Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
stress, the major factor negatively affecting crop yield [19]. Thus, drip method of ir-
rigation suffi ciently contributing for achieving higher yield.
1.4.5 IMPACT OF DRIP IRRIGATION TECHNOLOGY ON AGRICULTURAL
PRODUCTION
The economics of banana cultivation revealed that the cost of labor significantly re-
duced under drip method (Rs. 11,123/ha), which is 55.6% less than the control village
(Rs. 25,075/ha). The drip method of irrigation saves significantly the human labor in-
volved in crop production activities. It saves irrigation labor and weeding labor. On an
average the human labor days used for weeding banana is 17 labor days/ha under drip
method of irrigation where as it is 60 labor days/ha under flood method of irrigation.
Thus, the drip method saves nearly 71% of weeding labor when compared to flood
method of irrigation. Similarly, the drip method saves considerable labor for irrigation.
The irrigation labor is worked out to 168 labor days/ha under flood method of irriga-
tion where as it is 18 labor days under drip method of irrigation. As the drip method
saves considerable human labor, the cost of cultivation is significantly less under drip
method over the flood method (Table 6).
The reduction in cost towards human labor has signifi cant bearing on the cost of
cultivation. Though, the cost of installation of drip equipments and maintenance is
incurred by the drip farms, the reduced cost of cultivation is observed by 25%. The
gross margin per hectare is worked out to Rs. 189,259/ha in drip farms where as it
is Rs. 159,478/ha in control village. It clearly shows that drip method of irrigation
resulted in an increase of 18.67%. As the adoption of drip irrigation saves consider-
able water and energy, the water and energy productivity is signifi cantly more in drip
farms than the control village where the fl ood irrigation is followed. For instance, the
water productivity is worked out to 7.1 kg/M
3
of water in drip farms and 2.8 kg/M
3
of
water in control village. Signifi cant difference in energy productivity is also noticed.
The returns per unit of water and energy used show that drip farms have signifi cantly
higher returns over the control village. Thus one could conclude that the drip adoption
would be a viable technology and generate signifi cant bearing on the private profi ts.
TABLE 6
Economics of crop production (Rs. per ha) for Banana in sample farms, 2007-2008.
Particulars
Drip adopters
Non-adopters
Quantity of water pumped (M
3
)
8506.3
21316.9
Quantity of energy consumed (kwh)
2670.9
7313.9
Cost of labor (Rs.)
11123.4***
25075.4
Capital (Rs.)
70678.3***
94752.2
Yield (quintals)
605.6
591.5
Gross income (Rs.)
259937.5
254230.8
Gross margin (Rs.)
189259.2***
159478.5
Search WWH ::
Custom Search