farmer producer companies (fpcs) in karnataka

ASSESSMENT OF FARMER PRODUCER COMPANIES (FPCS) IN KARNATAKA

Implemented by

Published byDeutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH

Registered offices: Bonn and EschbornUmbrella Programme for Natural Resource ManagementA2/18, Safdarjung EnclaveNew Delhi 110 029 IndiaT: +91 11 4949 5353F : + 91 11 4949 5391E: [email protected]: www.giz.de

ResponsibleMohamed El-KhawadProgram Director and Cluster CoordinatorEnvironment, Climate Change and BiodiversityEmail: [email protected]

Rajeev AhalDirector, Natural Resource ManagementEmail: [email protected]

Technical PartnersSynergy Technofin Private Limited

Content ReviewDeepak Chamola, Technical Expert, GIZ

EditorRaj Pratim Das

Design and Layout Rouge Communications [email protected]

Photo credits/GIZGIZ is responsible for the content of this publicationOn behalf of theGerman Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ)

New Delhi, IndiaNovember, 2019

ASSESSMENT OF FARMER PRODUCER COMPANIES (FPCS)

IN KARNATAKA

CONTENTS

Executive Summary V

1. Introduction and Project Background 1

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Genesis of FPCs in India 2

1.3 FPCs in Karnataka 2

1.4 Objective of the Study 3

2. Approach and Methodology 4

2.1 Secondary Research and Desk Review 4

2.2 Primary Research 4

2.2.1. Sampling 4

2.2.2. Development of Survey Tools 5

2.2.3. Data Collection 5

2.3 Scoring, Ranking and Categorisation of FPCs 5

2.4 Developing Strategic Action Plan 5

3. Status of FPCs in Karnataka 6

3.1 Support Agencies 6

3.2 Resource Institution & Producer Organisation Promoting Institutions (POPIs) 6

3.3 Number of Villages Covered by FPCs 8

3.4 Memberships 8

3.5 Land Holding Pattern of Members 8

3.6 Caste of FPCs Members 9

3.7 Irrigation Pattern 9

3.8 Source of Livelihood 9

3.9 Age Profile of FPC Members 9

3.10 Education Profile of CEO/Managing Director 10

3.11 Education Profile of BoD 10

3.12 Responsibility of FPC Formation 10

3.13 Board Meetings 11

3.14 Business Activities of FPCs 11

3.15 Annual Turnover and Net Profit 11

4. Categorisation of FPCs 12

4.1 Defining Parameters for Categorisation 12

4.2 Scoring 13

4.2.1. Normalisation of Absolute Values 13

4.2.2. Assigning Weightage to Parameters 13

4.2.3. Summation of Scores 13

4.3 Results 13

5. Comparison of Different Categories of FPCs 15

5.1 Membership and Governance 15

5.1.1. Membership Campaign 15

5.1.2. Fee Collection 16

5.1.3. Board Meetings 16

5.1.4. Annual General Meeting (AGM) 17

5.1.5. External Audit 17

5.1.6. Record Keeping 18

5.1.7. Use of Data for Business Planning and Forecasting 18

5.1.8. Quality Assurance of Produce 19

5.1.9. Feedback Mechanism 19

5.2 Member’s Perception about FPCs 20

5.2.1. Impact on Income 20

5.2.2. Impact on Availability of Market Information 21

5.2.3. Impact on Access to Credit 21

6. Success Stories on FPCs 22

6.1 Sahayadri FPC Ltd., Nashik, Maharashtra 22

6.2 Jaithari FPC Limited, Annupur, Madhya Pradesh 23

6.3 COFE Producer Company Limited, Chhindwara, Madhya Pradesh 23

6.4 Pragatimitra North Kanara FPC Ltd., Uttara Kannada 23

6.5 Sri Chennambika Horticulture FPC Ltd., Hassan, Karnataka 24

7. Recommendations and Strategic Action Plan 25

7.1 Recommendations 25

7.2 Strategic Action Plan 27

7.2.1. Short-Term Strategy 28

7.2.2. Medium-Term Strategy 28

ABBREVIATIONS

AGM Annual General Meeting

APMC Agriculture Produce Market Committee

BoD Board of Directors

CEO Chief Executive Officer

FPC Farmer Producer Company

FPO Farmer Producer Organisation

GCA Gross Cropped Area

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GOI Government of India

MD Managing Director

MIS Management Information System

NABARD National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development

NBFC Non-Banking Financial Company

OBC Other Backward Classes

POPI Producer Organisation Promoting Institutions

PRODUCE Producers Organisation Development and Upliftment Corpus

RI Resource Institution

ROC Registrar of Company

SFAC Small Farmers’ Agribusiness Consortium

SOP Standard Operating Procedure

vAssessment of Farmer Producer Companies (FPCs) in Karnataka

Executive Summary

Agriculture is the backbone of the Indian economy and plays a pivotal role in its growth and development, with approximately 17% contribution to the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Over two third of India’s working population is engaged directly or indirectly with agriculture and allied activities for livelihood. As per the advance estimate of the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare released on 26th September 2018, the country was expected to produce 141.59 million tons of food grains, 22.19 million tons of oil seeds, 383.8 million tons of sugarcane and 32.48 million tons of cotton bales in the year 2018-19.

Shrinking acreage is one of the prime challenges to Indian agriculture, which is making the profession less economical for farmers. As per the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) more than 50% of small and marginal farmers in India are in debt. Small land holdings generate low annual agricultural production and marketable surplus, and eventually trap farmers into a vicious cycle of debt.

Karnataka plays a vital role in the Indian agrarian economy. The state has a total of 4.18 Million hectares of Gross Sown Area and 162 Agricultural Produce Market Committees (APMCs) to facilitate and regulate the marketing of agriculture commodities. The concept of collectivisation of farmers was envisioned to increase farmer’s income, which has resulted in the formation of Farmer Producer Companies (FPCs) in the state.

Performance of FPCs in Karnataka (A Sample Study)

A study was conducted to assess the performance of FPCs in Karnataka, where 90 FPCs were selected across different districts. These FPCs were categorised into four categories based on their performance on different parameters. Based on a cumulative score, a 2 X 2 matrix was created and FPCs were categorised into different quadrants of the 2 X 2 matrix.

a. Visionary Leaders (VL): This quadrant has 18 FPCs which are performing good as per the factual parameters and their perception amongst members is also good.

b. Emerging Companies (EC): 16 FPCs in this quadrant are perceived to be good by farmer members, however, their performance is not that good as indicated through factual parameters.

c. Progressive Companies (PC): This quadrant has 23 FPCs that are doing well on factual parameter but are not perceived good under perceptual parameters.

d. Weak Companies (WC): This quadrant has 33 FPCs that are performing low on both the factual and perceptual parameters.

vi Assessment of Farmer Producer Companies (FPCs) in Karnataka

130Lo

w

Low

Weak Companies (33FPCs)

Emerging Companies (16 FPCs)

Visionary Leaders (18 FPCs)

Progressive Companies (23 FPCs)

Fact

ual P

erfo

rman

ceFPC Mapping on Factual & Perceptual Score

Perceived Performance

Hig

h

High

120

110

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

00 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

From the analysis, it has been derived that FPCs in all the four categories have achieved milestones in one or other parameters considered for assessment. Category VL FPCs are classified as top ranked FPCs in the study because of their overall better performance on a maximum number of parameters considered for evaluation. Category EC & PC’s FPCs are performing well on some of the parameters and category WC’s FPCs have marked a composite performance because of weaker performance on few criteria. However, the category WC FPC has also performed equally or better than category VL, EC and PC in a few parameters. Though, overall WC category FPCs need to strengthen governance structure and business model.

Strategic Roadmap for FPCs

It can be understood that FPCs are trying to drive farmers into commercial agri business and creating more awareness about collectivisation concept and its benefits. Among the 90 FPCs that have been surveyed, all the FPCs have some or other strength or weakness, and there is a need for specific attention to each category of FPC to support them in different aspects for improvement in business performance.

Support AreaRecommendations

Category WC Category EC & WC Category VL

Institution Development

• Defining concrete plan and activity timeline and its achievement indicators for campaigning of new members addition.

• Making necessary provisions for required manpower for running day-to-day operation of the FPC. For this, appointment of Manager / Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Accounts Executive to be done for efficient management at initial stage.

• Recruitment of professionals for running FPC

• Strengthening existing system and processes of institution development and increasing membership.

viiAssessment of Farmer Producer Companies (FPCs) in Karnataka

Support AreaRecommendations


Member Mobilisation and

Governance

• Use of multiple channels for mobilising new members, like mass media (local newspapers for broadcasting FPC activities), capacity building programs, awareness shows, pamphlet advertisement, and award distribution to top contributing members.

• FPCs should timely notify members about the Annual General Meeting (AGM) and advertise it at operational village level, in order to achieve significant participation of members in AGM.

• FPCs should identify constraints of board members in attending Board of Director (BoD) meeting and suggest possible options to address the challenges. Some of the challenges like time management of meeting could be addressed by choosing suitable time for meeting with mutual consensus and as per the demand of the situation.

• The agenda of AGM should be discussed in Farmer Interest Group (FIG) meeting and should be remarked in ‘Minutes of Meeting’ register. FIG leader should convey the discussion outcome to respective BoD members and BoD should accordingly plan activities to fulfil members’ demands.

• FPC’s accountant should be trained about keeping of records of collected fee and distributing the receipt to shareholder, and its implication if the practice is not followed

• FPC should improve existing campaigning system by adopting digital mode of awareness like FPCs leaflet, brochure circulated through social media.

• FPC should try to increase distribution of AGM meeting minutes to 100% participants of AGM and FPC shareholder, in order to maintain the understanding with members.

Operations & management

• FPCs should develop Special Operating Procedures (SOPs) and indicators to measure the achievement under each activity and assign roles and responsibilities to each stakeholder for governance and business activities.

• Feedback mechanism should be strengthened by keeping track of each feedback received and measures adopted for resolution.

• BoD of respective location should personally approach members about their satisfaction on FPC’s response over raised queries.

Marketing / business

development

• FPC staff, BoD members and shareholders should be trained about the importance of quality of produce in order to market their surplus produce.

• FPCs should take help of Resource Institution (RI) in understanding about business planning and organise training sessions for capacity building of BoD members and FPC staffs on business development / marketing aspect

• Approaching agriculture district government officials for funds through various grant/subsidy schemes.

• FPC staff, BoD members and shareholders should be trained about importance of quality of produce in order to market their surplus produce.

• Management Information System (MIS) data should be updated on regular basis and should be used in business forecasting.

• FPC should mainly focus on shareholders awareness on quality parameters and its benefits.

• FPC can focus on developing its own brand for creating an alternate market.

• Existing MIS system needs to be strengthened for achieving better accuracy in forecasting and business planning.

Financial Management

• Approaching different financial institutions with the help of RI for credit linkage in order to get funds for business execution.

• Training to accountants to use IT software and keeping updated record of accounts.

• Approaching different banks with the help of RI for improving credit linkage and getting funds for business

viii Assessment of Farmer Producer Companies (FPCs) in Karnataka

During the course of this study, it was found that the major challenge to FPCs is less participation of members in business activities of FPCs, because shareholder members expect short term returns over their investment. The failure of FPCs in meeting these expectations leads to the disinterest of members in FPC’s activities. Another challenge is finding compatible staff for running FPCs who possess understanding about compliances, networking and leadership skills for business development.

Therefore, an Incubation Support system for developing capacities of FPCs and providing other support aspects could assist the FPCs in achieving their financial and developmental goals. Incubation support center should work on detailed plan based on different aspects. Broadly, the scope for proposed Incubation Support Centre can be as under:

Incubation Support

Weak Companies Visionary Leaders Emerging Companies/ Progressive Companies

• Plan for FPCs and community engagement

• Capacity building, training and awareness on institution development

• Networking with successful FPCs

• Linkage with credit institution

• Business plan preparation

• Focus on MIS management

• Networking with financial institutions for raising capital

• Business opportunity for scaling up

• Awareness on legal compliances

• Importance of quality parameters


• Market Linkage

• Infrastructure development

• Trading on eNam portal

• Awareness on technological advancement

• Tapping other possible business opportunity

Incubation centre should have professionals from the development sector, corporate sector, agriculture policy makers and agriculture statisticians to ensure FPCs get end to end solutions for constraints facing in the management of Producer Company (PC).

1Assessment of Farmer Producer Companies (FPCs) in Karnataka

1.1 Introduction

Agriculture is the backbone of the Indian economy and plays a pivotal role in its growth and development contributing approximately 17 per cent to the country’s GDP. Over two third of the country’s working population is engaged directly or indirectly with agriculture and allied activities for livelihood. As per the 1st advance estimate of the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare released on 26th September 2018, India is expected to produce 141.59 million tons of food grains, 22.19 million tons of oil seeds, 383.8 Million Tons of Sugarcane and 32.48 Million Tons of Cotton bales in the year of 2018-19.

According to the agriculture census of 2010-11 (Phase-II) released by the Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare (DAC&FW), total operational landholdings in India were estimated as 138.35 Million Hectares, with the average landholding size at 1.15 Hectare. The Gross Cropped Area (GCA) was estimated to be 193.76 Million Hectares.

Introduction and Project Background

CHAPTER 01

Agricultural Operational Landholding of India (2010-11)

Sl. No. Size-Group Percentage of operational holdings to total

1 Marginal (below 1.00 ha.) 67.1%

2 Small (1.00 - 2.00 ha.) 17.91%

3 Semi-medium (2.00 - 4.00 ha.) 10.04%

4 Medium (4.00 - 10.00 ha.) 4.25%

5 Large (10.00 ha. & above) 0.7%

Source: Agriculture Census 2010-11(Phase-II) Report, Agriculture Cooperation & Farmers Welfare

The prime challenge for agriculture is shrinking land holdings, making the farming profession less viable for farmers. As per the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) more than 50% of small and marginal farmers in India are in debt. Small land holdings generate low annual agricultural production and marketable surplus, and eventually trap farmers into vicious cycle of debt.

Honorable Prime Minister of India’s vision on doubling of farmer’s income by the year 2022 has got laudable attention in the country. Prominent strategies have been adopted by policy makers, agriculture economists and other supporting departments of the Government of India (GoI) on this agenda. Following are the strategies for growth in income of farmers:

2 Assessment of Farmer Producer Companies (FPCs) in Karnataka

i. Development initiatives including infrastructure

ii. Technology

iii. Policies

iv. Institution Building

Under the Institution Building, GoI is keenly promoting the concept of collective marketing through the aggregation of farmer’s marketable produce and leveraging the bulk quantity for a higher market price. FPC is one such legal institution which works on the same principle. On a larger perspective, now GoI is planning to project FPC as one stop solution for all the queries and agribusiness requirement of farmers like information centre, input supply centre, market linkages, credit facilitation centre, and moreover disseminate all the agriculture schemes through FPCs in the future.

1.2 Genesis of FPCs in India

Historical events in India have led to the formation of co-operatives for promoting welfare of rural communities during the Independence era. Post-independence, co-operatives have served as an established channel for government programs, functioning with substantial government funds and personnel. Government funding eventually led to the bureaucratisation and political interference in cooperatives, making them unable and unfit to compete in market or serve their member’s interest. To address these challenges, high level committee was formed on 21st December 1999 at New Delhi under the chairmanship of Dr. Y.K Alagh, which submitted its report on 6th March 2000. After review of the report, Honorable Minister of Law, Justice and Company affairs entitled the Bill as, “Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2000” which seeks to amend the Companies Act 1956 with additional part “Part IXA” on 6th February 2002, concerning the formation of PCs. The Companies Act offers a statutory and regulatory framework that allows for an equal footing with other forms of enterprises.

PC is a hybrid model between private companies and cooperative societies, aiming to combine efficiency of a company with the spirit of traditional cooperatives. The PC intends to integrate small and marginal farmers into modern supply chain networks minimising operational cost, while benefitting from the economies of scale. Profit of the company is largely distributed on the basis of “Patronage”, which acts as reward for members contributing to the business. Major areas where FPCs provide service and assistance are:

• Marketing services of surplus produce of farmer members

• Input supply services at comparatively lower rate than market

• Technical assitance on Package of Practices (POPs) and in agriculture and allied activities

• Dissemination of information on different government schemes to farmer members

• Logistics for transportation of farmer’s produce

1.3 FPCs in Karnataka

The Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare is extending all the necessary support to strengthen the FPCs. One of the key support areas is providing financial as well as technical support to meet the objective of boosting the income of the farmers, which is based on the principle of aggregation to leverage economies of scale for a higher price. Members of FPC also have enormous hopes of getting more price for their produce as well as the betterment of livelihood by becoming a member of FPCs. However, not all FPCs have proved productive to their member farmers. Some of the key reasons behind FPCs not being able to achieve the expected output are:

• The foremost reason is the weak foundation of FPC laid by RI during the mobilisation process. The thought behind the formation and functioning of FPC was not detailed out among the members, due to which farmers developed a wrong notion of getting benefits from FPC by just paying the share money and are not aware of their patronage and responsibilities with FPC. Eventually, the situation has led to a lack of ownership of FPC among the shareholders.


• After the mobilisation process is completed and FPC is incorporated, activities like AGM and cluster meetings have been skipped to avoid expenditure in order to save money which could be utilised in business activities. It weakens the base of hierarchical structure of FPC and farmers lose their confidence in the company.

• Leadership plays a vital role in the success of FPCs. After incorporation, proper SOP is either not developed by RI for FPC or they are unable to implement it. Proper structured road map for training and meeting is not prepared, lack of which leads to feeble leadership among the BoD members and CEO.

• The CEO fulfills only the basic criteria of eligibility but lacks the required skills to accomplish the set target and run the FPC.

• Insufficient funds to kick start the business activity pulls the FPC backwards from doing business easily, as FPC needs seed fund to procure raw material from farmers and then must bear other costs like labor charges, transportation charges and miscellaneous fixed and variable costs.

• Tedious documentation process for getting loans for business activities constrains FPC from accomplishing their targets in a timely manner. The harvesting and marketing of raw produce of farmer is a time bound activity, however, untimely availability of loan amount hinders the target achievement.

• Timely completion of statutory compliances is mandatory for all the FPCs. However, FPCs have scarce knowledge of compliances which levies heavy penalty on FPCs, reducing the hard-earned profits.

• Most of the organised buyers prefer to work with existing commodity suppliers or traders, who are consistent on quantity and timeliness of supply. Inconsistent supplies hinder FPCs in tapping the potential business from organised buyers. Also, engaging with organised players requires supply of specific quality of material. Currently, FPCs stand behind in cleaning and grading activities.

• Most of the FPC’s equity value is found low because of which other funding agency restrict extending any grant to them.

• Caste and social dynamics of the region also impacts FPC’s functioning and success in village areas. Few FPCs do not organise the AGMs and BoD meetings, because of heterogeneity in caste, which leads to difficulty in gathering and finally poor governance of FPC.

Given this background, a study was required to understand the problems, assess the capabilities, gauge the gaps, map the possibilities and suggest the best strategy to build the capacity of FPCs for future operations. The study was also required to identify the variations in capacities and vulnerabilities of the FPCs from the point of view of various parameters such as demography, organisation, strategy, services, governance, marketing, operations, financials and impact on farmers.

1.4 Objective of the Study

The broad objective of the study is to assess 90 FPCs in Karnataka, with a view to identify their capacity building needs. The specific objectives of the study are provided below:

• To assess the status based on various parameters such as governance, organisation and administration, strategy, marketing, operations, finance, services, impact among others

• To develop an assessment tool and categorise 90 FPCs

• To design a state level action plan for different categories of FPCs, for better and efficient management of the FPCs


Approach and Methodology

CHAPTER 02

This FPC assessment report is based on the survey of 90 FPCs operational in 28 districts of Karnataka. The following section provides the methodology used to assess these FPCs:

2.1 Secondary Research and Desk Review

Secondary research and desk review were done to understand the mechanism of FPC functioning at national and state level. The general idea of FPC functioning, the aim of its formation, its role in farmers growth, guiding principles etc. were reviewed from secondary research.

2.2 Primary Research

The various steps involved for conducting primary research are given hereunder:

2.2.1. Sampling

Figure 1: Number of FPCs Covered in each District

90 FPCs in total from 28 districts of Karnataka were considered for the study, of which 60 FPCs have been supported by National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) while 30 FPCs by the Department of Horticulture. Stratified Random Sampling technique was used for selecting the FPCs working in different districts within Karnataka.


Figure 2: Approach and Methodology Summary

2.2.2. Development of Survey Tools

Structured questionnaires were used for collection of data from primary sources. Various questions were framed to understand the details of FPC processes and other areas of information requirement from CEO, BoD and farmer members of FPC.

2.2.3. Data Collection

For information gathering, primary interactions involved in-depth interviews as well as Focus Group Discussions (FGDs). In-depth interviews were conducted with CEOs of each FPC, while FGDs were conducted separately with BoD as well as a group of member farmers / FIGs in each FPC. The FGDs were involved in discussions with 3-4 BoDs and 6-7 FIGs/member farmers. In the survey questionnaire, both open-ended and close-ended questions were used.

2.3 Scoring, Ranking and Categorisation of FPCs

The set of questions covered three broad categories, namely (1) Factual Data, which covered business and financial performance of FPC and their approach to activities (2) Perceptual Data, which captured the impact of FPC on members based on the perception of members. The aim of this activity was to improve the predictive performance of the classification process by means of bundling multiple data into clusters by use of excel.

2.4 Developing Strategic Action Plan

Based on information gathered during the process of the primary survey, collective profiling, scoring, ranking, and categorisation of FPCs and their descriptive analysis, strategic action plan was developed for all the four categories of FPCs.

A diagrammatic representation of approach and methodology is given below.

Secondary Research and Desk Review

Field Survey and Data Collection

Analysis and Report Writing

Normalisation and Cumulative Scoring of FPCs

Mapping of FPCs into Quadrant

Collective Profiling of FPCs

Data Cleaning

Survey Tool Development and Sampling

Strategic Action Plan for Each Category of FPC


Status of FPCs in Karnataka

CHAPTER 03

3.1 Support Agencies

The support agencies / RIs mainly provide financial support to FPCs for a certain initial period, mainly apportioned into two chunks. The first is for FPC’s administrative and operational cost, which is disbursed quarterly / half-yearly into FPC’s bank account and second is the cost for providing technical assistance and support to FPCs in their management and development activities.

NABARD is an apex development financial institution in India which broadly focuses on the empowerment and financial inclusion for communities in rural India. NABARD has promoted a total of 2081 FPCs across the nation in 29 states and 473 districts with a base of 6.64 lakh shareholders till October 2018. In Karnataka, NABARD has promoted 187 Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs) in 30 districts. The key areas of support include assistance in market linkage, capacity building interventions and schemes for FPC members and leaders, credit facilitation etc.

Small Farmers’ Agribusiness Consortium (SFAC) is an exclusive society focusing on increasing farmer’s income by working on principle of aggregation and economies of scale. It has pioneered the formation and advancement of FPCs. SFAC has registered 773 FPCs throughout India in 29 states. It has a base of 7.52 lakh mobilised farmers. SFAC also provides financial assistance to FPCs and RIs for undertaking administrative and operational activities. In addition to that, it also provides support for Matching Equity Grant Scheme to encourage FPC in raising equity, member’s participation and enrolment in company, eventually increasing the farmer base and strengthening their bargaining power. SFAC also provides Venture Capital Assistance to the FPCs, in order to promote new business activity.

3.2 Resource Institution (RI) & Producer Organisation Promoting Institutions (POPIs)

Support agencies channelise the financial aids and technical assistance to FPCs though RI or POPI. RIs conduct study to identify potential villages where farmers are willing to form FPC after inducting them about FPC and its benefits. Once the identification process is completed, RIs prepare feasibility plan and business plan of FPC and submit it to the support agency along with supporting documents. Once it gets approved from support agencies, RI receives the first installment of the grant. Thereafter, RIs start mobilising farmers into small groups named FIG, collect share money from each member and deposit into FIG’s bank account. On the other side, RIs complete all the other documentation work of FPC formation like selection of BoD members, incorporation of the company, supporting FPC in conducting AGM, and other technical assistance. As per the guidelines, RI can do handholding of FPC for two or three years.


Role of RI or POPI can be assigned to the following institutions: Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), Trusts, Corporates, State Govternment Departments, NABARD-promoted subsidiaries, Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK), Big Farmer Producer Companies, Farmers Federations, Commodity Board/ Federations/ Exchanges, Co-op Milk Unions and other experienced institutions meeting the eligibility criteria.

The Name of the Key Resource Institutions / POPIs supporting 90 FPCs selected for study in Karnataka state has been given below.

Name of the Key Resource Institutions / POPIs

Organisation for Development of People (ODP)

VRUTTI

DHAN Foundation

Mother

Karnataka Integrated Development Society

MYRADA

ICCOA

RIDA

Prawarda

Janahita

Society for Conservation & Protection of Environment (SCOPE)

Deshpande Foundation

Manuvikas

Sajala Shree

Prajwal

Youth for action

Avishkar

Forum for Rural Development (FORD)

Vikasana

Chaithanya Rural Development Society

Kolar Organics

Outreach

Speech

Indian Rural Integrated Development Society (IRIDS)

Kolar Taluk Vayaligam Raitura Vakuta

Vyakthi Vikasa Kendra

Indian Society of Agribusiness Professionals (ISAP)

Krushak Mitra Grameen Abhivruddhi Sanstha


3.3 Number of Villages Covered by FPCs

On an average, the support agencies mandatorily prefer minimum of 500 members in an FPC, so that the equity money can be utilised for business purpose as a kick-start fund. To cover that voluminous base of members, FPCs must explore different villages. The below figure depicts percentage of FPCs working in a different range of operational village areas. It exhibits that out of 90 FPCs, majority of FPCs operate in between 1 to 15 villages, while only 8% of FPCs operates in more than 46 to 60 villages.

Between 46 to 60 Villages

8% FPCs

9% 25%

58% FPCs

Between 31 to 45 Villages Between 16 to 30 Villages

Between 0 to 15 Villages

3.4 Memberships

Farmer members are the foundation pillars of the FPCs. FPCs have a varied range of farmer members. The below figure illustrates FPC falling under different categories based on farmer members strength. Majority of FPCs have a member strength of 751 to 1000, while only 1% of surveyed FPCs have a member strength of 1000 to 1250.

3.5 Land Holding Pattern of Members

Land Holding Pattern of Farmers

8%

36%18%

38%

Maginal Farmers

Small Farmers

Medium Farmers

Large Farmers

One of the key objectives of formation of FPCs was to save interest of small and marginal farmers. Such farmers have a lesser quantity of marketable surplus and are also exploited the most by middleman and traders. Out of the surveyed FPCs, 74% of the members are marginal farmers and small farmers, while a meagre 8% farmers are from the large farmers category.


Caste of FPCs Members

Age Profile of FPC Members

The graph demonstrates caste profile of the FPC members. Of the 90 FPCs, 825 of FPCs have Schedule Caste (SC), Schedule Tribes (ST) and Other Backward Class (OBC) members comprising more than 50% of the total member strength.

The members’ age in majority of FPCs is between 30-45 years. Meanwhile, in only 9% of FPCs, members’ age is 60 years and above.

3.6 Caste of FPCs Members

3.7 Irrigation Pattern

The major sources of irrigation in the villages are borewells. Open wells, canals and ponds are the other available sources of irrigation.

3.8 Source of Livelihood

Agriculture is the major source of livelihood for the member farmers. Other than agriculture, horticulture and allied activities of agriculture, including dairy, goat rearing, and poultry also form different sources of livelihood to the member farmers.

3.9 Age Profile of FPC Members

2%

82%

16%

>50% SC, ST, OBC

50% SC, ST, OBC, and 50% General

>50% General

Up to 30 years

30-45 years

45-60 years

60 years and above

41%

22%

9%

28%


3.10 Education Profile of CEO/Managing Director

Education profile of CEO

As per the policy manual of SFAC and NABARD, FPC should have full time CEO or MD. Among all the 90 FPCs’ CEO and MD that have been appointed, the educational qualification of 72% of FPCs’ CEO is graduation.

3.11 Education Profile of BoD

Education Profile of BoD

The education profile of BoD has also been considered for assessment. 40% of BoD are matriculate and can easily handle documentation work. 24% BoD are graduate which enables them to handle day to day activities. It was also observed that more educated board members find it easy to decentralise the workload among BoD and CEO.

3.12 Responsibility of FPC Formation

FPCs are formed with support of RI at initial stage of formation and later FPC management is run by BoD and CEO. However, RIs facilitate the decision-making process of FPCs, including the use of farmers data and preparation of operational plan for FPCs.

3%

72%

5%

20%

High School

Graduate

Higher Secondary

Post Graduate

Illiterate

Primary

Secondary

Graduate

Post Graduate

26%

40%

24%

6%4%


3.13 Board Meetings

Timely and consistent BoD meeting is one of the important factors in FPC’s success. 77% FPCs conduct BoD meeting on monthly basis, 18% FPCs organise BoD meeting on quarterly basis, while 3% FPCs do not organise meeting at all. Of the FPCs conducting BoD meetings 97% of the FPCs maintain minutes of meeting.

3.14 Business Activities of FPCs

FPC formation also aims to provide a one stop solution to farmers. Currently, it is challenging for FPC to market produce of every member because of lack of market linkage and stringent quality parameters of organised buyers.

Of the surveyed FPCs, 71% provide agricultural inputs to farmers, while 40% FPCs provide output marketing services. The contribution of FPCs in providing advisory service was found to be low, with only 10% FPCs providing these services to farmers. Primary value addition facilities like sorting and grading machinery can provide better prices to farmers for their produce and FPC can also earn service charge from it. Presently, 165 of FPC provide primary value addition services to farmers.

3.15 Annual Turnover and Net Profit

In FY 2017-18, a majority of surveyed FPCs achieved turnover up to INR 10 Lakhs, while only 7% of the surveyed FPCs recorded a turnover in the range of INR 1 Crore to INR 5 Crores. For the same year, majority of the FPCs reported a net profit of up to INR 1 Lakh, while 23% FPCs could not make profit.

Turnover (2017-18) Net Profit (2017-18)

15

77%

18%

3%

2%

Monthly Meetings

Quaterly Meetings

No Meeting

Fornightly Meetings

Between 10 to 25 Lakhs Upto to 1 Lakhs

Upto 10 Lakhs No ProfitBetween 50 Lakhs to 1 Crore Between 2.5 to 5.0 LakhsBetween 1 Crore to 5 Crore Between 5.0 Lakhs to 10 Lakhs

Between 10 Lakhs to 50 Lakh

57%

20%

13%

3% 7%

Between 25 to 50 Lakhs Between 1.0 to 2.5 Lakhs

57%

23%11%

1%2%

6%


Categorisation of FPCs

CHAPTER 04

4.1 Defining Parameters for Categorisation

The categorisation of FPCs were done considering the various parameters that determine the performance of FPCs. The parameters including business performance, FPC’s approach to business activities and impact of FPCs on their members was considered for categorisation of FPCs.

Parameter Sub-parameters

Business and Financial Performance

• Paid up share capital (in Rs.)

• Turnover (2017 -2018)

• Net profit or losses (2017 -18)

• No. of villages covered by FPCs

• Output marketing services to members

• Participation of FPC in commodity exchanges

• Access to credit / working capital from bank

• Number of general members

• Number of equity shareholders

FPC’s Approach to Activities • Promotion of member’s participation in FPO’s business activities

• Number of BoDs meetings organised during a year (FY 2017-18)

• Business planning process and implementation

• Appointment of auditor

• Conduction of external audits

• Process of keeping records of transaction

• Book / record keeping and filing to RoC

• Product quality control and inspection

• Members’ feedback mechanism

• Campaign for membership mobilisation in FPC

• Membership fees / share fee collection process in the FPC

• Participation of directors in board meetings


• AGMs process and participation

• Decision making process in FPC

• Communication approach within FPC

• Compilation and use of data in decision making

Impact of FPC • Impact on crop yield / productivity

• Impact on quality of produce

• Access to information

• Access to credit

• Access to farm machinery, Custom Hiring Centre (CHC)

• Linkages and interaction with external agencies

• Output / product marketing

• Access to government subsidies

• Access to marketing infrastructure

• Participation in Agri/Horti. value chains

• Increase in income

4.2 Scoring

FPCs have been classified into VL, EC, PC and WC category based on the scoring in the above three parameters. The following approach was followed for scoring of FPCs.

4.2.1. Normalisation of Absolute Values

The five sub-parameters namely number of equity shareholders, number of general members, paid-up share capital, number of BoD meetings and number of permanent staff are absolute values which were converted to a rating of 1 to 5 for negating the anomalies arising from absolute data. The method of normalisation is provided in Annexure 2.

4.2.2. Assigning Weightage to Parameters

Some of the key sub-parameters have more significance than others for indicating the performance of FPCs, therefore different weightages were assigned to different parameters while scoring. For this purpose, 80% weightage has been assigned to turn-over, net profit/loss, paid-up share capital and number of shareholder members, while 20% weightage was assigned to remaining parameters.

4.2.3. Summation of Scores

Cumulative scores for each FPC in each parameter were obtained by adding the individual ratings of sub-parameters in each category.

4.3 Results

Based on a cumulative score, a mid-range value of 22.4 and 4.9 were obtained for factual and perceptual data set, respectively, on which a 2X2 matrix has been created. Based on the mid-range value, FPCs were grouped into four different categories named as quadrants.

• First quadrant or Visionary Leaders (VL): This quadrant has 18 FPCs which are performing good as per the factual parameters and their perception amongst members is also good.


• The second quadrant or Emerging Companies (EC): This quadrant has 16 FPCs which are perceived to be good by farmer members, however, their performance is not that good as indicated through factual parameters.

• Third quadrant or Progressive Companies (PC): This quadrant has 23 FPCs that are doing well on factual parameter but are not perceived good under perceptual parameters.

• Fourth quadrant or Weak Companies (WC): This quadrant has 33 FPCs that are performing low on both the factual and perceptual parameters.

130

Low

Low

Weak Companies (33FPCs)

Emerging Companies (16 FPCs)

Visionary Leaders (18 FPCs)

Progressive Companies (23 FPCs)

Fact

ual P

erfo

rman

ce

FPC Mapping on Factual & Perceptual Score

Perceived Performance

Hig

h

High

120

110

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

00 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40


Comparison of Different Categories of FPCs

CHAPTER 05

5.1 Membership and Governance

5.1.1. Membership Campaign

The diagram characterises that in the VL category FPCs, 61% FPCs use formal campaign, publicity material and provide recognition for existing members to add new members. A significant portion of FPCs, i.e. 67% in WC category also have formal campaign, use publicity material and provide recognition for existing members to add new members.

Membership Campaign Mechanism


5.1.2. Fee Collection

In the majority of FPCs, share fee was collected with formal records and receipt was issued to shareholder members to ensure transparency. In very few cases, the fee was collected, however, the receipt was not issued. For VL and PC category FPCs, the fee collection process was followed more rigorously, as compared to the FPCs of WC and EC category.

Membership Fee Collection

Participation of Directors in BoD Meetings

5.1.3. Board Meetings

Regular BoD meetings and active participation of members is the key factor in successful management of the FPC. Approximately 78% of VL category FPCs conduct regular BoD meetings with more than 80% participation of directors. On the other hand, approximately 55% of FPCs in WC category conduct regular BoD meetings.


Annual General Meeting Process

External Audit Process

5.1.4. Annual General Meeting (AGM)

AGM is a common platform where shareholders interact with BoD members and FIG. The balance sheet as well as profit and loss statement of the FPC is also presented in AGM. The FPCs who have a formal agenda for conducting AGM and prepare minutes of meeting symbolises a process oriented FPC. Based on field interactions, it was observed that most of the FPCs from VL category conduct AGM with proper agenda and ensure a high participation of members in the AGM.

5.1.5. External Audit

This section highlights different categories of FPCs and their audit compliances. The external audits were conducted in majority of FPCs from VL category, where approximately in 83% of FPCs from this category, external audits were conducted by registered auditors, supervised by audit committee and the results were shared with shareholders / members. The same process was followed by a smaller number of FPCs from other categories.


5.1.6. Record Keeping

Keeping updated record of all the account books and activity is one of the key elements in growth of FPCs and ensures transparency in management. A significant number of FPCs from VL category have deployed IT software for keeping the records of account.

Record Keeping of Transactions

Use of Data for Business Planning and Forecasting

5.1.7. Use of Data for Business Planning and Forecasting

Updated and compiled data of FPC activities is an essential component for productive decision making. Nearly 44% of FPCs in category VL have detailed MIS data backup used in business planning and forecasting. On the other hand, category EC has only 12% FPCs which are using a data management system for business planning and forecasting purpose.


Quality Management Process

Feedback Mechanism

5.1.8. Quality Assurance of Produce

Quality is one of the key parameters for determining the marketability of the produce, and for maintaining quality, a formal process of quality assurance is of utmost importance. Therefore, SOPs for maintaining quality and training to the FPC staff for following these SOPs becomes integral.

It can be observed that most of the FPCs in all the categories have no quality control mechanism and trained staff for quality management. Category VL has the highest percentage of FPCs who conduct a formal quality inspection with proper SoPs and trained staff, along with trainings to members on quality.

5.1.9. Feedback Mechanism


This section mainly focuses on feedback mechanism of FPCs on the kind of service offerings to their members. Majorly, for all FPCs there is feedback solicitation and response process through formal and informal means. Interestingly, the WC category FPCs have performed slightly better than other category FPCs in terms of adopting formal process for feedback solicitation, with proper feedback form, record and response to their members.

5.2 Member’s Perception about FPCs

The perception of members about the respective FPCs was captured to understand whether the members get the expected benefits of FPCs membership. For this purpose, interactions were conducted with 4-5 members /FIGs of the surveyed FPCs to identify the areas where FPCs have been able to benefit their members. The following parameters indicate the impact of FPCs on the members:

5.2.1. Impact on Income

The major impact in income due to membership of FPC was reported by members of VL category FPC. Members of 78% of FPC from VL category reported increase income between 30 to 50%. While for other category FPCs, majority of members reported up to 10% increase in income. The increase in income can be majorly attributed to increase in marketable surplus and better price realisation.

Increase in Members’ Income


Impact on Access to Credit

Impact on Access to Market Information

5.2.2. Impact on Availability of Market Information

Majority of FPCs in category VL and EC have been enabler in dissemination of prices of commodities in nearby mandis. Such information has been helpful for farmers in taking decision for marketing their surplus produce. 78% FPCs of category VL have reported a moderate improvement in availability of information, while the farmers of PC and WC category FPCs did not report any improvement in access to market information.

5.2.3. Impact on Access to Credit

The member’s access to credit has not much improved across all categories. Only 11% FPCs of category VL mentioned to have good improvement in access to credit which was even low in the case of EC category FPCs, while no improvement was reported by the members of PC and WC category FPCs.


Success Stories on FPCs

CHAPTER 06

This section highlights some of the FPCs from Karnataka as well as from other states who have shown good performance on business activities and overall management. The success stories of such FPCs have been presented in this section as case studies.

6.1 Sahyadri FPC Ltd., Nashik, Maharashtra

The Sahyadri Farms, the FPC was set up in the year 2011. The company was set up with the aim to ensure a fair return to the farmers. The company worked on the philosophy of providing the best infrastructure and adequate production and processing facilities to the farmers who could not secure a good produce due to the frugality of resource and operations.

The company also considered developing branded traceable products that would promote sustained growth and could cater to the demands of end consumer by offering them quality products at fair prices, while achieving economies of scale and costs to the growers. This was driven on Farmer Producer Model that would play an ever-increasing role in the rural economy, providing employment to large numbers of farmers.

The company has set up modern infrastructure facilities including Cold Storage for fast moving products, Cold Storage for frozen products, Pre-Cooling Chambers, Ripening Chambers, Fresh Fruits & Vegetables Packing Facility, Aseptic Processing Facility, Frozen Processing Facility, IQF Processing Facility, and Vacuum Pre-Cooling Facility for Leafy Vegetables for value addition and post-harvest management of fruits and vegetables.

Sahyadri FPC has excelled in a short span of time. It has leveraged its presence in the total value chain by involving itself in all the activities of the supply chain including processing and export. The primary objective of the company was to provide the best of infrastructure and adequate production and processing facilities to the farmers to make them participate in the value chain. Majority of the farmers working with the FPC are small and marginal farmers. The members of the company are involved in cultivation of high value crops. The bulk of income of the company comes from export of grapes to countries like United States of America (USA), Europe and West Asian Countries. The company is also involved in processing activities covering a wide range of products such as fruit juice, ketchup, jam and jelly.

Currently, the company has grown to become the largest FPC in the country, with a membership of 8,000 farmers and a turnover of Rs 300 Crore. It is also the largest grape exporting company of India and has revolutionised the fruits and vegetables farming. The company has also developed forward linkages with large food retailers of the country, such as Big Bazaar for supplying fruits and vegetables.


6.2 Jaithari FPC Limited, Annupur, Madhya Pradesh

The FPC is involved in sale of agri-inputs, production of Wheat, Gram and Paddy seeds and value addition activities like cleaning, sorting, grading, packaging and tagging of farm produce. Average annual turnover of the FPC in FY 2017-18 was Rs 1.41 Crore. The company is promoted by the RI named Action for Social Advancement (ASA).

The FPC is successfully carrying out the business of input as well as output marketing. The company started the trading of fertilisers and seed and sold agri-inputs worth Rs 87 lakhs in 2017-18 to more than 500 members. The FPC works with 4-5 buyers to supply them approximately 700 MT of staples including paddy, soybean and gram.

Around 6-7 BoDs actively participate in activities of the FPC. Regular meetings of BoDs are organised on a monthly basis and registers and books of accounts are being verified at regular intervals. The BoDs have a detailed knowledge about the statutory compliances of the company.

The timely and professional approach of FPO towards institutional networking has resulted in its linkage with KVK Department, Shahdol. The members of FPC received trainings on modern techniques of cultivation from KVK. For financial and technical support, Ananya Finance and Samunnati Value Chain Finance have been linked to members.

6.3 COFE Producer Company Limited, Chhindwara, Madhya Pradesh

The FPC is involved in production of vermi-compost and selling to their members; Processing of custard apple, and aggregation & marketing of farm produce. The company recorded a turnover of Rs. 10 Lakh in FY 2017-18. The company has established a central processing unit with all necessary infrastructures such as cool chambers with a capacity of 350 Kg of pulp every day and enabling processing of 1200 Kg of raw custard apple. The company has operated successfully and performed well, therefore other FPOs are showing interest in conducting exposure visit to it.

The key business activities undertaken by the company are as follows:

• The company received Rs.10 lakhs financial support from RI for the purchase of machinery

• The company has signed memorandum of understanding (MoU) with nearby cold storage facilities to store processed custard apple

• The company also procures organic cotton from farmers and involved in the production of vermi- compost which are being sold to members

• The company also operates a full-fledged fruit processing unit and supplies pulp to various big players such as Dinshaws Ice Cream, Top N Town Ice Cream, and Venkatesh Naturals, among others.

BoDs actively participate in day-to-day activities of the FPC. Members of FPO participate in interface meetings held with suppliers and buyers. BoDs meetings are on quarterly basis and they verify registers and books of accounts at regular intervals.

The professional approach of FPC towards institutional networking has resulted in its linkage with KVK Chhindwara and ATMA, Mohkhed, which provide trainings to the members of FPCs. RI has facilitated linkage of FPC with Ghoomar FPC of Rajasthan for technical and financial support.

6.4 Pragatimitra North Kanara FPC Ltd., Uttara Kannada

The Pragatimitra North Kanara FPC Ltd is registered under companies’ act 2013. The company operates in all parts of Uttara Kannada district with special emphasis on Paddy and Areca nuts. Vegetables and Coconut are the other commodities associated with the company. In the area of its operation, the farmers face certain challenges, such as:


• The farmers with land holdings are mostly small and marginal farmers, which has resulted in migration of young family members in search of employment to faraway places and only the aged members are looking after the farm/agriculture activities.

• Non-availability of land holding and lack of agriculture work throughout the year causes results in involvement of landless labor community in non-agri sector. This has resulted in scarcity of labor for agriculture practices.

To overcome these challenges associated with the producers, the company has designed the following products:

• Purchase of indigenous and hybrid variety of paddy at farmers’ doorstep to ensure the best rates for their produce. The company has procured over 100 quintals of paddy from its members.

• Providing the skilled labor support to the farmer for harvesting of Areca Nut. This is a limited service provided to farmers who face scarcity of skilled labor. This is amalgamated with the processing product of the company where the member can ensure the timely harvest and processing of Areca Nut.

• Processing of Areca Nut where the producer can bring the raw produce into the common processing center of the company and get back the processed produce.

• De-husking Machine for de-husking of Areca Nut at the farmer’s doorstep. This product is proposed to reduce the cost of de-husking by at least 40% in comparison with manual peeling through labour.

The company has been also supplying labours like tree climbers, rope holders, Areca Nut collectors and vehicle support to Areca Nut farmers. The key benefits to the farmers from these initiatives have been reported as reduction in problem of labour shortage.

6.5 Sri Chennambika Horticulture FPC Ltd., Hassan, Karnataka

Registered in December 2016 and based out at Mosalehosahalli, Hassan (Karnataka), the FPC covers 28 villages and has 1000 farmer members at present. It has 85% members from landless, marginal or small farmers category, of which nearly one fourth are women. The company is run by 10 BoD, out of which three are female. Other than these board members, there are four permanent employees helping the company in day-to- day activities. The company has formed sales, finance and documentation committees, for special focus in these areas. The last AGM was held in September 2018, in presence of nine of the designated board members and 300 members of the FPC.

The company reported a turnover of Rs. 10 lakh in 2016-17, which increased to Rs. 5 Crore in 2017-18. The company also recorded a profit-margin of Rs. 10 lakh in the year 2017-18. The major business areas of company include sale of agri-input, forward marketing linkages, agricultural advisory and farm machinery rental services. The company majorly markets potato procured from farmers and also provides rental services for tractor, grass cutter, seed drill, coconut sheller etc.


Recommendations and Strategic Action Plan for Karnataka

CHAPTER 07

Karnataka is one of the prominent states which is extensively focusing on agriculture development. The state has been also emphasising on promotion of FPCs and has set good examples of FPCs with significant success stories. In chapter 4, factual and perceptional data has been analysed from survey of 90 FPCs and these FPCs have been categorised into four broad categories (VL, EC, PC & WC). Characteristics of these FPCs have also been described along with analysis of various external and internal factors influencing FPC’s performance. Based on the outcome of analysis, in this chapter, specific recommendations have been made for each category of FPCs for further improvement and accordingly a State Level Strategic Action Plan has been proposed.

7.1 Recommendations

From the analysis it has been derived that FPCs in all the four categories have achieved milestones in one or other parameters considered for assessment. Category VL FPCs are classified as top ranked FPCs in the study because of their overall better performance on maximum number of parameters considered for evaluation. Category EC & PC FPCs are performing good on some of the parameters and category WC FPCs have marked a composite performance because of weaker performance on a few criteria. However, the category WC FPC have also performed equally or better than category VL, EC and PC in few parameters. Though, overall WC category FPCs need to strengthen governance structure and business model.

Focus on promotion of member participation,

quality of produce, members feedback mechanism,

scaling-up business and profitability.

VLEmphasise on development of adequate business team, record keeping, governance structure, product quality

management, credit linkage.

PC & ECDevelop shareholders base,

adequate business team, promote member participation

and focus on business planning & execution.

WC


ParticularRecommendations


Institution • Defining concrete plan and activity timeline and its achievement indicators for campaigning of new members addition.

• Making necessary provisions for required manpower for running day-to-day operation of the FPC. For this, appointment of Manager / CEO and Accounts Executive to be done for efficient management at initial stage.

• Recruitment of professionals for running FPC

• Strengthening existing system and processes of institution development and increasing membership.

Member Mobilization and

Governance

• FPCs should use multiple channels for mobilising new members, like mass media (local newspapers for broadcasting FPC activities), capacity building programs, awareness shows, pamphlet advertisement, and award distribution to top contributing members.

• FPCs should timely notify members about the AGM and advertise it at operational village level, in order to achieve significant participation of members in AGM.

• FPCs should identify constraints of board members in attending BoD meeting and suggest possible options to address the challenges. Some of the challenges like time management of meeting could be addressed by choosing suitable time for meeting with mutual consensus and as per the demand of situation.

• The agenda of AGM should be discussed in FIG meeting and should be remarked in ‘Minutes of Meeting’ register. FIG leader should convey the discussion outcome to respective BoD members and BoD should accordingly plan activities to fulfil members’ demands.

• FPC’s accountant should be trained about keeping of records of collected fee and distributing the receipt to shareholder, and its implication if the practice is not followed

• Bottom-up approach of decision making should be followed, involving members’ opinion on key decisions.

• FPC should improve existing campaigning system by adopting digital mode of awareness like FPCs leaflet, brochure circulated through social media.

• FPC should try to increase distribution of AGM meeting minutes to 100% participants of AGM and FPC shareholder, in order to maintain the understanding with members.

Operations & management

• FPCs should develop SOPs and indicators to measure the achievement under each activity and assign roles and responsibilities to each stakeholder for governance and business activities.

• Feedback mechanism should be strengthened by keeping track of each feedback received and measures adopted for resolution.

• All the record should be computerised in order to ease accessibility of information to BoD members. Also, timeline should be fixed for weekly or monthly review about the feedback status.

• BoD of respective location should personally approach members about their satisfaction on FPC’s response over raised queries.


ParticularRecommendations


Marketing / business

development


• MIS data should be updated on regular basis and should be used in business forecasting.

• FPCs should take help of RI in understanding about business planning and organise training sessions for capacity building of BoD members and FPC staffs on business development / marketing aspect

• Approaching agriculture district government officials for schemes on warehousing or funds available for developing the infrastructure for FPC work


• MIS data should be updated on regular basis and should be used in business forecasting.

• FPC should mainly focus on shareholders awareness on quality parameters and its benefits.

• FPC can focus on developing its own brand for creating a niche in the market.

• Existing MIS system needs to be strengthened for achieving better accuracy in forecasting and business planning.

Financial Management

• Designing transaction record keeping system for ensuring transparency in FPC activities.

• Approaching different banks with the help of RI for improving credit linkage in order to get funds for business execution.

• Accountant should be trained to use IT software and keeping updated record of accounts.

• Approaching different banks with the help of RI for improving credit linkage in order to get funds for business execution.

Recommendations mentioned above are based on findings of survey conducted for 90 FPCs and are broad-based in nature. However, for taking-up task of supporting these FPCs and implementation of these recommendations, customised interventions can be identified for each FPC based on diagnostic study of each of the FPC.

7.2 Strategic Action Plan

It can be understood that FPCs are trying to drive farmers into commercial agri business and creating more awareness about collectivisation concept and its benefits. Among the 90 FPCs that have been surveyed, all the FPCs have certain strengths, weaknesses and challenges which are key to determine their growth and success in future. Based on the study, customised strategic action plan has been designed to overcome the challenges faced by all categories of FPCs.

During the course of this study, it was found that the major challenges to FPCs is less participation of members in business activities of FPCs, because shareholder members expect short term returns over their investment. The failure of FPCs in meeting these expectations leads to disinterest of members in FPC’s activities. Another challenge is finding compatible staff for running FPCs who possess understanding about compliances, networking and leadership skills for business development.


To overcome the challenges to the growth and performance of FPCs, there is a strong requirement of strategy roadmap through building an FPC incubation support system. The incubation support system can be provided by a third-party, or specific incubation center should be set up to serve requirements of FPCs. FPCs which are in category WC should be targeted under short-term plan under the incubation support, while mid-term plan should be targeted for category EC, PC and category VL FPCs. The proposed strategy roadmap for FPCs is provided hereunder.

7.2.1. Short-Term Strategy

The short-term strategy can be implemented between 3 to 6 Months, focusing on the FPCs of categories WC, EC, PC. The key elements of strategy in short-term could be as follows:

• Identifying FPCs with lowest accumulated score of all parameters and are on the verge of shut down.

• Emphasising on FPC’s awareness among members and operational village.

• Community based activity approach to promote participation of members in each activity.

• Developing IEC material for capacity building of stakeholder on legal & statutory compliances.

• Organising exposure visit of members at successfully running FPC.

• Facilitating support for raising capital and networking with the banks / Non-Bank Finance Companies (NBFCs) / other sources.

• Community engagement program should be organised on regular basis to mark FPCs presence in working villages.

• Documentation management and record keeping should be emphasized to keep track of all activity.

7.2.2. Medium-Term Strategy

The medium-term strategy can be implemented between 6 to 18 Months, focusing on the FPCs of VL category. The key elements of strategy in medium-term could be as follows:

• Identifying best performing FPCs based on accumulated score of all parameters and have concrete road map for business development.

• Assistance in making business proposals and pitching institutional buyers of agri commodity or investors in agribusiness venture.

• Networking with industry, potential buyers, importers.

• Legal support for developing contract agreements and other documentation support.

• Facilitating finance / capital for creating infrastructure, value addition facilities / processing etc.

• Community based activity approach to promote participation of members in each activity.

• Strengthening value chain activity of FPC by installing small processing unit of raw agricultural commodities.

• Developing websites and social networking identities of FPC.

As the need of handholding support to FPCs is of critical importance, it is proposed to set up an Incubation Support System for providing handholding support and capacity building of the FPCs of different categories. Incubation support center should work on detailed plan based on different aspects. Broadly, the scope for proposed Incubation Support Centre can be as under:


Incubation Support

Weak Companies Visionary Leaders Emerging Companies/ Progressive Companies

• Plan for FPCs and community engagement

• Capacity building, training and awareness on institution development

• Networking with successful FPCs

• Linkage with credit institution

• Business plan preparation

• Focus on MIS management

• Networking with financial institutions for raising capital.

• Business opportunity for scaling up.

• Awareness on legal compliances


• Importance of quality parameters.

• Market Linkage

• Infrastructure development

• Trading on E-NAM portal.

• Awareness on technological advancement

• Tapping other possible business opportunity

Incubation support center should work on detailed plan based on different aspects. Broadly, the scope of support through proposed Incubation Support Centre could be in the following areas:

• Support for institution development for FPC

• Support for institution development for FPC

• Networking platform (peer learning, entrepreneurs, investors, business partners, expert

• Organizing capital, through debt / equity or working capital

• Technology identification and adoption

Incubation center should have professionals from development sector, corporate sector, agriculture policy makers and agriculture statisticians to ensure FPCs get end to end solutions for constraints facing in management of producer company.


Annexure

Annexure 1: Normalization, Segmentation and Scoring of Absolute Values

S.No. Parameter Category Parameter Normalisation and Conversion of Value

Scoring and Segmentation

1 FPCs Approach to Activities

Number of equity shareholders

All absolute values Normalised into

Percentile against the highest value (i.e. 1250 Shareholders taken as 100 per centile and

all the other absolutes values converted into per

centile against it)

Number of general members

1 - 0 to 250 members 2- 251 to 500 Members,

3 - 501 to 750, 4 - 751 to 1000

5 - 1001 and above

2 Number of general members


Percentile against the highest value (i.e. 1250 Shareholders taken as 100 per centile and

all the other absolutes values converted into per

centile against it)

Number of general members

1 - 0 to 250 members 2- 251 to 500 Members,

3 - 501 to 750, 4 - 751 to 1000

5 - 1001 and above

3 Paid up Share Capital All absolute values Normalised into

Percentile against the highest value (i.e. 62.50

Share Capital taken as 100 per centile and all the other absolutes

values converted into per centile against it)

Paid up Share Capital (in Rs.)

1 - 0 to 2.50 Lakhs 2- 2.51 to 5.00 Lakhs, 3 - 5.01 to 7.50 Lakhs 4 - 7.51 to 10.00 Lakhs

5 - 10.01 Lakhs and above

4 Number of BODs meetings organized during (FY 2017-18)


Percentile against the highest value (i.e. 43 BOD meetings taken

as 100 per centile and all the other absolutes

values converted into per centile against it)

Number of BoDs meetings organized during (FY

2017-18)

1 - 1 to 5 2 - 6 to 10 3 - 11 to 15 4 - 16 to 20

5 - 21 and Above


5 Business and Financial Performance Parameter

Number of Permanent Staff


Percentile against the highest value (i.e. 30 Permanent Staff taken as 100 percentile and all the other absolutes values converted into percentile against it)

Number of Permanent Staff

1 - 1 to 5 2 - 6 to 10 3 - 11 to 15 4 - 16 to 20

5 - 21 and Above

Annexure 2: Profiling Tables

S. No. Number of equity shareholders Total FPCs

1 Between 1 to 250 Members 19





Total 90

S. No. Number of Villages Total FPCs

1 0 to 15 Villages 52





Total 90

S. No. Education of CEO Total FPCs

1 Post-Graduation 18

2 Graduation 65

3 Higher secondary 4

4 High School 3

Total 90


S. No. Business Activity YES NO

1 Agri-input Store (Selling seeds, pesticides, fertilizers and other inputs) 64 26

2 Agri-output marketing (Procurement of agricultural produce for further trading) 36 54

3 Extension support and advisory services (On PAID basis) 9 81

4 Farm machinery rentals, Custom Hiring Centre 30 60

5 Infrastructure rental (Warehouses, Cold Storages, Collection Centre etc. on rent) 2 88

6 Primary value addition (Sorting, Grading, cleaning, washing, collection etc.) 14 76

7 Food Processing (milling, flouring, juice, pickle making, branded packaging etc.) 9 81

8 Loans to members / Financial services 4 86

9 Agricultural insurance services to farmers 7 83

10 Any other business 10 80

Total 185 715

FPC Turnover 2017-18 2016-17 2015-16

No Turnover 7 5 2

Up to 10 Lakhs 5 31 39

Between 10 to 25 Lakhs 0 14 18

Between 25 to 50 Lakhs 0 5 12

Between 50 Lakhs to 1 Crore 1 2 3

Between 1 Crore to 5 Crore 1 3 6

Above 5 Crore 0 0 0

NA 76 30 10

Total 90 90 90

FPC Net Profit 2017-18 2016-17 2015-16

No Turnover 7 13 7

Up to 1 Lakhs 5 33 51

Between 1.0 to 2.5 Lakhs 1 6 10

Between 2.5 to 5.0 Lakhs 1 4 5

Between 5.0 Lakhs to 10 Lakhs 0 1 2

Between 10 Lakhs to 50 Lakhs 0 0 1

Above 50 Lakhs 0 1 0

NA 76 32 14

Total 90 90 90

Campaign for Membership mobilisation in FPC VL EC PC WC

1. No formal membership activity / campaign 1 7 2 1

2. Campaign at initial stage, but not Now 2 1 4 2

3. No formal campaign, but members are mobilising new members 3 0 3 5

4. Formal membership campaign, without action 1 2 5 3

5. Formal Campaign, publicity material; recognition for existing members to add new members

11 6 9 22

Total 18 16 23 33


Membership Fee Collection VL EC PC WC

1. No membership fee for new members 0 1 0 2

2. Inconsistent fees collected from new members 0 0 0 3

3. Fees collected but without adequate record and receipt 0 0 1 0

4. Fees collected with records, without receipts 2 4 1 4

5. Fees collected with proper record and receipt to new member 16 11 21 24

Total 18 16 23 33

Participation of Directors in Board Meeting VL EC PC WC

1. No Formal Board meetings are conducted 0 0 0 1

2. Board meetings are conducted irregularly 0 0 0 0

3. Regular Board meetings with participation of less than 50% Directors

1 0 2 9

4. Regular Board meetings with 50–80% participation 3 8 11 5

5. Regular Board meetings with more than 80 % Director’s participation

14 8 10 18

Total 18 16 23 33

Annual General Meeting VL EC PC WC

1. No AGM has been conducted in last two yrs. 0 2 0 5

2. AGM conducted without formal agenda 0 0 0 0

3. AGM with formal agenda but less than 30% members participation

0 1 1 1

4. AGM with formal agenda and less than 50% of member participation

3 6 10 17

5. AGM with formal Agenda, distribution of minutes and more than 50% participation

15 7 12 10

Total 18 16 23 33

Members’ Feedback mechanism for adequate response VL EC PC WC

1. No formal / informal process for feedback 6 2 2 0

2. Informal process for collecting feedback, without any record 1 4 6 9

3. Informal process for feedback from members with written records / documents

6 2 5 12

4. Formal process for feedback, with proper ‘FEEDBACK FORM’, receipt and record

3 5 6 4

5. Formal process for feedback, with proper ‘Feedback Form’, record and RESPONSE.

2 3 4 8

Total 18 16 23 33


FPC Category

Seed selling license Fertiliser selling license Pesticide selling license FSSAI license

Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total

VL 9 9 18 15 3 18 12 6 18 3 15 18

EC 9 7 16 11 5 16 8 8 16 2 14 16

PC 18 5 23 20 3 23 20 3 23 2 21 23

WC 8 25 33 16 17 33 15 18 33 0 33 33

Decision Making VL EC PC WC

1. There is no clear line of decision making in FPC 0 0 0 3

2. FPC related major decision are taken by POPI / RI 0 0 0 0

3. CEO takes decision, there is no process for inputs from BoD / Members

0 0 1 0

4. CEO takes decision in consultation with BoDs 8 8 9 8

5. Decisions taken with active participation of members, BoDs and CEO

10 8 13 22

Total 18 16 23 33

Communication approach within FPC VL EC PC WC

1. No organised channel of communication 0 0 0 0

2. Information made available on demand by members 0 0 2 5

3. Oral communication through regional representatives 3 3 1 4

4. Communication through formal measures (Letter / Phone calls / messages), but irregular

2 8 5 9

5. Communication through formal measures (Letter / Phone calls / messages), with defined periodicity

13 5 15 15

Total 18 16 23 33

Promotion of Members Participation VL EC PC WC

1. No member is approached for participation in FPC’s business, NO incentive mechanism

1 0 2 1

2. Existing members only approach for participation, but NO incentive mechanism

2 2 3 13

3. BoD & CEO promote members’ participation in business, but NO incentive mechanism

6 8 10 7

4. BoD & CEO promote members’ participation in business, with occasional incentives / schemes

8 4 6 8

5. Active participation is promoted through structured incentives and patronage bonus

1 2 2 4

Total 18 16 23 33


Book / Record keeping and filing to RoC VL EC PC WC

1. No formal books/records of accounts are kept 0 2 2 2

2. Account books / records are kept informally 0 1 0 3

3. Formal books of accounts and records are kept but regular filing to RoC is not done

0 1 1 4

4. Formal books of accounts and records are kept but with irregular filing to RoC

0 1 2 1

5. Formal books of accounts and records are kept with regular filing to RoC

18 11 18 23

Total 18 16 23 33

Process of keeping records of transaction VL EC PC WC

1. No formal books of accounts are kept / No transactions are recorded

0 3 0 4

2. Transaction records are kept informally in notebooks 1 3 3 11

3. Separate formal books of records are managed for different parties’ transactions

6 0 14 11

4. FPC use IT software (e.g. Tally) through third party / part time resources.

4 9 3 6

5. FPC has deployed IT software in the office for keeping records of accounts

7 1 3 1

Total 18 16 23 33

Conduction of External Audits VL EC PC WC

1. No external Auditor has been appointed 0 2 3 6

2. A basic inspection audit is organised 3 0 0 4

3. Audit through external auditor is conducted irregularly 0 0 1 1

4. External audits conducted regularly; no financial results are shared with Members / Shareholders

0 2 4 4

5. Regular external audit by registered Auditors, supervised by Audit Committee and shared with shareholders / members

15 12 15 18

Total 18 16 23 33

Access to Credit / Working capital from Bank VL EC PC WC

1. FPC does not know, how to apply for bank loan / FPC has not reached to stage to avail loan

9 6 8 13

2. FPC management know, how to apply for bank loan, but lack required documentation

4 8 6 8

3. FPC has applied for bank loan but have not been able to avail due to lack of credit worthiness

1 1 4 9

4. FPC has got loan availed once only 0 1 5 3

5. FPC has availed bank loan multiple times and has proven credit repayment history.

4 0 0 0

Total 18 16 23 33


Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for routine works VL EC PC WC

1. There are no SoPs relating to operation 5 5 7 18

2. There are SoPs but are not documented 3 4 2 1

3. Documented SoPs exists but are not followed by the FPC 1 0 3 5

4. Documented SoPs; being followed up sometimes; but not on regular basis

6 3 8 4

5. Documented SoPs are strictly followed with regular training of staff

3 4 3 5

Total 18 16 23 33

Product Quality control and Inspection VL EC PC WC

1. No mechanism and manpower for quality control 6 11 14 22

2. Minimal inspection of product, without trained staff and SoPs 3 1 3 4

3. Informal quality inspection, as per buyers’ SoPs, but no trained staff

2 1 1 1

4. Formal quality inspection with proper SoPs and trained staff 4 3 4 5

5. Formal quality inspection with proper SoPs and trained staff, training of members on quality

3 0 1 1

Total 18 16 23 33

Compilation and Use of data in decision making VL EC PC WC

1. No data of members maintained, except list of names 0 0 0 0

2. Basic data (name, contact details, landholding) of members is compiled only once

2 5 6 15

3. Detail data of members (Name, contact details, landholding etc.) compiled only once

7 5 3 8

4. Detail data of members (as above) is compiled and updated on regular basis but not used regularly

1 4 7 2

5. Detail Data is updated on regular basis and is used in business forecasting

8 2 7 8

Total 18 16 23 33

Output Marketing VL EC PC WC

1. No Role of FPC in output marketing 4 4 5 10

2. FPC organises market linkages, but no active role in marketing 2 2 2 6

3. FPC organises market linkages and facilitate aggregation of products for supply to buyers

1 2 5 3

4. FPC provides market information, organises market linkages; conduct trading for members

8 5 9 14

5. FPC provides market information, organises market linkages; conduct trading for members

3 3 2 0

Total 18 16 23 33


Services of Marketing Infrastructure (Warehousing / Sorting-grading, Pack-house etc.)

VL EC PC WC

1. Never provided / no marketing infrastructure 12 12 16 20

2. Infrastructure support provided once in a while 1 1 1 3

3. FPC has own infrastructure but less than 25% utilisation 0 2 2 2

4. Regular use with 25-50% utilisation 1 0 2 5

5. Regular use with more than 50% utilisation 4 1 2 3

Total 18 16 23 33

Business Planning process and implementation VL EC PC WC

1. No business plan prepared 0 3 4

2. Business plan prepared without any research, no implementation 2 5 2 2

3. Business plan with sample survey; partly being implemented 5 1 8 12

4. Business plan, with each members’ data, partly being implemented

8 5 5 10

5. Business plan, with each members’ data, being Implemented 3 5 5 5

Total 18 16 23 33

Business development (BD) and marketing team and services VL EC PC WC

1. No dedicated team for BD & Marketing 6 12 12 22

2. No dedicated team, but temporary staff as and when required from RI / POPI / Other agencies

1 2 5 6

3. Permanent staff for BD and marketing appointed, but are not trained adequately

2 2 1 0

4. Qualified staff for BD and marketing appointed, but does not give required time and emphasis

3 0 2 3

5. Qualified team with adequate resources and efforts for BD and marketing

6 0 3 2

Total 18 16 23 33

Participation of FPC in commodity exchanges / ENAM for marketing facilitation

VL EC PC WC

1. FPC management has no idea of commodity exchanges / online marketing platforms

10 4 16 23

2. Knows about exchange & marketing platforms but do not have idea to participate

4 7 6 5

3. Knows about exchange & marketing platforms and have applied for registration

3 1 1 1

4. FPC Registered with exchange / E-NAM but participate occasionally

1 2 0 1

5. FPC Registered with exchange / E-NAM but participate regularly 0 2 0 3

Total 18 16 23 33


Compilation and Use of data in decision making VL EC PC WC

1. No data of members maintained, except list of names 0 0 0 0

2. Basic data (name, contact details, landholding) of members is compiled only once

2 5 6 15

3. Detailed data of members (Name, contact details, landholding) compiled only once

7 5 3 8

4. Detailed data of members (as above) is compiled and updated on regular basis but not used regularly

1 4 7 2

5. Detail Data is updated on regular basis and is used in business forecasting

8 2 7 8

Total 18 16 23 33

Annexure 4: Scores of FPCs on factual and perceptual parameters

S. N. Name of FPC District Total Score on Factual Parameters

Total Score on Perceptual Parameters

Category

1 Honnalgere Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Mysore 23.6 4.8 PC

2 Raithambruta Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Mysore 15.6 4.4 WC

3 Pavagada Farmer Producer Company Ltd. Tumkur 22.6 5.2 VL

4 Nidagal Farmer Producer Company Ltd. Tumkur 21.4 7.2 EC

5 South India Natural Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Bidar 19.2 2.2 WC

6 Parisara Premi Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Raichur 26 2.2 PC

7 Kapilatreetha Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Koppal 19.8 2.2 WC

8 Sanjeevini Farmer Producer Company Ltd. Bidar 18.8 2.2 WC

9 Raithabandhu Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Mysore 21 2.2 PC

10 Maanjira Farmer Producer Company Ltd. Bidar 20.2 2.2 WC

11 Nargund Farmer Producer Company Ltd. Gadag 21.4 5.6 EC

12 Bhootayi Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Haveri 25.2 2.2 PC

13 Menasagi Farmer Producer Company Ltd. Gadag 21.4 5.6 EC

14 Paraga Horticulture Agriculture Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Dharwad 18.4 5.2 EC

15 Jamkhandi Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Bagalkote 24.6 2.2 WC

16 Shri Kalabheiravashwara Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Chitradurga 18.6 5.6 EC

17 Srishail Mallikarjuna FPC Chitradurga 16.8 5.6 EC

18 Basaveshwara Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Haveri 21.2 6.4 EC





Category

19 Pragatimitra North Kanara Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Uttara Karnataka 30.2 6.8 VL

20 Sri Uthsavamba HorticultureFarmer Producer Company Ltd.

Davangere 26 7.2 VL

21 Dumawada Farmer Producer Company Ltd. Dharwad 22.8 7.2 VL

22 Kshema Lingeshwara Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Gulbarga 22.8 6 EC

23 Ijeri Farmer Producer Company Ltd. Gulbarga 21.4 6.2 EC

24 Basavasagara Producer Company Ltd Raichur 25.4 2.2 PC

25 Malli Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Gulbarga 20 5.6 EC

26 Abhinashri Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Koppal 23.4 2.2 WC

27 Salughatte Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Tumkur 18.2 2.2 WC

28 Samrudhi Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Chitradurga 15.8 5.2 EC

29 Hebburu Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Tumkur 24 2.2 PC

30 Kengal Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Ramnagara 27.6 2.2 PC

31 Siddalagatta sericulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Chikkaballapur 25 2.2 PC

32 Arkavatthi Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Ramnagara 27.4 2.2 PC

33 Gurumutkal Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Yadgiri 21.8 6 VL

34 Sri Marikamba Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Tumkur 19.6 2.2 WC

35 Gramachethana Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Tumkur 20.2 2.2 WC

36 Ballari Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Ballary 19.6 2.2 WC

37 Revanasiddeshwara Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Yadgiri 23.8 2.2 PC

38 Vatadohosahalli Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Chikkaballapur 23.6 2.2 PC

39 Bhootai Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Chikkaballapur 21.2 6 VL

40 Manchanhalli Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Chikkaballapur 22 2.2 PC

41 Gudibande Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Chikkaballapur 19.2 2.2 WC

42 Nagargere Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Chikkaballapur 19.6 2.2 WC

43 Sharadambha Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Chikkamanglur 23 7.2 VL

44 Attibylu Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Shivamoga 22.4 6.4 EC

45 Maravalli Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Shivamoga 20.6 6.4 EC





Category

46 Shivamogga Thungabhadra Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Shivamoga 22 6.8 EC

47 Karavali Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Udupi 27.4 6.4 VL

48 Kumaradhara Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Dakshina Kannada 29 7.2 VL

49 Suvarna Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Udupi 25.4 5.4 VL

50 Bhuvanamandara Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Kodagu 20.2 5.6 EC

51 Sri Chennambika Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Hassan 30.8 7.6 VL

52 Moodalagiri Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Kolar 26.8 7.4 VL

53 Sri Vinayaka Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Kolar 30.2 7.2 VL

54 Koppa Sericulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Mandya 27 7.2 VL

55 Aashodaya Farmer Producer Company Ltd. Bidar 21.8 2.2 WC

56 Kolar Organic Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Kolar 24 5.2 VL

57 Kaladgi Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Bagalkote 30.6 5.4 VL

58 Kayaka Yogi Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Dharwad 29.6 4.6 PC

59 C. Puttarajgavayi horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Gadag 27 6.4 VL

60 Fakirabudhiyal Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Bagalkote 22.6 6.6 EC

61 Ulluvayogi Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Dharwad 27.4 5.6 VL

62 Sri Madhukeswara Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

uk 27.2 2.2 PC

63 Negilayogi Farmer Producer Company Ltd. Davangere 14 2.2 WC

64 Vedhavathi Farmer Producer Company Ltd. Chitradurga 14.4 2.2 WC

65 Vishwa Bandhu Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Davangere 26.4 2.2 PC

66 Bhuchethana Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Davangere 14.4 2.2 WC

67 Kumadwatti Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Ltd.

Haveri 24.4 2.2 PC

68 Byadgi Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Haveri 19 2.2 WC

69 Raithakranthi Farmers Producer Company Ltd.






Category

70 Chikkamallanahole Farmers Producer Company Ltd.


71 Basavanabaagewaadi Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Bijapur 23.6 2.2 WC

72 Davanagere Farmers Producer Company Ltd.


73 Raithabandhu Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Mysore 20 4.4 WC

74 Siridhanya Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Mysore 20 4.4 WC

75 Harohallo Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Mysore 20 4.4 WC

76 Udigala Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Chamarajanagar 26 2.2 PC

77 Gundlupete Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Chamarajanagar 26.2 2.2 PC

78 Pragathi Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Chamarajanagar 19.2 2.2 WC

79 Rampura Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Chamarajanagar 19.8 2.2 WC

80 Mahadewava Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Chamarajanagar 18.8 2.2 WC

81 Raithaneravu Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Chamarajanagar 18.2 2.2 WC

82 Bhudevi Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Bengaluru 18.4 2.2 WC

83 Shivganga Organic Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Bengaluru Rural 27 4.4 PC

84 Kolarama Farmers Producer Company Ltd. Kolar 22 4.4 WC

85 Sadarahalli Dairy Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Chikkamanglur 21.6 4.4 PC

86 Sadarahalli Coconut Farmers Producer Company Ltd.

Chikkamanglur 15 2.2 WC

87 Anekel Horticultural Farmer Producer Company Ltd

Bengaluru Urban 29.6 2.2 PC

88 Holur Horticultural Farmer Producers Company Ltd.

Kolar 26 2.2 PC

89 Tubugere Horticulture Farmer Producers company Ltd

Bangalore rural 26.6 4.4 PC

90 Krushik Mitra Farmer Producer Company ltd

Belagavi 21.2 4.4 WC

NOTES

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH

A2/18 Safdarjung EnclaveNew Delhi-110029 India

T: +91-11-494953535E: [email protected]/India

farmer producer companies (fpcs) in karnataka

Documents