000			02560nam a2200217 4500
999			_c53424 _d53424
003			OSt
005			20200908115736.0
008			200908b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aKapuria, Cheshta _935965
245			_aCrop Diversification and Crop Disposition in India : An Inter - State Analysis
300			_a7-21 p.
440			_aTitle Indian Journal of marketing _vVol 50(5-7) _935967
520			_aGiven the low productivity and earnings of Indian farmers, especially small and marginal landholders, it is pertinent to understand the constraints under which they operate and correspondingly address the same. Amongst several factors, farmers’ earnings can also improve through crop diversification and conducive crop disposition channels, which involve fewer middlemen. This way, farmers can capture a greater share of value addition in the supply chain from farm-gate to consumer. With this backdrop, the present paper analyzed two specific objectives. First, to estimate the degree of crop diversification and the prominent ways in which crop disposition takes place across states and union territories (UTs) in India, and second, to analyze the relationship between crop diversification and variants of crop disposition in India. Four crop diversification indices were calculated, namely Gibbs and Martin, Herfindal – Hirschman Index, Simpson Diversity Index, and Bhatia’s Index. The paper primarily used GM Index for further analysis. Channels of crop disposition were analyzed through six agencies, that is, local private agents, mandis, input dealers, co-operatives and government agencies, processors, and others. Our findings indicated the following : First, crop diversification remained ‘low’ to ‘moderate’ for most of the Indian states and UTs. Second, though crop diversification increased for several states and UTs during the two Rounds, the pace of improvement was slow. Third, crop disposition is generally undertaken through private agents. Fourth, the relationship between crop diversification and sale to ‘mandis’ was positive and significant, while that between crop diversification and ‘sale to local private agents’ was negative and significant.
653			_aCrop Diversification,
653			_aAgricultural Economics,
653			_aCrop Disposition,
653			_aEconomic Policy, and Development
700			_aKaur, Simrit _935966
773	0		_030302 _978621 _aGILANI, MEENAKSHI _dINDIAN JOURNAL OF MARKETING 2012 NEW DELHI _o55511735 _tINDIAN JOURNAL OF MARKETING
942			_2ddc _cJA-ARTICLE