Thumbnail Image

Kerala Agricultural University, Thrissur

The history of agricultural education in Kerala can be traced back to the year 1896 when a scheme was evolved in the erstwhile Travancore State to train a few young men in scientific agriculture at the Demonstration Farm, Karamana, Thiruvananthapuram, presently, the Cropping Systems Research Centre under Kerala Agricultural University. Agriculture was introduced as an optional subject in the middle school classes in the State in 1922 when an Agricultural Middle School was started at Aluva, Ernakulam District. The popularity and usefulness of this school led to the starting of similar institutions at Kottarakkara and Konni in 1928 and 1931 respectively. Agriculture was later introduced as an optional subject for Intermediate Course in 1953. In 1955, the erstwhile Government of Travancore-Cochin started the Agricultural College and Research Institute at Vellayani, Thiruvananthapuram and the College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences at Mannuthy, Thrissur for imparting higher education in agricultural and veterinary sciences, respectively. These institutions were brought under the direct administrative control of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Animal Husbandry, respectively. With the formation of Kerala State in 1956, these two colleges were affiliated to the University of Kerala. The post-graduate programmes leading to M.Sc. (Ag), M.V.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees were started in 1961, 1962 and 1965 respectively. On the recommendation of the Second National Education Commission (1964-66) headed by Dr. D.S. Kothari, the then Chairman of the University Grants Commission, one Agricultural University in each State was established. The State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) were established in India as an integral part of the National Agricultural Research System to give the much needed impetus to Agriculture Education and Research in the Country. As a result the Kerala Agricultural University (KAU) was established on 24th February 1971 by virtue of the Act 33 of 1971 and started functioning on 1st February 1972. The Kerala Agricultural University is the 15th in the series of the SAUs. In accordance with the provisions of KAU Act of 1971, the Agricultural College and Research Institute at Vellayani, and the College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Mannuthy, were brought under the Kerala Agricultural University. In addition, twenty one agricultural and animal husbandry research stations were also transferred to the KAU for taking up research and extension programmes on various crops, animals, birds, etc. During 2011, Kerala Agricultural University was trifurcated into Kerala Veterinary and Animal Sciences University (KVASU), Kerala University of Fisheries and Ocean Studies (KUFOS) and Kerala Agricultural University (KAU). Now the University has seven colleges (four Agriculture, one Agricultural Engineering, one Forestry, one Co-operation Banking & Management), six RARSs, seven KVKs, 15 Research Stations and 16 Research and Extension Units under the faculties of Agriculture, Agricultural Engineering and Forestry. In addition, one Academy on Climate Change Adaptation and one Institute of Agricultural Technology offering M.Sc. (Integrated) Climate Change Adaptation and Diploma in Agricultural Sciences respectively are also functioning in Kerala Agricultural University.

Browse

20171
Reset filters
Subject: Rural Banking and Management × Author: KAU × End date: 2017 × Start date: 2010 × Type: Thesis × Thesis Type: M.Sc ×
Reset filters

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    ThesisItemOpen Access
    Economics of dairying in Thrissur district
    (Department of Rural Banking & Finance Managemnet , College of Cooperation, Banking & Management, Vellanikkara, 2017) Greeni, T Thankachan; KAU; Molly Joseph
    Dairy is a vital part of the global food system providing economic, nutritional and social benefits to a large proportion of the world’s population. It has assumed one of the most important roles in providing employment and income generating opportunities for rural population.The advent of dairying has been a boon for dairy farmers and of particular importance to those segments of the society that have been traditionally weak, the small landholders, landless labourers and women. Agriculture, being only seasonal, the dairy industry provides off-season work, steady income and keeps the rural population employed throughout the year. The study titled ‘ Economics of Dairying in Thrissur District’ has been conducted with the objectives of examining the pattern of dairying adopted by farmers, identifying the sources, types and extent of assistance and incentives provided to the dairy farmers and studying the impact of assistance and incentives on the sustainability of dairying. The assistance and incentives provided to the dairy farmers, the pattern of dairying adopted and the impact of assistance and incentives on the sustainability of dairying have been studied at the district level of Thrissur using both secondary and primary data. Secondary data regarding the various assistance and incentives received by the farmers have been collected from Dairy Development Department, Animal Husbandry Department and Kerala Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation (MILMA) (Thrissur Dairy). Data regarding the societies have been collected from the Procurement and Inspection (P&I) wing of Thrissur dairy. For collecting primary data, multistage random sampling method was employed. 133 respondents were selected from five taluks of Thrissur district. In the first stage, from each taluk, two Anand Pattern Co-operative Societies (APCOS) have been selected for which the societies in the taluks have been ranked based on the quantity of milk supplied to MILMA during the last three years. From the rank list prepared, societies which ranked first and the last have been selected. Thus the sample size of APCOS has become ten, i.e., two societies each from five taluks. In the second stage, from each of the societies, 10 farmers who are pouring members for the last three years have been selected randomly. As a control group for comparison, three farmers who are not the members of the society, but residing within the area of operation of the society have been selected. Thus the sample size is 130 dairy farmers, consisting of 100 member farmers of APCOS and 30 non 2 member farmers. In addition to this, three commercial dairy units from the study area, with a minimum cattle holding of 20, have also been included for the study. Pre-tested structured interview schedule has been used for collecting data from the respondents. The major statistical tools used for the study were one sample t test, independent samples t test, Kruskal Wallis H test, Mann Whitney U test, ANOVA , post hoc test for multiple comparison and Cobb- Douglas production function. The pattern of dairying adopted by the farmers is discussed under two heads- feeding practices and breeding practices. For studying the feeding practices adopted by the farmers, the study takes into account the feeding schedule specifications prescribed by the Productivity Enhancement Department of National Dairy Development Board, Anand and also the actual feeding practices adopted by the farmers. Comparisons with the standards have been made both member - wise and category - wise. Based on the cattle population, while comparing the actual quantity given and the recommended quantity, it could be observed that concentrates and paddy straw are not given upto the recommended quantity whereas green grass is provided more than the prescribed quantity. Among these, the quantity of concentrates and green grass given by the farm respondents are more than the required quantity whereas the quantity of paddy straw given is found to be less when compared to the other three categories.With respect to the breeding practices, artificial insemination method is being adopted by all the respondent farmers and the various kinds of breeds that have been found in the study areas are Holstein-Friesian, Jersey, Crossbreed cattle, Vechur cow, Sunandhini and Kasargod dwarf cow. The sources from which the farmers are receiving assistance and incentives include MILMA, Animal Husbandry Department and Dairy Development Department.The various assistance received by the respondent farmers are availability of paddy straw at concessional rate, mediclaim insurance for dairy farmers, subsidy for cattle shed development, rubber mat subsidy, Ksheeravardhini scheme, cattle insurance premium subsidy, interest subsidy for bank loan, summer incentive, assistance for fodder scheme, milk shed development programme and cattle feed subsidy. Among these, the summer incentive scheme which is being provided by MILMA is found to be the most acceptable and fully availed scheme among members. None of the respondents is found to be receiving any of the selected assistance from Animal Husbandry 3 Department. However the farmers are receiving various services free of cost such as artificial insemination, free medicines and vaccination. The impact of assistance and incentives is studied upon the members and non members in their production, marketable surplus, gross income, cost and net income. Member - wise and category - wise analysis of data have been done. It was found that cost - wise, there is significant difference among members and non members. As the members are receiving various assistance and incentives, it enables them to reduce their costs. But it is not getting reflected in their net income. Cobb-Douglas production function was employed separately for total respondents and also for total members. From Cobb- Douglas production function, it was observed that one rupee increase in feed cost leads to 19 paisa increase in production for all respondents, and 22 paisa increase in production for members. This tilts to the fact that the members who are affiliated to the society could make a significant impact in their feed cost through various assistance received by them. However, the advantage available to them through these assistance and incentives does not lead to increase in their net income. This indicates that though they can reduce their cost, dairying is not sustainable unless it is reflected in their net income. It was found that the extent of amount of assistance and incentives is meagre for dairy farmers who are receiving the support from MILMA and Dairy Development Department since they obtain below 10 per cent of their total cost as subsidy amount. While examining the attitude of dairy farmers towards the assistance and incentives, majority of the respondents have no opinion. The major reason for this attitude is their lack of awareness about the support programmes or their hesitant attitude towards institutional agencies. It could also be observed that the assistance and incentives received by the dairy farmers have no impact on the employment generated by dairying in a household. Since majority of the respondents under study undertakes dairying as a subsidiary occupation which gives them either a subsidiary income or a means for meeting their day to day livelihood expenses, it could not make an impact in the asset creation of dairy farmers. Both category - wise and member - wise benefit cost ratio was analysed and it was found that majority of the respondents have benefit cost ratio ranging from one to two. 4 For ensuring sustainability of dairying, there should be significant impact on the net income of farmers. Whenever there is a rising feed cost, a proportionate increase in return should also be ensured. Subsidy rates and amounts should also increase that would enable them to reduce the cost to the extent where they can make a significant impact on the net income. There is also an increasing need for creating more awareness among the dairy farmers about the existing schemes of assistance and incentives which are available for them. For reducing the production gap for milk in the State, the existing dairy farmers should be retained and the younger generation to be attracted for which dairy farming should be made sustainable through proper institutional support enabling them to earn a reasonable net income.