The prices of agricultural commodities are inherently more volatile than non-agricultural commodity prices. The major reasons are the inelastic nature of supply to prices. Lack of market integration and information asymmetry also play a role. A very good harvest in one year will result in sharp fall in the prices of that commodity, and farmers will be discouraged from continuing production due to heavy loss. As a result of this, supply will go down in the next year and price will increase. Somewhat similar to this, we experience in the case of pulses. A severe deficit in supply led to soaring of prices in the year 2015–16. However, an increased price and other government interventions again encouraged the production of surplus. Even with an increase in production, the import dependency to meet the excess demand is growing. Additionally, an increase in production is still lagging behind the demand. To counter this, the government announces MSP for various crops including pulses in each year. MSP acts as an instrument in enabling government to guarantee minimum prices to farmers prior to the cropping season so that farmers are encouraged to allocate acreage under pulses cultivation. Thus, the provision of MSP provides an assured market for farmers. However, our analysis of the profile of sample households in Chap. 5 and the discussion in Chap. 9 showed that percentage of farmers who have information about pulses MSP and those who are availing MSP were very less. The farmers who sold crop to procurement agencies even when they had information about MSP and procurement agencies were also less. Therefore, the present chapter will make an analysis of factors influencing the information access to MSP and utilisation of MSP.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Adesina, A. A., & Zinnah, M. M. (1993). Technology characteristics, farmers’ perceptions and adoption decisions: A Tobit model application in Sierra Leone. Agricultural Economics, 9(4), 297–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5150(93)90019-9
Feder, G., Just, R. E., & Zilberman, D. (1985). Adoption of agricultural innovations in developing countries: A survey. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 255–298.
Kassie, M., Jaleta, M., Shiferaw, B., Mmbando, F., & Mekuria, M. (2013). Adoption of interrelated sustainable agricultural practices in smallholder systems: Evidence from rural Tanzania. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(3), 525–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2009.01.001
Kassie, M., Teklewold, H., Jaleta, M., Marenya, P., & Erenstein, O. (2015). Understanding the adoption of a portfolio of sustainable intensification practices in eastern and southern Africa. LandUsePolicy, 42, 400–411. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.08.016.
Langyintuo, A. S., & Mungoma, C. (2008). The effect of household wealth on the adoption of improved maize varieties in Zambia. Food Policy, 33(6), 550–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.04.002
Manda, J., Alene, A. D., Gardebroek, C., Kassie, M., & Tembo, G. (2015). Adoption and impacts of sustainable agricultural practices on maize yields and incomes: Evidence from Rural Zambia. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67(1), 130–153. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12127
Meshram, V., Chobitkar, N., Paigwar, V., & Dhuware, S. R. (2012). Factors affecting on SRI system of paddy cultivation in Balaghat Ddistrict of Madhya Pradesh. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, I (Special Issue), 202–204.
Ogada, M. J., Mwabu, G., & Muchai, D. (2014). Farm technology adoption in Kenya: A simultaneous estimation of inorganic fertilizer and improved maize variety adoption decisions. Agricultural and Food Economics, 2(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40100-014-0012-3
Pender, J., & Gebremedhin, B. (2008). Determinants of agricultural and land management practices and impacts on crop production and household income in the highlands of Tigray, Ethiopia. Journal of African Economies, 17(3), 395–450. https://doi.org/10.1093/jae/ejm028
Roodman, D. (2009). Estimating fully observed recursive mixed-process models with cmp. Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1392466.
Roodman, D. (2011). Fitting fully observed recursive mixed-process models with cmp. The Stata Journal, 11(2), 159–206.
Teklewold, H., Kassie, M., & Shiferaw, B. (2013). Adoption of multiple sustainable agricultural practices in rural Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 64(3), 597–623. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12011
Uaiene, R. (2011). Determinants of agricultural technology adoption in Mozambique. In African Crop Science Conference Proceedings, 10, 375–380.
Rights and permissions
© 2022 Centre for Management in Agriculture (CMA), Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad (IIMA)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Varma, P. (2022). Information and Utilisation of MSP: Major Determinants. In: Pulses for Food and Nutritional Security of India. India Studies in Business and Economics. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-3185-7_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-19-3184-0
Online ISBN: 978-981-19-3185-7
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)