Indian Farming

September 20152

Pulses Production Trends and StrategiesPulses Production Trends and Strategiesto become self sufficient

A. Amarender Reddy1

Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012

Indian Farming 65(6): 02–10; September 2015

The United Nation declared 2016 as international year of pulses, given its importance in food

and nutrition security and source of income and employment to small and marginal farmers’ in

developing countries. Historically India is the largest producer, consumer and importer of pulses.

Pulses production in India is about 19 million tonnes, every year India is importing about 3-4

million tonnes of pulses to meet its annual demand of 22-23 million tonnes. Even though there is

a significant increase in pulses production in the last decade from 15 million tonnes to 18-19

million tonnes due to the implementation of National Food Security Mission (NFSM),

Accelerated Pulses Production Programme (APPP) and Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY),

there is little improvement in production of kharif pulses. There is a lot of scope in expanding area

under rice fallows in eastern and southern India and crop diversification from rice-wheat to

cereal-pulse based cropping systems in northern India.

PULSES, also known as grain

legumes, are a group of 12 crops

that includes chickpea, pigeonpea,

urad, moong, lentils, khesari, beans

and peas. They are high in protein,

fibre, and various vitamins, and

provide amino acids. They are most

popular in developing countries, but

are increasingly becoming recognized

as an excellent part of a healthy diet

throughout the world (Reddy, 2013).

Because of its high protein content,

pulse crops are one of the most

sustainable crops a farmer can grow.

It takes just 359 litre of water to

produce one kg of pulses, compared

with 1,802 for soybeans and 3,071

for groundnut. They also contribute

to soil quality by fixing nitrogen in

the soil. Though India is largest

producer and consumer of pulses, the

yield levels are too low (750 kg/ha),

there is a massive yield gap between

India and other developed countries

and also within India, between

research station yield and farmers’

yields. There are some isolated

success stories like chickpea

revolution in Andhra Pradesh and

spring moong/urad in irrigated areas,

expansion of area under pigeonpea in

eastern India in the last decade.

However, for effective upscale of

these isolated success stories, there is

a need for an integrated approach

through strengthening of NFSM and

APPP along with policy prescription

to strengthen entire value chain from

production, procurement and

distribution through public-private

partnerships. The two policy

instruments, Minimum Support Price

and adjustments to tariff rates needs

to be used judiciously to bridge the

gap between demand and supply, to

provide proper incentive to farmers

to increase production and at the

same time to reduce spikes in open

market prices to safeguard

consumers. With the introduction of

improved varieties, promotion of

better management techniques and

development of inclusive marketing

channels, pulse crops can overcome

the lower yields and make good

profits to farmers’ in India. This

paper is aimed at examining the

current trends in production, import

and export, price, and costs and

profitability of pulses and suggests

policy options to increase pulses

production by using the secondary

data collected from ministry of

agriculture and also using the cost of

cultivation scheme unit level data

collected under the comprehensive

cost of cultivation scheme,

government of India.

Trends in Production, Supply and

Demand

With the stagnation in pulses at

below 15 MT until 2009-10 and

steep rise in prices and importance of

pulses, the government of India

introduced many programmes and

policy instruments targeted to

increase pulses production and yield.

Due to all these efforts, India

achieved a record pulses production

at 19.8 MT in 2013-14 with an all-

time high production achieved in

chickpea (9.53 MT). However, with

the population of 1282 million, as

per the Indian Council of Medical

Research (ICMR) Recommended

Dietary Intake (RDI) of 80 gm/

capita/day, India needs to produce

36.9 million tonnes of pulses. This

indicates that there is a deficit of 17.1

Indian Farming

September 2015 3

MT. However, some other studies

projected a moderate demand of

25.39 MT by 2025 with the

assumption that the current scenario

of high prices continue and

unaffordable to many of low income

consumers. Almost every year, India

is importing 3-4 MT of pulses to

meet its annual demand of 21-22 MT

at exiting higher prices. The demand

and production of pulses in the

country along with the net imports

during 2007-08 to 2014-15 is given

in Table 1. The figures show that

even though, there is increased

production from 14 MT to 19 MT,

the net imports were increased given

the increased population and

purchasing power of the consumers.

State-wise Trends, Area and Production

of Pulses

Madhya Pradesh is the largest

producer of pulses followed by

Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Uttar

Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and

Karnataka. These six states together

contribute 79% of pulses area and

80% of pulses production. The area

under chickpea is shifted from north

India to south and central India

during the last decade. Area and

production share of rabi pulses also

increased compared to kharif pulses.

Some Isolated Success Stories

Success stories have emerged in

the last decade in respect of area and

yield increase. There is significant

progress in the chickpea production

which was increased from 5.6 MT to

8.9 MT, due to the development of

high yielding varieties like JG-11,

which are heat tolerant and suitable

for mechanized cultivation. Hence,

there is a shift in area of chickpea

from north India to south and central

India. Chickpea area in south India

expanded from just 2.2 m ha to 5.1

m ha between 1970s and late 2000s

mainly due to the development of

heat tolerant varieties which are

suitable for the plentiful of rice

fallows available for cultivation in the

central and south India. The yield

levels were increased in rabi pulses

(chickpea, lentil) and spring moong/

urad compared to kharif pulses (like

pigeonpea, kharif moong and urad).

The greater challenge is how we can

upscale this success in few crops in

isolated places (especially for rabi

pulses) to other pulses (kharif) and

into new locations. Between

triennium ending (TE) 2006 to TE

2015, urad production increased by

71.8%, chickpeas by 58.6% and

moong by 42.4% mostly contributed

by rabi season (Table 3). Now

chickpeas contributes about 47% of

total pulses production. The past

experience of yellow revolution

shows most of the success is short

lived if we don’t improve our

production technology in the long

run.

Distribution of districts based on

yield levels (below 0.5t/ha; 0.5 to 1t/

Table 1. Projected demand and supply ofpulses (Million Tonnes)

Year Production Net Totalimports availability

2007-08 14.8 2.0 16.8

2008-09 14.6 2.9 17.52009-10 14.7 3.6 18.3

2010-11 18.2 2.6 20.8

2011-12 17.2 3.3 20.52012-13 18.3 3.8 22.2

2013-14 19.8 2.7 22.5

2014-15(E) 18.4 3.9 22.3

Source: Department of Economics andStatistics (2015): net imports= imports-exports: total availability= production + netimports.

Table 2. Area and production of pulses (TE 2014)

State Area Share in total Production Share in total Yield(1000 ha) area (%) (1000 ha) production (%) (kg/ha)

Madhya Pradesh 5310 22 4807 26 905Maharashtra 3489 14 2565 14 735Rajasthan 3967 16 2286 13 576Uttar Pradesh 2365 10 2148 12 908Andhra Pradesh 1850 8 1468 8 794Karnataka 2345 10 1286 7 549Others 4990 21 3674 20 736All India 24315 100 18234 100 750

Shift of chickpea area from North India to South and Central India

Further, pulses demand is highly

price elastic (consumers demand

more pulses if the prices comes

down) and income elastic (as income

increases, consumer demand more

pulses), we can reasonably predict

that the demand will increase

anywhere between 26 to 36 MT in

the near future, if prices are

reasonably low due to the reduction

in the cost of production with the

wider adoption of improved

technology (as it happened in the

case of chickpea during the past

decade especially in southern states

like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka).

In fact some econometric estimates

of the income elasticity of demand of

pulses range from 1.5 to 2.0. This

would mean that with an increase of

around 6.5% annual in per capita

income demand for pulses would

increase around 10% annually.

Indian Farming

September 20154

ha and more than 1t/ha) is given in

Table 4. It is interesting to see that the

districts with more than 1 t/ha yield

increased from 19% to 66% in case of

chickpea. There was significant

increase of high productivity districts

in case of lentil also from 13% to 18%

between 1999 and 2012. Whereas

high productivity districts decreased

from 37% to 22% for pigeonpea.

Percentage of districts with less than

0.5 t/ha yield decreased in all crops

except in pigeonpea. However, still

large number of districts are below

0.5 t/ha category in case of moong

and urad. These figures are indicating

that most of the technological

development and diffusion was

concentrated only in chickpea. For all

other pulse crops, there is a long way

to go in spreading the new

technology to impact on yields.

International Trade in Pulses

India’s exports are exclusively

dominated by chickpea (98.5% of

total exports of pulses), while import

basket is quite diversified although

share of yellow peas(37.9%) is much

higher followed by moong/urad

(17.8%), lentils (17%), chickpea

(13.7%) and pigeonpea (13.6%)

(Table 5). Chickpea are mostly

exported to Pakistan, Turkey, Algeria,

Sri lanka and United Arab Emirates.

Peas are imported from Canada and

Russia; moong/urad Myanmar;

lentils from Canada and USA;

chickpeas from Australia and Russia

and pigeonpeas from Myanmar and

Tanzania, Mozambique(Table 6).

Long Run Inelastic Supply Reason for

High Prices

Since 1966, pulse crops have been

neglected with agricultural policy

environment favouring spread of

green revolution technology in few

crops like paddy and wheat for food

security reasons in many developing

countries including India. This input-

intensive technology further

enhanced already existing yield gap

between major cereals and pulses.

Due to prolonged neglect for several

decades, yield levels of pulse crops are

stagnant (increased only by 12.2%

from 1966 to 2009 as against

162.6% increase in yield of wheat).

Table 6 depicts the changes in real

prices between TE 1969 and TE

2009 for pulses and competing crops.

The real price steeply increased for

pulses by 42% compared to a decline

for wheat (-10.2%), maize (-18.9%)

and millets (17.4%), mainly due to

low supply response of pulse

crops(Table 7).

As a result of widened gap

between yields of pulses and major

cereals (the yield of wheat increased

from 1.6 times that of pulses in 1969

Table 4. Distribution of districts by level of yield (% to total districts growing the crops)

Yield level Chickpea Pigeonpea Lentil Moong Urad

1999 2012 1999 2012 1999 2012 1999 2012 1999 2012

Less than 0.5 t/ha 13 3 17 27 14 35 74 67 77 47

0.5 to 1 t/ha 68 31 46 51 73 48 26 32 28 51More than 1 t/ha 19 66 37 22 13 18 0 1 0.7 2.1

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Table 3. Crop wise progress in production (million tonnes) of pulses

Crop TE 2006 TE 2014-15 % increase

Pigeonpea 2.48 (18.0) 3.0 (15.8) 20.2Chickpea 5.6 (40.6) 8.9 (47.1) 58.6Urad 1.02 (7.4) 1.8 (9.3) 71.8Moong 0.98 (7.1) 1.4 (7.4) 42.4Other Pulses 3.74 (27.1) 3.8 (20.4) 2.7Total 13.81 (100) 18.9 (100) 36.5

Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.

Table 5. India’s imports and exports (average of 2012-13 and 2013-14)

Pulses Exports Share in total Imports Share in total(1000 tonnes) pulses exports (1000 tonnes) pulses imports

(%) (%)

Peas 0.7 0.3 1350.6 37.9Chickpeas 264.4 98.5 486.9 13.7Moong/Urad 1.6 0.6 633.5 17.8Lentils 0.9 0.3 607.5 17.0Pigeonpeas 0.8 0.3 486.0 13.6Total 268 100.0 3564.5 100.0

Table 6. India’s trade destinations of major pulses for 2013-14

Pulses Top 5 export destinations Top 5 import sources

Peas Myanmar (84.70%), Pakistan (7.37%), Canada (70.59%), RussiaNepal (5%), Shri Lanka DSR (2.82%), (11.06%), USA (8.37%),

Australia Malaysia (0.04%) (6.19%), France (1.74%)

Chickpeas Pakistan (29.93%), Turkey (18.11%), Australia (61.43%), RussiaAlgeria (17.24%), Sri Lanka (5.34%), (22.77%), Tanzania (7.84%),U Arab EMTS (4.43%) Myanmar (6.40%), USA (0.47%)

Moong/urad USA (49.69%), Unspecified (10.21%), Myanmar (82.83%), TanzaniaSri Lanka (7%), Canada (7.72%), (4.23%), Kenya (3.55%),Kenya (4.29%) Australia (3.05%), Mozambique

(1.61%)

Lentils Myanmar (35.16%), USA (25.17%), Canada (79.33%), USAKuwait (7.17%), Bhutan (6.55%), (10.70%), Australia (9.85%),Singapore (5.92%) Uzbekistan (0.01%), Turkey

(0.01%)

Pigeonpea Nepal (78.79%), Canada (19.19%), Myanmar (51.37%), TanzaniaIsrael (1.92%), Korea (0.09%) (27.44%), Mozambique (14.69%),

Malawi (4.53%), Kenya (1.79%)

Table 7. Trends in real prices (`/quintal)

Crop TE TE % change in1970 2013 real prices

Millet 1947 1609 -17.4Wheat 2585 2321 -10.2Maize 2101 1705 -18.9Pigeonpea 2800 3977 42.0

Source: FAOSTAT accessed on 31st July2014; prices were deflated by CPI foragricultural labourer with 1986/87 baseyear.

Indian Farming

September 2015 5

to 3.8 times in 2009) the relative

profitability and competitiveness of

pulse crops reduced even though

prices increased due to shortage of

supply (due to inelastic supply).

Another important reason for

decreased preference for pulses by

farmers is continued high instability

in yields of pulse crops (instability is

16.5% during 1989-2009, as against

instability in wheat at 5.1%) than

major cereal crops.

Reasons for Long Run Inelastic Supply

The growth in production has not

responded to increase in prices in case

of pulses (especially in pigeonpea,

moong and urad) mainly due to (i)

area stagnation: The main reason for

stagnation in area under pulses has

been differential impact of

technology and relative profitability

leading to shifting of area under

pulses to more remunerative crops,

(ii) Expansion of irrigation.

Uncontrolled water flow (flooding)

common in canal systems is

incompatible with large scale area

under pulses, (iii) High risk in

productivity and farm income. There

is a significant decline in instability of

yield of paddy and wheat from the

onset of Green Revolution.

Instability in productivity of chickpea

remained much higher than of wheat,

in pigeonpea, much higher than

paddy. Pulses grown under

unirrigated rainfed conditions, in

marginal lands suffered instability,

(iv) There is no major technological

breakthrough in India compared to

countries like Canada and others

achieving averages of around two

tonnes per hectare in pulses

productivity, (v) Technology

breakthroughs in the difficult regions

and adverse farming conditions

(rainfed regions, the ghats and hill

regions) was just not there on a large

scale. (vi) Scattered and thin

distribution of various types of pulse

crops cultivated mostly on marginal

lands, with each crop contributing a

small share in total pulses area – the

biggest hurdle for all stakeholders

(researchers/ extension/ development/

credit/ market support agencies in

both the public and private sectors) is

to provide input and output services

and other institutional support; (vii)

Indeterminate plant type of pulse

crops with low yield potential and

low response to input management.

(v) Near stagnation in yield and

technology and hence profitability of

pulse crops relative to other

competing crops (vi) High frequency

of crop failure and yield instability

due to pests and diseases and drought

and floods (vii) Low priority by

policy makers due to marginal

importance of pulses at local level to

have significant impact to farmers

income. As a result, area under paddy

and wheat increased in high –

productive zones along with high

doses of inputs like fertilizer and

pesticides and pulse crops shifted to

marginalized lands with little inputs

even though prices are high. Still

more than 90% of the pulses growing

districts are with less than 1 t/ha

yield, although production risk is

reduced slightly in recent years due to

the development of abiotic and biotic

stress tolerant varieties.

Spike in Prices in Recent Past

Prices of pulses consistently

increased from 2005 to 2010,

thereafter there was downward

movement of pulses except chickpea

upto 2012, but chickpea prices

steeply decreased after 2012-13

before recent rise again. While prices

of moong and urad showed upward

trends after 2013. Price indices of

chickpea are always moderate

compared to other pulse crops

throughout the period, except

between 2012 and 2013. The spike in

the chickpea prices during the 2012

is mainly due to the higher world

prices up to August 2012, thereafter

domestic prices were higher than

world prices due to short supply and

higher MSP, although overall both

domestic and world prices moderated

after 2012. Pigeonpea, moong and

urad showed rising trend in prices

with less fluctuation, while lentil

showed higher fluctuation in prices

with overall upward trend.

Trends in Wholesale Prices of Pulses

There was an upward movement

in the prices of total pulses and

several peaks are also seen especially

after 2005 (shown in the figure). The

spike years are 2006, 2010 and 2012.

In 2006, there was a surge in imports

of pulses and the gradual pass-

through of high global prices

continued in further years. The year

2009 was a poor agricultural year

therefore prices also aggravated. In

2012, high MSP and world prices

along with the depreciation of Indian

Rupee led to elevated prices.

The regression analysis gave the

following equation:

Y = -43.23+0.62* Trend + 1.25*

Seasonality – 45.30* D1 -33.72* Net

Imports -0.02 * Annual Rainfall +

3.76* Pulse Production. D1 is the

time dummy for the period 2005-15.

Index number of wholesale prices (2004-05=100)

Indian Farming

September 20156

Short-term Measures to Manage Spike

in Prices

The wholesale price index of

pulses (2004-05=100) peaked in the

year 2010 as a result of stagnant

production (production is stagnate at

below 15 MT (in 2007-08 only 14.8

MT; in 2008-09 14.6 MT and in

2009-10 14.7 MT), and rise in

demand. Imports peaked in the year

2009-10 to 3.6 MT. Given that, the

India is a major importer in the

world markets, whenever there is

shortage in domestic production,

India goes for importing from the

world markets, world pulses prices

increase steeply and invariably India

has to import pulses at higher prices.

As a result of high import prices,

domestic prices rise further. The open

market prices reached ` 90/kg for

pigeonpea, ` 70 for moong and urad

in the late 2010. In response to the

higher prices, government of India

has taken a number of policy

initiatives to increase free imports,

curtail speculative activities by

traders, streamlining the distribution

and supply chain through market

intervention as mentioned below.

• Reduced import duties to zero -

for pulses up to 31.3.2011

(extended further).

• Banned export of pulses (except

kabuli chana) up to 31.3.2011.

• Enabled imposition of stock limit

orders by State governments in

the case of pulses upto 30.9.2011

(extended further).

• Publicity campaigns have been

undertaken to popularise

consumption of yellow peas.

• There is a scheme for supply of

imported pulses by Public Sector

Undertakings to state

Governments for distribution

through Public Distribution

System, @1 kg per family per

month at a subsidy of ` 10 per

kg.

• The supply of imported pulses at

subsidized rate helped increase the

domestic availability. This helped

in moderating the prices of

pulses.

However, these measures can only

be effective in controlling higher

prices in the short run, as they are

targeted to reduce prices through a

mixture of trade policies (free

imports and ban on exports) and

demand management (like

distribution of pulses through PDS)

and not targeted increase production

over long period. To reduce prices in

the long run, India has to encourage

domestic production at lower cost.

Given India’s large consumption

needs very limited international

supply, it cannot depend on the world

markets for pulses supply year after

year, which will expose India’s pulses

consumers and producers to higher

fluctuations in international markets.

Factors for Recent Increase in

Production

In the past decade, pulse

production increased by 36.5%

mostly contributed by chickpea,

moong and urad. However, India

needs to increase pulses production

from 19 MT to anywhere between

25.39 MT and 36.9 MT to meet its

deficit. Still the yield levels of most of

the pulse crops remain very low

compared to the potential as well as

the world average except chickpea.

With the increased pulse imports year

after year and higher prices,

government of India initiated a

combination of technology and

market interventions. The recent

break from the stagnant pulses

production is attributed to proper

implementation of various

government programmes, larger

increase in Minimum Support Price

(MSP), good monsoon, increase in

area under rabi/spring

pulses(especially chickpea in non-

traditional areas), strong technology

back-up and timely availability of

seeds in the market. To give a boost

to pulses production, the government

has been implementing National

Food Security Mission-Pulses since

rabi 2008 in all major pulses

producing states covering about

97.5% pulses area in the country.

India has also launched Accelerated

Pulses Production Programme (A3P)

since Kharif, 2010 as a part of

NFSM-Pulses for demonstration of

production and protection

technologies in village level compact

blocks. Assistance is also being

provided to the farmers’ under other

crop development programmes such

as special initiative for pulses in

dryland area of 60,000 villages under

Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana

(RKVY) since 2010-11, Integrated

Development of 60000 Pulses

villages in Rainfed Areas 2011-12,

Special Plan to achieve 19+ million

tonnes of pulse production during

kharif 2012-13, additional area

coverage of Pulses rabi/summer

under NFSM-Pulses for additional

rabi/summer production during

2012-13, Macro Management of

Agriculture (MMA) and Bringing

Green Revolution to Eastern India

(BGEI) in rainfed areas across the

country for increasing crop

productivity and strengthening

market linking. In addition, 15

districts of Jharkhand and 10 districts

of Asom have also been included

under NFSM-Pulses based on their

potential for pulses development. The

Minimum Support Prices (MSPs) of

kharif pulses (pigeonpea, moong and

urad) have been increased compared

to competing crops to induce farmers

to take up pulses in kharif season. For

example, the annual compound

growth rate of MSP between 2001

and 2015 is 10.6% for pigeonpea,

11.3 % for moong and 10.8 % for

urad, which is far higher than the

competing crops(Table 9). NAFED

procured the market arrivals

whenever the prices fall below MSP.

The substantial increase in the MSPs

Table 8. Determinants of wholesale prices of pulses

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat

Intercept -43.23 56.62 -0.76Trend 0.62 0.03 19.95Seasonality 1.25 0.53 2.34Dummy 2005 -45.31 5.10 -8.88Net imports -33.72 4.47 -7.54Annual rainfall -0.02 0.01 -1.81Pulses production 3.77 0.64 5.92R square 0.93Observations 252

Indian Farming

September 2015 7

of pulses is to incentivise farmers to

increase their area and production, to

adopt high cost inputs like improved

seed (which will increase seed

replacement rate), fertilizers and

irrigation for increasing productivity.

All these efforts resulted in record

production. However, still

productivity of pulses in India (750

kg/ha) is lesser than the advanced

countries including China (1567 kg/

ha) (FAOSTAT, 2014).

Marketing Channels

Almost more than 95% of the

pulses produced in India go through

private channels as mentioned below

• Producer – Dal Miller –

Consumer,

• Producer – Village Trader –Dal

Miller – Wholesaler – Retailer –

Consumer,

• Producer – Dal Miller -Retailer -

Consumer,

• Producer – Wholesaler – Dal

Miller - Retailer –Consumer,

• Producer – Wholesaler – Dal

Miller – Wholesaler - Retailer –

Consumer,

• Producer – Wholesaler – Retailer

– Consumer (For whole moong),

• Producer – Commission Agent –

Dal Miller – Wholesaler –Retailer

– Consumer.

Institutional: (i) Producer –

Procuring Agency - Dal Miller –

Consumer, (ii) Producer – Procuring

Agency – Dal Miller – Wholesaler –

Retailer – Consumer, and (iii)

Producer – Procuring Agency – Dal

Miller – Retailer – Consumer.

For imported pulses, the channel

will be Exporting country –

Importing country – Private/

Government Agencies – Wholesaler /

Cooperative Societies – Retailer /

Village Societies – Consumer

Resuming to Liberal Export and Import

Policy

After recognition of the export

potential of some of the pulse crops

with recent increase in production

especially Kabuli chickpea, stringent

ban on exports was slowly

withdrawn. Under the advance

authorization scheme, import of

pulses was allowed after domestic

processing and value addition. The

prohibition of export of pulses is not

applied to exports of Kabuli chickpea

and a limited quantity of organic

pulses. Export to neighboring

countries like Bhutan and Maldives

are allowed. Although statutory

import duty is 50%, applied duty is

kept at zero for all pulses and import

of pulses are free without any

quantitative restrictions. However,

free imports will not have any

perceptible impact on the quantity

imported and domestic prices, as

there is no big difference between

domestic and international prices,

many times international prices are

high than domestic prices except

yellow peas.

Yield, Cost Structure and Profitability of

Pulse Crops Across Farm Size Groups

The plot level data of cost of

cultivation scheme was examined for,

government of India to work out

profitability for the year triennium

ending (TE) 2002 and 2010. Average

crop yields were increased from 8.9

to 11.4 quintal in pigeonpea, from

9.3 to 9.7 quintal in chickpea, from

8.5 to 9.1 quintal in lentil, from 3.3

to 4.0 in moong and from stagnant at

5.2 quintal in urad between TE 2002

and TE 2010 among sample farmers

(Table 10). In general, marginal plots

were having higher yield per ha,

compared to large plots, but there is

no significant difference in yields

among marginal, small and medium

plots.

The changes in cost structure

(share of different cost items in total

cost) among different crops are given

in Table 11. It indicates that the

human labour contributes to about

37 %( chickpea) to 53 %(moong) in

2010. In general, share of casual

labour is less compared to family

labour except in moong. Further

share of casual labour share increased

and family labour decreased. Share of

animal labour is higher in pigeonpea

Table 9. The MSPs (`/quintal) of pulses and competing crops

Year Paddy Maize Wheat Chickpea Pigeonpea Moong Urad

2000-01 510 445 610 1100 1200 1200 12002001-02 530 485 620 1200 1320 1320 13202002-03 530 485 620 1220 1320 1330 13302003-04 550 505 630 1400 1360 1370 13702004-05 560 515 640 1425 1390 1410 14102005-06 570 525 650 1435 1400 1520 15202006-07 580 540 750 1445 1410 1520 15202007-08 645 600 1000 1600 1550 1700 17002008-09 900 840 1080 1730 2000 2520 25202009-10 1000 840 1100 1760 2300 2760 25202010-11 1000 880 1170 2100 3500 3670 34002011-12 1080 980 1285 2800 3700 4000 38002012-13 1250 1175 1350 3000 3850 4400 43002013-14 1310 1310 1400 3100 4300 4500 43002014-15 1360 1310 1450 3175 4350 4600 4350ACGR (%) 8.1 8.4 7.5 7.9 10.6 11.3 10.8

Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.

Table 10. Yield (quintal/ha) among different plot sizes

Year Marginal Small Medium Large All

Pigeonpea TE 2002 9.7 8.6 7.9 6.8 8.9TE 2010 13.0 9.5 9.6 8.3 11.4

Chickpea TE 2002 9.6 9.4 9.4 9.0 9.3TE 2010 9.9 9.2 9.6 9.9 9.7

Lentil TE 2002 9.0 8.7 8.3 8.0 8.5TE 2010 10.1 9.2 8.3 8.4 9.1

Moong TE 2002 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.8 3.3TE 2010 4.2 3.8 3.6 4.7 4.0

Urad, TE 2002 4.8 4.9 5.2 6.1 5.2TE 2010 4.7 5.2 5.1 6.4 5.2

Source: Cost of cultivation scheme unit level data: Farmers were grouped in to marginal,small, medium and large based on bottom 25th, 25 to 50, 50 to 75 and top 25 % basedon area under pulse crops (quintile groups).

Indian Farming

September 20158

(16%) and lower in urad (6%) and

lentil(7%) mostly contributed by

own animals. Share of machine

labour is higher in lentil (22%),

followed by chickpea (20%) and least

in moong(12%) and pigeonpea

(13%). Share of all labour (human,

animal and machine together) is

contributing to 78% in moong to

65% in chickpea. Given that the

labour scarcity is increased in the

villages and wage rates have increased

in the last decade, there is an increase

in farm mechanization across all the

crops and states. Share of seed is

higher in chickpea and lentils (about

Table 11. Cost structure (% of total cost) in TE 2002 and TE 2010 of major pulse crops

Crop Pigeonpea Chickpea Lentil Moong Urad

Cost item 2002 2010 2002 2010 2002 2010 2002 2010 2002 2010

Family labour 21 18 22 17 17 17 24 27 17 17Attached labour 2.4 2.4 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.7 2.9 1.9 2.1 1.0Casual labour 21 27 12 18 21 23 20 23 31 32Total human labour 44 47 35 37 39 40 47 53 50 50Hired animal 4.3 4.1 0.9 1.9 0.8 1.0 2.7 1.9 2.2 0.7Owned animal 18 12 8 6 12 6 21 12 14 5Total animal labour 23 16 9 8 13 7 24 14 16 6Hired machine 8 12 15 18 21 20 6 11 10 15Own machine 0.8 0.7 2.2 1.9 1.7 2.6 0.6 1.0 0.7 1.1Total machine labour 8 13 17 20 22 22 7 12 10 17Labour (human, animal 75 76 60 65 74 69 77 78 76 73and machine)

Seed value 6 6 25 20 16 21 14 14 14 17Fertilizer 8 7 7 7 8 7 6 4 5 3Manure 2.5 2.2 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.2 2.2 2.7 1.5 1.1Insecticides 7.6 7.6 1.1 4.6 0.9 1.3 1.1 1.2 3.3 5.7Irrigation charges 0.9 0.7 7.1 3.6 1.2 1.2 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.9Miscellaneous Cost 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Source: Cost of cultivation scheme unit level data.

Table 12. Gross returns, total cost and profitability (` 1000/ha) among different plot size among sample farmers

TE 2002 TE 2010

Marginal Small Medium Large All Marginal Small Medium Large All

Pigeonpea Gross returns 15.6 13.8 12.5 10.5 14.2 49.4 36.2 34.1 29.9 43.2 Cost A2 11.1 6.8 5.6 5.6 8.7 34.6 16.2 13.1 11.5 26.3 Profit 4.4 7.0 6.9 5.0 5.4 14.9 20.0 21.0 18.4 16.8Chickpea Gross returns 15.7 14.6 15.1 13.6 14.5 24.2 21.7 21.7 22.1 22.4 Cost A2 11.8 7.5 6.4 5.5 7.2 19.9 11.8 10.8 9.4 12.4 Profit 3.9 7.1 8.7 8.1 7.3 4.3 9.8 10.9 12.7 10.0Lentil Gross returns 13.5 12.8 12.3 11.5 12.6 32.7 29.8 27.1 26.4 29.5 Cost A2 10.9 5.5 4.9 4.4 6.7 18.0 9.4 8.1 7.8 11.5 Profit 2.5 7.3 7.3 7.1 5.9 14.8 20.3 19.0 18.6 17.9Moong Gross returns 6.5 6.0 5.8 6.5 6.1 16.5 14.8 14.0 17.1 15.4 Cost A2 8.6 5.3 4.5 4.3 5.9 15.7 8.0 6.9 8.1 9.9 Profit -2.1 0.6 1.3 2.1 0.2 0.8 6.8 7.1 9.1 5.4Urad Gross returns 8.8 8.4 8.4 9.9 8.9 17.9 19.0 18.7 23.8 19.4 Cost A2 8.7 6.0 5.4 4.7 6.4 17.2 8.6 8.4 9.1 11.7 Profit 0.1 2.4 3.1 5.2 2.5 0.7 10.4 10.3 14.7 7.7

Source: Cost of cultivation scheme unit level data. Note: costs are based on cost A2 concept (which include all paid out costs and imputedvalue of owned land). Farmers were grouped in to marginal, small, medium and large based on bottom 25th, 25 to 50, 50 to 75 and top25 % based on area under pulse crops (quintile groups).

20%). Share of fertilizer contributes

not more than 8% in many pulse

crops. Share of insecticide is higher in

pigeonpea and urad.

In triennium ending 2010,

profitability (gross returns-cost) of

lentil was higher (` 17.9 thousand/

ha), followed by pigeonpea (` 16.8

thousand/ha), chickpea (` 10

thousand/ha), whereas for moong

and urad profit are less than ten

thousand (Table 12). In general,

profitability is much higher among

medium, and large farmers compared

to marginal and small farmers. The

trend is more or less similar in TE

2002 also. Overall, even though

yields are higher among marginal

farmers, the profitability is low due

to high overhead costs (indivisible

costs like farm machinery, tractors,

threshers and harvesters, supervision

and management cost which is

becoming very high given the

increased wages), there is a need for

development and diffusion of

machinery suitable for marginal

farmers to increase labour

productivity. Low profitability of

marginal and small plots shows that

the requirement of consolidation of

marginal holdings for higher profits.

Indian Farming

September 2015 9

Pigeonpea profitability was higher

in Bihar (` 27.1 thousand/ha),

followed by Gujarat (` 26.1

thousand/ha), UP (` 23.1 thousand/

ha), AP (` 15.7 thousand/ha) in TE

2010(Table 13). The interstate

differences are mainly explained by

the differences in the cost per hectare.

Even though gross returns are higher

in Maharashtra (` 54,200),

profitability was low in Maharashtra

(only ` 15.4 thousand) due to high

cost of cultivation (` 38.7 thousand/

ha). In Bihar, profitability was high

(` 27.1 thousand) due to low cost of

cultivation (` 8.3 thousand) even

though gross returns are low (` 35.4

thousand). Overall, cost of

cultivation in chickpea was low

compared to pigeonpea. Cost of

cultivation ranged between ` 4.7

thousand/ha in Haryana and ` 17.4

thousand/ha in UP. Profits were

higher in Bihar, Rajasthan and UP.

Lentils also exhibit similar cost

benefits as that of chickpeas due to

similarity in agronomic practices and

both are rabi crops. Again moong

and urad exhibit similarity in costs

and benefits with comparatively low

costs and benefits compared to

chickpea and lentil. Over all, results

show that, cost reduction should be

the main strategy to increase

profitability, which can be done

through judicious use of inputs and

especially labour.

Role of Technology

Among various factors

contributing to higher production

(18 to 19 million tonnes) of pulses in

recent years, availability of quality

seeds of high yielding varieties (like

JG-11 of chickpea which

revolutionized pulse production in

Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka which

are non-traditional areas for pulses

cultivation) played a major role. Due

to wider adoption of JG-11 and other

improved varities, yield level of

chickpea in Andhra Pradesh (about

2t/ha) is highest compared to any

other major chickpea growing

country. National Agricultural

Research System (NARS) has made

several efforts in producing required

quantity of breeder seeds of major

pulse crops during last decade. ICAR

Institutes viz., Indian Institute of

Pulses Research (IIPR), Indian

Agricultural Research Institute

(IARI), State Agricultural

Universities (SAUs) together with

State Farm Corporation of India

(SFCI) have produced sufficient

quantity of breeder seeds of major

pulses which are subsequently used in

producing foundation and certified

seeds and made available to farmers.

However, due to administrative

delays, procedures, lack of

transparent and timely

communication among different

stakeholders in the seed supply chain

(from block/mandal level agricultural

office to the state department of

agriculture, National Seed

Corporation, ICAR institute), the

seed replacement ratio is still low.

Most of the times, seed reaches the

villages after sowing season. Another

major problem is that even though

new improved varieties are

recommended by the ICAR, many

government departments are still

procuring outdated varieties with low

potential yield for distribution among

the farmers. There is no competitive

environment in pulses seed market as

there is few or no private players.

Technology Demonstrations

Conduct of technology

demonstrations on various pulse

crops in different states were

undertaken under the aegis of the

ICAR with technology back up by

Indian Institute of Pulses Research.

Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVKs) at

Table 13. State wise changes in profitability of different pulse crops (Units: ` 1000/ha)

TE 2002 TE 2010

Crop Gross Cost A2 Profit Gross Cost A2 Profitreturns returns

Pigeonpea Bihar 35.4 8.3 27.1Gujarat 14.4 6.3 8.1 44.0 18.0 26.1Uttar Pradesh 15.9 7.2 8.7 36.0 12.9 23.1Andhra Pradesh 11.1 10.0 1.1 33.7 18.0 15.7Karnataka 8.8 6.9 2.0 26.8 11.2 15.6Maharashtra 16.2 10.9 5.4 54.2 38.7 15.4Madhya Pradesh 9.2 5.7 3.5 25.9 10.8 15.1Odisha 6.3 5.3 1.0 18.6 8.7 9.9Tamil Nadu 16.8 3.8 13.0 16.9 32.5 -15.6Total 14.2 8.7 5.4 43.2 26.3 16.8

Chickpea Bihar 15.4 5.7 9.7 26.0 9.2 16.8Rajasthan 13.5 6.3 7.1 22.0 9.3 12.8Uttar Pradesh 18.0 10.2 7.8 30.1 17.4 12.6Madhya Pradesh 14.0 6.9 7.1 22.3 9.8 12.5Karnataka 17.6 11.1 6.5Haryana 9.5 5.7 3.8 11.3 4.7 6.5Maharashtra 12.9 9.3 3.6 19.5 16.3 3.2Andhra Pradesh 30.9 15.6 15.3Total 14.5 7.2 7.3 22.4 12.4 10.0

Lentil Bihar 13.1 5.2 7.9 29.4 8.0 21.4Madhya Pradesh 11.3 5.5 5.8 24.0 8.1 15.9Uttar Pradesh 12.9 10.0 2.9 30.4 17.2 13.2West Bengal 33.0 14.0 19.0Total 12.6 6.7 5.9 29.5 11.5 17.9

Moong Andhra Pradesh 8.2 5.7 2.5 14.2 6.5 7.7Karnataka 12.7 7.7 5.0Maharashtra 6.8 7.5 -0.7 22.0 20.7 1.4Odisha 5.3 4.6 0.7 12.7 7.0 5.6Rajasthan 6.5 7.2 -0.7 16.4 8.1 8.3Total 6.1 5.9 0.2 15.4 9.9 5.4

Urad Andhra Pradesh 10.8 4.4 6.4 28.0 10.1 17.9Madhya Pradesh 8.1 4.7 3.4 18.2 8.2 10.0Maharashtra 7.4 7.8 -0.4 19.0 23.7 -4.7Odisha 7.4 5.4 2.0 16.5 8.0 8.6Rajasthan 8.5 7.1 1.4 19.2 11.3 8.0Tamil Nadu 10.1 7.7 2.4 23.6 12.2 11.4Uttar Pradesh 10.6 6.9 3.7 15.7 13.9 1.8Total 8.9 6.4 2.5 19.4 11.7 7.7

Indian Farming

September 201510

district level and All India

coordinated projects in different

centres were given the responsibility

of organizing these demonstrations.

Demonstrations on high yielding

varieties along with package

technology show that moong yield

can be enhanced by 46.7% with

average grain yield of 1100 kg/ha and

with profit of ` 35700 per ha with

short duration crop maturing in less

than 65 days. This has encouraged

farmers to cultivate summer moong.

Similarly, encouraging incremental

yield achieved during kharif from

short duration pulse crops like urad

and pigeonpea showed that

popularization of high yielding and

disease resistant varieties along with

matching package technology can

enhance the yield levels by 34-47%

from the present low levels. The

results of successful technology

demonstrations at ICRISAT and

IIPR, Kanpur has provided enough

confidence on the potential of the

existing technologies to upscale on

farmers fields. There is a need for

development of model extension

strategy for pulse crops in

collaboration with state department

of agriculture, KVKs, SAUs and

ICAR at district level to reduce yield

gaps between lab and land.

Opportunities for Expanding Pulses Area

The recent task force on pulses

headed by Dr Alagh identified the

areas/states which have the potential

for increasing pulses area (i)

identification of additional area

having potential for pulse crops by

utilization of rice fallow lands (3 to

4 million ha) largely in Eastern

India and can yield around 2.5

million tonnes, (ii) diversification of

about 5 lakh ha area of upland rice,

4.5 lakh ha area of millets and 3

lakh ha area under barley, mustard

and wheat, currently giving low

yields can be brought under kharif/

rabi pulses, (iii) About 16.5 lakh ha

area vacated by wheat, peas, potato

and sugarcane can be used for

raising 60-65 day summer moong

crop in the UP, Punjab, Haryana,

Bihar, Gujarat, and West Bengal

where adequate irrigation facilities

exist and the menace of blue bull is

contained and (iv) similarly pigeon

pea on rice bunds and intercropping

in specific agro climatic regimes is

identified.

Strategies for Streamlining Production,

Procurement and Distribution

Development of varieties, hybrids

and GM crops which are high

yielding as well as abiotic and biotic

stress tolerant. The adoption of newly

released promising varieties,

integrated crop management (with

components of integrated nutrient

management, integrated pest

management) and life saving

irrigation for rabi crops. However,

scientific and technological

development without reaching

farmers through proper distribution

channels is not fruitful. Hence, the

increased availability of quality seeds

at the village level through innovative

seed production and distribution

mechanisms is important. Efforts

need to be made to increase farm

mechanization through varietal

development and innovative custom

hiring facilities to reduce peak season

labour requirement. Mandatory

procurement of pulses by the

government agencies in case prices

fall below MSP. Procurement centre

with adequate storage facilities need

to be established at district and block

level in major pulse growing zones.

There is a need to blend domestic

price policy with tariff policy such

that domestic price of pulses stabilize

and assured profits to pulse producers

are ensured. Import duties on pulses

need to be calibrated in response to

the demand and supply situation.

The policy instruments which are

detrimental to free market such as

stocking limit orders, trading

movement controls, licensing

requirements and other controls need

to be removed in a phased manner.

SUMMARY

Apart from enhanced availability

of newly released seeds of high

yielding varieties recommended by

ICAR, the strong field level

extension, government procurement

at enhanced minimum support prices

in case of glut in markets and

effective government programmes

like NFSM, APPP and RKVY helped

in enhancing pulses production

especially in a few pockets in the

country. These initial steps need to

be up- scaled and out-scaled through

appropriate technology support,

favourable Govt. policies and

remunerative price backed by

effective supply chain management.

With this, India can reduce or

eliminate the projected deficit (17

MT deficit projected based on

recommended consumption

requirements 80 gm/capita/day or

to meet the 6 million tonnes

deficit projected by IIPR, Kanpur by

2020.

1 Principal Scientist (Agricultural Economics)

Share your experiences with

Indian FarmingWrite to:Editor

INDIAN FARMINGDirectorate of Knowledge Management in Agriculture

Indian Council of Agricultural ResearchKrishi Anusandhan Bhavan I,

Pusa, New Delhi 110 012