
Plant protection chemicals 1005.18 (1.42) 1130.78 (1.63) 1086.80 (1.56)
Fertilizer 4687.63 (6.63) 4442.99 (6.41) 4636.54 (6.64)
Interest on working capital @7% 1873.88 (2.65) 1841.82 (2.66) 1851.85 (2.65)
Total variable cost 53539.40 (75.72) 52623.35 (75.97) 52909.87 (75.75)
2. Fixed cost
Land revenue 12.35 (0.02) 12.35 (0.02) 12.35 (0.02)
Rental value of owned land 15076.67 (21.32) 14602.52 (21.08) 14911.04 (21.35)
Depreciation 516.41 (0.73) 513.24 (0.74) 477.52 (0.68)
Interest on fixed capital 1560.54 (2.21) 1512.81 (2.18) 1540.09 (2.20)
Total fixed cost 17165.97 (24.28) 16640.92 (24.03) 16940.99 (24.25)
Total cost 70705.36 69264.27 69850.86
Source: Field survey

The average yield of CO (R) 51 variety of sample farmers was observed to be 50.05 q/ha followed by ASD 16 (46.28 q/ha),
ADT 43 (45.49 q/ha) [Table 2]. Among the three varieties, CO (R) 51 was high yielding than other varieties. The average
gross returns obtained from CO (R) 51, ADT 43, and ASD 16 varieties were |95369.41, |93855.49 and |90434.96. The
average gross return was more in case of CO (R) 51 variety than other varieties. Gross return in CO (R) 51 was about 1.02
times and 1.05 times more (|95369.41/ ha) than the gross returns from ADT 43 (|93855.49/ ha), and ASD 16 (|90434.96/
ha). The results of Murya. A 2011 are conformity with the result obtained in the present study (11) .

Table 2. Cost concepts and economic indicators of rice cultivation for Kuruvai (|/ha)
S.NO Particulars ADT 43 CO (R) 51 ASD 16
1 Cost A1 70705.36 69264.27 69850.86
2 Cost B1 57502.58 56503.57 56791.67
3 Cost B2 72579.24 71106.09 71702.71
4 Cost C1 61314.97 60214.60 60743.67
5 Cost C2 76391.63 74817.12 75654.71
6 Yield (q/ha) 45.49 50.05 46.28
7 Price (|/q) 1905 1905 1865
8 Gross return (|/ha) 93855.49 95369.41 90434.96
9 Net return (|/ha) 17463.85 20552.29 14780.25
10 Benefit-cost ratio 1.32 1.37 1.29
11 Cost of production (|/q) 1679.27 1494.47 1634.69
Source: Field survey

https://ijed.in/ 3
Arun et al. / Indian Journal of Economics and Development. 2020; Doi: https://doi.org/10.17485/IJED/v8.52

The net return of CO (R) 51 was |20552.29/ ha, which was higher than ADT 43 (|17463.85/ ha) and ASD 16 (|14780.25/
ha). The results of net returns not confirmed with Kumar et al 2017 (12) . The benefit-cost ratio was observed in 1.37, 1.32,
and 1.29 for CO (R) 51, ADT 43, and ASD 16 varieties.
In the samba season, cost of cultivation worked out for three varieties viz., BPT 5204, CR 1009 sub 1, and NLR 34449
[Table 3]. All three varieties, human labour accounted major proportion to variable cost followed by machine labour, seed
cost. Proportion of variable and fixed cost in total cost accounts 75.70 and 24.30 percent for BPT 5204, 75.87 and 24.13
percent for CR 1009 sub 1, 77.10 and 22.90 percent for NLR 34449. Thus, it can be inferred from Table 3 that human labour
and machine labour formed major component of total variable cost.

Table 3. Economics of major rice varieties grown in the Samba (|/ha)

S. No Particulars BPT 5204 CR 1009 Sub 1 NLR 34449
1. Operational cost
Seed cost 2644.55 (3.79) 2426.64 (3.56) 2609.38 (3.85)
Hired human labour 23651.40 (33.88) 23162.75 (33.97) 22962.18 (33.84)
Machine labour 18040.88 (25.84) 18087.72 (26.53) 17713.43 (26.11)
Manures 2619.35 (3.75) 1818.65 (2.67) 2575.86 (3.80)
Plant protection chemicals 1259.70 (1.08) 1027.52 (1.51) 1063.86 (1.57)
Fertilizer 4854.37 (6.95) 4669.21 (6.85) 4790.04 (7.06)
Interest on working capital @7% 1849.57 (2.65) 1810.41 (2.66) 1830.95 (2.70)
Total variable cost 82544.74 (75.70) 51726.01 (75.87) 52312.84 (77.10)
2. Fixed cost
Land revenue 12.35 (0.02) 12.35 (0.02) 12.35 (0.02)
Rental value of owned land 14997.96 (21.48) 14534.12 (21.32) 13532.07 (19.94)
Depreciation 415.13 (0.59) 409.92 (0.60) 577.63 (0.85)
Interest on fixed capital 1542.54 (2.21) 1495.64 (2.19) 1412.20 (2.08)
Total fixed cost 16967.97 (24.30) 16452.03 (24.13) 15534.25 (22.90)
Total cost 69812.72 68178.04 67847.09
Source: Field survey

The variety wise cost of cultivation varied for BPT 5204, CR 1009 sub 1, and NLR 34449 which were |75075.08,
|73755.65, and |72495.60 per ha in samba [Table 4]. However, the average yield of CR 1009 sub1 variety on sample farms
was observed 47.67 q/ha followed by NLR 34449 (45.73 q/ha), BPT 5204 (43.70 q/ha). Among three varieties CR 1009
sub 1 average yield was substantially higher than that of other varieties. On an average, cost incurred for plant protection
chemicals for BPT 5204 (|1259.70/ ha) was higher than other varieties. The study revealed that the cost of production was
more in BPT 5204 variety (|1718/q) than CR 1009 sub 1(|1547/q) and NLR 34449 variety (|1585/q).

Table 4. Cost concepts and economic indicators of rice cultivation for samba (|/ha)
S.No Particulars BPT 5204 CR 1009 Sub 1 NLR 34449
1 Cost A1 54814.76 53967.84 53669.90
2 Cost B1 56357.31 55463.47 55082.1
3 Cost B2 71355.26 69997.59 68614.17
4 Cost C1 60077.13 59221.53 58963.53
5 Cost C2 75075.08 73755.65 72495.6
6 Yield (q/ha) 43.70 47.67 45.73
7 Price (|/q) 1905 1865 1905
8 Gross return (|/ha) 83265.87 88937.13 87116.19
9 Net return (|/ha) 8190.79 15181.47 14620.59
10 Benefit-cost ratio 1.19 1.30 1.28
11 Cost of production (|/q) 1718 1547 1585
Source: Field survey

The average gross returns obtained from BPT 5204, CR 1009 sub 1 and NLR 34449 varieties were |83265.87/ha,
|88937.13/ha and |87116.19/ha, respectively. The gross return was more in the case of CR 1009 sub 1 variety. Gross return
in CR 1009 sub 1 was about 1.02 times and 1.06 times more (|88937.13/ha) than the gross returns from NLR 34449
(|87116.19/ha), and BPT 5204 (|83265.87/ha). The results of study conducted by Murya. A 2011 are conforming to the

https://ijed.in/ 4
 Arun et al. / Indian Journal of Economics and Development. 2020; Doi: https://doi.org/10.17485/IJED/v8.52

result obtained in the present study (11) .

The net return of CR 1009 sub 1 was |15181.47/ha, which is higher than other varieties. The cost-benefit ratio was
observed to 1.19, 1.30, and 1.28 for BPT 5204, CR 1009 sub 1, and NLR 34449 varieties. This result was not confirmed with
Hussain et al 2008 (13) .
While comparing two seasons, the first season average cost of cultivation was higher than the second season due variable
cost viz., manure, machine labour, human labour and seed cost. The average cost of cultivation in Kuruvai for ADT 43, ASD
16 and CO (R) 51 varieties were |76391.63/ha, |75654.71/ha, and |74817.12/ha, respectively. And in the samba season, the
average cost of cultivation for BPT 5204, CR 1009 sub 1, and NLR 34449 varieties were |75075.08/ha, |73755.65/ha, and
|72495.60/ha, respectively. The yield of Kuruvai was higher than the samba. The low yield in the second season is due to
unseasonal rainfall, high pest attack, late sowing. This is an example of marginal diminishing utility. When land is being
used repeatedly, the production capacity of the land goes on decreasing.

4 Conclusion
The average cost of cultivation for Kuruvai season was higher than samba season due to fertilizer cost, machine labour, seed
cost. In Kuruvai, average cost of cultivation for ADT 43 was |76391.63/ha, which was higher than ASD16 (|75654.71/ha)
and CO (R) 51 (|74817.12/ ha) varieties. In samba, average cost of cultivation for BPT 5204 (|75075.08/ha) was higher
than other varieties. Yield of kuruvai season was higher than samba season. The low yield in samba season was due to
unseasonal rainfall, high pest attack, late sowing. In Kuruvai season, benefit cost ratio of CO (R) 51(1.37) was higher than
ADT 43 (1.32) and ASD16 (1.29). In samba season, benefit cost ratio of CR 1009 sub 1(1.30) was higher than NLR 34449
(1.28) and BPT 5204 (1.19). The study suggests that to cultivate CO (R) 51variety during Kuruvai season and CR 1009 sub 1
variety during samba season. This will increase net return to farmers. So, the extension personnel should create awareness
about the merits of these varieties and encourage adoption of these varieties.

References
1) FAOSTAT. 2018. Available from: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC.
2) Agricultural Statistics at a Glance. Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India. 2018. Available from: www.agricoop.nic.
inandhttp://eands.dacnet.nic.in.
3) From 1, 10,000 varieties of rice to only 6,000 now. India. 2012. Available from: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/from-110000-
varieties-of-rice-to-only-6000-now/article3284453.ece.
4) Sourirajan M. Pathartha Gunapadam - Palporul vilakkam (in Tamil). Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu, India. Saraswati Mahal Press. 2000.
5) Nelson ARLE, Ravichandran K, Antony U. The impact of the Green Revolution on indigenous crops of India. Journal of Ethnic Foods. 2019;6(1).
Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42779-019-0011-9.
6) Salient Statistics on Agriculture. 2019. Available from: https://www.tnagrisnet.tn.gov.in/.
7) Shanmuganatha M, Rajendran A. Critical analysis of soil for better rice and sugarcane farming in Thanjavur region of India. World Journal of
Agriculture and Soil Science. 2020;5(3). Available from: https://doi.org/10.33552/WJASS.2020.05.000611.
8) Ajith K, Geethalakshmi V, Ragunath KP, Pazhanivelan S, Panneerselvam S. Rice acreage estimation in Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu using lands at
8 OLIIMAGES and GIS Techniques. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2017;6(7):2327–2335. Available from:
https://dx.doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.607.275.
9) Sharma S, Rajendran R, Ravi V. Improving Resource Use Efficiency of Cereal Based Cropping Systems with Integration of Best Management with
Conservation Agriculture Under Changing Agricultural Scenarios in Cauvery Delta of Tamil Nadu. Journal of Ecosystem & Ecography. 2016;06(04).
Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7625.1000213.
10) Raju V, Rao DVS. Economics of Farm Production and Management. New Delhi. Oxford and IBH Publishing. Co. Pvt Ltd. 1990.
11) Murya A. An economic analysis of Swarna Sub1 Rice variety cultivation in Chandauli, Uttar Pradesh. Pantnagar (Uttarakhand). 2011.
12) Kumar S, Kour S, Lalotra S, Choudhary K, Singh H. Response of different Rice varieties and fertility levels on relative economics and quality of rice
under aerobic conditions. Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology. 2017;23(6):1–7. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.9734/cjast/2017/
34118.
13) Hussain A, Khattak NR, Khan AQ. Cost Benefits Analysis of Different Rice Varieties in District Swat. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture. 2008;24(4):745–
748. Available from: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/42009/.

https://ijed.in/ 5

View publication stats