Improving farm profitability in BT cotton through enhanced operational efficiency: Empirical evidence from Telangana

Introduction

The adoption and performance of Bt cotton in India, and its commercial release in 2002, marked the beginning of the "Gene Revolution" in Indian agriculture. Bt cotton rapidly expanded to nearly 90% of the country's cotton-growing area due to its potential for improved bollworm control and higher productivity [1] . India is one of the leading cotton-producing countries in the world, with cultivation in over an area of nearly 125 lakh ha (2025-26). Total cotton production in the country was estimated at 317 lakh bales, which was later revised to 320.5 lakh bales based on improved crop conditions and higher arrivals from major cotton-growing states [2] . Gujarat ranked first in cotton production, followed by Maharashtra and Telangana during the above period. Telangana emerged as one of the major cotton-growing states in India, with a cultivated area of 18 lakh ha (2025-26). Cotton production in the state was estimated at 38-40 lakh bales, placing the state in third position among cotton-growing states in the country. According to the Cotton Corporation of India (CCI), the state recorded the highest procurement during the season (2025-26), indicating the importance of cotton cultivation in the state economy [3] . The adoption of improved cotton technologies increased productivity and farm income in major cotton-growing regions of India. 4 The profitability largely depends on efficient utilization of inputs such as human labour, fertilizers, irrigation and plant protection chemicals.5 Rising input costs, labour scarcity, pest incidence and price fluctuation adversely affected the profitability of cotton in Telangana [6] .

Materials and methodology

A multistage sampling procedure was adopted for the study. Nalgonda was purposively selected owing to its largest area under Bt cotton cultivation in Telangana. Three mandals, viz., Narketpally, Munugode, and Chandur, were purposively selected because they accounted for the largest area under cotton cultivation. Three villages were randomly selected from each mandal, and fifteen cotton growers from each village were selected, resulting in a total of 135 samples. They were further categorized into marginal (35), small (54) and large (46) farmers based on their area of cultivation. The cost of cultivation was calculated by using CACP cost concepts. Farm Business Measures are indicators used to evaluate the economic performance, profitability, and efficiency of a farm enterprise. The estimation of resource use efficiency in cotton cultivation was carried out using the Cobb-Douglas production function. A multiple linear regression model was employed to understand the influence of climatic variables on cotton productivity.

Garette ranking analysis was used to find out the adaptation and mitigation strategies followed by farmers.

Results and Discussion Economics of cotton cultivation

The cost analysis of cotton cultivation (Table 1) shows that total cultivation cost rose progressively with farm size. Total cost of cultivation at Cost C3 was estimated at ₹1,17,415 ha-1 on marginal farms, ₹1,19,989 ha-1on small farms and ₹1,24,654 ha-1 on large farms, as presented in Table 2. The higher cost incurred on large farms was mainly attributed to high expenditure on hired human labour, machine labour, fertilizers, and plant protection chemicals. The total cost of cotton cultivation was ₹97887.50 ha-1, and costs were relatively higher on large farms relative to marginal farms [7] . Among various cost components, across all farm-size categories, expenditure on human labour constituted the largest share of the total variable cost. The expenditure ranged from ₹41,628 ha-1 on marginal farms, ₹41,909 ha-1 on small farms and ₹44,388 ha-1on large farms. Human labour accounted for 39 per cent, 38 per cent and 39 per cent of the total cultivation cost on marginal, small and large farms, respectively, indicating the labourintensive nature of cotton cultivation. Similar results revealed that labour constituted a major component of cotton cultivation cost in Gujarat [8] . The total variable cost, including interest on working capital, was estimated at ₹80,972 ha-1, ₹82,227 ha-1 and ₹85,675 ha-1 on marginal, small and large farms, respectively. Total fixed cost was estimated at ₹25,769 ha-1 on marginal farms, ₹26,853 ha-1 on small farms and ₹27,646 ha-1 on large farms. The increase in fixed cost with farm size was mainly due to the high rental value of land and interest on fixed capital. Also brought out the fact that operational and fixed costs increase with expansion in farm size in northern India [9] . The gross income realized from cotton cultivation was highest on large farms (₹1,60,183 ha-1), followed by small farms (₹1,47,784 ha-1) and marginal farms (₹1,43,598 ha-1). Net income was also highest on large farms (₹35,529 ha⁻¹) compared to small (₹27,795 ha⁻¹) and marginal farms (₹26,183 ha⁻¹) as presented in Table 3. Net income was 36 per cent higher in large farms than marginal farms and 28 per cent higher than small farms, indicating the greater profitability of larger farms which indicates higher economies of scale. Similar findings were observed that adoption of High-Density Planting System (HDPS) technology resulted in 6.02 per cent higher net returns in cotton cultivation in Telangana [10] . Farm business income and family labour income were also comparatively higher on large farm holdings. The Benefit-Cost ratio was estimated at 1.35, 1.35, and 1.41 for marginal, small, and large farms, respectively, indicating that cotton cultivation was economically viable across all categories of farmers. Similar results were observed B:C ratios ranging from 1.73 to 1.83 in cotton cultivation in Chhattisgarh [7] .

The study indicated that cotton cultivation was profitable across all farm categories, though profitability was relatively higher among large farms. Human labour emerged as the major component of cultivation costs, underscoring the need for labour-saving technologies viz., mechanization, and efficient resource management practices to improve profitability in cotton cultivation.

Resource use efficiency in cotton cultivation

The Cobb-Douglas production function analysis indicated seed, FYM, and fertilizers had a positive influence on cotton production, as shown in Table 4. The coefficient of seed (0.09) was positive and significant, indicating that an increase in seed input increased cotton output. This may be due to the adoption of improved Bt cotton hybrids and better seed quality. Similar observations were reported that improved seed utilization positively influenced cotton productivity in Haryana [5] . The coefficients of FYM (0.13) and fertilizers (0.27) were positive and highly significant, indicating that balanced nutrient application enhanced cotton productivity and returns. The coefficient of human labour (-0.11) was negative, indicating that an increase in human labour beyond the optimum level reduced cotton output. This suggests the existence of excess labour use in cotton cultivation, resulting in diminishing marginal productivity of labour. Similar results were observed that manure and fertilizer significantly influenced Bt cotton production [11] .

The MVP/MFC analysis revealed that human labour, bullock labour, machine labour, and plant protection chemicals were over-utilized, as their MVP/MFC ratios were less than one. In contrast, seed, farmyard manure, and fertilizers were underutilized, with MVP/MFC ratios greater than one. These findings indicate that reducing the use of over-utilized resources while increasing the use of under-utilized resources towards their economically optimal levels would improve resource-use efficiency and enhance farm profitability.MVP/MFC ratios greater than unity for human labour (1.44), machine labour (5.07), seed (12.76), and irrigation (1.88), indicating that these resources were underutilized and that increased use could enhance returns [12] . The resource-use pattern observed was broadly in conformity with the recommendations prescribed for cotton cultivation in Telangana. The recommended seed rate for hybrid cotton is 1.5-2.0 kg ha⁻¹, whereas the sample farmers used 3.95 kg ha⁻¹ on marginal farms, 4.00 kg ha⁻¹ on small farms and 5.13 kg ha⁻¹ on large farms, indicating relatively higher quantity of seed used.

The recommended application of farmyard manure is 10 t ha⁻¹; however, the quantity applied by farmers varied from 8.54 t ha⁻¹ on marginal farms to 10.25 t ha⁻¹ on small farms and 11.28 t ha⁻¹ on large farms. Fertilizer use ranged from 223.67 kg ha⁻¹ on small farms to 251.94 kg ha⁻¹ on marginal farms and 226.59 kg ha⁻¹ on large farms, reflecting substantial investment in nutrient management. Plant protection chemicals were applied at 6.90, 6.79, and 7.09 litres ha⁻¹ on marginal, small, and large farms, respectively, indicating the importance of pest management in cotton production presented in Table 5. Therefore, the study suggested that efficient and scientific utilization of productive resources such as quality seed, FYM and fertilizers could improve cotton productivity and profitability, while excessive use of labour and plant protection chemicals should be minimized to enhance the efficiency of resource utilization.

Adaptation and Mitigation Strategies

The Garette ranking analysis shown in [13] . The interaction between sowing date and climate significantly influenced cotton yield and resource use efficiency. Extreme rainfall reduced seed cotton yield, but appropriate management of sowing dates mitigated yield losses [14] .

scores. The relatively lower adoption of these practices may be attributed to resource constraints, limited awareness, and operational challenges. Overall, the findings suggest that cotton growers predominantly adopt economically viable mitigation practices, improve resource-use efficiency, and are compatible with existing production systems. The importance of soil management and tillage practices in improving cotton productivity under changing climatic conditions [15] . The potential of genomic approaches to enhance stress resilience and reported that rising temperatures, altered rainfall patterns, and extreme weather events adversely affect cotton yield [16] .

Conclusion:

Cotton cultivation was profitable across all farm categories, with relatively higher returns observed on large farms due to better resource utilization. Human labour constituted the major share of cultivation cost, reflecting the labour-intensive nature of cotton farming. The study showed that balanced input use, efficient resource allocation, and adoption of improved production technologies are essential for enhancing cotton productivity and profitability. Therefore, strengthening extension support, promoting scientific cultivation practices, and encouraging efficient input management would contribute to sustainable cotton production.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementThe authors gratefully acknowledge the support and facilities provided by Kerala Agricultural University for this research work. Declaration of Competing Interest:Authors do not have any conflicts of interest to declare.

References

1. Kalamkar SS. Biotechnology in Indian agriculture: Review of adoption and performance of Bt cotton. Millennial Asia. 2013;4(2):211-236.
2. Cotton Association of India (CAI). Official Website of the Cotton Association of India. 2026.
3. Cotton Corporation of India (CCI). MSP Procurement Report on Cotton Season 2025-26. 2026.
4. Bennett R, Kambhampati U, Morse S, Ismael Y. FarmLevel Economic Performance of Genetically Modified Cotton in Maharashtra, India. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy. 2006;28(1):59-71.
5. Kumar V, Goyal SK, Malik JS, Ekta. Economic Analysis and Resource Use Efficiency of Cotton Production in Haryana. Indian Journal of Extension Education. 2023;59(2):51-54.
6. Shwetha MN, Devi IS, Lavanya T, Suhasini K, Meena A. Growth in Area, Production and Productivity of Cotton Crop in India: A State-Wise Analysis. International Journal of Environment and Climate Change. 2022;12(11):51-57.
7. Deepak, Seth MK. Assessment of Compound Growth Rate and Economic Analysis of Production of Cotton in Bemetara District of Chhattisgarh, India. Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology. 2024;42(5):177-186.
8. Borisagar DG, Singh OP, Singh V. Assessing the Profitability of Cotton Cultivation in Northern Gujarat. Journal of Agricultural Development and Policy. 2025;35(1):73-79.
9. Singh A, Kumar R. Resource Utilization and Economic Analysis of Cotton Farming in Northern India. Journal of Krishi Vigyan. 2025;13(1):154-162.
10. Sunitha G, Sunandini GP, Lavanya T, Reddy DS. Economic Impact of Adopting High Density Planting System Technology in Cotton: Evidence from Telangana, India. Journal of Scientific Research and Reports. 2025;31(12):461-470.
11. Das L, Rout RK. Resource Use Efficiency of Bt Cotton Production in Western Undulating Agro-Climatic Zone of Odisha, India. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2019;8(1):3223-3231.
12. Vikas HO, Sharma, Kumar M. Resource Use Efficiency of Bt Cotton in Hanumangarh District of Rajasthan. Journal of Krishi Vigyan. 2019;8(1):247-251.
13. Rahman MHU, Ahmad I, Ghaffar A, Haider G, Ahmad A, Ahmad B, et al. Climate Resilient Cotton Production System: A Case Study in Pakistan. In: Cotton Production and Uses: Agronomy, Crop Protection, and Postharvest Technologies. 2020. p. 447-484.
14. Wu F, Guo S, Huang W, Han Y, Wang Z, Feng L, et al. Adaptation of Cotton Production to Climate Change by Sowing Date Optimization and Precision Resource Management. Industrial Crops and Products. 2023;203:113.
15. Ali MA, Ilyas F, Danish S, Mustafa G, Ahmed N, Hussain S, et al. Soil Management and Tillage Practices for Growing Cotton Crop. In: Cotton Production and Uses: Agronomy, Crop Protection, and Postharvest Technologies. 2020. p. 9-30.
16. Khan MA, Anwar S, Abbas M, Aneeq M, de Jong F, Ayaz M, et al. Impacts of Climate Change on Cotton Production and Advancements in Genomic Approaches for Stress Resilience Enhancement. Journal of Cotton Research. 2025;8(1):17.