Final version of Tropical Legumes II Project Report for Phase 1 - icrisat

Socio-Economics/Targeting
Situation and outlook
A number of biotic and abiotic factors limit realization of yield potential, besides the lack of availability
of improved seed to farmers. The slow growth of chickpea yield in India can be attributed to: (i) the shift
in crop area from favorable to marginal environments; (ii) the slow uptake of improved varieties and
other production technologies; and (iii) its cultivation on poor soils under erratic rainfall conditions.
Trade in chickpea is relatively robust and has been growing over time. Close to 10% of the total
chickpea produced in 2003-05 entered the international market. Trade statistics indicate a demandsupply
imbalance for pulses in Asia. While the quantum of chickpea exports from Asia doubled between
1981 and 2007, overall the region remains a net importer. The increased import demand has induced
countries such as Australia and Canada that traditionally did not grow chickpea to emerge as significant
exporters now.
Demand and supply projections of chickpea under the business-as-usual scenario for India and Asia
corroborate the fact that in the near future, domestic production is unlikely to catch up with growing
demand. If current trends in per capita income and production were to continue, by 2020 India’s
demand for chickpea would increase to 10 million MT worsening India’s net trade situation.
The scope of raising chickpea production in Asia through area expansion alone is extremely limited.
Therefore the main challenges for research and development are to bridge the gap between actual
and attainable yield by enhancing farmers’ access to good quality inputs, improved technologies
and information; improve the competitiveness of pulse crops through domestic incentives related to
production, marketing, processing prices in line with cereals and competing crops; and achieve a
technological breakthrough that not only overcomes yield barriers but also provides effective protection
against insect pests and diseases, and tolerance to moisture stress.
Baseline survey and adoption studies
Socio-economic and demographic composition of the farmers
The summary details of selected districts for both control and treatment villages for baseline survey are
presented in Table 7-1.
Table 7-1: Survey districts and villages for Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka
State District Treatment village Control village
Andhra Pradesh Kurnool Pulimaddi (30)* Brahamanapalli (15)
Mitnala (30) Munagala (15)
Balapanoor (30) Rasulpet (15)
Prakasam Chirakurapadu (30) Payidipadu (15)
Kollavaripalem (30) Bodavada (15)
Chirvanauppalapadu (30) Maddirala (15)
Karnataka Dharwad Harobelawadi (30) Kabbenur (15)
Shirkol (30) Hansi (15)
Kumaragoppa (30) Yemnur (15)
Gulbarga Kurikota (30) Bhushangi (15)
Farhatabad (30) Honnakirangi (15)
Gotur (30) Bennur (15)
*Figures in parenthesis indicate number of farmers selected in that village
Progress of Phase 1
159