A study on the socio-economic status of fig growers in major fig-growing areas of Maharashtra

Introduction

Agriculture plays a crucial role in sustaining rural livelihoods in India, with horticulture emerging as a key subsector for income enhancement and diversification. Among fruit crops, fig (Ficus carica L.) has gained increasing importance due to its high economic returns, nutritional value, and adaptability to semi-arid climatic conditions. Maharashtra is one of the leading fig-producing states in India, with districts like Pune and Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (formerly Aurangabad) contributing significantly to its cultivation. Pune district is well known for its organized fig orchards, better irrigation infrastructure, and higher adoption of improved cultivation practices. In contrast, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar district, characterized by relatively drier agro-climatic conditions, has witnessed gradual expansion in fig cultivation due to its drought tolerance and market potential. Despite these regional advantages, fig growers in both districts face several challenges, including climate variability, water scarcity, pest and disease incidence, price fluctuations, and limited access to advanced technologies. The socio-economic characteristics of farmers play a pivotal role in determining their capacity to adopt improved practices, manage risks, and sustain productivity. Variables such as age, education, landholding size, farming experience, income, access to irrigation, credit availability, and extension contact significantly influence the decisionmaking behavior and overall performance of

Materials and Methods

A multistage sampling technique was use for the selection of districts, tahsils, and villages. At the first stage, the leading district from the zone had selected. In the second stage, three tahsils selected from the district. The final stage consisted of selecting four villages from the each selected tahsil Twenty-Five Fig growers from each selected village had selected randomly. Thus, total 300 respondents had selected for this study. The data were collected through personal interview with the help of interview schedule prepared based on objectives of the study. The collected data were scored, tabulated and analyzed by using frequency, mean, percentage and standard deviation.

Results and Discussion

Age

Age denotes the chronologically completed calendar years by the fig growers. Age is one of the important determinants of a personal behaviour. It is the basic character of an individual linked up with maturity. The information was collected regarding the age of the fig growers and they were then grouped into three categories based on mean + standard deviation. The findings are presented in Table 1. [8] , Karangami (2021) [9] . Moreover, dissimilar to Kalamkar (2022) [2] .

Education

Formal education improves the problem-solving capacities of an individual. It helps to broaden the viewpoint of a person and is important in determining his attitude towards the development. The fig growers were classified into three categories as shown in Table 2. [12] and Bari (2020) [6] , Patil (2021), and Kalamkar (2022) [2] . Dissimilar to Shankara (2019) [3] .

Family size

Family size refers to the total number of members consisting Generally, the large family finds it more difficult to arrive at a decision when compared to small sized families. The data in this regard are presented in Table 3. It is evident from the data showed in Table 3 that majority (48.67 per cent) of the fig growers belonged to 'medium' family size; followed by 38.00 per cent and 13.33 per cent of the 'small' and 'big' family size, respectively. The most of the fig growers were having medium to small family size. It might be because medium-sized families often provide sufficient family labour for carrying out various agricultural operations such as pruning, irrigation management, harvesting, and marketing. Availability of family labour also reduces dependence on hired labour and helps fig growers manage orchard crops more efficiently. The findings are quite similar to the findings of Manjuntha (2016), Kolgane (2019), Adha et al. (2021) and Kalamkar (2022) [2] . And dissimilar to Shankara (2019) [3] .

Farming Experience

Farming experience denotes the number of years the fig growers were actively engaged and involved in farming activity at the time of data collection, was taken into consideration in round years. The information regarding the experience of fig growers were collected, tabulated, and analyzed. Data in this connection are presented in Table 4. From the above findings, it may be concluded that slightly more than half i.e., 52.33 per cent of the fig growers had medium farming experience, which might be due to fig growers with greater farming experience generally possess better knowledge of orchard management practices such as irrigation scheduling, pest and disease management and adaptation to climatic fluctuations. The finding of the study was similar with those reported by Vishalakshi (2016), Romade (2016), and Bari (2020) [6] .

Social participation

Social participation refers to the degree of participation of fig growers in the occasions of the formal and informal organizations simply as a member or as an office bearer. Social participation brings an individual in close connection with other members of the social organization. This can provide an instance to discuss ideas, acquaintance, and experiences. Data in this connection are presented in Table 5. [12] . www.extensionjournal.com The findings indicate that although fig growers are associated with different social organizations, their participation is mostly occasional in nature. However, participation in such organizations helps in sharing of information, improving access to inputs and services, and strengthening collective decision-making. This may contribute to better adaptation of fig growers towards climate variability. The findings are consistent with Romade (2016) and Musani (2021) [10] .

Annual income

Fig growers with sound economic conditions can purchase necessary agricultural inputs, whatever they require. This situation ultimately results in higher access perceived impact by the farmers. Keeping this in view, the annual income of the fig growers was studied. Annual income refers to the total annual earning of family members through all the sources. The respondents were grouped in to three classes. The data with regard to annual income of respondents are presented in Table 6. The data regarding annual income from Table 6 indicate that more than half (59.33 per cent) of the fig growers were 'medium income category' of annual income, followed by 25.34 per cent of the fig growers were 'high income category' of annual income and 15.33 per cent of the fig growers were 'low income category' annual income respectively. The majority of responders had medium-sized land holdings, which may be the most likely explanation for this. It is concluded from these findings that, maximum fig growers had medium category of annual income due to majority of them were having small and semi-medium land holdings. The most likely reason might be, the fig cultivation, being a high-value horticultural crop, provides relatively better economic returns compared to many traditional field crops. The findings of the present study are in line with the findings of Galande (2014), Patil (2017) [12] , and Kakde (2018) [8] .

Land Holding

Land holding means the number of hectares of land owned by the dryland farmer and his family as a whole. Here, size of the land holding was measured in terms of ha of the land owned and worked by the farmers. The data relating to the land holding of the fig growers is presented in Table 7. 8. [12] .

Extension contact

It denotes the frequency of contact of the fig growers with diverse extension agencies such as Agricultural Assistant, Circle/Taluka Agricultural Officer, Extension Officer, Scientist etc. for acquirement of the information. The data in this regard were collected and are presented in Table 9. [8] and Islam et al. (2019). Fig growers had good extension contacts, the possible reason might be, they are having many issues while doing farming. That's why they focused to be in contact with extension personals to solve their problems. But there is need to reduce gaps and increase regular contact level. The finding is in line with the findings of Bahiram (2010), Kakde (2018) [8] and Maraddi et al.

Mass media exposure

The extent to which the respondents were exposed to various media outlets regarding fig-farming methods, which was determined by tracking how frequently the respondents used the various media outlets The findings suggest that fig growers predominantly rely on electronic and digital media sources, particularly television and mobile-based platforms, for obtaining agricultural information. In contrast, traditional media such as radio and printed materials are less preferred. The relatively low participation in extension activities such as exhibitions and field days indicates the need for strengthening farmer engagement through these channels. The findings are in conformity with those reported by Khan et al. (2010), Romade (2016), and Musani (2021) [10] .

Economic motivation

Economic motivation refers to the relative importance that an individual farmer places on achieving economic gains through farming activities. It reflects the extent to which farmers are oriented towards increasing income, maximizing profit, and adopting economically beneficial practices. The responses from the fig growers were obtained for each statement based on their level of agreement or disagreement using a five-point continuum ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. The information regarding the economic motivation of the fig growers is presented in Table 11 [11] .

Risk Orientation

The [11] and Pandya and Timbadia (2016) [11] . [11] , and Pandya & Timbadia (2016) [11] .

Conclusion

The study findings indicate that the majority of the Fig

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgmentI would like to express my sincere gratitude towards my honorable research guide Dr. G. K. Sasane for his intellectual inspiration, valuable suggestions, constant guidance, cooperative attitude and willing help throughout the course of investigation and preparation of the manuscript.

References

1. Bidve G. Marketing behavior of pomegranate growers. Rahuri (IN): Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth; 2021.
2. Kalamkar R. Perception and adaptation strategies of pomegranate growers towards climate change and variability in Maharashtra. Rahuri (IN): Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth; 2022.
3. Shankara MH. Farmer's perception of climate change and their adaptations. Bengaluru (IN): University of Agricultural Sciences; 2010.
4. Hahn MB, Riederer AM, Foster SO. The livelihood vulnerability index: a tool to measure livelihoods and predict their vulnerability to climate change. J Public Health Epidemiol. 2009;1(2):6-21.
5. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
6. Bari A. Socio-economic status of farmers in Maharashtra: A case study. Aurangabad (IN): Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University; 2020.
7. Chavan P. A study on socio-economic profile of farmers in Western Maharashtra. Rahuri (IN): Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth; 2019.
8. Kakde SR. A study on extension contact of dryland farmers in Marathwada region. Parbhani (IN): Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth; 2018.
9. Karangami P. Risk orientation of grape growers in Nashik district Rahuri (IN): Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth; 2021.
10. Musani A. A study on socio-economic characteristics of dryland farmers in Vidarbha region. Akola (IN): Dr Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth; 2021.
11. Pandya RD, Timbadia CK. Scientific orientation and economic motivation of the farmers. Gujarat J Ext Educ. 2016;27(1):134-137.
12. Patil S. Social participation of farmers in developmental activities. Rahuri (IN): Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth; 2017.