Institutional interventions in promoting value addition of Jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus)

Abstract

Jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus), the largest tree-borne fruit, is a tropical fruit belonging to the family Moraceae and has gained popularity and recognition in recent years. With a production of 32,91,500 MT in 2023–2024, India is a major producer of jackfruit, with Kerala accounting for almost 43 percent of the total production at 14,11,930 MT (MoA&FW, 2024). In 2018, the government of Kerala declared it as the state fruit given its abundance and enormous potential. The jackfruit is a versatile fruit that can be used for fuel, food, medicine, industrial products, and fodder. Nevertheless, the fruit is not fully exploited and is wasted in the fields and that can be condensed to an extent through value-addition. The value-added products of jackfruit can also act as a reliable source of income for agripreneurs and farmers, and they can make the fruit and its products available during the off-season as well. Even though several institutions introduced various initiatives to support them, the impact of these interventions on agripreneurs was hardly addressed. At this juncture, the study was undertaken with the objectives of examining the developmental programmes/ schemes of various governmental and other institutions for the promotion of the value addition of jackfruit, assessing the impact of institutional interventions on the value addition of jackfruit, and identifying the constraints faced by the agripreneurs engaged in value-addition of jackfruit. The study was confined to the state of Kerala. Both primary and secondary data were collected for the study. The institutions selected for the study included Department of Agriculture Development and Farmer’s Welfare (DA&FW), State Horticulture Mission Kerala (SHM), Vegetable and Fruit Promotion Council Keralam (VFPCK), Small Farmer’s Agribusiness Consortium (SFAC), Kishi Vigyan Kenda (KVK), Kerala Agricultural University (KAU), and District Industries Centre (DIC). Primary data were collected from the officials of these institutions. Primary data were also collected purposively from 40 agripreneurs involved in the value addition of jackfruit who were registered under DIC and operational at the time of the survey using a structured questionnaire. The agripreneurs included FPC as well. The secondary data were collected from published reports and authorised websites. The data were collected between July and September of 2024. Using percentage analysis, XXXV

descriptive statistics, the chi-square test of independence, and Garrett’s ranking technique, the collected data were analysed. All of the selected institutions were providing knowledge enhancement programmes. Financial support was offered by institutions like DA&FW, SHM, SFAC, VFPCK, KAU, and DIC under various initiatives. Market support was also provided by the institutions through the conduct of exhibitions and training related to the aspects of marketing value-added products of jackfruit. The institutions also supported product development as well as infrastructure development. KAU and KVK spawned technologies for processing jackfruit and transferred them to the agripreneurs. The processing units of the jackfruit surveyed included 25 micro units, 14 small units, and an FPC. The number of jackfruit processing units surged after the COVID-19 pandemic. The majority of the agripreneurs sourced the jackfruit for processing from the local farmers which augmented the income of farmers. Many of them used machinery and some of them used processing technologies transferred by KAU and KVK. A total of 10 marketing channels for value-added products of jackfruit were identified within which, most of them marketed their produce through local markets. Most of the jackfruit processing units were profitable and an association between the financial position and years of operation was observed through chi-square test of independence. All the agripreneurs were aware of institutions DA&FW, KAU, and DIC indicating the wider outreach and reputation held by these institutes. Most of the agripreneurs made use of the various supports provided by the selected institutions. Over half of the agripreneurs showed a high level of involvement with KAU and KVK particularly for support in knowledge enhancement and product development. The major institution aiding the agripreneurs in finance was DIC. The agripreneurs tended to utilise a portion of the funds received for infrastructure development. The major providers of market support were KAU and DICs. Since the exact quantitative data of the changes observed in the unit’s post-intervention was unavailable, the impact of the institutional intervention was analysed using descriptive statistics. The XXXVI

interventions positively impacted the value-addition of jackfruit. Financial and infrastructure assistance augmented the volume of production and the number of processing units. Other interventions such as knowledge enhancement programmes, market support, and product development support streamlined the production and resulted in observable changes in the quantity of jackfruit procured, revenue generated from the unit, and production volume. The units saw significant improvements when intervened in the infrastructure development. The agripreneurs also had many setbacks while processing jackfruit which was identified through Garrett’s ranking technique. The inability to purchase modern machinery was the main financial constraint. The marketing was stalled by the high level of competition, varying demand, and restricted market access. Agripreneurs also had trepidation about the irregular conduct of exhibitions and trade fairs by government organisations. They were also constrained by technological challenges such as their cost and shortage of skilled labour. The legal constraints that impeded the operations of some of the agripreneurs were the high compliance costs, insufficiency in legal support, and less awareness about the legalities. Perishability, seasonality, and the decreased availability of high-quality jackfruit as a result of climate change were the main crop-specific barriers to their value addition. The major constraint on FPCs was their ignorance of the legalities that must be adhered to while operating an FPC, which caused many of them to cease operations. They were also impacted by competition and had limited funds to purchase new equipment. Transportation of the raw materials was also hampered because of the scattered locations of the members' jackfruit trees. Most of the agripreneurs were positive and thrived in their business despite several obstacles they faced when processing jackfruit. More initiatives and training tailored to the value addition of jackfruit could increase employment and decrease wastage of jackfruit. The government should also ensure that trade fairs and exhibitions are held regularly to advertise different jackfruit products. Efforts could be also taken to provide them with transportation and cold storage facilities. Also, agripreneurs could be trained to turn jackfruit into non-food products. With prompt XXXVII

propagation of these supports to the beneficiaries, productivity could be enhanced and more revenue can be generated to the state.