Archives

This study has been conducted in Eluru block of West Godavari located in between latitude 16.91740 North, 81.33990 East. West Godavari District is well developed in Fisheries with Resources of Fishery wealth in Marine, Brackish Water, Reservoir and Inland Fisheries. It is in fact the aqua hub of Andhra Pradesh. Blue Revolution is well expressed in this district through a multi-pronged approach which includes the introduction of fast-growing, high-yielding species Multi stage random sampling was used for the study to select the respondents, 98 respondents has been selected from four different villages randomly based on the population of the villages.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1: Marketing Cost, Marketing Margin and Price Spread in different Size of Farm Groups (Rs/qtls)
Channel 1
Producer               Consumer

Sno	Particulars
		catla catla
	Sale price of producer	12168
	Cost incurred by producer
	Packing cost	105
	Weighing cost	86
	Miscellaneous	96
	Total cost	287
	Net price received by producer	12112
	Consumer paid price	12168
	Marketing efficiency	42.39

 

The above table reveals the marketing channel 1, in which there are no intermediaries involved .it shows total marketing cost incurred for a producer which involves packing, weighing of the fish which is Rs 287/quintal in fingerling size and marketing efficiency recorded 42.39 in a fingerling size of catla catla respectively.

Table 2: Marketing Cost, Marketing Margin and Price Spread in different Size of Farm Groups (Rs/qtls)
Channel 2
Producer           Auctioneer           Wholesaler            Retailer            Consumer

 

Above table reveals the marketing cost, price spread and marketing margin of channel 2, three intermediaries were identified in this marketing channel. Producer sells his produce to wholesaler through auctioneer .producer finds targeted wholesalers and auctions the produce to wholesaler and in turn sells it to the retailers in the market. Finally the produce reaches customer after collecting commissions. Marketing cost when producers sold the produce is Rs.250/quintal which is auctioneers commission. The purchased produce is transported in containers and supplied to retailers by wholesaler at various levels which costs about an average of Rs. 494/qtls in fingerling, after adding margin to it i.e. Rs 150/quintal .similarly retailers marketing cost and marketing margin i.e.Rs.403/quintal and Rs.233/quintal respectively. In total the average total marketing cost from the collected samples 1147/quintal, marketing margin is recorded as Rs.383/quintal. Price spread is recorded as Rs.1530/quintal. Marketing efficiency is calculated at 8.83.

Table 3: Marketing Cost, Marketing Margin and Price Spread in different Size of Farm Groups (Rs/qtls) (table no.4.11)
Channel 3
Producer          Auctioneer         Trader         Wholesaler         Retailer         Consumer

 

Above table reveals the marketing cost, price spread and marketing margin of channel 3, four intermediaries were identified in this marketing channel. Producer sells his produce to trader through auctioneer .producer finds targeted traders and auctions the produce to traders and in turn sells it to the traders in the market. The traders buy the produce from farmer and transports to various markets to distribute among wholesalers adding his marketing cost and marketing margin i.e. 555/quintal and 312/quintal. Then wholesalers distribute the produce to local retailers with certain margin. Finally the produce reaches customer after collecting commissions. Marketing cost when producers sold the produce is Rs.250/quintal which is auctioneers commission. The purchased produce is transported in containers and supplied to retailers by wholesaler at various levels which costs about an average of Rs.248/quintal, after adding margin to it i.e. Rs 150/quintal. similarly retailers marketing cost and marketing margin i.e. Rs. 335/quintal and Rs.152/quintal. In total the average total marketing cost from the collected samples are 1388 fingerling, marketing margin is recorded as Rs.614/quintal. Price spread is recorded as Rs.2002/quintal. Marketing efficiency is calculated at 6.84.

Table 4: Comparison of total marketing cost, total marketing margin, price spread, producer’s share in consumer rupee (%) and marketing efficiency in three different channels (fingerling) (Rs/qtls).

 

Table 4 reveal that total marketing cost in channel-I was Rs.287/quintal, price spread Rs.287/quintal, producer share in consumer rupee 97.68, marketing efficiency 43.2 percentage and there is no total marketing margin respectively.
            The total marketing cost in channel-II was Rs.1147/quintal, total marketing margin Rs.383/quintal; price spread Rs.1530/quintal, producer share in consumer rupee 89.63 percent and marketing efficiency 8.83 percentage.
The total marketing cost in channel-III was Rs.1388/quintal, followed by total marketing margin Rs.614/quintal, price spread Rs.2002/quintal, producer share in consumer rupee 88.36 and marketing efficiency 6.84 percentage.

       

Produces share in consumers rupee is recorded highest in channel I with 97.68 percent, followed by channel II  with 90.97 percent and channel III  with 88.36 percent as there are more market intermediaries involved in channel II and channel III.

       

Table 5: ANOVAs for Comparison of total marketing cost, total marketing margin, price spread, producer’s share in consumer’s rupee (%) and marketing efficiency in three different channels.

       

 

In the above  ANOVA table, due to size group degrees of freedom is 2, sum of squares  is 1485813, mean sum of squares is 742906, F. Calculated value is 5.28, F. tabulated value @ 5% is 5.14, result is not significant, standard deviation is 306 and critical difference is @ 5% is 748.755. In due to particulars, degrees of freedom is 3, sum of squares is 2461054, mean sum of squares is 820351, F. Calculated value 5.83, F. tabulated value @ 5% is 4.75, result is  significant, standard deviation is 265 and critical difference is 648.4316. In error, degree of freedom is 6, sum of squares is 842924 and mean sum of squares is 140487.35.

CONCLUSION

The present study reveals that the large farmers practicing fisheries tend to gain more profit when compared to medium and small farmers. There are about four middle men involved in the process of marketing of inland fish (Catla catla) i.e. Auctioneer, Trader, Wholesaler, Retailer. The study reveals three existing marketing channel i.e. channel I (Producer to Consumer), channel II (Producer -Auctioneer - Wholesaler - Retailer - Consumer), channel III (Producer- Auctioneer – Trader - Wholesaler – Retailer - Consumer). The producer’s share in consumer’s rupee happens to higher  in channel I followed by channel II and channel III because of no market intermediaries present in the particular channel.

REFERENCES

Banafar, Singh & Gauraha, A. K. (2007). Economics of production and marketing of duck –cum-fish enterprises: a micro level evidence from Chhattisgarh, Agricultural Marketing. 50(3), 17-20pp.
Bhattacharya, H. (2002). Commercial exploitation of fisheries: production, marketing and finance strategies. (19), 327pp.
Kingra & Singh (2007). Examination on fresh water fish marketing and price spread. Published. Punjab.
Ravishankar, C. N. (July 2018). Economics of Indian fisheries. Published, KAU, Kochi.
Singh, A. K. (1996). An economic analysis of production and marketing of fish in Nagra block of Ballia District, U.P. Unpublished, M.Sc Agricultural Economics thesis, Allahabad agriculture institute. Deemed University.