Year: 2022 | Month: December | Volume 9 | Issue 4

Economic Analysis of Yield Gap in Chick Pea

Sandip S. Thakare Nilesh A. Shionkar Shobhana G. Tale Sunil N. Ingle Deepak H. Ulemale
DOI:10.30954/2394-8159.04.2022.5

Abstract:

The pulses are rich source of proteins, also a rich source of green and dry fodder for livestock production.
Therefore, pulses are important in cropping system of Maharashtra. Due to their protein richness, pulses are the integral part of the Indian people. Chickpea has the richest, cheapest and easiest source of best quality proteins and fats. Chickpea is also a good source of vitamins and minerals like potassium and phosphorus. In this study an attempts has been made to study Economic analysis of yield gap in chick pea. The study was based on both primary as well as secondary data collected from Bhandara district of Maharashtra. The Primary data of 90 chick pea growers were collected from six villages from two tehsils of Bhandara District viz. Bhandara and Pauni and from these 45 and 45 samples were selected purposively. The secondary data on area, production and productivity was pertained to the periods 1991-92 to 2020-21 collected from various government publications. The present study revealed that, area, production and productivity of chick pea had increased in Bhandara district over theperiod of time. The yield gap analysis shows that the overall yield gap I i.e. difference between potential yield and farmers yield worked out to be 283 kg/ha and yield gap II i.e. difference between potential farm yield and farmers yield was 210 kg/ha. The highest total yield gap was recorded in small farmers (375 kg/ha), while lowest in large farmers (176 kg/ha) in yield gap I. Magnitude and Direction of yield gap shows that the yield gap is increased at increasing rate. The path analysis measured the direct and indirect effect of input gaps on yield gap explained that the total effect of seed (0.98) was found to be highest in large farmers, while seed (0.98), fertilizer (0.98) and plant protection (0.93) found to be highest in small size group of farmers. 



Print This Article Email This Article to Your Friend

AgroEcoomist-An International Journal In Association with AAEBM