Browsing by Author "Athira k"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Livelihood security through mixed farming among smallholder farmers in south kerala
    (Department of Agriculture Economics, College of Agriculture, Vellayani, 2026) Athira k
    The present study entitled “Livelihood security through mixed farming among smallholder farmers in South Kerala” was carried out during 2024-25 with three objectives: estimating the economics of crops and cattle rearing in mixed farming, optimising the crop–cattle mix for income enhancement and risk minimisation, and developing a composite livelihood security index for smallholder households. Mixed farming is the primary livelihood activity in South Kerala, where farmers work with very small landholdings and depend on both crops and cattle for a steady income, household food supply and overall stability. In the context of shrinking land size, rising costs and variable market prices, understanding how mixed farming contributes to livelihood security has become crucial. The study utilised both primary and secondary data. Primary data was collected from smallholder farmers through a structured and pre-tested interview schedule, while secondary information related to crops, livestock, and milk marketing was obtained from government sources and milk cooperatives. Thiruvananthapuram and Kollam districts of South Kerala were purposively selected for the study as they had the highest population of crossbred cattle in South Kerala. From each district, two blocks were chosen, namely Perumkadavila and Nemom in Thiruvananthapuram, and Anchal and Sasthamcotta in Kollam. From each block, 50 households practising mixed farming were randomly selected, giving a total sample size of 200 farmers. Farmers with a maximum operational landholding size of two hectares and owning up to three crossbred cows were selected as sample respondents. The economics of crop cultivation was analysed using the CACP cost concepts. Coconut recorded a Cost C of ₹2,18,153 per hectare and generated gross returns of ₹2,98,893 per hectare, with a B:C ratio of 1.37. Banana showed the highest profitability, with a Cost C of ₹3,95,653 per hectare and gross returns of ₹8,26,718 per hectare, resulting in a B:C ratio of 2.09. Tapioca recorded a Cost C of ₹2,33,185 per hectare, gross returns of ₹4,85,330 per hectare and a B:C ratio of 2.08. Fodder cultivation had a Cost C of ₹2,92,970 per hectare and gross returns of ₹5,65,194 per hectare, showing a ii B:C ratio of 1.90. Elephant foot yam, although more expensive to establish, showed very high returns with a Cost C of ₹5,57,265 per hectare and gross returns of ₹10,96,089 per hectare, giving a B:C ratio of 1.97. These results indicate that seasonal crops such as banana, elephant foot yam and tapioca contribute significantly to farm profitability. The cost of producing milk was estimated as ₹53 per litre when the value of family labour was imputed, whereas the average procurement price received by farmers from cooperatives was ₹42 per litre. This showed that dairy farming results in negative net returns when the imputed value of family labour is considered. Feed cost constituted the major share of total dairy expenditure. Despite these challenges, dairy remained important because it supplied regular income and allows them to remain active throughout the year. The optimisation analysis using a linear programming model was carried out to identify the most profitable combination of crop and livestock enterprises under the existing resource constraints. The optimum plans were generated by progressively increasing the number of milch animals while keeping the cultivated area constant. When the herd size increased from one to two cows (Optimum I), total farm income rose from ₹2,45,302 to ₹3,96,247, reflecting a 62 per cent improvement. Increasing the herd size from two to three cows (Optimum II) further enhanced income to ₹6,27,308. The highest income of ₹7,87,549 was obtained under Optimum III, when the herd size was expanded from three to four cows, compared to ₹6,35,000 in the corresponding existing situation. However, the increase in income was accompanied by a proportional rise in both labour and non-labour costs. Labour cost increased from ₹80,785 in the existing system to ₹1,43,674, ₹1,95,584 and ₹2,62,307 under Optimum I, II, and III, respectively. Similarly, non-labour cost rose from ₹1,03,515 to ₹1,95,257, ₹204345, and ₹4,10,958 across the respective plans. As a result, the pattern of net returns did not follow the same upward trend. Net returns declined slightly from ₹61,002 in the existing plan to ₹57,316 in Optimum I, owing to the sharp rise in feed and input costs. Profitability then improved markedly in Optimum II (₹1,40,813) when the herd size increased to three cows, before showing a mild decline in Optimum III (₹1,14,284). This suggests diminishing marginal returns beyond a certain herd size. Income risk associated with different herd sizes was analysed using the MOTAD model. The first plan (1-2 cows) recorded the lowest total deviation (₹14.88 lakh) and average deviation (₹40,216), indicating low risk. The second plan (2-3 cows) showed moderate risk with a total deviation of ₹41.67 lakh and an average deviation of ₹57,882. The third plan (3-4 cows) showed the highest risk with a total deviation of ₹74.80 lakh and an average deviation of ₹82,200. However, it was observed that the income per unit of risk was highest for the 2-3 cow range (10.84), showing that this range offers the best balance between income and stability. Herd sizes beyond three cows introduced disproportionately high risk. Thus, it can be concluded that for the small holder farmers practising mixed farming, optimum herd size is three. The Livelihood Security Index (LSI), constructed from 73 indicators, showed an overall score of 0.62, indicating a moderate level of livelihood security. Among the four categories, social security was the highest (0.68), supported by strong performance in education (0.85), health (0.70), institutional access (0.61) and market access (0.67). Economic security ranked next with a score of 0.65, followed by food security with a score of 0.53, limited mainly by low cattle-feed availability (0.45). Ecological security was the lowest (0.47) due to poor soil and water conservation practices (0.44) and limited climate-change response (0.50). From the results of the present study, following policy formulations can be considered. Since the actual cost of producing milk is ₹53 per litre, the procurement price offered by cooperatives needs upward revision to prevent negative net returns for smallholder farmers. As feed constitutes the major share of milk production cost, supplying more quantity of cattle feed at subsidised rates through dairy cooperatives can be considered. Effective integration of crop and cattle enterprises can be promoted by recycling crop residues as feed and applying cattle manure in fields. Farmers may be encouraged to maintain an optimum herd size of three crossbred cows, which balances milk output with land, labour and feed resources. Training in record-keeping, farm planning and budgeting can help improve economic efficiency. According to the study, for smallholders, dairy farming becomes profitable only when family labour is used without hiring. Finally, value-added dairy processing in cooperatives may be improved and the additional profits may be shared with farmers. Given that ecological security scored the lowest in the Livelihood Security Index, targeted interventions such as soil and water conservation measures, climate adaptation support and the promotion of sustainable fodder cultivation are crucial for improving long-term resilience. Together, these measures can enhance livelihood stability, reduce production risks, and strengthen the overall livelihood security of smallholder mixed farming households in South Kerala.