Protected Cultivation Technology

222 Pages·2015·7.43 MB·English

Lkajf{kr Ñf’k izkSn~;ksfxdh% vuqdj.k ,oa izHkko dk

ewY;k¡du

Protected Cultivation Technology: An Assessment
of Adoption and Impact

ITIGI PRABHAKAR

DIVISION OF AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION
ICAR-INDIAN AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE
NEW DELHI – 110012
2015

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The best and safest thing to keep a balance in your life is to acknowledge the great
powers around us and within us. So it is essential that I acknowledge the great powers,
who paved the way on which I have walked so far. As a prelude to my thanksgiving, at
first I wish to thank the almighty for giving me strength to complete my entire course
and research program.
I wish to express my deepest sense of gratitude and indebtedness to
Dr. K. Vijayaragavan, Former Joint Director (Extension) & Director (Acting) and
chairperson of my advisory committee for his invaluable guidance, constant
encouragement, cooperative attitude, immense patience, useful discussion and peerless
criticisms during the course of investigation and preparation of the manuscript. He has
always been a fountain of inspiration to me.
It is a great privilege for me to express my esteem and profound sense of
gratitude to Dr. Premlata Singh, Head and Professor, Division of Agricultural
Extension and Co-chairperson of my advisory committee for her constructive and
valuable suggestions. She was always there to meet all my professional needs and
helped her best whenever I sought for them.
I feel immense pleasure to convey my heartfelt thanks to members of my advisory
committee Dr. T. Janakiram, ADG (Horticulture-1), Dr. I. Sekar, Principal Scientist,
Division of Agricultural Economics and Dr. Seema Jaggi, Professor, ICAR-Indian
Agricultural Statistical Research Institute, New Delhi for their kind suggestions,
encouragement and needed help during my study.
I express my heartful thanks to Dr. J. P. Sharma, Joint Director (Extension),
IARI, New Delhi for providing me all the help and motivation in undertaking this
research in an enthusiastic manner.
It is a great occasion for me to express my deep sentiments, legitimate regards
and gratitude towards Dr. Roy Burman, Dr. V. Sangeeta, Dr. Rashmi Singh, Dr. M.S.
Nain, Dr. B.K Singh, Dr. Kumbhare, Dr. Monika and Dr. Sujit Sarkar, Division of
Agricultural Extension, ICAR-IARI, for providing me the necessary facilities and

CONTENTS
Chapter Title Page No.
1 Introduction 1-8
2 Review of Literature 9-26
3 Research Methodology 27-44
4 Results and Discussion 45-106
5 Summary and Conclusion 107-120
Abstract
References I-X
Annexure I i-xiii
Annexure II xiv-xxii
Annexure III xxiii-xxiv
Annexure IV xxv-xxxi
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. No. Title After
page No.
1. Karnataka geographical map 28
28
2. Maharashtra geographical map
28
3. Bengaluru rural district geographical map
28
4. Belgaum district geographical map
28
5. Pune district geographical map
28
6. Sangli district geographical map
44
7. Glimpses of Data collection process
LIST OF TABLES

Table After Page
Title
No.
No.
4.1.1 Time line representation of greenhouse growth and 48
development around the world
4.1.2 Area (ha) under greenhouse cultivation of 54
horticulture crops in various countries
4.1.3 Area (ha) under plastic low tunnels for protected 57
cultivation of horticulture crops in different countries
4.1.4 Area under floating mulch (ha) in different countries 58
4.1.5 Area under plastic mulch (ha) in different countries 59
4.1.6 Potential production identified for protected 63
cultivation in India
4.1.7 Crops grown under Protected Cultivation 72
Technology in Karnataka and Maharashtra
4.1.8 Varieties of various crops grown under polyhouse in 73
Karnataka and Maharashtra
4.2.1 Basic information about area, initial investment, 75
source of information of PCT growers in the study
area
4.2.2 Extent of adoption of various components in 77
polyhouse technology by respondents
4.2.3 Extent of adoption of various components of shade 79
nethouse technology by respondents
4.3.1 Determinants of adoption of polyhouse technology 82
4.3.2 Determinants of adoption of shade nethouse 83
technology
4.4.1 Impact of polyhouse on employment generation 85
(mandays)
4.4.2 Impact of polyhouse technology on land holding 85
status (Acres)
4.4.3 Impact of polyhouse technology on Savings (Rs.) 86
4.4.4 Economics of rose cultivation under polyhouse 86
technology in Maharashtra
4.4.5 Economics of rose cultivation under polyhouse 86
technology in Karnataka
4.4.6 Economics of gerbera cultivation under polyhouse 86
technology in Maharashtra
4.4.7 Economics of gerbera cultivation under polyhouse 86
technology in Karnataka
4.4.8 Economics of carnation cultivation under polyhouse 87
technology in Maharashtra
4.4.9 Economics of carnation cultivation under polyhouse 87
technology in Karnataka
4.4.10 Comparison of total cost required, total net profit and 87
B:C ratio between Maharashtra and Karnataka
4.5.1 Impact of nethouse technology on Employment 90
generation (mandays)
4.5.2 Impact of nethouse technology on change in 91
Landholding (acres)
4.5.3 Impact of nethouse technology on change in savings 91
(Rs)
4.5.4 Economics of chilli seed production under nethouse 91
technology in Karnataka
4.5.5 Economics of chilli seed production under nethouse 91
technology in Maharashtra
4.5.6 Economics of tomato seed production under 92
nethouse technology in Karnataka
4.5.7 Economics of tomato seed production under 92
nethouse technology in Maharashtra
4.6.1 Environmental constraints as perceived by farmers in 93
adoption of polyhouse technology
4.6.2 Technical constraints as perceived by farmers in 95
adoption of polyhouse technology
4.6.3 Labour constraints as perceived by farmers in 96
adoption of polyhouse technology
4.6.4 Economic constraints as perceived by farmers in 97
adoption of polyhouse technology
4.6.5 Average initial investment required to establish 98
polyhouse under one unit area (1008 sq m) for
important crops grown under polyhouse in the study
area
4.6.6 Marketing constraints as perceived by farmers in 99
adoption of polyhouse technology
4.6.7 Strategies to expedite the rate of adoption of 101
polyhouse technology as perceived by farmers
4.6.8 Strategies to expedite the rate of adoption of 103
polyhouse technology according to other
stakeholders