International Journal of Commerce & Business Management

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

Effect of Subsidies on Fertilizer Sale in Shrirampur and Nagar Tahasil


Affiliations
1 College of Agriculture Business Management, Loni (M.S.), India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


We studied about effect of fertilizer subsidy on sale of fertilizer. This study was conducted between July 2018 to Sept. 2018 on the sample of 200 farmers selected on convenience from 12 villages of 2 talukas of Ahemadnagar district which are Shrirampur and Nagar. Primary data was collected by survey method on pretested semi-structured schedule and appropriate tools were used to analysis of data. Shrirampur taluka has good irrigation facilities as compared to Nagar taluka. 78 per cent farmers used solid fertilizer and 35 per cent farmers used water soluble fertilizer. Solid fertilizer has low prices because government provide subsidy on solid fertilizer and so that its sale is high. But in case of water soluble fertilizer, government does not provide any subsidy so that its price is high and its sale is low as compare to solid fertilizer. 41.5 per cent farmers think about fertilizer subsidy while buying of fertilizers. But 50 per cent famers buy product on the basis on price so that we can say that the sale of solid fertilizer is high than water soluble fertilizer.

Keywords

Fertilizer, Subsidy, Solid Fertilizer, Water Soluble Fertilizer, Price.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Amaliyar, Kinjal and Singh, Ritambhara (2016). Study of market potential, farmers buying behavior and satisfaction level towards water soluble fertilizers in Anand and Narmada district of Gujarat, India.

  • Amanda, Briney (2008). Green revolution: History and overview of the green revolution, About.com Geography, October 23, 2008, http://geography.

  • GoI (2006). Some aspects of operational land holdings in India, 2002-03, NSS 59th Round (January-December 2003), National Sample Survey Organization, Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation, Government of India, New Delhi, India.

  • GoI (2007). All India Report on Input Survey 1996-97 Agricultural Census Division, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi, India.

  • GoI (2009). Report of the committee on state Agrarian relations and the unfinished task in land reforms, Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India, New Delhi, India.

  • GoI (2011). Annual Report 2010-11, Department of Fertilizers, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, Government of India, New Delhi, India, pp. 103.

  • GoI (2011a). Interim report of the task force on direct transfer of subsidies on kerosene, LPG and fertilizer, Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India, New Delhi, India, June 2011.

  • GoI (2012). Union budget – Various Issues from 2002-03 to 2012-13. Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi, India.

  • GoI (2012a). Report of the working group on fertilizer industry for the twelfth five year plan (2012-13 to 206-17), Department of Fertilizers, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, Govt. of India, New Delhi, India.

  • GoI (2012b). All India report on input survey 2006-07, Agricultural Census Division, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi, India.

  • GoI (2012c). Rates of P and K fertilizers for 2011-12, Department of Fertilizers, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, Government of India, New Delhi, India.

  • Gulati, Ashok (1990). Fertilizer subsidy: Is the cultivator ‘net subsidised’? Indian J. Agric. Econ., 45 (1) : 1-11.

  • Gulati, Ashok and Sharma, Anil (1995). Subsidy syndrome in Indian agriculture, Econ. and Politi. Weekly, 30 (39): A93-A110.

  • Gulati, Ashok and Narayanan, Sudha (2003). The subsidy syndrome in Indian agriculture. Oxford University Press, New Delhi, India.

  • Kothari, C.R. (1985). Research methodology – method and techniques. 2nd Ed., Publisher, Wishwa Prakashan, 1985. ISBN, 8173280363 .

  • Morris, M., Kelly, V. A., Kopicki, R. and Byerlee, D. (2007). Promoting increased fertilizer use in Africa: Lessons Learned and Good Practice Guidelines, World Bank, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.

  • Panagariya, Arvind (2001). Fertilizer subsidy”, Economic Times, February 28, 2001. PIB (2012), “Import of Fertilizers”, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, Press Information Bureau, Government of India, New Delhi, August 24, 2012.

  • PIB (2012a). Year-wise amount of fertilizer subsidy released during 2009-10 to 2011-12, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, Press Information Bureau, Government of India, New Delhi, India.

  • PMEAC (2012). Economic outlook 2012/13, Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister, New Delhi, India.

  • Sharma, Brahma (2012). Fertilizer technology and management.

  • Sharma, Vijay Paul and Thakker, Hrima (2010). Fertilizer subsidy in India: Who are the beneficiaries? Econ. & Politi. Weekly, 45 (12) : 68-76.

  • Swaminathan, M.S. (2009). Drought management for rural livelihood securities, The Hindu August 17, pp.7.

  • WEBLIOGRAPHY

  • www.agricoop.nic


Abstract Views: 223

PDF Views: 0




  • Effect of Subsidies on Fertilizer Sale in Shrirampur and Nagar Tahasil

Abstract Views: 223  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

S. D. Varandal
College of Agriculture Business Management, Loni (M.S.), India
A. S. Kshirsagar
College of Agriculture Business Management, Loni (M.S.), India

Abstract


We studied about effect of fertilizer subsidy on sale of fertilizer. This study was conducted between July 2018 to Sept. 2018 on the sample of 200 farmers selected on convenience from 12 villages of 2 talukas of Ahemadnagar district which are Shrirampur and Nagar. Primary data was collected by survey method on pretested semi-structured schedule and appropriate tools were used to analysis of data. Shrirampur taluka has good irrigation facilities as compared to Nagar taluka. 78 per cent farmers used solid fertilizer and 35 per cent farmers used water soluble fertilizer. Solid fertilizer has low prices because government provide subsidy on solid fertilizer and so that its sale is high. But in case of water soluble fertilizer, government does not provide any subsidy so that its price is high and its sale is low as compare to solid fertilizer. 41.5 per cent farmers think about fertilizer subsidy while buying of fertilizers. But 50 per cent famers buy product on the basis on price so that we can say that the sale of solid fertilizer is high than water soluble fertilizer.

Keywords


Fertilizer, Subsidy, Solid Fertilizer, Water Soluble Fertilizer, Price.

References