Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Agricultural credit in India: determinants and effects

  • Article
  • Published:
Indian Economic Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Credit is used as an instrument to raise the capital required to increase farm productivity, income and welfare of farmers, particularly small and marginal farmers who lack the capital to buy necessary inputs in time for agricultural operation. But the question of whether the goals of credit policies were met still remains unanswered. This study, therefore, attempted to estimate the effect of farm credit on investment, input expenditure, income and other welfare indicators using national-level farm household survey data. We used the logit function to estimate the determinants of credit access and the propensity score matching algorithm to estimate the effect of credit policies. Results revealed that only 33% of farmers have access to credit facilities and that middle-aged farmers and farmers with a larger farm size have shown a higher probability of accessing credit facilities, whereas farmers from underprivileged castes have shown the least probability of credit access. Nevertheless, credit access, overall, has significant positive effects on farm investments, such as land-building, livestock and machinery. It also has a significant positive effect on the farm revenue expenditure, including the expenditure on seeds, machinery, labour, irrigation, plant protection chemicals and livestock inputs. As a result, credit access has an incremental effect on farm income per hectare, livestock income and monthly consumption expenditure. The results imply that although farm credit policies have improved the welfare of beneficiary farmers, the credit distribution system seems to be inefficient as more than 60% of farmers do not have access to credit. This demonstrates that there is a need for inclusive and holistic policy interventions to include all farmers in the credit system, specifically offering term loans to small and marginal farmers. Apart from this, it is also suggested that simplified crop loan and Kisan Credit Card facilities be made available to tenant farmers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

This manuscript has used secondary data of various published reports and the data are available for cross references.

Notes

  1. A confounding variable is a variable other than desired one being studied that is associated with both the output variables and the factor being studied. In this study, confounding variables (e.g., age, education, farm size, etc.,) may distort the effects of credit access on the output variables in question (Austin, 2011).

References

  • Abebaw, D., Fentie, Y., & Kassa, B. (2010). The impact of a food security program on household food consumption in Northwestern Ethiopia: a matching estimator approach. Food Policy, 35(4), 286–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agbodji, A. E., & Johnson, A. A. (2019). Agricultural credit and its impact on the productivity of certain cereals in Togo. Emerging Market Finance and Trade. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2019.1602038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed, M. H., Geleta, K. M., Tazeze, A., & Andualem, E. (2017). The impact of improved maize varieties on farm productivity and wellbeing: Evidence from the east Hararghe zone of Ethiopia. Development Studies Research, 4(1), 9–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, P. C. (2011). An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behavioural Research, 46, 399–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Awotide, B. A., T. Abdoulaye, A. Alene, and V.M. Manyong. 2015. Impact of access to credit on agricultural productivity: Evidence from smallholder cassava farmers in Nigeria (No. 1008–2016–80242).

  • Banerjee, A. V. (2013). Microcredit under the microscope: what have we learned in the past two decades, and what do we need to know? Annual Review of Economics, 5, 487–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, A. V., Karlan, D., & Zinman, J. (2015). Randomized evaluations of microcredit: introduction and further steps. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 7(1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battese, G. E., & Coelli, T. J. (1992). Frontier production functions, technical efficiency and panel data: With application to paddy farmers in India. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 3(1), 153–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauchet, J., & Morduch, J. (2013). “Is micro too small? microcredit vs SME finance. World Development, 43, 288–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benedetto, U., Stuart, J. H., Gianni, D. A., & Eugene, H. B. (2018). Statistical primer: propensity score matching and its alternatives. European Journal of Cardio- Thoracic Surgery, 53(6), 1112–1117. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezy167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhalla, G.S., & Singh, G. (2010). Growth of Indian Agriculture: a district level study, Planning Commission, Government of India. Available at http://planningcommission.nic.in/reports/sereport/ser/ser_gia2604.pdf.

  • Bhatt, M. S., & Bhat, S. A. (2014). Technical efficiency and farm size productivity-micro level evidence from Jammu & Kashmir. International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics, 2(4), 27–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binswanger, H. P., & Khandker, S. R. (1995). The impact of formal finance on the rural economy of India. Journal of Development Studies, 32(2), 234–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bravo-Ureta, B. E., Solís, D., Moreira López, V. H., Maripani, J. F., Thiam, A., & Rivas, T. (2007). Technical efficiency in farming: a meta-regression analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 27(1), 57–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookhart, M. A., Schneeweiss, S., Rothman, K. J., Glynn, R. J., Avorn, J., & Sturmer, T. (2006). Variable Selection for Propensity Score Models. American Journal of Epidemiology, 163(12), 1149–1156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buadi, D. K., Anaman, K. A., & Kwarteng, J. A. (2013). Farmers’ perceptions of the quality of extension services provided by non-governmental organisations in two municipalities in the Central Region of Ghana. Agricultural Systems, 120, 20–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2013.05.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caliendo, M., & Kopeinig, S. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(1), 31–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cariappa, A.G.A., & Sendhil, R. (2021). Does Institutional Credit Induce on-Farm Investments? Evidence from India, 2021 Conference, August 17–31, 2021, Virtual 315221, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

  • Carter, M. R. (1989). The impact of credit on peasant productivity and differentiation in nicaragua. Journal of Development Economics, 31(1), 13–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, T., & Gupta, A. (2017). Loan repayment behaviour of farmers: analysing indian households. Kanpur: IIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chand, R., & Singh, J. (2022). Workforce changes and employment: some findings from PLFS data series. NITI Aayog Discussion Paper. New Delhi.

  • Coleman, B. E. (1999). The impact of group lending in Northeast Thailand. Journal Development Economics, 60(1), 105e141. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3878(99)00038-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, B. E. (2006). Microfinance in Northeast Thailand: who benefits and how much? World Development, 34(9), 1612–1638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2006.01.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornejo, J., & McBride, W. (2002). Adoption of bioengineered crops. Agricultural economics report No. 810. 1800 M street, NW, Washington, DC 20036–5831.

  • Dagar, V., Khan, M. K., Alvarado, R., Usman, M., Zakari, A., Rehman, A., Murshed, M., & Tillaguango, B. (2021). Variations in technical efficiency of farmers with distinct land size across agro-climatic zones: Evidence from India. Journal of Cleaner Production, 315, 128109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Datta, S., Tiwari, A. K., & Shylajan, C. S. (2018). An empirical analysis of nature, magnitude and determinants of farmers’ indebtedness in India. International Journal of Social Economics, 45(6), 888–908.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deaton, A. (1990) Saving in Developing Countries: Theory and Review. Proceedings of the World Bank Annual Conference on Development Economics 1989. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank.

  • Dehejia, R. H., & Wahba, S. (2002). Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(1), 151–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dev, M.S. (2012). Small farmers in India: challenges and opportunities. Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, Working paper. http://www.igidr.ac.in/pdf/publication/WP-2012-014.pdf

  • Diagne, A., Zeller, M., & Sharma M. (2000) “Empirical Measurements of Households’ Access to Credit and Credit Constraints in Developing Countries: Methodological Issues and Evidence”. Food Consumption and Nutrition Division (FCND) Discussion Paper 90. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

  • Diagne, A., & Zeller, M. (2001). Access to credit and its impact on welfare in Malawi (Vol. 116). International Food Policy Research Institute.

  • Eswaran, M., & Kotwal, A. (1990). Implications of credit constraints for risk behaviour in less developed economies. Oxford Economic Papers, 42(2), 473–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) (2012). Sustainable Crop Production Intensification. Twenty-third Session. Rome, Italy.

  • Ghalib, A. K., Issam, M., & Imai, S. K. (2011). The impact of microfinance and its role in easing poverty of rural households: estimations from Pakistan. Kobe University, 1, 1–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of India (2019). Agriculture Census 2015–16. All India Report on number and area of operational holdings agriculture census division. Department of Agriculture, Co-Operation & Farmers Welfare Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, New Delhi.

  • Guirkinger, C. (2008). Understanding the coexistence of formal and informal credit markets in Piura. Peru. World Development, 36(8), 1436–1452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazarika, G., & Alwang, J. (2003). Access to credit, plot size and cost inefficiency among smallholder tobacco cultivators in Malawi. Agricultural Economics, 29(1), 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2003.tb00150.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jayachandran, S. (2006). Selling labor low: wage responses to productivity shocks in developing countries. Journal of Political Economy, 114, 538–575.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, P. K., Joshi, L., & Birthal, P. S. (2006). Diversification and its impact on smallholders: evidence from a study on vegetable production. Agricultural Economic Research Review, 19, 219–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karthick, V., & Madheswaran, S. (2018). Access to formal credit in the indian agriculture: does caste matter? Journal of Social Inclusion Studies, 4(2), 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khandker, S. R., & Faruqee, R. R. (2003). The impact of farm credit in Pakistan. Agricultural Economics, 28, 197–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khandker, S. R., & Koolwal, G. B. (2016). How has microcredit supported agriculture? Evidence using panel data from Bangladesh. Agricultural Economics, 47(2), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.2016.47.issue-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, A., Mishra, A. K., Saroj, S., & Joshi, P. K. (2017). Institutional versus non-institutional credit to agricultural households in India: Evidence on impact from a national farmers’ survey. Economic Systems, 41(3), 420–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, A., Mishra, A. K., Sonkar, V. K., & Saroj, S. (2020). Access to credit in eastern india implications for the economic well-being of agricultural households. Economic & Political Weekly, 55(21), 46–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, A., Singh, R. K. P., Jee, S., Chand, S., Tripathi, G., & Saroj, S. (2015). Dynamics of access to rural credit in India: Patterns and determinants. Agricultural Economic Research Review, 28, 151–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latruffe, L., Balcombe, K., Davidova, S., & Zawalinska, K. (2004). Determinants of technical efficiency of crop and livestock farms in Poland. Applied Economics, 36(12), 1255–1263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luan, D. X., & Bauer, S. (2016). Does credit access affect household income homogeneously across different groups of credit recipients? Evidence from rural Vietnam. Journal of Rural Studies, 47, 186–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mal, P., Manjunatha, A. V., Bauer, S., & Ahmed, M. N. (2011). Technical efficiency and environmental impact of Bt cotton and non-Bt cotton in North India. AgBioforum, 14(3), 164–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malaiarasan, U., Paramasivam, R., & Felix, K. T. (2021). Crop diversification: Determinants and effects under paddy-dominated cropping system. Paddy and Water Environment, 19, 417–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10333-021-00843-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manjunatha, A. V., Anik, A. R., Speelman, S., & Nuppenau, E. A. (2013). Impact of land fragmentation, farm size, land ownership and crop diversity on profit and efficiency of irrigated farms in India. Land Use Policy, 31, 397–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manogna, R. L., & Mishra, A. K. (2020). Price discovery and volatility spillover: an empirical evidence from spot and futures agricultural commodity markets in India. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies, 10(4), 447–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manogna, R. L., & Mishra, A. K. (2022). Agricultural production efficiency of Indian states: evidence from data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 27(4), 4244–4255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendola, M. (2007). Agricultural technology adoption and poverty reduction: a propensity-score matching analysis for rural Bangladesh. Food Policy, 32(3), 372–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mor, S., & Sharma, S. (2012). Technical efficiency and supply chain practices in dairying: The case of India. Agricultural Economics, 58(2), 85–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morduch, J. (1999). The microfinance promise. Journal of Economic Literature, 37(4), 1569–1614.

    Google Scholar 

  • NABARD (2018). NABARD All India Rural Financial Inclusion Survey - 2016–17.

  • Nanthakumaran, A., & Palanisami, K. (2013). Efficiency in sugarcane production under tank irrigation systems in Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of Environmental Professional Sri Lanka, 1(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.4038/jepsl.v1i1.5138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narayanan, S. (2016). The productivity of agricultural credit in India. Agricultural Economics, 47(4), 399–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nikoloski, Z., & Ajwad, M.I. (2013). Do economic crises lead to health and nutrition behavior responses? analysis using longitudinal data from Russia. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 6538, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2297215

  • National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) (2003a). India - Situation Assessment Survey of Farmers: NSS 59th Round, Schedule 33, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India.

  • National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) (2013). All India Debt & Investment Survey: NSS 70th Round, Schedule 18.2, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India.

  • Ochieng, J., Knerr, B., Owuor, G., & Ouma, E. (2016). Commercialisation of food crops and farm productivity: Evidence from smallholders in Central Africa. Agrekon, 55(4), 458–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogubazghi, S. K., & Muturi, W. (2014). The effect of age and educational level of owner/managers on SMMEs’ access to bank loan in Eritrea: evidence from Asmara City. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 4(11), 632.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pathania, A., Chaudhary, R., & Kumar, K. (2020). Analysis of Agriculture Input Consumption by Indian Farmers. International Journal of Economic Plants, 7(2), 086–090. https://doi.org/10.23910/2/2020.0369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pufahl, A., & Weiss, C. R. (2009). Evaluating the effects of farm programmes: Results from propensity score matching. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 36(1), 79–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quach, M. H., Mullineux, A. W., & Murinde, V. (2005). Access to credit and household poverty reduction in rural Vietnam: a Cross Sectional study. Edgbaston, UK: The University of Birmingham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajeev, M., & Mahesh, H. P. (2014). The indian banking system: reforms and beyond. In J. S. Zajaczkowski & M. Thapa (Eds.), India in the contemporary world: polity, economy, and international relations. India: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ray, D. (1998). Development economics. USA: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, V. R., & Reddy, P. P. (2007). increasing costs in agriculture: agrarian crisis and rural labour in India. Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 50(2), 273–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richard, L. K., Job, L. K., & Wambua, T. R. (2015). Effects of micro credit on welfare of households: the case of Ainamoi Sub County, Kericho County, Kenya. Developing Country Studies, 5(18), 72–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, M. (2001). The Micro-finance Revolution: Sustainable Finance for the Poor. Washington D.C.: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1985). Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The American Statistician, 39(1), 33–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiferaw, B., Kassie, M., Jaleta, M., & Yirga, C. (2014). Adoption of improved wheat varieties and impacts on household food security in Ethiopia. Food Policy, 44, 272–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoji, M., Aoyagi, K., Kasahara, R., Sawada, Y., & Ueyama, M. (2012). Social capital formation and credit access: Evidence from Sri Lanka. World DevelopMent, 40(12), 2522–2536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidhu, R. S., Vatta, K., & Kaur, A. (2008). Dynamics of institutional agricultural credit and growth in Punjab: contribution and demand-supply gap. Agricultural Economic Research Review, 21, 407–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, A. K., Narayanan, K. G. S., & Sharma, P. (2019). Measurement of technical efficiency of climatic and non-climatic factors in sugarcane farming in Indian states: use of stochastic frontier production function approach. Climate Change, 5(19), 150–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. A., & Todd, P. E. (2001). Reconciling conflicting evidence on the performance of propensity-score matching methods. American Economic Review, 91(2), 112–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sriram, M. S. (2007). Productivity of rural credit: a review of issues and some recent literature. International Journal of Rural Management, 3(2), 245–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/097300520800300204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staffa, J. S., & Zurakowski, D. (2018). Five steps to successfully implement and evaluate propensity score matching in clinical research studies. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 127(4), 1066–1073.

    Google Scholar 

  • Economic Survey (2015–2016). Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi.

  • Swain, R. B., Sanh, N. V., & Tuan, V. V. (2008). Microfinance and poverty reduction in mekong delta in Vietnam. African and Asian Studies, 7(2–3), 191–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tripathi, R. S., Dev, C., & Sharma, M. L. (1994). Variation of productivity of short-term credit used for wheat production in different zones of Uttar Pradesh Hills. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 49(3), 491–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, W. (2020). Estimation of technical efficiency and output growth decomposition for small-scale rice farmers in Eastern India: A stochastic frontier analysis. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies, 10(2), 139–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Y. (1995). Productivity growth, technological progress, and technical efficiency change in China: A three-sector analysis. Journal of Comparative Economics, 21, 207–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeller, M., Schrieder, G., Von Braun, J., & Heidhues, F. (1997). Rural finance for food security for the poor – implications for research and policy. Baltimore: International Food Policy Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeller, M., & Sharma, M. (2002). Access to and demand for financial services by the rural poor: a multicountry synthesis. In M. Zeller & R. L. Meyer (Eds.), The triangle of microfinance: financial sustainability, outreach and impact. Baltimore: International Food Policy Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

The authors have no financial or proprietary interests in any material discussed in this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kumaraguru Institute of Agriculture, Erode, 638 315, Tamil Nadu, India

    Paramasivam Ramasamy

  2. Madras Institute of Development Studies, Chennai-600 020, Tamil Nadu, India

    Umanath Malaiarasan

Authors
  1. Paramasivam Ramasamy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Umanath Malaiarasan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paramasivam Ramasamy.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ramasamy, P., Malaiarasan, U. Agricultural credit in India: determinants and effects. Ind. Econ. Rev. 58, 169–195 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41775-023-00187-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41775-023-00187-8

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation