Finger Millet ( Eleusine coracana L . Gaertn . ) Production System : Status , Potential , Constraints and Implications for Improving Small Farmer ’ s Welfare

This article aims to investigate the growth in area, production and productivity, mapping of cultivation technologies, economics, potentials and constraints for area and production expansion of finger millet. The exponential growth rates, indicated that though there was deceleration both in area and production there was significant growth in productivity due to introduction of high yielding varieties. The respondents under different production system (rainfed and irrigated situation) were homogeneous with respect to the age and family size except land holding and education level. Finger millet possesses tremendous potential for product diversification and export. Mapping of cultivation technologies indicated that, farmers applied more fertilizers than recommended. Hence, there is a need to strengthen extension/outreach programmes to create awareness among farmers to use the optimum level of nutrients, which helps in reducing the cost incurred by farmers as well as subsidy burden on government. The existing procurement price for finger millet was Rs. 2100/q which failed to cover the cost of production under rainfed situation. In the total land holding, the area under finger millet accounted for major (64%) share in rainfed situation and thus the procurement price must be fixed looking into the cost of production of rainfed (Rs. 2624/q) finger millet, which helps in improving the welfare of finger millet growing small farmers.


Introduction to the Problem
Millets are one of the oldest foods known to humans but they were discarded in approbation of wheat and rice with urbanization and industrialization (http://www.millets.res.in).Millets are the imperative food and fodder crops in semi-arid regions that are predominantly gaining more relevance in the world (http://www.millets.res.in).They are mostly grown in marginal areas or under agricultural conditions where major cereals would fail to give sustainable yields (Global Facilitation Unit for Underutilized Species, 2014).The millets production in the World accounts for 30.73 million tonnes, out of which 11.42 million tonnes is produced in India accounting for 37% of total World production (http://www.fao.org).Millets produce multiple securities (food, fodder, health, nutrition and ecological) making them the crops of agricultural security (Millet Network of India-Deccan Development Society-FIAN, 2009).Minor millets (finger millet, foxtail, kodo millet, proso millet, little millet and barnyard millet) have received far less research and development recognition than other crops with regard to crop improvement, cultivation practices and utilization (Global Facilitation Unit for Underutilized Species, 2014). is grown in India, Srilanka, Nepal, parts of Africa, Madgaskar, Malaysia, Uganda and Japan (http://agritech.tnau.ac.in).In India, finger millet is cultivated over an area of 1.19 million hectares with a production of 1.98 million tonne giving an average productivity of 1661 kg per ha.Karnataka accounts for 56.21 and 59.52% of area and production of finger millet followed by Tamil Nadu (9.94% and 18.27%), Uttarakhand (9.40% and 7.76%) and Maharashtra (10.56% and 7.16%), respectively (http://www.indiastat.com).
Finger millet is the prime staple food consumed by majority of population in South Karnataka.Finger millet has manifold nutritional benefits, it has thirty times more calcium than rice (Millet Network of India-Deccan Development Society-FIAN, 2009).Finger millet straw is an extensive feed in the livestock sector.Finger millet is not a season bound crop and hence if moisture is available, can be cultivated throughout the year (http://www.agritech.tnau.ac.in).Millets are low water consuming crops."The rainfall requirement for sorghum, pearl millet and finger millet is less than 25% of sugarcane and banana and 30% that of rice" (Millet Network of India-Deccan Development Society-FIAN, 2009).Finger millet grains have long storability even under normal conditions and have made them "famine reserves".This aspect is at most important as Indian agriculture suffers from vagaries of monsoon (Michaelraj & Shanmugam, 2013).Millets are the promising ones for fighting hunger, malnutrition and for ensuring food and nutritional security for masses (Gupta, 2006).In spite of these admirable qualities and its importance in food and nutrition security at regional level the crop is neglected in our policies and programmes both at national and regional levels.With this backdrop, the present study is focused on investigating the growth in area, production and productivity of finger millet, costs and returns, profitability as well as the potentials and constraints for area and production expansion of finger millet.This helps in exploring the possibilities to augment the production of finger millet in areas where there is vast potential for finger millet cultivation aiming at improving the welfare of small farmers.

Methodology
The study uses both secondary (time series) as well as primary (filed level) data to address the issues outlined above.To analyze the economics of finger millet and to identify the constraints and potentials for development, the required primary data were collected from the randomly selected farmers (comprising largely small holders) using pre-tested and well-structured schedule through personal interview method for the year 2014-15.Tumakuru, Hassan, Ramanagara and Bengaluru rural districts of Karnataka (India) were selected for the survey as they are the major finger millet growing districts of Karnataka.From each district sixty sample farmers were selected randomly.Sixty sample farmers comprised of 30 rainfed and 30 irrigated finger millet growing farmers.Totally data was collected from 240 finger millet growing farmers.General information regarding socio-economic status, cropping pattern, cultivation technologies, cost and returns, potentials and constraints for area and production expansions was collected from the sample farmers.The data collection was exclusively based on the memory of the respondents.To assess growth in area, production and productivity of finger millet, the data for 30 years from 1984-85 to 2013-14 for all India and Karnataka State were collected from India Stat.

Exponential Growth Model
The exponential growth model was employed to find out the growth in area, production and productivity of finger millet.The Growth rates for area, production and productivity were computed for a period of 30 years from 1984-85 to 2013-14.The study period was divided into different periods considering the important developments that have taken place in agriculture namely, economic liberalization-1991, targeted public distribution system-1997 and national food security mission-2007.Exponential growth model was selected for the analysis as most of the time series data follow exponential trend.Similar approach was used by Kumar and Ranjan (1998), Kumawat and Meena (2005), Sakamma and Ananth (2011), Bairwa et al. (2012) and Vinayaka et al. (2014).

Costs and Returns
The costs were classified into variable and fixed costs.Variable cost/working capital includes cost of inputs (seed, farm yard manure (FYM), fertilizer), labour cost and interest on working capital.Fixed cost includes depreciation on farm implements, land revenue, rental value of land, managerial cost and risk premium.The gross return was arrived at by adding the income from main product (grain) and the by-product (straw).
The information pertaining to the cropping pattern, socio-economic status, cost and returns, profitability as well as the potentials and constraints for area and production expansions are presented in tables for better comprehension.In order to facilitate interpretation of findings, statistical measures like percentages and averages were used.

Growth Rates of Finger Millet in Karnataka and India
Growth rates for area, production and productivity were computed for a period of 30 years from 1984-85 to 2013-14.The study period was divided in to four periods (Table 1), period I (1984-85 to 1991-92), II (1992II ( -93 to 1997-08)-08), III (1998-99 to 2007-08) and IV period (2008-09 to 2013-14) considering the important milestones that have taken place in agriculture as mentioned in the previous section and having bearing on the development of finger millet crop (economic liberalization-1991, targeted public distribution system-1997 and national food security mission-2007) in the country.

Growth in Area under Finger Millet
The growth in area for the overall period (Table 1) indicated that, area under finger millet for India (-2.594%) was declining at a faster rate compared to Karnataka (-1.811%).Similar trend was observed during period I, II, III and IV.The introduction of the above said programmes during different time periods had a negative impact on finger millet area both in India and Karnataka.This is also evident from the Figures 1 and 2. The implementation of Targeted Public Distribution system and National Food Security Mission, the Minimum Support Price and procurement of major cereals (rice and wheat) with appreciable increase in price have adversely affected the area under finger millet in both Karnataka as well as India. jas.ccsenet.

Source: htt
Source: htt Similarly, Kannan (2011) while analyzing the compound annual growth rates of area, production and productivity for major crops by States, found that finger millet registered negative growth rate in area and production except productivity across the States and at all India level.This implies that crop diversification is increasingly inclined towards commercial crops in the States resulting in shrinkage of area under coarse cereals and small millets.
After analyzing the trend in area, production and productivity of finger millet, the study focused on the status of finger millet crop in Karnataka along with the status of finger millet farmers.

Cropping Pattern in Karnataka
The cropping pattern followed in rainfed and irrigated situations in the study area were distinct.Finger millet was an important crop in rainfed situation in kharif whereas, red gram was the major crop in irrigated situation.
Finger millet was also grown as irrigated crop in Rabi season in the study area.The cropping intensity (Table 2) was high in case of irrigated situation (151.30%)compared to that of rainfed situation (118.80%).The finger millet occupied highest share in gross cropped area among all the crops in rainfed situation (53.92%) as it can withstand drought conditions, followed by maize (18.82%), red gram (13.01%) and mango (7.16%).

Socio-Economic Characteristics of Finger Millet Farmers
The average age of farmers of rainfed situation was 54 years while it was 53 years in irrigated situation.The classification of the farmer respondents according to their education level revealed that majority of farmers had primary education in both rainfed (38%) and irrigated situation (41%).In both, rainfed (28%) and irrigated (30%) situation farmers having secondary education occupied the second position (Table 3).With regard to average family size, it was same in both the situation (no.5) and was statistically non-significant indicating that the contribution of family labour was same under both the situations.
With regard to land holding, the average size of land holdings was bigger in irrigated situation (1.48 ha) compared to rainfed situation (1.14 ha).Both under rainfed and irrigated situation majority of ragi growing farmers belong to small holders group.The area under finger millet in the total land holdings accounted for 64% in rainfed and 25% in irrigated situation.
The difference in the age and family size of the sample respondents was statistically non-significant revealing similarity between two situations except land holding and education level.These facts clearly showed that the selected farmer-respondents in rainfed and irrigated situation were homogeneous with respect to the socio-economic characteristics except land holding and education level.In rainfed finger millet cultivation, the major cost item in working cost was the cost on human labour (27.25%) followed by cost on machine labour (17.25%),FYM (12.40%), fertilizer (9.96%), bullock labour (9.09%) and interest on working capital (2.68%).
Out of the total variable cost both in rainfed and irrigated situations, around 36% was incurred only on the labour indicating that cultivation of finger millet is labour intensive.These findings are in line with the results of Lal and Sharma (2006), Pant andSrivastava (2014), andJimjel et al. (2015).This clearly indicated that human labour was the most important input in finger millet cultivation, which is mainly required for activities such as sowing/transplanting, weeding, harvesting and post-harvest operations (threshing, cleaning and bagging).
Fixed costs accounted for 19% of the total cost of cultivation in rainfed and irrigated finger millet cultivation.Among fixed costs, rental value of land was major chunk in rainfed (8.23%) and irrigated (7.77%) finger millet cultivation.The average fixed cost was Rs. 9,155 per ha and Rs.11,979 per ha in rainfed and irrigated finger millet cultivation, respectively.
The average cost of cultivation of rainfed finger millet and irrigated finger millet was Rs. 48,575 and Rs.64,369 per hectare, respectively.Cost of cultivation was high in irrigated situation compared to rainfed situation, because of more labour, FYM, fertilizer use besides irrigation cost and nursery.

Returns from Finger Millet Cultivation
The gross returns comprised returns from main product (grain) as well as by-product (straw/fodder).The average grain yield obtained per hectare under rainfed and irrigated situation was 18.51 quintals and 31.55 quintals (Tables 5 and 7), respectively.Per hectare gross returns were Rs.40,165 and Rs.67,007 in rainfed and irrigated finger millet cultivation, respectively.
The results indicated that, yield was high in irrigated situation compared to rainfed situation which was mainly because of the management practices like timely irrigation, optimum plant spacing, use of fertilizer and FYM.Irrigated finger millet also fetched higher price compared to rainfed finger millet because of off season production (produce would be ready for sale during the months of February to March during which market arrivals are less, resulting in high price for the produce).
The analysis of net return from finger millet cultivation revealed that the net return per hectare was negative i.e.Rs. 8,410 under rainfed situation (Table 5), whereas, the net return was Rs. 2,638 under irrigated situation (Table 7).Rainfed farmers realized negative net returns because of low yield and also high cost of cultivation.In spite of loss, farmers continue to grow finger millet mainly for the purpose of consumption and for the quantity and quality of the fodder that it provides.The cost of production was high in rainfed finger millet cultivation (Rs.2,624 per quintal) compared to that of irrigated (Rs.2,040 per quintal) finger millet cultivation due to low yield in rainfed situation.But the existing procurement price for finger millet was Rs. 2100 (Government of Karnataka) and Rs.1650 per quintal (Minimum Support Price of Government of India) fails to cover the cost of production of finger millet under rainfed situation.In the total land holding, the area under finger millet accounted for major (65%) share in rainfed situation, indicating finger millet is mainly cultivated as rainfed crop and thus the procurement price must be fixed looking into the cost of production of rainfed finger millet.The rate of return per rupee of expenditure incurred in rainfed and irrigated finger millet cultivation was found higher in case of irrigated (1.04) condition than in rainfed situation (0.83).
These results are in accordance with the study of Pant and Srivastava (2014), that the net returns from finger millet cultivation over all variable costs excluding family labour cost and including land revenue, depreciation and interest on working capital and imputed value of family labour) were negative indicating that the crop was cultivated only for subsistence and not for commercial purpose.Narayanamoorthy (2013) indicated that cultivation of finger millet under rainfed condition was not profitable.

Strengths
Finger millet is called as the powerhouse of health benefiting nutrients (http://www.thefitindian.com/) as it has highest amount of calcium (344 mg/100 g of finger millet), iron (3.9 g/100 g of finger millet) and minerals (2.7 g/100 g of finger millet) (Millet Network of India-Deccan Development Society-FIAN, 2009).Due to its high content of polyphenols and dietary fiber, finger millet exhibits anti-diabetic and antioxidant and antimicrobial properties thus very much preferred by diabetic patients.Finger millet grains are malted and fed to infants, because of its high nutritional value.To produce one kg of finger millet only 1500 to 2000 liters of water is needed as against 4000 to 5000 liters of water to produce one kg of rice (The New India Express, 2015) thus the water requirement of the crop is low.Majority of farmers grow finger millet crop because of the fodder requirement for livestock as it is highly palatable to livestock.In finger millet crop the incidence of pest and diseases is very low thus limits the usage of pesticide, and mostly farm yard manure is applied in the production of finger millet thus by default forms environmental friendly crop (Figure 11).

Weaknesses
Lack of remunerative price which fails to cover the cost of cultivation and provide reasonable profit margin to farmers acts as disincentive to grow finger millet by farmers.The yield especially in rainfed finger millet is very jas.ccsenet.
low which reasons fo consumpti Karnataka

Oppo
There is a There is v have alrea export of f benefits; re Cultivation practices adopted by farmers were mapped to know the lacunas in the technologies followed by farmers and identify the gaps in some of the quantifiable variables in comparison with the recommended practices.Results indicated that, both in rainfed (N: 105.2, P: 65.3, K: 1 kg/ha) and irrigated (N: 142, P: 54.2, K: 1.3 kg/ha) situation, application of nitrogen and phosphorous was higher than the recommended dose (rainfed = N: 50, P: 45, K: 40 kg/ha; irrigated = N: 100, P: 50, K: 50 kg/ha) as farmers perceived higher application of fertilizers leads to higher yield.Although farmers applied more fertilizers the yield under rainfed and irrigated situation (18.5 and 31.6 q/ha, respectively) was less than the recommended (22.5 and 32.5 q/ha, respectively) and it is a point of double loss to farmers in terms of both, excess cost incurred due to higher usage of fertilizer as well as reduced returns due to lower yield compared to recommended.Hence, there is a need to strengthen extension/outreach programmes to create awareness among farmers to use the optimum level of nutrients, which helps in reducing the cost incurred by farmers as well as subsidy burden on government In rainfed situation, kg of seeds were used per hectare which was two times higher than the recommended (12.5 kg/ha).Whereas, in irrigated situation farmers were using seeds (20.63 kg/ha) four times higher than the recommended (5 kg/ha).
Per hectare cost of cultivation of finger millet was Rs. 48,575 and Rs.64,369 in rainfed and irrigated situation, respectively.Variable costs accounted for about 80% in finger millet cultivation indicating that finger millet is not a capital intensive crop.Analysis of cost structure revealed that Rs. 17,651 (36.34%) and Rs.23,641 (36.73%) of total cost of cultivation was incurred on labour in rainfed and irrigated situation, respectively indicating that finger millet though not capital intensive is a labour intensive crop.To reduce the problems faced by small farmers regarding labour availability, efforts should be made by the scientists to develop and promote suitable farm mechanization technologies.
The cost of production was Rs. 2624/q under rainfed situation and Rs.2040/q under irrigated situation.But the existing procurement price for finger millet was Rs. 2100 per quintal (Government of Karnataka) and Rs.1650 per quintal (Minimum Support Price of Government of India) fails to cover the cost of production of finger millet under rainfed situation.In the total land holding, the area under finger millet accounted for major (64%) share in rainfed situation, indicating finger millet is mainly cultivated as rainfed crop and thus the procurement price must be fixed looking into the cost of production of rainfed finger millet.Further, lack of remunerative price which fails to cover the cost of cultivation and provide reasonable profit margin to small farmers acts as disincentive to grow finger millet.Low yield combined with low price leads to reduced returns is one of the main reasons for farmers reducing area under finger millet.Hence, Government should increase the procurement price at least to cover its cost of production in order to help the small famers to continue to grow finger millet.Further, lack of remunerative price which fails to cover the cost of cultivation and provide reasonable profit margin to small farmers acts as disincentive to grow finger millet.Low yield combined with low price leads to reduced returns is one of the main reasons for farmers reducing area under finger millet.Hence, Government should increase the procurement price at least to cover its cost of production in order to help the small famers to continue to grow finger millet.
There is a high demand for finger millet malt due to its high nutritional value with appealing flavor and taste.Finger millet possesses tremendous potential for product diversification.The potential for export of finger millet in the form of grain, flour and value added products needs to be explored.Thus, there is a need to discover the markets for augmenting the exports through organizing trade fairs, exhibitions to create awareness and also gain knowledge about the quality preference and thereby plan measures to promote finger millet exports.

Table 2 .
Cropping pattern in the study area(ha) Note.Figures in parentheses indicatepercentage to gross cropped area.

Table 3 .
Socio-economic characteristics of finger millet farmers and assets position in rainfed and irrigated situations in Karnataka

Farm assets (no. of farm assets)
* Note.**, *: Significant at 1% and 5%; NS = not significant; Figures in parentheses indicate percentage to respective group total.

Table 4 .
Cost of cultivation of rainfed finger millet in Karnataka (hectare)

Table 5 .
Returns from rainfed finger millet in Karnataka (hectare)

Table 6 .
Cost of cultivation of irrigated finger millet in Karnataka (hectare)

Table 7 .
Returns from irrigated finger millet in Karnataka (hectare)