Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Economic Analysis of Post Harvest Losses in Marketing of Tomato in Karnataka


Affiliations
1 Department of Agricultural Economics, Dr. B.S. Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Ratnagiri (M.S.), India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


The present paper on post-harvest losses in marketing of tomato in Eastern dry zone of Karnataka was undertaken with the specific objective to estimate the post-harvest losses in marketing of tomato.The data were collected by survey method pertained to the agricultural year 2013-14 for assessing post-harvest losses in tomato the technique of “overall assessment of commodity movement system” has been used.The prevailing marketing channels in Kolar districts were channel-I: (Producer→Commission agent→ Wholesaler→Retailer→Consumer), channel-II: (Producer→Commission-agent→Retailer→Consumer), channel-III: (Producer →Retailer→Consumer) and channel-IV: (ProducerConsumer). The estimated total PHLs in physical terms were highest in channel-I (23.19kg), followed by 19.96 kg in channel-II and 17.32 kg in channel-III and lowest in channel-IV (13.78kg). Considering different channels in marketing of tomato the per quintal economic loss was maximum Rs. 440.19 in channel I and minimum Rs. 258.10 in channel IV. Among the channels, entire loss was borne by producer in channel IV as it was a direct channel. However, in channel I, II and III the share of intermediaries was to the tune of 68.25 per cent, 59.03 per cent and 49.05 per cent, respectively and the remaining burden of loss was borne by producer 31.75 per cent, 40.97 per cent and 50.95 per cent, respectively. The major constraints faced by the tomato growers in marketing were high commission charges, high transport charges, wide price fluctuation, non-availability of cold storage facility, lack of market information and non-availability of labour in time. Government should provide infrastructure for cold storages in producing areas for benefits of the farmers and market functionaries during unfavorable price situations to minimize post harvest losses and linkage to processing industries in production areas.


Keywords

Post Harvest Losses, Marketing Channels, Intermediaries, Constraints.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


Abstract Views: 260

PDF Views: 1




  • Economic Analysis of Post Harvest Losses in Marketing of Tomato in Karnataka

Abstract Views: 260  |  PDF Views: 1

Authors

J. M. Talathi
Department of Agricultural Economics, Dr. B.S. Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Ratnagiri (M.S.), India
V. A. Thorat
Department of Agricultural Economics, Dr. B.S. Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Ratnagiri (M.S.), India
P. J. Kshirsagar
Department of Agricultural Economics, Dr. B.S. Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Ratnagiri (M.S.), India

Abstract


The present paper on post-harvest losses in marketing of tomato in Eastern dry zone of Karnataka was undertaken with the specific objective to estimate the post-harvest losses in marketing of tomato.The data were collected by survey method pertained to the agricultural year 2013-14 for assessing post-harvest losses in tomato the technique of “overall assessment of commodity movement system” has been used.The prevailing marketing channels in Kolar districts were channel-I: (Producer→Commission agent→ Wholesaler→Retailer→Consumer), channel-II: (Producer→Commission-agent→Retailer→Consumer), channel-III: (Producer →Retailer→Consumer) and channel-IV: (ProducerConsumer). The estimated total PHLs in physical terms were highest in channel-I (23.19kg), followed by 19.96 kg in channel-II and 17.32 kg in channel-III and lowest in channel-IV (13.78kg). Considering different channels in marketing of tomato the per quintal economic loss was maximum Rs. 440.19 in channel I and minimum Rs. 258.10 in channel IV. Among the channels, entire loss was borne by producer in channel IV as it was a direct channel. However, in channel I, II and III the share of intermediaries was to the tune of 68.25 per cent, 59.03 per cent and 49.05 per cent, respectively and the remaining burden of loss was borne by producer 31.75 per cent, 40.97 per cent and 50.95 per cent, respectively. The major constraints faced by the tomato growers in marketing were high commission charges, high transport charges, wide price fluctuation, non-availability of cold storage facility, lack of market information and non-availability of labour in time. Government should provide infrastructure for cold storages in producing areas for benefits of the farmers and market functionaries during unfavorable price situations to minimize post harvest losses and linkage to processing industries in production areas.


Keywords


Post Harvest Losses, Marketing Channels, Intermediaries, Constraints.