Socio-economic profile of organic farmers in Chhatarpur district of Madhya Pradesh

Introduction

Agriculture is the backbone of many developing countries. A large amount of population depends directly or indirectly on farming for their livelihood. After the green revolution was launched in India, substantial increase in the production of food grains was achieved through the use of improved crop varieties and higher levels of inputs fertilizers and plant protection chemicals. But it has now been realized that the increase in production was achieved at the cost of soil health. Sir Albert Howard known as "Father of Organic Farming" is widely credited with pioneering the organic farming philosophy. According to the latest edition of the world of Organic Agriculture 2025 published by FiBL -Research Institute of Organic Agriculture and IFOAM (International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements) organic agriculture is practiced in 188 countries (Ghildiyal & Mallaih, 2024) [2] . The total area under organic practices has reached 96.4 million hectares globally. Share of global agricultural land under organic farming around 2%. There are almost about 4.3 million organic farmers globally. The top 10 countries roughly contribute 82% of the world's total agriculture area. India's rank in terms of area under organic farming is II nd , covering approximately 4.7 million hectares and its rank in terms of organic farmer is I st , (Willer et al. 2024) [9] . The area of Madhya Pradesh is 10.13 lakh hectares, Maharashtra has an area of 9.66 lakh hectares followed by Rajasthan and Gujarat. Sikkim is India's first fully organic state in January 2016, where chemical fertilizers are completely banned. (Sharma & Shingvi 2017) [8] . Organic farming is a production system that avoids or limits the use of synthetic compounded fertilizers, pesticides, growth regulators and other chemicals. The main aim of organic farming is to maintain the health of soil, plants, animals, humans, and the environment while ensuring longterm agricultural productivity. Organic farming includes food quality, human health, animal welfare and socio-economic goals in addition to the holistic interplay of the soil, plants, and environment. Eight different ways of composting are recommended in Madhya Pradesh. They are Indore method, NADEP compost, vermicompost, Bhabut Amrit Pani, Amrit Sanjeevni, Pitcher Khad, Biogas slurry, Green manure and Biofertilizer.

Review of literature

Jaganathan reported that majority of the farmers (70.00%) were in the middle age group, 25.60 percent were in the old age group and 04.40 per cent were in the young age group. Deshmukh reported that majority of the farmers (75.00%) were in the middle age group,15.00 percent were in the young age group and 10.00 percent were in the old age group. Nazuri reported that majority of the farmers (93.20%) were males and only 06.80 percent were females. Deshmukh reported that majority of the respondents (79.17%) had secondary level of education followed by 13.33 percent of them belonged to primary level of education and 07.50 percent had college and above level of education. Panchbhai reported that majority of the respondents have (77.00%) medium family size followed by 15.00 percent and 08.00 percent who were in large and small family size, respectively.

Methodology

The study was conducted in Chhatarpur district, Madhya www.extensionjournal.com Pradesh. There are 8 blocks in the district Chhatarpur. Out of these 2 blocks, namely Chhatarpur and Nowgong were selected purposively for the study. Total 8 villages were selected namely Alipura, Sarsed, Galan, Lahdra, Isanagar, Basata, Barkoha and Mau. From each village 15 farmers were selected through purposive sampling. Thus, a total of 120 respondents were included in the study. There were 15 Independent variables and 2 Dependent variables selected for the study. The independent variables were -Age, Gender, Education, Size of family, Organic farming experience, Farm size, Annual income, Livestock possession, Source of information, Type of house, Caste, Occupation, Membership of organization, Source of irrigation, Source of drinking water. Keeping in view the review of relevant literature available and consultation with literature, 15 independent variables were included in the study. The data were collected by the investigator herself employing personal interview at the residence or field of the farmers with the help of structured interview schedule.

Results and Discussion

The Socioeconomic approach is mainly concerned with the social, economic, and political aspects of individuals or social groups in society. The findings of the study have been presented in the table1, sub head: Profile of Organic farmers. [7] .

Gender

Data shows that 72.50% are male (highest) and 27.50% are female. The study reported that majority of the farmers (95.83%) were males and only 04.17 percent were females. (Deshmukh, 2018) [1] .

Educational Status

The study reveals that the largest proportion of respondents (35.83%) had secondary level education, followed by primary education (28.33%), higher secondary (23.33%), graduate and above (6.67%), and illiterate (5.83%). The study reported that majority of the respondents (79.17%) had secondary level of education followed by 13.33 percent of them belonged to primary level of education and 07.50 percent had college and above level of education. (Deshmukh, 2018) [1] .

Family Size

Data shows that 45.00 per cent of the respondents had a medium-sized family (5-8 members) highest, followed by small family (34.17%) and large family (20.83%). The study of Panchbhai etal. (2017) [6] reported that majority of the respondents have (77.00%) medium family size followed by 15.00 percent and 08.00 percent who were in large and small family size, respectively.

Type of house

Shows that the majority of respondents (44.17%) resided in pakka houses, followed by mixed type (34.16%) and kachcha houses (21.67%).

Caste Category

Data shows that OBC respondents constituted the largest proportion (42.50%), followed by General category (31.67%), SC (14.17%), and ST (11.66%).

Source of Information

Data shows that the largest proportion of respondents (32.50%) had access to three information sources. Only 5.83 per cent had access to five or more sources including scientists and KVK officials, while 23.33 per cent depended on a single source.

Organic farming Experience

Data shows that the majority of respondents (54.17%) had 0-5 years of organic farming experience, indicating that a large proportion of farmers are still in the early stages of organic transition. Only 12.50 per cent had more than 10 years of experience.

Occupation that 45.00 per cent of respondents were engaged in agriculture as their sole occupation, followed by agriculture combined with dairy farming (22.50%). These findings indicate that for a majority of respondents, farming is the primary livelihood activity, which explains their relatively high commitment to organic farming practices.

Annual income

Data shows that 55.00 per cent of the respondents had annual income in the range of Rs. 1,00,000-1,50,000, followed by Rs. 1,51,000-2,50,000 (34.17%) and above Rs. 2,50,000 (10.83%).

Land Holding Size that the majority of respondents (45.83%) were marginal farmers with less than 1 hectare of land, followed by small farmers (35.83%), medium (13.34%), and large farmers (5.00%). The study reported that majority of the respondents (54.17%) had marginal land holding followed by 36.67 per cent small and 09.16 per cent large land holding categories (Kumar, 2017) [4] .

Conclusion

A majority of organic farmers were middle aged (31-50 years) and males. They had good education indicating that majority of farmers have secondary education. Majority of them have medium (5-8 members) in their family, pakka house, OBC caste. The organic farmers have mainly three sources of information indicating that they obtain information from neighbours, extension agents and NGOs. They had poor experience of organic farming and mainly depend on agriculture for their source of income. The predominance of lower income group farmers underscores the need for financial assistance and subsidies to enable them to invest in organic inputs, training, and certification. The majority of farmers had marginal land holding. Socioeconomic profile is important to provide valuable insight and has the potential to provide critical inputs for the design and implementation of support programmes to promote organic farming for rural development.

References

1. Deshmukh D. Knowledge and adoption level of root and tuber crops growers in Navsari district of South Gujarat. Navsari: Navsari Agricultural University; 2018.
2. Ghildiyal D, Mallaiah LC. An analysis of global organic farmland leaders. Saudi Journal of Economics and Finance. 2024;8(11):371-377.
3. Jaganathan D. Analysis of organic farming practices in arecanut in South India. Journal of Community Mobilization and Sustainable Development. 2016;11(2):206-214. www.extensionjournal.com
4. Kumar DB. Educational status of rural women in household decision making in Cooch Behar district of West Bengal. Indian Journal of Extension Education and Rural Development. 2017;25.
5. Nazuri N, Man N, Aqilahsaufe, Nazuri S. Knowledge, attitude and skills of farmers on adoption of new paddy seed varieties in Muda Area, Kedah. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science. 2018;23(8):64-69.
6. Panchbhai GJ, Siddiqui MF, Sawant MN, Verma AP, Parameswara Naik J. Correlation analysis of sociodemographic profile of dairy farmers with knowledge and adoption of animal husbandry practices. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2017;6(3):1918-1923.
7. Sakthi Devi KR. A study on attitude of farmers towards organic farming. International Journal of Current Research and Modern Education. 2017;2(1):159-162.
8. Sharma N, Singhvi R. Effects of chemical fertilizers and pesticides on human health and environment: a review. International Journal of Agriculture, Environment and Biotechnology. 2017;10(6):675-680.
9. Willer H, Trávníček J, Schlatter B. The world of organic agriculture: statistics and emerging trends 2024. 2024. p. 1-352.