Livelihood security through mixed farming among smallholder farmers in central kerala

Abstract

Indian agriculture is mainly dominated by small and marginal farmers with fragmented landholdings and functions as a symbiotic system, where crops and livestock complement each other economically. Mixed farming is an agricultural practice that combines crop cultivation with livestock rearing or other supplementary enterprises. Among the supplementary enterprises, dairy farming has evolved as an important source of income and acts as a buffer against crop failure. Mixed crop- livestock systems are considered a promising approach to achieving both environmental and economic sustainability in agriculture. In Kerala, where small farms dominate and coconut-based cropping is widespread, dairying has become a major livelihood support. In this scenario, the present study examined the economic performance of crops and livestock in mixed farming, optimisation of crop–cattle combination for income and risk reduction. In addition, a composite livelihood security index was developed by integrating various indicators that reflect the economic, food, social, and environmental dimensions of livelihood security. Thrissur and Palakkad districts of Central Kerala, with high population of crossbred cattle were purposively selected for the study. A total of 200 small holder farmers owning up to two hectares of land and one to three milch cows were selected. Coconut, arecanut, rice, homestead vegetables, and green fodder were identified as the major crops among the selected households. Coconut and arecanut dominated the cropping pattern, reflecting both cultural preference and profitability. The cost of cultivation analysis showed clear differences across enterprises: arecanut (B:C 2.07) and coconut (1.53) stood out as highly profitable crops, while rice (1.08) and vegetables (1.01) barely crossed the threshold of economic viability. Despite the high initial cost of green fodder cultivation, it performed fairly well with a B:C ratio of 1.98 due to strong demand from dairy households. Livestock, on the other hand, emerged as a major pillar of household income with an average net return of ₹38,900 per cow per year. The results of resource optimisation showed an increase in income with increase in the number of milch cows. Total income showed a improvement from ₹6.2 lakh under current conditions to ₹7.47 lakh under the optimal plan with three cows. However, this increase came with higher labour and non-labour costs, pointing to the fact that ii expansion is possible only if farmers can manage the additional workload and expenses. Since income alone does not reflect the uncertainties faced by farmers, a MOTAD risk analysis was carried out. It revealed that moving from two to three cows involved the least risk, whereas increasing from three to four cows significantly increased variability in income. This suggested that owning three cows is the most financially and risk-wise balanced option for smallholder households. A composite livelihood security index was developed to capture food and feed, economic, social, and ecological security so as to understand the livelihood security of farmers in daily lives. The overall score of 0.629 reflected a moderate level of security among the sample households. Economic security scored relatively high (0.717), supported by stable livestock income and decent infrastructure. Social security (0.689) also remained strong due to good access to education, markets, and institutions. Food security (0.639) was moderate, showing the role of diverse crop and livestock sources. However, ecological security scored the lowest (0.470), pointing to challenges such as soil degradation, water issues, and climate-related uncertainties. This signals that although mixed farming reduces economic vulnerability, environmental sustainability remains a concern. Important constraints identified were the high cost of cattle feed, labour shortages and high labour wages, low milk prices received from milk societies, frequent disease outbreaks, and crop losses due to pests, weather fluctuations, and wild animal attacks. Farmers also struggled with price volatility of crops, high veterinary expenses, and delays in receiving payments from Supplyco agents. Targeted interventions such as subsidised feed and fodder development programmes, promotion of labour-saving tools and machinery, better milk price policies, stronger veterinary services, climate-smart crop management, and more reliable market and payment systems will be required for addressing these challenges. In conclusion, this study reaffirms that mixed farming is not only economically beneficial but also crucial for stabilising livelihoods in Central Kerala.