Comparative economic analysis of organic and conventional okra cultivation in Vidarbha

Introduction

India is one of the world's major vegetable-producing countries. Vegetable cultivation contributes substantially to farm income, employment generation and the supply of nutritious food. Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L. Moench) is an important vegetable crop cultivated widely in India and is an important source of income for vegetable growers. In recent years, increasing attention has been given to organic production systems because of consumer interest in food quality, environmental sustainability and reduced dependence on synthetic agricultural inputs. India is the second largest producer of the vegetables in the world after China (FAO). During 2024-25, India produced 214.56 million MT of vegetables with the area under cultivation of vegetables were 11.43 million hectares. Production and export of Indian vegetables have increased in recent years. During 2024-25, India exported fresh vegetable at Rs.6,373 crore and processed vegetable exports were Rs.6,504 crore. Organic farming is practiced in India since thousands of years. The great Indian civilization thrived on organic farming and was one of the most prosperous countries in the world, till the British ruled it. In traditional India, the entire agriculture was practiced using organic techniques, where the fertilizers, pesticides etc. were obtained from plant and animal products. India's rank 2 nd in terms of World's Organic Agricultural land and 1 st in terms of total number of producers. As per department of Agriculture and farmers welfare the total organic cultivated area under NPOP certification is 44.76 lakh ha with 46.99 lakh MT farm production. And total organic area under PKVY certification is 4.49 lakh ha with farm production pf 6.85 lakh MT. In Maharashtra, the total area under organic cultivation was 1.07 Lakh ha with organic farm production 16.06 Lakh MT and productivity was 15009.34 Kg/ha.

Methodology Sampling Framework

The present study was conducted in the Amravati division of Vidarbha region of Maharashtra, comprising five districts, namely Akola, Amravati, Yavatmal, Buldhana, and Washim. www.extensionjournal.com

In the first stage, two tahsils from each district were purposively selected based on the highest number of organic okra growers, namely: Akola and Patur (Akola district); Chandur Railway and Achalpur (Amravati district); Washim and Risod (Washim district); Buldhana and Shegaon (Buldhana district); and Ghatanji and Babhulgaon (Yavatmal district), making a total of ten tahsils. In the second stage, a list of villages engaged in organic okra cultivation was prepared for the selected tahsils. From each tahsil, two villages having the highest number of organic okra growers were purposively selected. Accordingly, a total of twenty villages were selected, namely: Chandur and Shivapur (Akola tahsil); Patur and Vivra (Patur tahsil); Amla Vishweshwar and Karla (Chandur Railway tahsil); Wadhona and Wasni (Achalpur tahsil); Sakhra and Babulgaon (Washim tahsil); Netansa and Navali (Risod tahsil); Nandrafuli and Malvandi (Buldhana tahsil); Warud and Titrav (Shegaon tahsil); Manoli and Erabora (Ghatanji tahsil); and Yerangaon and Sindi (Babhulgaon tahsil). For the study, data pertains to the agricultural year 2023-24. At the final stage, from each selected village, three organic and three conventional okra growers were randomly chosen. Thus, a total sample of 120 respondents was selected, comprising 60 organic and 60 conventional okra growers.

Collection of Data

Primary data were collected for the agricultural year 2023-24 using a pre-tested structured interview schedule through personal interviews. Secondary data on area and production of organic brinjal was obtained from the Centre for Organic Agriculture Research and Training and Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, along with relevant government publications.

Profitability in organic and conventional okra

To achieve the objective standardized costs concept of CACP i. e. cost-A 1 , A 2 , B 1 , B 2 , C 1 , C 2 and C 3 were used.

Costs concept

The standard costs concept i.e. Cost A 1 , Cost A 2 , Cost B 1 , Cost B 2 , Cost C 1 , Cost C 2 and Cost C 3 were used in present analysis.

Costs concept

The standard costs concept i.e. Cost A

Bullock labour

Hired and owned bullock labour cost was estimated at actual rate paid for hiring of bullock labour in the local market from time to time.

Machine labour

Machine hours in case of owned machine was evaluated as per the hired charges prevailed in the village and in case of hired machine was accounted as per the price paid by cultivator.

Seedlings

The actual cost paid for purchasing of seedling from the nursery was taken into account for evaluation.

Manures

The cost of farm yard manure produced on the farm was estimated at the prevailing rates in the village. In case of purchased farm yard manure the actual price paid was taken into account.

Fertilizers

Fertilizers in the form of Urea, DAP, 10:26:26, and MOP were used and quantity of nitrogen, phosphorus and potash was calculated in order to determine the actual, expenditure on nitrogen, phosphorus and potash.

Plant protection

This included the actual cost incurred on the purchase of insecticides, fungicides, pesticide etc. and their procurement.

Land revenues and other cesses

It included the actual land revenue with other cesses paid by farmers for the total land holdings. The land revenue and other cesses by the gross cropped area of the respective crop.

Irrigation charges

Irrigation charges were calculated at the rate of charges actually paid by the cultivator regarding electricity paid for the irrigation operation.

Depreciation and repairing charges

Depreciation means the decrease in the value of asset through wear and tear. Straight-line method was used to work out depreciation. The uniform rate of 10 per cent on the present value at the beginning of the year of farm implements and machinery was taken and only the proportionate charges were taken for the crop on hectare basis,

Evaluation of inputs

The items considered under the head inputs are human labour, bullock labour, machinery labour, seedlings, manures, fertilizers, irrigation etc. some of the inputs are produced or owned by farmers and some are purchased or hired in.

B) Cost 'A2'

Cost A 1 + Rent paid for leased-in land.

C) Cost 'B1'

Cost A 1 + interest value of owned fixed capital assets (excluding land).

b) Component included in cost 'B1' a) Interest on capital

It was calculated by charging interest at the rate of 10 per cent on investment on commonly used assets.

D) Cost 'B2'

Cost B 1 + Rental value of owned land (net of land revenue) and rent paid for leased-in land.

c) Component included in cost 'B2' a) Rental value of land

Rental value of land was calculated @ 1/6 th of gross value of produce by deducting the land revenue. It is calculated by following formula, Rental value of land = (1/6 th of gross value of produce -land revenue).

E) Cost 'C1'

Cost B 1 + imputed value of family labour.

d) Component included in cost 'C2' a) Family human labour

The general wage rate prevailing in the village (While performing various operations) was considered for assessing the wage the family male and female labour.

F) Cost 'C2'

Cost B 2 + Imputed value of family labour.

G) Cost 'C3'

Cost C 2 + marketing costs and transportation report.

II) Gross and net returns 1. Gross returns

Gross return of the farmers under the present study was estimated from returns obtained from sale of main produce. by deducting respective costs from the gross returns.

Net returns

Benefit-cost ratio

It is a ratio between the value of gross output and the cost of cultivation at different cost concepts. The probability of crop production cannot be justified completely unless benefit cost ratio were worked out. This is the ratio which represents returns obtained per rupee of investment. It was worked out by dividing gross return by the total cost. It was calculated at cost A 1 , cost A 2, cost B 1, cost B 2, cost C 1, cost C 2 and cost C 3 as -

Results and Discussion Distribution of okra growers according to size of holding

The data presented in Table 1 indicate the distribution of okra farmers according to the size of land holding under organic and conventional farming systems. Among the organic okra farmers, the highest proportion (45.00%) belonged to the small landholding category (up to 2.00 ha), followed by medium farmers (33.33%) and large farmers (21.67%). In the case of conventional okra farmers, the highest proportion was also observed in the small landholding category (38.33%), followed by large farmers (30.00%) and medium farmers (31.67%). www.extensionjournal.com Overall, the findings reveal that small farmers constituted the major proportion of okra growers in both farming systems. However, the proportion of large farmers was comparatively higher among conventional okra farmers (30.00%) than among organic okra farmers (21.67%). Conversely, organic okra farming had a relatively higher proportion of small and medium farmers. Thus, the distribution suggests that organic okra cultivation was relatively more prevalent among farmers with smaller landholdings, whereas conventional okra cultivation included a comparatively larger share of farmers with large holdings.

Per hectare average input utilization for okra

The information regarding per hectare input utilization for organic and conventional okra crop is presented in Table 2. [8] , indicating that manual weed management and bio-input application significantly increase labour demand. Similarly, comparable findings were reported by Mandal et al. (2022) [9] , who highlighted the dependence on farmyard manure, biofertilizers and botanical preparations instead of chemical [10] , who reported that organic okra production requires more labour for manual weeding, input preparation and field management. The relatively higher seed cost aligns with the observations of Meena and Sahu (2020) [11] , who noted that okra requires a larger planting rate and that certified organic seed material is typically more expensive. Similar expenditure patterns were reported by Patil and More (2021) [12] , who found manures and organic nutrient sources to be major contributors to the total cultivation cost in organic okra farming. The higher working capital requirement recorded in this study corroborates the findings of Rao and Chatterjee (2022) [13] , who reported that organic vegetable production systems generally incur higher upfront operational expenses when compared to conventional systems. This indicates that although conventional okra cultivation requires moderate investment compared to brinjal and tomato, its relatively higher per quintal cost of production reduces the profit margin, making returns more sensitive to market price fluctuations. The substantial proportion of seed and manures in the cost structure is comparable to the results of Sahu and Prasad (2019) [14] , who noted that okra growers incur relatively higher seed costs due to higher seed rates and preference for improved varieties. The relatively higher per quintal cost of production and moderate profit margin found in the present study are supported by the findings of Kumar and Lal (2021) [15] , who concluded that conventional okra, despite lower total www.extensionjournal.com investment than solanaceous vegetables, often yields comparatively lower net returns due to modest yield levels and price fluctuations.

Cost of cultivation of conventional okra-Cost of cultivation of conventional okra grown by farmers is presented in

Costs and returns from organic and conventional okra production (Rs/ha) The comparative analysis of costs and returns revealed that organic okra cultivation performed better in terms of yield, price realization, gross returns and absolute net returns, although it involved higher production costs. The average yield of organic okra was 106.77 q/ha, compared with 96.92 q/ha under conventional cultivation, representing an advantage of 9.85 q/ha. The price received by organic okra growers was Rs. Overall, the results indicate that organic okra cultivation generated higher gross returns and higher absolute net returns than conventional cultivation. The economic advantage of organic okra was mainly attributable to its higher yield and, particularly, the higher price received per quintal. However, the higher cost of organic production resulted in a comparatively lower output-input ratio at some cost levels. Therefore, the profitability of organic okra cultivation is closely associated with the availability of remunerative markets and the ability of farmers to obtain a sustained premium price for organic produce.

Conclusion

The present study revealed substantial differences in the cost and return structure of organic and conventional okra cultivation in the Amravati division of Vidarbha. Organic www.extensionjournal.com okra recorded a higher productivity of 106.77 q/ha compared with 96.92 q/ha under conventional cultivation. In addition, organic growers received a substantially higher price of Rs 2,763.18/q compared with Rs 2,202.08/q for conventional okra. As a result, organic cultivation generated a gross return of Rs 2,95,024.40/ha, which was considerably higher than the Rs 2,13,425.30/ha obtained from conventional cultivation. The higher gross return under organic cultivation was accompanied by a substantially higher cost of production. Cost C 3 was Rs 2,20,813.73/ha under organic cultivation compared with Rs 1,48,104.61/ha under conventional cultivation. Nevertheless, organic okra generated a higher absolute net return at Cost C 3 , amounting to Rs 74,210.67/ha, compared with Rs 65,320.69/ha under conventional cultivation. Thus, organic cultivation provided an additional net return of Rs 8,889.98/ha at the comprehensive cost level. However, the output-input ratio at Cost C 3 was 1.33 under organic cultivation compared with 1.44 under conventional cultivation. This indicates that although organic okra generated higher absolute returns, its higher production cost reduced its relative efficiency of investment at the comprehensive cost level. Therefore, the economic superiority of organic okra should be assessed not only on the basis of gross or absolute net returns but also in relation to the cost incurred and the stability of the premium price received.

References

1. Mishra B, Sahu GS, Tripathy P, Mohanty S, Pradhan S. Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers on pest incidence and yield of okra under integrated nutrient management. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2019;8(7):1029-1036.
2. Abha R, Meena ML, Singh R, Mandal RK. Effect of various organic manures on growth and yield of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench). J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2019;8(6):1203-1205.
3. Meena DC, Meena ML, Kumar S. Influence of organic manures and biofertilizers on growth, yield and quality of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L. Moench). Ann Plant Soil Res. 2019;21(2):130-134.
4. Sonawane KG, Pokharkar VG, Gulave C. Organic vs. inorganic production and marketing of okra in Western Maharashtra -An economic analysis. Int J Trop Agric. 2015;33(2):1233-1238.
5. Thakur M. Response of organic and natural farming management practices on productivity and profitability of okra. Int J Plant Soil Sci. 2025;37(8):473-481.
6. Masih S, Bahadur V, Joseph AV, Sher A, Dawson J, Das P. Effect of different organic treatments on growth, yield and quality of okra in Prayagraj region. J Adv Biol Biotechnol. 2025;28(7):1385-1392.
7. Naik BS, Veershetty K, Karthik VC, Baishya M, Chinival SS, Jeevan N, Hanji MB. Assessing the profitability of organic agriculture in India: A metaanalytical approach. Int J Agric Ext Soc Dev. 2024;7(9):321-328.
8. Jadhav AS, Pawar BR, Landge SU. Economics of production and marketing of organic okra in Western Maharashtra. Int Res J Agric Econ Stat. 2017;8(2):312318.
9. Mandal A, Ray K, Phonglosa A, Dutta S, Tripathy S. Bio-inputs and organic nutrient management in vegetable production: A comprehensive review. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2022;11(3):145-152.
10. Jadhav BR, Patil SN, Chavan SA. Labour utilization pattern and economic feasibility of organic farming in Maharashtra. Indian J Agric Econ. 2018;73(4):489-495.
11. Meena DC, Sahu GS. Input utilization and cost dynamics of organic vegetable production in central India. Ann Plant Soil Res. 2020;22(3):285-291.
12. Patil RB, More SS. Economic analysis of organic vs conventional okra cultivation in Vidarbha region. Int J Trop Agric. 2021;39(1):67-74.
13. Rao K, Chatterjee S. Financial viability and operational expenditure in organic vegetable systems: A comparative evaluation. Asian J Agric Ext Econ Sociol. 2022;40(9):112-120.
14. Sahu GS, Prasad R. Cost of cultivation and yield dynamics of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L.) under different nutrient regimes. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2019;8(6):1420-1428.
15. Kumar A, Lal HP. Comparative economic evaluation of conventional and organic vegetable production in northern plains of India. Indian J Sci Res. 2021;12(2):8895.
16. Food and Agriculture Organization. The State of Food and Agriculture 2024: Value-Creating Transformations of Agrifood Systems. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2024.