The Kendu Leaf Trade: Problems & Prospects in Orissa - Vasundhara

This is obviously because Orissa has its competitors only in the phal sector, and the phal market
is controlled basically in major phal producing states like Chhattisgarh and M.P.. Bumper
production in these two states and any change in the marketing strategy therein significantly
affects Orissa as traders decide their strategy according to the situation in these states. This is
what happened in 2004.Although the Orissa phal is supposed to be more preferable than its
counterpart in the neighbouring states because low production status helps in better handing and
early marketing of the phal here in Orissa, the advance sale system in Chhattisgarh/M.P. helped
the traders overcome the limitations in these two states, and hence Orissa virtually lost its
attraction till it itself followed the same strategy in 2005.The situation in 2004 can be imagined
from the fact that in the Jeypore Division whereas the net gain per PPQ during 2002 and 2003
was Rs.1922.95 and Rs.1289.88 respectively, in 2004 there was a net loss of
Rs.1145.53/PPQ(based on the statistics provided by the KL wing).
Presently the whole of Jeypore and Navarangpur divisions and part of Khariar division are
producing phal leaves. Although the advance sale system has been introduced, not all units are
purchased by the traders leaving the unsold units for departmental working. The Department
further decides if it will pursue procurement in such units, and if so, to what extent. Hence, it is
not that the advance sale mechanism solves all problems.
The question is that if phal marketing is the only major vulnerable part of the kendu leaf trade in
the state, why go for it Even if it is said that the phal system is practically feasible in naxalaffected
areas, why not then restrict it to only those units where processing of leaves is otherwise
not feasible, so that the extent of vulnerability reduces significantly
Two reasons are usually cited against this suggestion: 1.the transaction in phal is quite negligible
in comparison to that in the processed leaves; and 2.The areas currently under phal are not
feasible for the production of processed leaves 10 (this has been seen practically in the Jeypore
Division). Recognizing these factors, it can be said that any proposal for bringing more areas
under phal should be carefully examined on the ground of above discussion so as to avoid any
increase in the vulnerability factor.
9.1..2: Reorienting the operations of OFDC:
The Corporation (OFDC) rather popularly stands for ‘corruption’ among the traders because of
the following experiences:
• Mismanagement
• Corrupt practices
• Adamant behaviour
Although the general approach of OFDC in the matter of achievement in KL sales has been that
they have achieved what was possible within the existing limitations, and also that there is no
need to worry since ‘we have the monopoly (in processed leaves)’;but the Comptroller &
Auditor General cited several instances which indicate that not every thing was so perfect with
10 There may be also a reason that in some areas working/processing is practically difficult, not to speak of
commercial viability.
30