Analysis of marketed surplus and producer’s share across different marketing channels in the Zardalu mango supply chain

Introduction

Mangoes are grown over 2.21 million hectares in India, the world's biggest grower, yielding around 19.51 million tons a year. The Bhagalpur area of Bihar, which is well-known for its GI-tagged Zardalu mango, makes a substantial contribution to this output. The Zardalu cultivar is very commercial, with most of the crop being sold rather than eaten or kept. It is renowned for its intense scent, sweetness, and export potential. However, because of weak market systems, a lack of infrastructure, and the domination of intermediaries, farmers often earn a little portion of the consumer price even in the face of significant sold excess. A crucial economic metric that assesses a farmer's reliance on the market and prospective profitability is marketed surplus.

Strong commercial focus and earning potential are reflected in a bigger marketable surplus, according to studies. More than 80% of the Zardalu mango's total output is sold by producers in all farm categories-marginal, small, semimedium, and medium-demonstrating the fruit's high level of commercialization. However, until the producer receives a fair portion of the consumer price, just having a big marketed surplus does not equate to increased income. The amount of the consumer's final price that goes to the farmer is shown by the Producer's Share in Consumer's Rupee (PSCR). The number of intermediaries, pricing spread, transportation costs, transaction margins, and marketing channel all have a significant role. Channel I (Producer → Consumer) had the greatest PSCR (93.75%), according to the study's results, whereas Channel IV (Producer → Village Trader → Wholesaler → Retailer → Consumer) had the lowest (55.56%). This demonstrates unequivocally that shorter pathways guarantee greater farmer profitability. Therefore, assessing marketed surplus and PSCR is essential to comprehending how well Zardalu mango growers profit from market prospects. Due to its GI-tagged status, the Zardalu mango has special economic potential and may command high prices in both local and international markets. However, owing to a lack of collective marketing structures, insufficient market intelligence, improper grading, packing, cold storage, and weak negotiating power, small and marginal farmers are often unable to take advantage of these prospects. Due to these restrictions, manufacturers are forced to depend on commission agents or village merchants, who provide quick cash but lower net revenue because of a wider price differential. As a consequence, farmers continue to realize low levels of actual revenue, despite a huge marketed surplus. Therefore, it is essential to comprehend how marketed excess and PSCR are related in order to formulate policies and create effective supply chains. Higher market returns should ideally be obtained by a crop with a significant marketable surplus, but this is only possible when the producer keeps a reasonable portion of the consumer price. Therefore, examining PSCR in conjunction with marketable surplus offers a more comprehensive economic viewpoint, emphasizing both market potential and financial effect. In this regard, the current research compares the producer's share under various marketing channels and determines the marketable surplus of Zardalu mango across several farm types. The research sheds important light on how, without an attractive, effective, and farmer-centric marketing framework, commercialization by itself does not guarantee profitability.

Materials and Methods

Sampling and Study Area

The study was conducted in the two mango-dominant blocks of Sabour and Sultanganj in the Bhagalpur district of Bihar. From these blocks, four villages were chosen at random, and 60 mango growers in all were polled using random selection.

Data Collection

An organized and pre-tested schedule was used to conduct in-person interviews in order to gather primary data. Production, family consumption, waste, gifts, marketing costs, selling price, and price achieved at various marketing channels were all factors that were gathered. Government papers, scholarly publications, and other published literature were the sources of secondary data.

Tools for Analysis 2.3.1 Marketable and Marketed Surplus Estimation

The following formula was used to determine marketable surplus: Total Production -(Family Consumption + Waste + Gifts) = Marketable Surplus The amount that the producer actually sold was referred to as the "marketed surplus."

Consumer Rupee Producer's Share (PSCR)

The producer's portion of the consumer rupee was estimated using Acharya's formula: Price Paid by Consumer / Price Received by Producer = PSCR (%) × 100

Analysis of Percentages

The replies of several farmer types were compared using percentage analysis in order to ascertain the return shares and selling trends across channels.

Review of Literature

Marketed surplus and producer's share in the consumer rupee (PSCR) are two important metrics that show how profitable, marketable, and economically viable an agricultural product is. Mangos are a fruit crop that is very perishable and important to the economy. They need a good marketing system that determines both the volume sold (marketed surplus) and the price realized (producer's share) in order to keep farmers' incomes and the market stable. Sukmaya & Jakiyah (2021) examined the mango marketing system in Majalengka Regency, Indonesia, emphasizing the correlation between channel structure and the producers' share of the consumer rupee. The research delineated five marketing channels, encompassing direct sales from farmers to consumers and extending to more extensive networks involving distributors, merchants, and collectors. The results showed that longer channels cut producers' share by a lot (22.22%) because they cost more to market, but farmers made the most money (56.52%) from the shortest ways. The authors say that farmers could make more money by relying less on middlemen and improving cold storage facilities. Singh and Saini (2014) [10] examined the producer's share of the consumer rupee for mango cultivators in Haryana. Their research on different marketing channels found that direct transactions between farmers and consumers increased the producer's share (62.32%), while transactions that involved commission agents and wholesalers decreased it (43.65%) because of extra costs like commissions, market fees, and transportation. The study emphasized infrastructure development, direct connections between farmers and retailers, and enhanced market information systems as key strategies for augmenting farmers' share of the final consumer price. Chaudhary et al. (2012) [1] did a study on how producers' shares change depending on the marketing channel. Their data showed that farmers who sold directly to consumers kept the most of the consumer rupee. When farmers sold to wholesalers, commission agents, or pre-harvest contractors, on the other hand, their marketing costs and the margins of the middlemen went up, which hurt their income. The authors say that promoting farmer cooperatives and direct sales channels could help cut down on the costs of working with middlemen. Matin et al. (2008) [6] studied the mango marketing system in some parts of Bangladesh and found five main channels. These channels ranged from simple routes between farmers, retailers, and consumers to more complicated networks with many middlemen, such as Beparis, Aratdars, and city merchants. Their study found that the shortest channel had the biggest share, at more than 66%, while the longest chains cut the producer's stake to more than 60%. The authors determined that superfluous intermediaries must be eradicated and market infrastructure enhanced to ensure farmers receive a more equitable price. Dhurandher (2010) [2] conducted a study on banana production and marketing in the Raipur region of Chhattisgarh, identifying two principal marketing channels: Channel I went from Producer to Commission Agent to Retailer to Consumer, while Channel II went from Producer to Wholesaler to Consumer. The study found that farmers www.extensionjournal.com grew an average of 9.08 tons of bananas, but almost none of them were eaten on the farm. Instead, almost 99.7% of the fruit was sold, mostly through Channel I, where commission brokers were very important. The fact that transportation made up the biggest part of marketing costs across all channels shows how important logistics are to the banana industry. The study found that producers got the same selling price in both channels, even though Channel II got rid of the commission agent and retailer, making it shorter, more efficient, and with a smaller price spread. This showed that farmers didn't make any money from having fewer middlemen in Channel II; instead, wholesalers kept the profits, which was good for consumers. Komarek (2010) [4] examined the determinants affecting the participation of Ugandan banana growers in the market, highlighting the necessity of commercializing a highly perishable commodity such as bananas. [12] performed an economic analysis of mango production in the Lucknow region, considering marketing constraints. The study also found that contract marketing (Grower → Contractor → Wholesaler/Retailer → Consumer) has become more popular as an alternative because it helped lower the risks that come with perishability and prices that don't stay the same. The results showed that the main things that affected farmers' returns were relying on commission agents, not having enough storage space, and losing a lot of money after the harvest. Because of these rules, farmers sometimes had to take lower prices to keep their crops from going bad. The authors suggested that extension services should concentrate on post-harvest handling techniques and that investments should be directed towards cold storage and transportation infrastructure to aid farmers in accessing more lucrative markets and augmenting their share of consumer spending. Kumar et al. (2017) [5] examined the difficulties encountered by mango cultivators in the Saharanpur area of Uttar Pradesh. The main marketing problems were that farmers relied almost entirely on commission brokers, input prices were high, and farm-gate prices were low. Because perishability and a lack of storage space, sales must happen quickly and often under bad conditions. The authors say that setting up processing plants, making it easier to get loans, and offering training that adds value could all help the producer's bargaining power, make them less reliant on middlemen, and in the end, raise their share of the final price. The literature stresses that even though fruit crops have a lot of extra supply on the market because people don't eat them much at home, this doesn't mean that the producer will make more money until they get a big part of the price that the consumer pays. A good marketing plan that includes cooperative marketing platforms, fair prices, enough cold storage, and shorter pathways can greatly increase farmers' profits. The current research examines the producer's share of the consumer rupee and the marketed surplus for Zardalu mango in the Bhagalpur district of Bihar, utilizing various marketing channels to address the existing information gap.

Results and Discussion

Marketed Surplus of Zardalu Mango

Marketed surplus refers to the actual quantity of produce sold after deducting family consumption, wastage, and gifts. The study revealed that all producer categories sold more than 80% of their total production, highlighting the strong commercial nature of Zardalu mango. Table 1 shows the average production, consumption, and marketed surplus of Zardalu mango for different types of producers. The data shows that the marketed surplus and the marketable surplus are the same because all of the goods had already been sold by the time the data was collected. To get a better idea of how dependent the market is, we calculated the marketed surplus as a percentage of total production. The average production of marginal producers was 8.45 quintals, and they used 1.52 quintals, leaving them with a marketed surplus of 6.93 quintals, which is 82.01% of their total production. The results clearly show that as the number of middlemen increases, so do the marketing costs and margins at every level. This makes the price spread wider and lowers the percentage of the final price that goes to the producer. The number of middlemen and the marketing costs that went along with each level were the main things that affected the Producer's Share in Consumer's Rupee (PSCR). This changed a lot between the four marketing channels in Table 2. The results show that Channel I, where producers sold directly to customers, had the highest PSCR (93.75 percent). This got rid of middlemen and cut down on marketing costs. Because of this direct marketing strategy, producers were able to keep the biggest part of the money that the customer paid. On the other hand, the presence of retailers in Channel II caused the PSCR to drop to 67.90 percent because their profit margins and marketing costs cut into the producers' share. The PSCR dropped to 60.38 percent in Channel III, where the drop was more noticeable, because both wholesalers and retailers were involved. The PSCR for Channel IV, which included village merchants, wholesalers, and retailers, was the lowest at 55.56 percent. Intermediate profits and cumulative marketing costs made the price difference in this channel much bigger, which meant that manufacturers got the least amount of the consumer's rupee. These results clearly show that the producer's share goes down as the marketing chain gets longer. This shows that shorter, more direct marketing channels are better for raising producer profitability.

Conclusion

The study found that Zardalu mangos are a very profitable crop because more than 80% of the total output was sold across all farm types. Semi-medium farms had the biggest marketable surplus, which was 83.48%. But since profits mostly depended on the marketing channel used, a bigger marketed surplus didn't always mean more money. The Producer's Share in Consumer's Rupee (PSCR) changed a lot from one channel to the next. Channel IV (Producer → Village Trader → Wholesaler → Retailer → Consumer) had the lowest PSCR (55.56%), and Channel I (Producer → Consumer) had the highest (93.75%). The findings showed that shorter channels led to higher prices and lower deductions for middlemen. To make farmers more profitable, they need to have more access to markets, be able to sell directly to customers, and depend less on middlemen. For Zardalu mango producers, real economic benefits come from how well their marketing channels work, not just how much they sell.

Suggestions for Policy

• Encourage sales at the farm gate and direct sales from farmers to consumers. • Use digital channels to give people the most up-to-date information about market prices. • Use FPOs and FPCs to encourage aggregation, which will give you more power when negotiating. • Set a minimum support price or floor price for mangos during the excess season.

• At the village level, set up cold storage and mobile collecting trucks.

Extent in the Future

• Future studies may use price spread analysis and the cost-benefit ratio to figure out how profitable each channel is. • A comparison of PSCR between modern digital marketing platforms and older ones.

• Using AI-based prediction tools and pricing forecasts to make economic models for mango marketing.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgmentThe Department of Agri-Business Management (BAU, Sabour) helped with technical issues and gave guidance. The authors thank the farmers who answered the survey for giving them information about their production and sales.

References

1. Chaudhary RK, Singh DK, Kumar S. Economics of production and marketing of mango in Faizabad district of Uttar Pradesh. Indian J Agric Mark. 2012;26(3):118128.
2. Dhurandher TK. Production and marketing of banana in Raipur district of Chhattisgarh. Raipur: Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya; 2010. http://krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/handle/1/75105
3. DPR of Mango Zardalu. Detailed Project Report of Zardalu Mango Leather Processing. Indian Institute of Food Processing Technology, Ministry of Food Processing Industries (MOFPI); 2022.
4. Komarek A. The determinants of banana market commercialisation in Western Uganda. Afr J Agric Res. 2010;5(9):775-784.
5. Kumar M, Singh SN, Yadav RR, Doharey RK, Kumar A, Singh DP, Kumar S. Constraints analysis of mango growers in Saharanpur district of Uttar Pradesh. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2017;6(2):265-267. https://www.phytojournal.com/archives/2017.v6.i2.115 8/constraints-analysis-of-mango-growers-insaharanpur-district-of-uttar-pradesh
6. Matin MA, Baset MA, Alam QM, Karim MR, Hasan MR. Mango marketing system in selected areas of Bangladesh. Bangladesh J Agric Res. 2008;33(3):427438.
7. Mehjabeen, Durai AS. Trends in profitability amidst production constraints encountered by smallholder mango growers -A case of India. Asian J Agric Rural Dev. 2020;10(1):336-345. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.1005/2020.10.1/1005.1 .336.345
8. Narasalagi V, Shivashankar K. Analysis of producer's share in consumer's rupee in marketing of selected vegetables through different supply chains. Int J Agric Mark. 2020 Aug. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343905892
9. NHB. National Horticulture Board Mango report. New Delhi: NHB; 2024. https://nhb.gov.in/report_files/mango/mango.htm
10. Singh S, Saini GS. An analysis of producer's share in consumer rupee for mango in Haryana. Agric Econ Res Rev. 2014;27(2):273-280.
11. Teka Y, Malin H, Oljira A. Analysis of factors affecting mango market supply in Gomma District, Southwest Ethiopia. Agric Socio-Econ J. 2019;19(3):181-190. http://dx.doi.org/10.21776/ub.agrise.2019.019.3.7
12. Yadav S, Shukla A, Rai J, Mishra R. Economics of production and marketing of mango in district Lucknow (U.P.). J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2018;7(3):13981402. https://www.phytojournal.com/archives/2018.v7.i3.437 6/economics-of-mango-production-and-constraints-indistrict-lucknow-up