Constraints faced by fig growers and their suggestions for sustainable fig cultivation under climate variability in Maharashtra

Introduction

Fig (Ficus carica L.), popularly known as anjeer, is an important fruit crop belonging to the Moraceae family and is widely cultivated in tropical and subtropical regions. The fruit is highly valued for its rich nutritional composition, including dietary fibre, carbohydrates, essential minerals, and antioxidants, which has led to increasing demand among health-conscious consumers.

Methodology

The present study was conducted in Pune and Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar districts of Maharashtra, which are major fig-growing regions of the state. An ex-post facto research design was adopted for the investigation. A multistage sampling technique was employed. At the first stage, the two districts were selected purposively based on the area under fig cultivation. In the second stage, Purandar tahsil from Pune district and Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and Gangapur tahsils from Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar district were selected due to higher concentration of fig growers. In the final stage, villages having significant area under fig cultivation were selected. From each selected village, 25 fig growers were randomly selected, constituting a total sample of 300 respondents. Primary data were collected using a structured and pretested interview schedule designed to elicit information on constraints faced by fig growers under climate variability and their suggestions. The data were analysed using frequency and percentage. The Garrett Ranking Technique was employed to prioritize the constraints. The ranks assigned by respondents were converted into percent positions using the formula:

Where, Rij is the rank given for the ith item by the jth respondent Nj is the total number of items ranked. The percent positions were converted into Garrett scores using Garrett's conversion table. The mean Garrett score for each constraint was computed and used for final ranking.

The constraint with the highest mean score was considered the most severe.

Results and Discussion 1. Production and Input Constraints

Production and input constraints refer to the high cost and limited availability of essential inputs required for fig cultivation.

Labour Constraints

Labour constraints refer to issues related to the availability, cost, and efficiency of skilled and unskilled labour. www.extensionjournal.com Scarcity of skilled labour (57.60) was the most severe constraint, followed by high wages (55.30). Migration and lack of skilled workers for pruning significantly affect orchard management and productivity.

Irrigation and Water Constraints

Irrigation and water constraints refer to problems associated with water availability, irrigation costs, and water management practices.

Climatic and Environmental Constraints

Climatic and environmental constraints refer to the adverse effects of climate variability such as erratic rainfall, temperature fluctuations, and extreme weather events. Erratic rainfall (60.80) emerged as the major constraint, followed by temperature fluctuations. Unseasonal rains and extreme weather events negatively impact flowering, fruit set, and yield.

Pest and Disease Constraints

Pest and disease constraints refer to crop losses and management difficulties caused by pests, diseases, and inadequate control measures. Pest incidence (59.40) ranked first, followed by disease outbreaks. High cost of control measures and lack of timely advisory services further worsen crop protection challenges.

Infrastructure Constraints

Infrastructure constraints refer to the lack of essential physical facilities such as storage, transportation, roads, and market infrastructure. Lack of processing units 12900 43.00 V Perishability (55.00) was the major issue, followed by storage limitations and post-harvest losses. Lack of processing and packaging reduces market value.

Marketing and Value Chain Constraints

Marketing and value chain constraints refer to challenges in marketing, price fluctuations, value addition, and weak market linkages. Price fluctuation (54.00) ranked first, followed by lack of processing facilities. Dependence on middlemen and weak market linkages reduce farmers' income.

Financial and Investment Constraints

Financial and investment constraints refer to limited access to credit, high interest rates, and inadequate financial support for cultivation.

Market Information Constraints

Market information constraints refer to the lack of timely and accurate market information, including price data and extension services. Although labour constraints recorded a higher average Garrett score, production and input constraints secured the first rank due to their higher total Garrett score, reflecting their wider impact across respondents. Climatic and pestrelated constraints were of moderate severity, while financial, market information, and knowledge-related constraints were comparatively less severe. However, these constraints remain important for improving long-term sustainability and adoption of improved practices.

Suggestions Provided by Fig Growers to Overcome Constraints

After identifying the major constraints, fig growers were asked to suggest measures to overcome these challenges. Being primary stakeholders, their field-level experience provides valuable insights for improving resilience, productivity, and sustainability of fig cultivation under climate variability. The suggestions are presented in Table 14.

Future Scope

Further research should focus on developing climate-

Acknowledgement

www.extensionjournal.com resilient fig production practices, improving water management, and promoting stress-tolerant varieties. Studies on value chain development, processing, and market linkages are also needed to enhance farmers' income and ensure sustainable fig cultivation.

References

1. Ammar. Fig (Ficus carica L.) vulnerability to climate change: Combined effects of water stress and high temperature on ecophysiological behavior of different cultivars. South African Journal of Botany. 2022.
2. Chavan R. Climatic impacts on fruit crops in semi-arid Maharashtra. Journal of Horticultural Science. 2017;12(2):145-152.
3. Chandra Shekar G, Sidram BY, Goudappa SB, Basanayak R, Pujari R, Huchchanamanavar S. An analysis of technological gap in fig cultivation in Ballari district of Karnataka. International Journal of Agriculture Extension and Social Development. 2024;7(9):853-857.
4. Deshmukh P. Economic analysis of fig cultivation in Pune district. Agricultural Economics Review. 2016;34(1):56-63.
5. Dalve P, Kumar K. Organic cultivation of fig (Ficus carica L.). In: Ghosh SN, Krishna H, Rymbai H, editors. Organic culture of tropical and subtropical fruit plants. Gyanavi Publishers and Distributors; 2024:251272.
6. Etemadi M, Karami E. Organic fig growers' adaptation and vulnerability to drought. Journal of Arid Environments. 2016;124:142-149.
7. Gaikwad M. Value chain analysis of fig cultivation in Maharashtra. International Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2018;10(4):223-231.
8. Ghulghule JN, Shinde RB, Thombre AP. Economic analysis of fig (Ficus carica Linn.) in Maharashtra. International Journal of Commerce and Business Management. 2009;2(1):34-36.
9. Jadhav A. Farmers' adaptation strategies to climate variability in fruit crops. Journal of Rural Development. 2018;37(4):511-529.
10. Kumari N, Sharma A, Gupta N. Scope of fig (Ficus carica L.) cultivation in north-west India. Rashtriya Krishi. 2019;14(2):73-74.
11. Karami-Eshmaili K, Sadati SA, Hashemi M, Yadava J. Climate change vulnerability and resilience strategies for citrus farmers. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators. 2023;20:100617-100617.
12. Kulkarni V. Climate variability and horticultural production in semi-arid India. Journal of Environmental Studies. 2020;15(2):78-94.
13. Lee SJ. Future of fig: Climate change. 2023.
14. Lokappa, Satihal DG, Patil SS, Hiremath GM, Jaiprakash Narayan RP. Financial feasibility of fig cultivation (Ficus carica Linn.) in north-eastern Karnataka, India. Economic Affairs. 2018;63(2):347352.
15. Mishra P, Rajpoot D, Sanodiya M. Flowering and pollination behaviour of fig. Just Agriculture. 2024;4(10).
16. Malhotra SK. Horticultural crops and climate change: A review. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2017;87(1):12-22.
17. Patil R. Production and marketing constraints of fig growers in Maharashtra. Indian Journal of Agricultural Marketing. 2015;29(1):112-120.
18. Sharma SK, Singh RS, Sharma BD. Prospects and future strategies of fig cultivation in India. Central Institute of Arid Horticulture, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 2010.
19. Sawant K. Post-harvest challenges in perishable fruits: A case study of figs in Pune. Journal of Agrarian Studies. 2019;14(1):89-101.
20. Salem B. The effects of climate on fig tree yield in Bejaia. Namara for Economic and Trade Journal. 2024;8(2):86-97.
21. Swami D, Dave P, Parthasarathy D. Agricultural susceptibility to monsoon variability: A district level analysis of Maharashtra, India. Science of the Total Environment. 2018;619:559-577.
22. Yercan M, Engindeniz S. Determination of the cost and profitability of dried fig production: A case study for Turkey. Journal of Applied Horticulture. 2002;4(1):7-9.