ENERGY INPUTS AND CROP PRODUCTION

IN DERA ISMAIL KHAN DISTRICT OF N.W.F.P, PAKISTAN

Dissertation

by

Mohammad Azam Khan

For The Degree of Doctor of Engineering

Asian Institute of Technology

Bangkok, Thailand

December, 1994

-2-

ENERGY INPUTS AND CROP PRODUCTION

IN DERA ISMAIL KHAN DISTRICT OF N.W.F.P, PAKISTAN

by

Mohammad Azam Khan

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for degree of Doctor of

Engineering.

Examination Committee: Prof. Gajendra Singh (Chairman)

Prof. C. P. Gupta

Dr. V.M. Salokhe

Dr. R.M. Shrestha

Mohammad Azam Khan

Nationality : Pakistani

Previous Degree : Master of Engineering (1986), University of Agriculture Faisalabad,

Pakistan

Scholarship Donor : United States Agency for International Development

Asian Institute of Technology

Bangkok, Thailand

December, 1994

-3-

ABSTRACT

The major objective of this study was to investigate the patterns of energy consumption and their

relationship with crop production on farms with different levels of mechanization in Dera Ismail Khan

(D. I. Khan) District of North West Frontier Province, Pakistan.

A year-long survey was made of daily inputs of energy for crop production operations on more

than 600 crop plots of 26 farms in seven villages of D. I. Khan District was carried out. Sample farms

were selected based on the main power source bullock or tractor and were sub-categorized according to

the type of irrigation as canal irrigated, tubewell irrigated and rainfed. Average size of the both bullock

and tractor operated raifed farms was 8.2 ha and that of bullock operated irrigated farms was 3.9 ha and

tractor operated irrigated farms was 5.7 ha. Data were recorded through biweekly visits of the selected

farms to investigated the patters of energy consumption in crop production from different sources

namely human (family, permanently and casually hired) labor, bullocks, electric motors or diesel engines

and tractors. Crop yields, inputs of fertilizers and farm yard manure and values of these items were

recorded.

The cultivated areas of D.I. Khan District can be divided in three parts according to the systems of

irrigation applied. The west bank of the River Indus is irrigated by Chashma Right Bank Canal. In the

south east part of the district, irrigation is done with tubewells. Agriculture on western part of the district

depends on rainfall or seasonal hill torrents for its moisture requirements. Selection of the villages was

made after consulting authorities in the Departments of Agriculture, Irrigation and Revenue to represent

the district. This selection of seven villages was based on available mode of irrigation in that particular

village. The selection of farms in the villages was based on the main power source the farmer uses on his

farm, i.e., bullock or tractor. The selection of 26 farms was based on the criteria that the selected farms

in a category represent characteristics of all the farms present under that category of the area. Bullock

and tractor operated farms were sub-categorized according to source of water for irrigation as canal,

tubewell and rainfed (no irrigation). Average size of both bullock and tractor operated rainfed farms was

8.2 ha whereas bullock operated irrigated farms were below 5 ha and the average size of tractor operated

irrigated farms 5 to 10 ha in size. In the district, 51% of the farms are under 5 ha, whereas 24% are 5 to

10 ha and 25 percent are above 10 ha in size.

Energy inputs were computed by summing the energy inputs to all crop plots on a weekly and

annual basis for total holding and per hectare basis. Energy output/input ratios for wheat and sugarcane

for both bullock and tractor operated farms were also calculated.

It was observed that per hectare consumption of energy was higher on tractor operated farms

than that on bullock operated farms. Results indicate that the use of tractors does result in a reduction in

human labor hours and bullock energy on per hectare basis. It was also observed that permanent laborers

on tractor operated farms worked fewer hours during a one year period than that on bullock operated

farms.

Due to lack of a permanent source of irrigation the intensity of cropping on rainfed farms was the

-4-

lowest, therefore the consumption of energy on both bullock and tractor operated farms was very low.

Farms with canal irrigation had higher cropping intensities and used more energy than the rainfed farms.

However, in Kharif (Monsoon) season the irrigation water from canal was insufficient for the rice crop

therefore, 9 out of 31 ha remained fallow. On those farms which did not grow rice during the Kharif

season water was sufficient to grow other crops like fodder. On farms with tubewell irrigation 8 out of

17 ha on bullock operated farms could not be cultivated due to water logging problem and on 13 out of

25 ha on tractor operated farms no crops could be grown due to flooding. This caused lower cropping

intensity on tubewell farms than canal farms. Per hectare consumption of total energy use was the

highest on farms with tubewell irrigation due to the highest consumption of electrical or diesel energy

for pumping.

There were two peak periods of energy inputs on all farms, one during the months of April and

May for harvesting and threshing of the wheat crop. A severe shortage of labor occurred during this peak

period on both tractor and bullock operated farms. The other peak period occurred during the months of

October and November for harvesting of Kharif crops and sowing of winter (Rabi) crops. As the farm

operations performed with tractors took less time than bullocks so the duration of the second peak on

tractor operated farms was shorter than bullock operated farms. Land preparation and sowing operations

were performed with tractors on all tractor operated farms except on tractor operated rainfed farms

where mostly the sowing operation was performed with the seed tube attached to bullock drawn plow.

Due to the sowing operation performed with the help of bullock, the bullock energy was higher on

tractor operated rainfed farms than tractor operated irrigated farms. Unlike other farms, in the case of

bullock operated farms with canal irrigation, harvesting of wheat was performed mostly with permanent

labor and with the help of neighboring farmers on a reciprocity basis. They also called neighbors for help

in transplanting of rice during June July. Use of casual labor on tubewell farms was higher than that on

canal and rainfed farms since harvesting of sugarcane on tubewell farms was done mostly by casual

labor on a contractual basis.

The yields were higher on tractor operated farms than bullock operated farms. Rainfed farms

obtained the lowest yields, as their crops were rain dependent. Moreover, floods also damaged the crops

on some plots. Tractor operated farms with canal irrigation obtained the highest yields of wheat. Tractor

operated farms with tubewell irrigation obtained the highest yields of sugarcane. This was due to timely

land preparation with tractors and higher use of fertilizer on tractor operated farms compared to bullock

operated farms.

It was found that for each crop, the total energy output is greater than the total energy inputs.

Results show that the energy output/input ratio for wheat on a tractor operated farm is lower (3.3 and

2.2) than that of a bullock operated farm (3.7 and 2.9 on canal and tubewell irrigated farms respectively).

However, on tractor operated rainfed farms, output/input ratio was 7.2, which is higher than bullock

operated rainfed farms, where it was 4.2. In the case of sugarcane ratoon crop, it was 13.84 on tractor

operated farms with tubewell irrigation and 13.79 on bullock operated farms with tubewell irrigation. On

tractor operated farms with canal irrigation it was 19.6. Similarly for sugarcane planted crop it was it

was 4.8 on tractor operated farms with tubewell irrigation and 5.0 on bullock operated farms with

tubewell irrigation. On bullock operated farms with canal irrigation, it was 6.4.

-5-

As the yields and therefore crop values were higher on tractor operated farms than bullock

operated farms, the tractor farms obtained higher gross margins. Cost of production was lowest in

rainfed farms but the crop values were also the lowest, so the gross margins remained the lowest. The

gross margins on farms with canal irrigation were higher than the farms with tubewell irrigation. This

was because the farms with canal irrigation paid only a small amount of water tax whereas the farms

with tubewell irrigation spent higher amount of money to purchase irrigation water.

Projections were developed on the basis of upgrading the bullock operated farms performing

conventional tillage practices to higher level of mechanization. Secondly, floods are one of the major

problems of the area. The projection has also been developed not only to control floods but also to store

their water for assured irrigation to the rainfed cultivated area of the district. In the third projection the

farms were brought under controlled irrigation system and their main power source was tractor. Results

indicate that as steps are taken toward mechanized farming, there will be an increase in production and a

reduction in cost of production however, there will be increase in consumption of energy. The

implementation of the projections two and three will result saving in electrical energy, higher yields of

crops higher cropping intensities of the cultivated area and ultimately increase in gross margin of a farm.

-6-

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First of all, I would like to express my appreciation to my advisor Prof. Gajendra Singh for his

encouragement. A person of myriad skills, he has eased the way through a demanding project during

busy time in AIT. He is much appreciated as a mentor.

I wish also to express my appreciation to committee members including Prof. C.P. Gupta, Dr.

V.M. Salokhe

I am thankful to Dr. R.M. Shrestha for his suggestions, and keen interest in this study.

Special thanks go to Prof. Hamid Ullah Khan for his significant contributions and interest in the

study.

To my other colleagues I have spoken with about my study during stay in Dera Ismail Khan

(Pakistan) and numerous to name, but I thank all of them for sharing their ideas with me. In particular, I

wish to thank Dr. Mohammad Ayaz, Mr. Imam Bakhsh, Aman Ullah Khan and Sanaullah (Shanoo

Khan).

I must say a special thank to Pakistan Participant Training Program (PPTP) of the United States

Agency for International Development (USAID), who made available to me a scholarship to study at

AIT.

My gratitude also goes to all cooperating farmers of Dera Ismail Khan District who made this

study possible and enjoyable.

I will never forget the cooperation extended by Mr. Tomas Cardona and Mr. K. Chaiyaphol.

-7-

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

Title Page ii

Abstract iii

Acknowledgement vi

List of Figures ix

List of Tables x

I INTRODUCTION 1

II LITERATURE REVIEW 4

2.1 Human Energy 4

2.2 Animal Energy 6

2.3 Machinery and Fuel Energy 8

2.4 Fertilizer Energy 8

2.5 Pesticide Energy 9

2.6 Seed Energy 10

2.7 Energy Inputs for Crop Production 10

III OBJECTIVES

3.1 Scope of the Study 17

IV METHODOLOGY

4.1 Study Area 19

4.2 Data Collection 22

4.2.1 Hourly and daily rates for power sources 32

4.2.2 Charges of canal water 34

4.2.3 Prices of farm products 34

4.2.4 Prices of manures, fertilizer and

other chemicals 35

4.3 Transfer of Data for Processing 35

4.4 Date Analysis 36

4.5 Cost Analysis 37

V RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

5.1 Land Utilization 40

5.1.1. Reasons for Fallowing 40

-8-

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)

5.1.2. Cropping pattern 44

5.1.3. Crop failure 44

5.2 Analysis of Energy Inputs on the Farms 48

5.3 Weekly Energy Inputs on Farms 59

5.4 Analysis of Energy Inputs for Various Crops 72

5.4.1 Wheat 72

5.4.2 Sugarcane 82

5.4.3 Millet 91

5.4.4 Rice 93

5.4.5 Fodder, oilseed and chickpea 94

5.5 Yield, Cost of Production and Gross Margin 98

5.5.1 Yield of major crops 98

5.5.2 Production cost, gross margin

and net return for major crops 100

5.6 Present and future energy demands in D.I. Khan

District 113

5.6.1 Energy demand schedule during 1992-93 113

5.6.2 Priorities of mechanization 116

5.6.3 Energy demand schedule using different

projections 119

5.7 Present and future farm equipment demands in D.I. Khan

District 135

VI CONCLUSION 139

VII RECOMMENDATIONS 141

REFERENCES 143

APPENDICES 147

-9-

LIST OF FIGURE

FIGURE No. TITLE PAGE

4.1 Map of irrigation Systems in Dera Ismail Khan District 20

5.1 Per Hectare Weekly Energy Inputs for Bullock Operated

Rainfed Farms 60

5.2 Per Hectare Weekly Energy Inputs for Tractor Operated

Rainfed Farms 61

5.3 Per Hectare Weekly Energy Inputs for Bullock Operated

Farms with Canal Irrigation 62

5.4 Per Hectare Weekly Energy Inputs for Tractor Operated

Farms with Canal Irrigation 63

5.5 Per Hectare Weekly Energy Inputs for Bullock Operated

Farms with Tubewell Irrigation 64

5.6 Per Hectare Weekly Energy Inputs for Tractor Operated

Farms with Tubewell Irrigation 65

5.7 Estimated Weekly Use of Various Energy Sources for

Agriculture Operations in D.I. Khan During 1992-93 115

5.8 Energy Demand Forecast from Various Power Sources by

Using Projection One 130

5.9 Energy Demand Forecast from Various Power Sources by

Using Projection Two 131

5.10 Energy Demand Forecast from Various Power Sources by

Using Projection Three 132

-10-

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE No. TITLE PAGE

4.1. Agricultural Statistics of Dera Ismail Khan District

(N.W.F.P) for the Year 1992-93 21

4.2. Details About the Number of Farmers, Tractors, and Tubewells

in the Seven Villages and Their Geographic Location 24

4.3 Distribution of Farms Surveyed and Estimated Cultivated

Areas in the Various Categories for Dera Ismail Khan

(N.W.F.P), Pakistan 26

4.4 Distribution of Labor, Draft Animals, Holding Size,

Number of Plots and Their Sizes and for the Farms of

Various Categories 27

5.1 Land Use of Different Categories 41

5.2 Reasons of Fallow Land in Various Categories of Farms 42

5.3 Cropping Patterns by Rainfed and Irrigated Farms 45

5.4 Land Use of Different Farm Categories 47

5.5 Average Annual Energy Inputs per Hectare of Holding

of Farms on Various Categories 49

5.6 Number of Hours Worked by the Permanent Laborers During

a One Year and Cropping Intensities of Various Categories 51

5.7 Comparison of Cropping Intensities of Rainfed Farms after

Flood 53

5.8 The Use of Bullocks During a One Year Period and the Area

Under Fodder Crops for Various Categories 57

5.9 Use of Various Power Sources During Peak Periods 70

5.10 Average Annual Energy Inputs per Hectare of Holding

for Wheat Crop on the Farms of Various Categories 73

-11-

5.11 Per hectare Energy inputs for Various Agricultural

Operations for Wheat on Rainfed Farms 74

5.12 Per hectare Energy Inputs for Various Agricultural

Operations for Wheat Crop on Canal Irrigated Farms 75

-12-

LIST OF TABLE (Cont'd)

TABLE No. TITLE PAGE

5.13 Per hectare Energy inputs for Various Agricultural

Operations for Wheat Crop on Tubewell Irrigated Farms 76

5.14 Per hectare Energy Inputs from Physical Source, Seed

Fertilizer and Chemical for the Wheat Crop on Farms

of Various Categories 81

5.15 Average Annual Energy Inputs per Hectare of Holding

for Sugarcane (Ratoon) Crop for the Farms of Various

Categories 84

5.16 Average Annual Energy Inputs per Hectare of Holding

for Sugarcane (Planted) Crop on the Farms of Various

Categories 84

5.17 Per hectare Energy Inputs on Various Agricultural

Operations for Sugarcane (Ratoon) Crop on the Farms

of Various Categories 85

5.18 Per hectare Energy Inputs on Various Agricultural

Operations for Sugarcane (Planted) Crop on the Farms

of Various Categories 87

5.19 Per hectare Energy Inputs from Physical Sources,

Fertilizer and Chemical for the Sugarcane (Ratoon)

Crop on Farms of various categories 90

5.20 Per hectare Energy Inputs from Physical Sources, Seed,

Fertilizer and Chemical for the Sugarcane (Planted)

Crop on Farms of various categories 90

5.21 Average Annual Energy Inputs per Hectare of Holding

for Millet for the Farms of Various Categories 92

5.22 Average Annual Energy Inputs per Hectare of Holding

for Rice for the Farms of Various Categories 92

5.23 Average Annual Energy Inputs per Hectare of Holding

for Fodder, Oilseed and Chickpea Crop for the Farms

in Various Categories 95

5.24 Yield of Wheat, Ratoon and Planted Sugarcane Crops

Grown on the Farms of Various Categories 99

5.25 Per hectare Production Costs (Operation-wise) for the

Wheat Crop Grown on the Farms of Various Categories 102

-13-

LIST OF TABLE (Cont'd)

TABLE No. TITLE PAGE

5.25 Per hectare Production Costs (Power source-wise) for the

Wheat Crop Grown on the Farms of Various Categories 103

5.25 Per hectare Production Costs, Value of Output,

Gross margins and Return for the Wheat

Crop on the Farms of Various Categories 104

5.26 Per hectare Production Costs (Operation-wise) for

the Sugarcane Crops Grown on the Farms of Various

Categories 109

5.26 Per hectare Production Costs (Power source-wise) for

the Sugarcane Crops Grown on the Farms of Various

Categories 110

5.26 Per hectare Production Costs, Value of Output and

Gross margins and Return for the Sugarcane Crops

on the Farms of Various Categories 111

5.27 Total Annual Demand for Energy Inputs in D.I. Khan

District From Various sources for Different Projections 124

5.28 Estimated Increase in Production and Net Return of

Wheat in D.I. Khan District with Various Projections 126

5.29 Estimated Increase in Production and Net Return of

Sugarcane in D.I. Khan District with Various Projections 128

5.30 Estimated Use of Agricultural Workers, Bullocks and

Tractors for Agricultural Operations Using Various

Projections 133

5.31 Estimated Percentage Area Operated by Different Power

Sources During 1992-93. 136

5.32 Total Annual Demand for Farm Machines in D.I. Khan

District Under Various Projections. 137

-14-

LITERATURE REVIEW

Agriculture is essentially an energy-conversion process. Modern agriculture combining

petroleum-based fuels to power tractor and self-propelled machines with energy-intensive fertilizers and

pesticides, results in increased yields (STOUT, 1990). In less developed countries like Pakistan,

agriculture is in a transformation process from traditional to mechanized farming. According to

agricultural statistics of North West Frontier Province of Pakistan (1992-93), only 47% of the cultivated

area could be cropped while 53% was left idle in 1991-92. The main reason found out was the lack of

water resources to fulfil the demand of crop. Planners will have to understand that to feed the growing

population, more energy will be needed in the agricultural sector. Energy planners should provide

farmers as much energy as they can afford and effectively use to increase productivity (STOUT, 1990).

An essential element in making development policy is to analyze how agriculture is practiced

and how energy is used in rural areas (MAKHIJANI, 1975; FLUCK AND BAIRD, 1979). REVELLE,

(1976) also emphasized the need to conduct detailed studies in all parts of the country.

Studies relating different energy inputs necessary for crop production are reviewed in this

chapter.

2.1. Human Energy

An important consideration in agricultural energy analysis is the quantity of energy in

agricultural labor. The energy consumed by agricultural labor may vary by more than three orders of

magnitude, depending on the method chosen to determine the energy content of labor (FLUCK, 1981).

PANESAR AND BHATNAGAR (1987), noted that the physical workout of an average man is

0.075 kW for 8 hours per day. STOUT (1990) stated that a healthy adult can produce about 0.075 kW

continuously for 10 hours a day. FLUCK (1992), explained that an adult male can produce muscular

energy amounting to about 0.14 kWh to 0.42 kWh per day. This amount varies with task, and with

physiological, environmental and other factors.

MAKHIJANI (1975) used a range of 0.14 - 0.16 kWh/day for net energy output (with 2.34

kWh/day food intake) of agriculture labor for third world agriculture. For that he used the energy in the

food intake of all persons in a farming village as the gross energy input for human labor.

SMIL (1979) considered it necessary to construct a good balance sheet to establish the mean

energy consumption levels of a nation. After establishing how much nutrition is necessary to supply

adequate energy, he made calculations of annual energy expenditure in three different ways. The first

approach was to multiply a reasonable estimate of typical work rate by the aggregate number of work

hours. Annual useful output per person derived in this way was 106 - 141 kWh. The second method was

to treat a person as an energy converter, with a predetermined physiological performance and calculated

useful work as a proportion of total food consumption assuming a typical all day energetic efficiency of

15% for 8 hours of work. This procedure yielded annual useful energy total of 94 - 143 kWh per person.

The third approach, used by the World Health Organization and preferred by SMIL (1979), was that

-15-

energy available for activity was calculated as the residual after subtracting maintenance energy from

average food intake. This method resulted in 81 - 128 kWh for economically active adults. Any one of

these methods needs basic reliable information for its computation; and for reliable information there is

always a need of intensive studies.

2.2. Animal Energy

Domestic animals, especially large ruminant livestock such as cattle, buffaloes and camels, are

an extremely valuable renewable resource that fulfills several essential functions in the developing

countries. They provide much useful motive power for field work, irrigation, food processing, and

transportation. The average power output of a pair of Indian bullocks has been reported to be 0.37 to

0.93 kW (SINGH, 1973; PANESAR AND BHATNAGAR, 1987). SINGH et al. (1989) noted a

maximum draft of 13 to 16 percent of their body weight for six hours. The average speed, power and

work output of these bullocks in a six-hour working day were 3 km/h, 0.68 kW per pair and 3.90 kWh

per pair. The performance of bullocks depends on body size, draft, duration of work and climate. The

body weight was found to be a better measure of their size than their body dimensions. The speed,

power and work output increased with body weight.

DEVNANI (1981) estimated that bullock power can develop draft equivalent of 1/5 to 1/6 of

their body weight and the maximum pull bullocks could exert varied from 50 to 60% of body weight.

Donkeys and mules are used for carrying loads which can be as much as 50 to 60% of their body weight.

These animals are mostly used in hilly regions. SMIL (1979) and PANESAR and BHATNAGAR

(1987) also considered it necessary to estimate the weight of the animal to measure its average

performance. SMIL (1979) assessed that in sustained effort, cattle, buffaloes, and asses can exert a force

equal to about 10% of their body mass, and this ratio is as much as 15 % for horses and mules. The draft

power also depends on the animal's height. Owing to these differences average power may range from

0.25 hp for donkeys to over 0.75 hp for North China horses. Annual work hours may fall any where

within a wide span of from 2 to 8 hours per day for 100 to 300 days.

Studies also showed that a working animal can develop much higher power for a shorter period

than during normal work. In Italy, a pair of well-fed oxen have been able to develop 1.5 to 2.2 kW over a

hundred meter distance. In Brazil, a single bullock of 550 kg developed 1.5 to 2.8 kW over a hundred

meter distance (DEVNANI, 1981).

MAKHIJANI (1975) assumed that one bullock produces a power of about 0.50 hp and works for

about 1,000 hours per year yielding a net annual output of energy of about 370 kWh. He further assumed

that 75 percent of the animal labor was for farm work. If there was one draft animal per hectare the

annual useful energy in farm operation would be 278 kWh/ha. PIMENTEL (1992) estimated that the

maximum amount of time that a draft animal can work annually is 2000 h; however, a good average

figure would be about 1500 h per year, the author suggested.

2.3 Machinery and Fuel Energy

Energy consumed in field operations is affected by many factors. BOWERS (1992) concluded

-16-

that a wide variation can be expected due to weather, soil type, depth of tillage operations, field size,

degree of mechanization, and management ability. The author noted some soils required more energy to

do the same amount of work as others. CHANCELLOR (1982), showed 24 L of diesel fuel per hectare

for M.B. plow in California, USA, whereas, in a report by ENERCON (1990) 15 L per hectare were

used in Pakistan. The reason for higher consumption of fuel in the study of Chancellor was the soil

compaction in California (BOWERS, 1992).

Tractors are by far the greatest consumers of fuel in field operations accounting for 90-95% of

the fuel used. The efficiency of converting liquid fuel to useful field work is relatively low. Only 21.8%

of the fuel energy in the tank remains at the engine crankshaft (BOWERS, 1992).

Tractors operate under a wide variety of loads, according to Nebraska Tractor Test (DOWNS

and HANSEN, 1979) their average power level is approximately 55-60% of maximum load.

ENERCON (1990) concluded that Pakistani farmers operate their tractors in low gears with 80 to 90

percent of rated speed and the engines delivering about 50% of their rated power.

2.4. Fertilizer Energy

The major nutrients used by plants in the largest amounts are nitrogen, phosphorus and

potassium. HELSEL (1992) observed that fertilizer consumption is increasing at a fast rate. In 1964, 29

kg of chemical fertilizer nutrients per hectare were used in the world 54 kg in developed countries and 7

kg in developing countries. By 1991, use was 93, 66 and 134 kg/ha. In Pakistan, fertilizer use has

reached about 89 kg per hectare in 1991 compared to only 2 kg in 1960-61 (ECONOMIC SURVEY,

1992-93; AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS OF PAKISTAN, 1990-91; FAO, 1993).

The major N fertilizer products are ammonia, urea, and ammonium nitrate. In Pakistan, the most

commonly used fertilizer is urea (AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS OF PAKISTAN, 1990-91).

MITTAL et al. (1985) and PANESAR AND BHATNAGAR (1987) calculated 60 MJ per kg of energy

input by N, whereas the energy input for P2O5 was 11.1 MJ per kg and for K2O was 6.7 MJ per kg.

2.5. Pesticide Energy

Pesticides include herbicides, insecticides fungicides and others. Only about 2% of the energy

used in agriculture is for pesticides (STOUT, 1990).

HELSEL (1992) suggested that on an energy per unit basis, a typical herbicide may be applied at the rate

of 300 MJ/ha. RAO (1985) evaluated the energy inputs in weed control by taking into account the

energy costs of weedicide production, transportation of pesticides sprayers, bullocks and the fixed

energy inputs through equipment on farms in Haryana, India. Weed control in a hectare of wheat and

rice consumed 71 MJ/ha with 2-4 D spray. RAO (1985) calculated that manual weeding for wheat

required 191 MJ and rice 223 MJ per hectare.

2.6. Seed Energy

A significant amount of energy is associated with seeds and other planting materials. MITTAL et

-17-

al. (1985) and PANESAR AND BHATNAGAR (1987) took the energy equivalent values for seeds of

wheat, maize and paddy (not shelled rice) as 14.7 MJ/kg, and sugarcane as 5.3 MJ/kg.

2.7. Energy Inputs for Crop Production

STOUT (1990) estimated 202 million tons of oil equivalent in 1972 for the commercial energy

consumption for agricultural production in developed and developing countries, which increased to 287

mtoe in 1982. In developing countries, commercial energy use in agriculture increased from 33.5 mtoe

in 1972 to 76.5 mtoe in 1982. Although more than 50% of this increase was occurred in the developing

countries, yet it is still low compared to the area that is possessed by these developing countries. STOUT

(1990) stated that developing countries had 54% of the world arable land and the land under permanent

crops, but the produce was 48% of the world cereals and 62% of the world root and tubers.

SINGH (1973), and SINGH and CHANCELLOR (1975) conducted a detailed study during

1971-72 in North India to investigate energy inputs by farmers with different levels of mechanization

and the resultant output. They categorized the farms in six categories ranging from farms having all crop

lands un-irrigated and having animals as only the power source on the farms to the farms with tractors

and tubewells. They observed that farms with higher mechanical technology used more energy and

obtained higher yields of various crops. It was also found by the authors that the labor input and

production costs per unit of crop output decreased with increased mechanical technology. It was

noteworthy that for wheat the energy inputs in North India were equal to or sometimes more than the

energy inputs of American farmers growing wheat under the same conditions. The study projected that

only effective and timely use of energy can be linked with the prosperity of any country.

AHMED (1979) performed a study in Faisalabad district of Pakistan to compare two farming

systems, i.e., bullock farming and tractor farming. He selected 25 farms each for tractor and bullock. On

all these farms water from tubewells was available in addition to canals. The author observed a highly

significant reduction in labor input on tractor farms. The fertilizer use was higher on tractor farms but

not significantly higher compared to bullock farms. Similarly, the yields were also higher on tractor

farms, but the difference was not significant. It was observed that despite the desirable effects of tractor

cultivation on yield of crops, there was very little difference in gross income on a per hectare basis on

the tractor and bullock operated farms. The author determined that the inputs as water and fertilizers can

effectively substitute for tractor.

RAM and KHANDELWAL (1987) conducted studies through field experiments, collection of

farmers' data and estimation of energy needs on the basis of agricultural statistics of the state of Madhya

Pradesh of India. The state was divided into 12 agro-climatic regions. The farms were classified as

marginal, small, medium and large, however, the author did not give the size of these farms. It was

observed that tractor farms used more energy compared to bullock farms and also got high yields.

Comparing the energy input and output of paddy and wheat crop it was computed that energy

consumption of paddy crop under tractor and bullock farming was 751 kWh and 545 kWh per hectare.

The tillage operations consumed 30 to 35% of the total energy, irrigation, 28 to 30% and harvesting

exhausted 20 to 25% of the direct energy. In case of wheat crop use of energy under tractor and bullock

farming were 984 and 711 kWh/ha. Major energy intensive operations for wheat crop were irrigation

-18-

and tillage, in which irrigation consumed 50% and tillage operations consumed 30% in all the energy

treatments.

SHRESTHA (1988) performed a study on energy analysis of selected crops in Nepal. The study

was based on a field survey of two villages in different ecological zones. Data were collected from

previous years' crop production activities. For the analysis of data, the author categorized the farms in

six categories according to their size, power source and location. In case of paddy, it was observed that

the farms in plain areas used pumping devices to irrigate the fields and tractors for land preparation so

the human labor use remained low. The farms in hilly areas made higher use of human labor compared

to farms in plain areas and depend on rainfall for moisture requirements of the crop. In the case of wheat

the farms in plain areas used higher quantity of fertilizer and chemicals than the farms in hilly areas, and

obtained higher yields. However, the difference in yield was not significant. Sugarcane was grown only

in plain areas. The farms in hill areas were growing maize as their staple food crop.

MUSHTAQ (1990) performed a study on energy inputs and crop production on the wheat crop

in Faisalabad District of Pakistan. Since most of the cultivated area in Faisalabad (Punjab) is irrigated,

the author ignored the rainfed area. It was observed that energy use was higher on the farms which had

only tubewells as their source of irrigation, than the farms with canal or canal plus tubewell due to high

consumption of either electricity or fuel to run a tubewell. The farms with canal or canal plus tubewell

irrigation obtained higher energy output/input ratio compared to the farms that had only tubewells as an

irrigation source. The farms with tubewell obtained lower yields than canal due to poor quality of

ground water. Analyzing the yield against energy inputs, the author observed that on the farms with

tractors or bullocks as a power source and tubewells as irrigation still had a chance of increasing output

with more application of fertilizers but did not do so due to unsuitable water quality. The farms with

canal irrigation only were not taking full benefits of fertilizers as compared to the farms with canal and

tubewells. The reason the author observed was less quantity of water on farms with only canal irrigation.

The author did not find the tubewell water alone a suitable source of irrigation in that area due to the

presence of salts.

AHMED et al. (1991) studied the energy needs and available resources in an irrigated village in

Punjab province of Pakistan. Only 12% of the farmers in that village used bullocks for cultivation. Land

preparation was mostly done with tractors and sowing by broadcast method. Bullocks were mostly used

for transportation. Only 20% of the product was transported with the help of tractors from field to

village. Almost 80% of the area was irrigated by diesel engine tubewells and the rest with electric

tubewells. No farm with canal irrigation was reported by the authors in that village. Threshing of rice

was done manually while wheat was mechanically threshed. The average yield of wheat and rice was

1.76 and 1.85 tons per hectare respectively.

SIDHU and GREWAL (1991) conducted a study to examine labor use patterns in different farm

categories of Punjab (India). They categorized the farms into three categories as bullock operated farms,

tractor operated farms and tractor operated combine harvested farms. Data were collected on labor use,

other inputs use and level of production for all the crops and farms as a whole. It was observed that there

was no significant difference in labor use between bullock operated farms and tractor operated farms.

However, a significant decrease in per hectare human labor use was seen on tractor operated combine

-19-

harvested farms compared to bullock operated farms and tractor operated farms. In this category about

30% of wheat and 62% of paddy crop were harvested (and threshed) by combine harvester. It was also

noted that the share of hired labor to the total human labor employed on the farm increased as the level

of mechanization increased.

Comparing the agricultural production of Pakistan to the developed countries, IQBAL et al.

(1992) pointed out that it is three to four times less in Pakistan. The authors suggested adopting

mechanization in addition to the use of improved seed, fertilizer and plant protection measures to

increase crop yields. They figured that about 65% of the cultivated area in the country is operated by

small to medium size farmers. Most of these farmers can not justify owning a tractor or a complete range

of mechanized equipment therefore the authors suggested for custom hiring services in the agricultural

sector. To provide adequate services to the farmers in far-flung areas, the government should give

incentives for setting up private workshops. They calculated that by the year 2009 with the increased

mechanization trend in Pakistan more human labor and more tractors would be required. However,

animal power is expected to decrease by that time.

BONNY (1993) analyzed the energy intensity trend in French agriculture as a whole between

1959 and 1989 and one of its main crops, wheat, between 1958 and 1990. Due to difficulties involved in

evaluating consumption of indirect energy (i.e. the energy required to manufacture the different inputs

used, such as fertilizer, pesticides, machinery), only direct energy (such as fossil fuels, electricity and gas

directly consumed in agriculture) was considered for overall French agriculture. However, for wheat

indirect energy was also taken into account. It was observed that French agriculture has made more

economical use of energy during the past fifteen years. Overall energy consumption has not declined, but

in proportion to agricultural output, or per ton of wheat produced, it has been falling since at least 1977.

The author pointed out that this trend could be found in other western countries also. However, to verify

this trend properly, the author suggested further research in this field.

AHMED (1994) performed a detail study to find out the relationship between various energy

inputs and crop production in Faisalabad District of Pakistan. As Faisalabad has mostly well-developed

irrigation system, the author ignored the rainfed area. It was observed that the bullock operated farms

made higher use of permanent labor and bullock power than tractor operated farms, whereas tractor

operated farms made higher use of tractor. The overall energy use was also higher on tractor operated

farms than bullock operated farms. The farms having only canal water for irrigation used less quantity of

fertilizer and obtained lower yields. The gross margin remained higher on tractor as well as on bullock

operated farm that used tubewell water to supplement canal water than those farms that did not use

tubewell water to supplement canal water.

Based on this review and as pointed out earlier in chapter I, a number of issues and trends have

been identified as follow:

i. Lack of studies containing complete information about all the activities performed on

farms round the year in Pakistan.

ii. Lack of studies on rainfed areas of arid or semi-arid zones.

-20-

iii. Every area has its own problems and the way to solve those problems is quite different

for each area.

Modern agriculture is highly dependent on other sectors of the economy for most of its inputs,

except for land and solar energy. It also competes for most of its inputs, for labor, capital, water and

energy. Agricultural development in the last 30 years shows that the rate of dependency of agriculture on

other sectors is increasing. Thus, it is time to identify the stage of agriculture development by examining

the extent of this dependency.

-21-

III. OBJECTIVES

The major objective of this study was to investigate the patterns of energy consumption and their

relationships to crop production in rainfed and irrigated farms of arid and semi-arid zones of Pakistan,

namely Dera Ismail Khan District of North West Frontier Province.

The specific objectives were:

I. To study energy inputs on the farm from various energy sources, i.e., human labor, animal

power, electric and mechanical power on an annual and weekly basis during the whole crop season for

major crops.

II. To record yields and to determine gross margins for the major crops.

III. To estimate the use of energy in crop production for the Dera Ismail Khan District for 1992-93.

IV. To develop a mechanization plan for the Dera Ismail Khan District.

3.1 Scope of the study

The study was confined to collecting data from March 1992 to May 1993 covering Kharif (Monsoon

season) of 1992 and Rabi (winter season) of 1992-93.

This study should serve as a bench-mark for rainfed areas of arid and semi-arid zones and will help in

the preparation of an agricultural energy plan for the country.

Although the actual coverage is limited to a sample of 26 farms, the spatial scope of the study extends to

thousands of rainfed and irrigated farms of Pakistan having the same agricultural inputs.

From this study, priorities of mechanization of certain agricultural operations can be assigned after

assessing the effects of various alternatives for expending agricultural production through minimizing

energy bottlenecks.

IV. METHODOLOGY

4.1. Study Area

The study was conducted in Dera Ismail Khan (D. I. Khan) District of the North West Frontier Province

(N.W.F.P), Pakistan (Fig. 4.1). The area is bounded by the lower edge of the Marwat piedmont on the

north and at the foot of Sulaiman range (an extension of the Himalayas) extending over a major portion

of the north-west part of the area. The River Indus flood plains are in the east, and southern part joins

similar arid areas of Dera Ghazi Khan District of Punjab province. The average length from north to

south is about 150 km and the average width from east to west is

-22-

-23-

about 60 km. It has a total geographic area of 0.73 million hectares out of which only 0.24 million

hectares is cultivated. About one third of the cultivated area is irrigated while the other two thirds

depend on rainfall and hill torrents for its moisture requirements.

The area is arid to semi-arid with sub-tropical continental climate. The mean annual rainfall ranges from

180-300 mm, increasing from the south to north. The rainfall pattern is erratic and uncertain. About 60%

of the rainfall occurs in Monsoon season (July and August) usually in the form of intense showers

causing floods. June is the hottest month with a mean maximum temperature of 41 C. January is the

coldest month with a mean minimum temperature of 4 C. The agricultural statistics for D. I. Khan

District are summarized in Table 4.1. The mean monthly temperatures (maximum and minimum) and

rainfall are given in appendix A. 2.

The cultivated areas of D. I. Khan can be divided in three parts according to the systems of irrigation

applied. The west bank of the River Indus is irrigated by Chashma Right Bank Canal. The area irrigated

by canal water is more than fifty three thousand hectares. In the south east part of the district, irrigation

is done with tubewells. The farmers have installed centrifugal pumps for irrigation. The farmers in these

areas usually own electric motors (mostly 7.46 kW) to power irrigation pumps. In its extreme eastern

part close to banks of the River Indus, farmers have diesel engine to power centrifugal pumps during the

time when water level of the river is low and land is available for cultivation, i.e. from November to

May. The water table in this area ranged from 3 meters to 10 meters. The cultivated area of more than

150,000 hectare in the western part of the district depends on rainfall or seasonal hill torrents for its

moisture requirements. The hill torrents resulting from rains occurs in the months of July August and

February March. The catchment areas of the ranges are barren and have steep slopes. The flood water

flows down into the plains where it is diverted to fields varying in area (2-10 ha) and surrounded by high

(1-2 m) earthen dikes. Water infiltrates into the soil and cultivation is done when the soil is in proper

moisture condition. The ground water in this area is mostly saline (WAPDA, 1985).

4.2. Data Collection

After travelling extensively in the District and consulting authorities in the departments of Agriculture,

Irrigation and Revenue, seven villages were selected to represent the district. Details about the number

of farms, tractors and tubewells in the villages and their geographic locations with respect to the city of

Dera Ismail Khan are given in Table 4.2. Selection of villages was followed by listing most of the

households in the villages through which the following information was collected which provided a

basis for selecting the farms for this study.

1. Name of head of household.

2. Main occupation of the head of the household, whether farmer or non-farmer.

3. If head of the household is farmer, whether he was owner-operator, owner-cum-tenant or tenant.

4. If the head of the household is farmer, breakup of his land in the area owned, area rented-out and

the area rented-in, to arrive at the size of operational holding.

-24-

Table 4.1. Agricultural Statistics of Dera Ismail Khan (NWFP) Pakistan

for the year 1992-93

1 Geographical area 730,575 ha

2 Cultivated area 238,678 ha

3 Net Sown area 131,688 ha

4 Current fallow area 106,990 ha

5 Area sown more than once 12,650 ha

6 Cropped area (3 + 5) 144,338 ha

7 Culturable waste 355,561 ha

8 Forest 3,908 ha

9 Not available for cultivation 132,428 ha

10 Total uncultivated area 491,897 ha

11 Canal irrigated area 53,200 ha

12 Tubewell irrigated area 25,684 ha

13 Total irrigated area 88,195 ha

14 Population 635,494

15 Urban population 158,874

16 Rural population 476,621

17 Working population in agriculture 113,000

18 Total villages 269

19 total farming families 44,158

20 Average holding size

under 5 ha 51%

5 - 10 ha 24%

Above 10 ha 25%

21 Number of tractors 4,507

22 Number of electric motors 1,383

23 Number of diesel engines 227

24 Number of wheat threshers 795

25 Number of reapers 45

26 Number of bullocks 62,206

Sources Department of Agriculture (Statistic Wing) and

Revenue Department Dera Ismail Khan (1993 - 94).

-25-

Table 4.2.

Details about the number of farms, tractors, and tubewells in the seven

selected villages and their geographical location.

Name of villages

Number of

farms

Number of

Tractors

Number

of

tubewells

Location from the

D. I. Khan city

Number of

farms under

study

Saidallian 65 6 2 40 km North 1

Himat 123 12 3 22 km North-East 6

Sheroo Kohna 60 2 0 25 km West 1

Azmat abad 56 7 9 25 km South 1

Lunda Sharif 68 6 0 30 km South-West 3

Rangpoor Janoobi 35 2 0 40 km South-West 6

Jhoke Haqdad 62 14 18 60 km South-East 8

-26-

The farms were divided into two categories according to their main power source.

1. Bullock operated farms

2. Tractor operated farms

These two main groups were sub-divided into three categories according to their source of irrigation.

1. Rainfed farms

2. Tubewell irrigated farms

3. Canal irrigated farms

A list of 26 farmers with their identification and category codes is given in Appendix A.2. The selection

of seven villages was based on available mode of irrigation in that particular village and the farms in the

selected villages represented the main categories, i.e., bullock operated farms and tractor operated farms.

The selection of 26 farms was based on the criteria that the selected farms in a category represent

characteristics of all the farms present under that category of the area. The distribution of 26 farmers

with estimated cultivated areas according to categories is shown in Table 4.3. After the selection of

farms, data were collected from each of the farmers about the number of family members engaged in

farming operations, the number of permanent hired laborers, the number of plots and their size and

number of draft animals (Table 4.4). Distribution of labor, draft animals, holding size, number of plots

and their average sizes are given in Appendix A.3. Various implements and machines owned by the

surveyed farmers are given in Appendix A.4. (The questionnaire through which the information were

collected is given in appendix A.7).

A schedule of meeting the farmers once every two weeks was followed. Most of the times, the farmers

were interviewed while working at their farms as they were rarely available at their residences in the

village during day time. The interviewing of a farmer at a field site also helped to make an overall idea

about his farming.

Data from the farmers were collected on inputs to crop plots on a daily basis. For each crop-plot,

information was collected about the energy inputs from various sources about human labor, bullocks,

electric motors or diesel engines and tractors used to perform the agricultural operations listed below.

1. Seedbed preparation

2. Sowing

3. Irrigation

4. Intercultural operations, i.e. weeding, fertilizer application, etc.

5. Harvesting

6. Transportation of harvested material to the threshing floor.

7. Threshing

8. Transportation of agricultural produce to storage or market place.

The schedule of visits to the villages selected for the study is given below.

-27-

Table 4.3 Distribution of farms surveyed and estimated total cultivated area in

various categories for Dera Ismail Khan (NWFP) Pakistan

Farm

category

Number

of farms

Area (ha) associated with

categories under study

Percentage of

total area

understudy

Cultivated area

(ha) associated

with categories

in Dera Ismail

Khan

Percentage

of total

cultivated

area

Bullock Tractor Total

Rainfed 10 49.3 32.9 82.2 52.9 150483.0 63.0

Canal 7 20.9 9.9 30.8 19.8 53200.0 22.3

Tubewell 9 17.4 25.0 42.4 27.3 25684.0 10.8

Bullock 16 87.6 56.4

Tractor 10 67.8 43.6

Total 26 155.4

The remaining 9311 ha (3.9 % of the cultivated area) is irrigated by perennial springs, lift pumps and

floods of rivers.

-28-

Table 4.4.

Per farm distribution of labor, draft animals, holding size, number of plots and their

sizes in various farm categories

Farm

category

Numbare

of farms

understudy

Average

number

of

family

labor

average

number of

permanent

hired

labor

Total

Permanent

labor

Average

number

of draft

animals

Average

farm

size

(ha)

Average

number

of plots

Average

plot size

(ha)

(a) (b) (a+b) (c) (d) (e) (f)

Bullock

rainfed 6 1.0 0.0 7.0 2.2 8.2 6.3 1.30

Bullock

Canal 5 1.8 0.4 6.8 2.0 4.2 35.0 0.12

Bullock

Tubewell 5 1.6 0.2 6.6 2.0 3.5 32.2 0.11

Tractor

rainfed 4 1.0 0.0 5.0 1.0 8.2 5.8 1.43

Tractor

Canal 2 1.5 0.5 3.5 1.0 5.0 30.0 0.17

Tractor

Tubewell 4 2.0 0.3 6.0 0.5 6.3 40.0 0.16

Day Village visited

Saturday Himat

Sunday Sheroo Kohna

Monday Jhoke Haqdad

Tuesday Azmat Abad or Saidallian

Wednesday Rangpoor Janoobi

Thursday Lunda Sharif

Due to the regular schedule of the visit, farmers tried to stay at the meeting point in their fields on a

particular day and time. In the beginning, some farmers were hesitant to give full information about the

whole farming activities. However, a working relationship was developed after a few meetings.

The procedure of an interview with the farmer was quite simple. A rough map of plots belonging to a

particular farmer was made (which was destroyed after completion of data collection), and each plot

indicated the name of crop grown. The farmer was then asked about each plot, one by one about the

operations performed and their performance date during the period since the previous visit to his farm.

For each operation, energy source, type of energy source (whether source was owned or hired) and value

of these items was recorded. Every plot was listed with an identification name which was used to ask

-29-

any information about that particular plot. This simplified the interview procedure to a great extent as all

family members were very familiar with these identification names of the plots. It was, therefore, not

necessary to have the interview with the same family member every time.

Family labor and permanently hired labor were counted as permanent labor. The draft animal used for

plowing the fields is the bullock. Camels were used for transportation of harvested crops from point of

harvesting to threshing floor and later from the threshing floor to store or market. An approximate power

rating was assigned to each animal depending on its size, physical condition, and the performance during

the study period. The power ratings are given in Appendix A.4. The information about which the

questions were asked during interviews, about various agricultural operations is given below.

1. Seedbed Preparation: Includes tillage operations

(i) Power source: Human labor (permanent or hired), bullocks, tractor (make, size, owned or hired)

(ii) Implement type: Traditional or steel plow, tine cultivator, disc harrow or any other

implements and their sizes

(iii) Time: Man hours, bullock hours, tractor hours

(v) Fuel consumed: liters

2. Sowing: Includes sowing or planting of crops, preparation of seed, i.e. cleaning

and cutting of sugarcane stalks for seeding and transplanting of rice seedlings

(i) Power source: Human labor (permanent, casual), bullocks, tractor (make, size, owned or hired)

(ii) Implement type: Hand tool, traditional plow, seeding attachment or seed drill

(iii) Time: Man hours, bullocks hours, tractor hours

(iv) Quantity: Seed, fertilizer

(v) Fuel consumed: liters

3. Irrigation

(i) Source: Canal, tubewell

(ii) Power source: Human labor, electric motor, diesel engine (size, owned or hired)

(iii) Time: Man hours, electric motor hours, diesel engine hours

(iv) Quantity: diesel (l) or electricity (kWh)

4. Intercultural Includes weeding, fertilizer and other chemical applications,

Operations:

(i) Power source: Human labor (permanent, casual), bullocks, tractor (make, size, owned or

hired)

(ii) Implement type: Hand tools, traditional or steel plow or any other implement like sprayer

and their sizes

(iii) Time: Man hours, bullock hours, tractor hours,

(iv) Quantity: Fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides

(v) Fuel consumed: liters

5. Harvesting: Includes the harvesting of crops, sugarcane cutting

(i) Power source: Human labor

(ii) Implement type: Hand tools (sickle, axe)

(iii) Time: Man hours

-30-

6. Threshing: Includes threshing of grain crops

(i) Power source: Human labor (permanent, casual), bullocks, tractor (make, size, hired or owned)

(ii) Implement: Thresher (capacity, owned or hired)

(iii) Time: Man hours, bullocks hours, tractor hours

(iv) Quantity: Quantity of threshed crop

(v) Fuel consumed: liters

7. Transportation: Includes transportation of harvested crop from fields to threshing

floor and threshed crop from threshing floor to storage at home or to the market

(i) Power source: Human labor, bullocks or camels, tractor (make, size, owned or hired)

(ii) Implement type: Bullock cart, tractor trailer

(iii) Time: Man hours, bullock hours, tractor hours

(iv) Fuel consumed: liters

4.2.1. Hourly and Daily Rates for Power Sources:

(i) Human labor. Three types of labor was used by the farmers for all agricultural operations of various

crops. These were family labor, permanently hired labor and casually hired labor. Family labor was a

permanent source of labor supply to all farmers, while on certain farms permanent hired labor was also

engaged on an annual or monthly basis, mostly to supplement family labor. Casual labor, on the other

hand, was only used when the amount of work to be done for crop production was more than what

family or permanent hired labor could handle. For example, there are two cropping seasons in a year:

Rabi and Kharif. Each of these seasons consists of a number of agricultural activities to be performed

within specific time periods; periods for plowing, irrigation, sowing and harvesting of crop. As these

activities are time specific and must be completed within limited periods the demand for labor during

these periods varies significantly. The wages for labor were therefore calculated keeping in view the

peak periods of agricultural activity and the slack periods.

Permanently hired labor worked on a contractual basis under an agreement, the farmer was

bound to pay a specific amount of money in cash and/or share of crop periodically in lieu of services and

the value of payment was made in kind at current market prices. The current market rate of 8 hours work

in normal times was Rs. 50.00 in village Himat and Rs. 40.00 in other villages under study. However,

during peak periods this wage rate was much higher. The wage rate in peak periods was Rs. 80 in village

Himat and Rs. 60 in other villages under study. The rate of daily wages was higher in the village Himat

because of closeness to the city. The custom charges of human labor are given in Appendix A.4.

(ii) Bullocks. The hiring of the bullocks was not in practice. However, a farmer who uses the services of

bullocks from another farmer is bound to return the same on demand. The hourly charges of a bullock

were almost the same as hiring of human labor.

(iii) Electric Motors and Diesel Engines: The charges for the use of electric motors to power irrigation

pumps were Rs. 0.85 per kWh. Flat rates were based upon the size of the motor. This rate was Rs. 122

per hp per month i.e. the farmers with 15 horse power motors were paying Rs. 1830 per month

irrespective of the number of times a crop is irrigated. The hourly rates for the use of diesel engines to

power irrigation pumps depends upon the fuel (diesel) consumed. The rate of diesel was Rs 6.12 per

liter. However, the custom charges for irrigation for both power sources were paid on the basis of the

-31-

amount of produce. These charges were one third of the threshed crop in case of wheat and one third of

the harvested crop in case of sugarcane.

(iv) Tractors. The hiring charges of tractors (average size of 37 kW) varied from operation to operation.

In the case of plowing, these charges were Rs 60 per hour in irrigated farms and Rs 70 per hour in

rainfed farms. For rotavating and land levelling operations, the tractor owner charged Rs 80 per hour in

both irrigated and rainfed farms. For transportation of harvested crops from field to threshing floor, the

charges were Rs 100 per hour. The hiring rate for threshing varied from place to place; the most

common was a 14th part of the threshed crop or Rs 100 per hour. To compute threshing charges, a

charge of Rs.100 per hour was used.

4.2.2. Charges of Canal water

Canal irrigation charges were based on the crop of a particular plot. The charges are fixed and

there is no bar on the number of times of irrigation. The charges for some of the crops are given below:

Crop Canal Water Charges per hectare

1. Wheat Rs. 71.14

2. Sugarcane Rs. 209.46

3. Oil seed Rs. 75.09

(including rape seed and mustered)

4. Rice Rs. 94.85

5. Rabi Fodder Rs. 55.33

(including Barseem)

6. Kharif Fodder Rs. 55.33

(including Maize, Millet and legumes)

4.2.3. Prices of Farm Products

Prices of farm products received by the farmer (farm gate prices) varied from season to season.

The price of a particular crop was generally lower during the harvesting period and some period

following harvest when most of the farmers take their crop to market. This variation in prices has been

reduced to some extent due to the fixing of procurement prices for certain crops by the government. A

list of prices of farm products received by the farmers in Dera Ismail Khan District during the year 1992-

93 is given in Appendix A.5.

4.2.4. Prices of Manure, Fertilizer and other Chemicals:

The prices of most chemical fertilizers were uniform throughout the district. Farmyard manure

was mostly purchased on a negotiable basis. A list of prices of manure, fertilizers, and other chemicals

paid by farmers in D.I. Khan District is given in Appendix A.6.

4.3. Transfer of Data for Processing

During the interviews, the information was recorded in forms (The questionnaire used for this

purpose is given in appendix A 6). A calendar of agricultural operations performed during the survey

period was prepared for each farmer. It included the data of each operation performed and the hours of

use of power sources i.e. human labor, bullocks, electric motor or diesel engine and tractor. The date of

an operation performed in a particular plot was recorded as told by the farmer. While transferring the

-32-

data on to the calendar, the time spend could be verified by checking against the number of human labor

(permanent), bullocks or tractors, and other power sources available to the farmer on that particular date

including the number of casual laborers and other power sources hired. The data were processed with

SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences; MARIJA, 1990). The codes for data records and analysis

are given in Appendix A 7. Each day of the year was assigned a particular number i.e., January 1, was

numbered as 001 and February 1, as 032, etc.

4.4. Data Analysis

There were more than 600 crop plots of six different crops grown by 26 farmers under study.

Energy equivalents for various direct and indirect sources of energy, as adopted by the Indian Council of

Agricultural Research (MITTAL et al. 1985), were used in this study. The details of the procedures are

as follows.

1. The product of the number of man hours and estimated power rating (0.075 kW) of human labor.

2. The product of the number of bullock hours and the estimated power rating of each animal (0.37

kW) during the survey.

3. For electric motors, the product of rated power of the electric motor, time consumed in operation

and load factor. Load factor was equal to actual electricity consumed (read from energy meter)

during operation over electricity consumed at rated power.

4. For diesel engines and tractors, the product of rated engine power, time consumed in operation

and load factor. Load factor was equal to actual fuel consumption over fuel consumed at rated

power.

Computations were made for energy inputs on a per hectare basis for each holding. The average

energy inputs per hectare on an annual and weekly basis during the whole crop season were determined.

Similarly, average energy inputs per hectare from various sources for different crops were also

determined.

4.5 Cost analysis

All agricultural farms under study were economically analyzed. This analysis was performed to

examine the gross margins and net returns of the farms.

The payments made of land, for its use in production, are called land rent. Annual land rent was

Rs. 472 per hectare for rainfed farms, Rs. 790 for tubewell irrigated farms and Rs. 1739 per hectare for

canal irrigated farms. The cost of family labor was counted equal to the cost of permanently hired labor.

Casually hired labor was employed during the peak periods for specific operations like harvesting and

threshing of wheat, transplanting of rice, and sugarcane harvesting. Payment to casually hired labor was

made either in kind or cash or both. Whatever the mode of payment, the entire cost of this labor was

estimated and allocated to that farm. The prevailing price of seed at the time of sowing, was used for

estimating the cost of home produced seed. A common seed rate of wheat was 100 kg/ha in irrigated

farms and 125 kg/ha in rainfed farms in D. I. Khan District. Though the price of one kg of wheat seed

varied from Rs 3.50 to 4.50, an average value of Rs 4.00 was used to compute the cost of seed which

amounted to Rs. 400 to 500/ha. The costs of fertilizers applied were charged to the concerned farm. Two

types of fertilizers were commonly used in the irrigated farms of D. I. Khan District (Urea and Di

Ammonium Phosphate). The average prices of fertilizers are given in Appendix A. 6. In the case of farm

yard manure it was observed that no farmer used farm yard manure for major crops like wheat and

-33-

sugarcane. It was mostly used for heating and cooking purposes. Some farmers used it for vegetables

they had grown on their farms for domestic purposes.

The cost of production for a particular crop included the costs of all operations performed with

various power sources, and the costs of material inputs like seed, manure, fertilizers, herbicides and

insecticides needed to grow one hectare of that crop. The cost of production was also calculated by

summing the cost of all power sources, i.e., human labor, bullock energy, electrical or diesel energy,

tractor and the materials used for that particular crop. These costs of production were also calculated by

excluding the cost of family labor.

Gross value of output includes the value of crops (wheat, sugarcane) and byproducts (wheat

straw). Value of the wheat crop was computed using an average market price (farm gate price) of Rs

3500 per ton which the farmers received during 1992-93.

The quantity of straw was calculated from the grain yield. For every ton of grain there was 1.25

ton of straw. An average price of 1.25 tons of straw obtained from a ton of wheat grain was Rs. 400. The

hiring rates of all power sources i.e., human labor, bullocks, electrical motor, diesel engine and tractor

are given in Appendix A. 4.

Gross margin was defined as the gross value of product minus the production cost, excluding the

cost of family labor and land rent (ABBOTT and MAKEHAM, 1979). Return to the family labor was

also calculated to find out the earning of a farmer, in case he has to pay land rent and incase he has his

own land and he does not need to pay the land rent.

V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

5.1 Land Utilization.

The total farm area possessed by 26 farmers under study was 155.4 hectares. The land use

patterns for the two main categories of power and three subcategories of water source are shown in

Table 5.1 and 5.2.

Almost 81% of the cultivated area on the tractor operated rainfed farms and 62% of the

cultivated area on bullock operated rainfed farms was sown during the winter (Rabi) season. In

Monsoon (Kharif) cropping season, 67% of the cultivated area on bullock operated rainfed farms and

58% on the tractor operated rainfed farms was sown. All the cultivated area on irrigated farm (of either

power source) was sown during the Rabi season. However, 50% of the cultivated area on bullock

operated farms with canal irrigation and 58% on tractor operated farms with tubewell irrigation

remained fallow during the Kharif season.

5.1.1 Reasons for Fallowing of Cultivated Area

Fallowing of land can be attributed to a number of factors. The main factor was the shortage of

water.

During the Kharif season, shortage of water was the major reason that kept a good portion of

cultivated land fallow not only on rainfed farms but also on farms with canal irrigation. In the case of

canal irrigated farms most of the farmers grew rice and could not get enough water to support the crops

for their whole farm. However, during the Rabi season only rainfed farms were affected due shortage of

water.

Other factors are of localized nature. These are water logging and salinity, occurrence of floods

during the Kharif season, resting of land for increased fertility and lack of draft animals and capital.

-34-

On irrigated farms, water logging and salinity was another reason due to which in the Kharif

season, 8.4 ha on bullock operated farms with tubewell irrigation and 1.5 ha on tractor operated farms

with canal irrigation could not be cultivated. In the Kharif season, rise in the river head causes the rise of

water table in the adjacent fields. When the water table come close to the surface, salts accumulate in the

root zone and due to presence of excess water or salts, cropping in that particular fields did not remain

possible.

In tubewell irrigated farms some plots were kept fallow to increase fertility.

Lack of draft power or labor was also a reason for keeping the land fallow. Out of six under

study farmers, there was one farmer on the bullock operated rainfed farms who could not cultivate all his

land due to lack of capital for in time land preparation and sowing. This farmer had lost all his millet

crop during previous Kharif season flood. In the Rabi season, he was afraid to take risk of flood.

Moreover, to balance the loan of previous season lost crop, the farmer wanted to go for daily

Table 5.1. Land use of different categories under study area.

Farm

category Cultivated

area

Rabi

sown

Rabi

fallow

Kharif

sown

Kharif

fallow

Average area

under

sugarcane

(ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha)

Bullock

rainfed 49.3 30.6 18.7 32.9 16.4 0.0

Bullock

Canal 20.9 19.8 0.1 10.1 9.8 1.0

Bullock

Tubewell 17.4 8.6 0.0 0.0 8.6 8.8

Bullock

operated

farms 87.6 59.0 18.8 43.0 34.8 9.8

Tractor

rainfed 32.9 26.7 6.2 19.2 13.7 0.0

Tractor

Canal 9.9 7.4 0.0 4.3 3.1 2.5

Tractor

Tubewell 25.0 15.1 0.0 0.7 14.4 9.9

Tractor

operated

farms 67.8 49.2 6.2 24.2 31.2 12.4

Total 155.4 108.2 25.0 67.2 66.0 22.2

-35-

Table 5.2. Reasons of fallow land in various categories of farms

Farm

category Season

Total

fallow

area

Shortage

of water

To

increase

fertility

Water

logging

lack of draft

power and

capital

Due to

flooding

(ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha)

Bullock

rainfed Rabi 18.7 12.3 0.0 0.0 3.6 2.8

Bullock

Canal Rabi 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0

Bullock

Tubewell Rabi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Tractor

rainfed Rabi 6.2 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Tractor

Canal Rabi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Tractor

Tubewell Rabi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total

Rabi 25.0 18.5 0.0 0.1 3.6 2.8

Bullock

rainfed Kharif 16.4 16.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Bullock

Canal Kharif 9.8 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6

Bullock

Tubewell Kharif 8.6 0.0 0.2 8.4 0.0 0.0

Tractor

rainfed Kharif 13.7 13.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Tractor

Canal Kharif 3.1 1.6 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0

Tractor

Tubewell Kharif 14.4 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 13.0

Toral

Kharif 66.0 38.9 1.6 9.9 0.0 15.6

Year

Total 91.0 57.4 1.6 10.0 3.6 18.4

-36-

wages. Because in case he asks the fallow farmers to help during land preparation and sowing, he would

have to extend his services on demand also. So the farmer decided not to cultivate his all farm area. It

was commonly observed in rainfed area that the farmers, who lose the crops in one season, prefer to go

for daily wedges in the coming season. They cultivate the crop only on small portion of their land which

remains sufficient for their family requirements.

Flooding during the Kharif season was another factor due to which many plots remained fallow

on bullock operated canal irrigated farms and tractor operated tubewell irrigated farms. Floods prevented

the farmers to cultivate 50% of their farm area in tubewell irrigated farms during the Kharif season for

this reason. However, during the Rabi season only 1% of the cultivated area of bullock operated rainfed

farms remained fallow.

5.1.2 Cropping Pattern

Wheat was the major crop during Rabi season on rainfed as well as on the irrigated farms of the

District. Chickpea and oilseed were also grown in some plots of rainfed farms in this season, whereas,

mustard and vegetables were sown in irrigated farms. During the Kharif season, the cropping patterns

consisted of millet in rainfed farms, rice in canal irrigated farms and sugarcane in both canal and

tubewell irrigated farms. Rabi and Kharif fodder were grown on rainfed as well as on irrigated farms by

the farmers depending upon the needs of the animals they owned (Table 5.3). Cropping patterns of

individual farmers understudy are given in Appendix A 8.

5.1.3 Crop Failure

The hill torrents have made deep cuts in the plain areas over the decades and these acts as

channels for the passage of flood water. At some places these channels are manmade. The water is

blocked in the bed of the torrent with a temporary dam, called "Bund" or "Gatti" in the local dialects.

This water is then diverted into big embanked fields. The floods in the torrents are very unpredictable in

their timing and magnitude. They may be too early, i.e., before the erection of dams in the bed of the

torrent or, they may be too big for the crude loose earthwork that quite often breaks and get washed

away by the mere force of the flood. This system of irrigation requires a great deal of earthwork and

much work throughout the year for preparation of fields for the next crop or for the next years' flood.

These dams are prepared with the help of bullocks on bullock operated farms and with the help of

tractors on tractor operated farms.

Not all the sown area could be harvested due to floods. Out of the total sown area of 108 ha in

the Rabi season, crops were harvested on only 92 ha. The fodder was harvested on 4 ha while rest of the

12 ha was destroyed by flood (Table 5.4). Similarly, out of the total sown area of 67 ha in the Kharif

season, crops were harvested on only 31 ha. The fodder was harvested on 13 ha while the rest of the 23

ha was destroyed by flood. The crops on 65% of the sown area on bullock operated and 8% of the sown

area on tractor operated rainfed farms were destroyed by floods during the Kharif season. However,

during the Rabi season, 16% of the sown area on bullock operated and 28% of the sown area on tractor

operated rainfed farms were destroyed by floods. The crops on canal and tubewell farms were also

affected but they were not completely damaged as was the case in rainfed farms.

-37-

Table 5.3. Cropping patterns of rainfed and irrigated farms understudy area.

Farm

category Total

Land Wheat

Chick

pea

Oil

seed

rabi

fodder Rice millet

Kharif

fodder Sugarcane

Cropped

area

Cropping

Intensity

ratoon Planted

(ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (%)

Bullock

rainfed 49.3 26.4 0.8 3.4 0 0 19 13.9 0 0 63.5 129

Tractor

rainfed 32.9 25.7 0 1 0 0 13 6.2 0 0 45.9 140

Bullock

Canal 20.9 16.8 0 0.4 2.6 7.7 0 2.4 0 1 31.9 153

Tractor

Canal 9.9 6.4 0 0 1 2.4 0 1.9 2.5 0 16.7 169

Bullock

Tubewell 17.4 8.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.5 1.3 26.2 151

Tractor

Tubewell 25 14.4 0 0 0.7 0 0 0.7 4.8 5.1 35.6 142

Table 5.4. Sown, harvested and flood damaged areas on rainfed and irrigated farms.

Rabi Crops Kharif Crops Sugarcane

Farm

categor

y Total

Land Sown

Harve

sted

Fodd

er

flood

dama

ged

Fall

ow Sown

Harve

sted

Fodde

r

flood

dama

ged

Fall

ow

rato

on Planted

(ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha)

Bullock

rainfed 49.3 30.6 27.1 0.0 3.5 18.7 32.9 10.0 1.4 21.5 16.4 0.0 0.0

Tractor

rainfed 32.9 26.7 23.6 0.0 3.1 6.2 19.2 9.1 4.2 5.9 13.7 0.0 0.0

Bullock

Canal 20.9 19.8 17.2 2.6 0.0 0.1 10.1 7.7 2.4 0.0 9.8 0.0 1.0

Tractor

Canal 9.9 7.4 6.4 1.0 0.0 0.0 4.3 2.4 1.9 0.0 3.1 2.5 0.0

Bullock

Tubewe

ll 17.4 8.6 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.6 7.5 1.3

Tractor

Tubewe

ll 25.0 15.1 14.4 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 14.4 4.8 5.1

-38-

5.2 Analysis of Energy Inputs on the Survey Farms.

Energy inputs for farm operations were computed by summing the energy inputs of all crop plots

of a given farm. The computation was done on both weekly and annual basis for the total farm and per

hectare of holding. The average annual energy inputs per hectare from human labor, bullocks, electric

motors or diesel engines and tractors for all six categories of farms are given in Table 5.5.

It is evident from the Table that the energy used by the farms increased as their mechanization

level increased, i.e., the farms having tractors as their main power source used more energy than farms

having bullocks as their main power source. Using a tractor takes more energy (kWh) to plow one

hectare of land than using a pair of bullocks. This was due to the higher draft requirement of deep

plowing and higher pulverization by a tractor plow than bullock plow. The farms with tubewell

irrigation used more energy than the farms with canal irrigation followed by the rainfed farms. This was

because of higher consumption of energy in irrigation from tubewell on tubewell irrigated farms than

canal irrigated farms. In canal irrigated farms only man power was used for irrigation.

Permanent laborers include both the family laborers and the permanently hired laborers. The

number of hours each permanent labor worked on an annual basis was calculated by summing up the

work hours of permanent laborer in each category and dividing it by the number of permanent labor in

that category as well as through the following equation.

Work hours Work hours per ha per year x holding size

per laborer = ─────────────────────────────────────────

per year Number of permanent laborers

The computed values for work hours per permanent laborer on an annual basis are given in

Table 5.6. The number of hours each permanent laborer worked during one year period of study on

tractor operated farms were less than that on bullock operated farms. The decrease was due to

economically sound position of farmers of tractor operated farms than the farmers of bullock operated

farms. They would hire casual labor to do some of the jobs that they otherwise could have done

themselves. Another factor for high use of permanent labor on bullock operated farms is the use of

bullocks for most of the farming operations. Tractors on bullock operated farms were only used when it

was hard for bullocks to plow i.e., sugarcane ratoon plots or rice plots having heavy soil. Sometimes a

farmer had to hire a tractor when he was not able to plow all his fields at the appropriate time by bullock

plow.

The use of bullocks for tillage was almost replaced by tractors on tractor operated farms. It takes

less time but greater quantity of energy to plow one hectare of land with a tractor than with a pair of

bullocks. For example on farms with tubewell irrigation it took 58 hours for a pair of bullocks to prepare

one hectare seedbed. On tubewell irrigated farms the land preparation needed only two to three plowing

(in some plots even direct sowing was also observed) due to sandy soil. A pair of bullocks produced an

output of 0.74 kW per hour (0.37 kWh per bullock). In that case energy consumption amounted to 43

kWh. On the other hand commonly used tractor of 37 kWh took almost 8 hours to plow one hectare on

tractor operated farms with tubewell irrigation. Hence taking an average load factor of 0.5, tractor used

148 kWh of energy for the preparation of land.

-39-

Table 5.5. a.

Average annual energy iputs per hectare of holding including flood

affected plots on various categories of farms

Farm

category Permane

nt labor

Casual

labor

Total

labor

Bullock

energy

Pumping

energy

Tractor

energy

Total

energy

(h) (h) (h) (kWh) (kWh) (kWh) (kWh)

Bullock

rainfed 124.0 42.0 166a*

24.6g 0.0 55.2

o 92.2

u

Tractor

rainfed 74.0 36.0 110b 12.8

h 0.0 116.1

p 137.1

v

Bullock

Canal 348.0 41.0 389c 37.3

i 0.0 68.2

o 134.5

v

Tractor

Canal 289.0 236.0 525de

1.8j 0.0 204.1

q 245.1

w

Bullock

Tubewell 309.0 304.0 613d 44.1

k 1032.4

m 62.4

o 1184.6

x

Tractor

Tubewell 160.0 267.0 427ce

1.4j 1031.4

m 288.0

r 1352.7

y

Table 5.5. b.

Average annual energy iputs per hectare of holding excluding flood

affeced plots on various categories of farms

Farm

category Permane

nt labor

Casual

labor

Total

labor

Bullock

energy

Pumping

energy

Tractor

energy

Total

energy

(h) (h) (h) (kWh) (kWh) (kWh) (kWh)

Bullock

rainfed 157.0 62.0 219a 28.3

g 0.0 67.5

o 112.1

u

Tractor

rainfed 82.0 46.0 128b 13.5

h 0.0 123.6

p 146.6

u

Bullock

Canal 348.0 41.0 389c 37.3

i 0.0 68.2

o 134.5

u

Tractor

Canal 289.0 236.0 525de

1.8j 0.0 204.1

q 245.1

v

Bullock

Tubewell 309.0 304.0 613d 44.1

k 1032.4

m 62.4

o 1184.6

w

Tractor

Tubewell 160.0 267.0 427ce

1.4j 1031.4

m 288.0

r 1352.7

x

Values followed by the same letter in column are not significantly different

from each other at 5% level of significance.

1 man hour = 0.0746 kWh (Source: Singh and Mitter, 1992)

-40-

Table 5.6 Number of hours worked by the permanent laborer during a one year period

and intensities of cropping of various categories

Farm

category

Average

number of

Permanent

labor

Average

holding

size

(ha)

No. of ha

per

permanent

labor

Work hr

per

permanent

labor per

ha

Work hr

per

permanent

labor per

year

Average

intensity

of

cropping*

Area

under

sugarcane

as %age

of

cultivated

area

a b b/a c b x c/a %

Bullock

rainfed 1.0 8.2 8.2 124.0 1017 129 0.0

Tractor

rainfed 1.0 8.2 8.2 74.0 607 140 0.0

Bullock

Canal 2.2 4.2 1.9 348.0 664 153 4.8

Tractor

Canal 2.0 5.0 2.5 289.0 723 169 25.0

Bullock

Tubewell 1.8 3.5 1.9 309.0 601 151 50.9

Tractor

Tubewell 2.3 6.3 2.7 160.0 438 142 39.6

* Based on area sown

Nine out of thirteen tractor operated farms did not have bullocks for draft power. However, they

do have other animals for milk. On some farms, bullocks or camels were used for the transportation of

harvested crop from fields to threshing floor. They could easily transport the harvested crop from their

fields to the threshing floor with their tractor and trollies but they used the camel because of their

custom. Maximum use of tractors occurred during threshing operation of wheat on bullock as well as on

tractor operated farms.

Rainfed Farms.

Overall consumption of energy on rainfed farms was lower than the irrigated farms. One of the

reasons of this low use of energy was low cropping intensities.

Agriculture in this area depends on rains and hill torrents. The farmers on rainfed farms were

able to cultivate their farms and sow crops in both cropping seasons of the year due to good rains.

However, many of them lost their crops due to heavy flood and could not harvest their crops. If the area

of crops destroyed by floods is deleted for the farms in these categories and only area harvested is

considered, then cropping intensity worked out to be the lowest (Table 5.7) of the copping intensities of

all categories (Table 5.3). This resulted in the lowest energy use.

-41-

-42-

Table 5.7. The use of bullock during one year period and area under fodder crops

Farm

category

Average

number

of

bullock

Average

holding

size

(ha)

No. of

ha per

bullock

Bullock

energy

used

/ha

Energy input

/bullock/year

Average

annual

use

/bullock

Area under fodder

as %age of total

cropped area

a b b/a c d= b x c/a h

Bullock

rainfed 2.2 8.2 3.7 24.6 91.7 248.0 21.9

Tractor

rainfed 1.0 8.2 8.2 12.8 105.0 283.0 13.5

Bullock

Canal 2.0 4.2 2.1 37.3 78.3 212.0 15.7

Tractor

Canal 1.0 5.0 5.0 1.8 9.0 24.0 17.4

Bullock

Tubewell 2.0 3.5 1.8 44.1 77.2 209.0 0.0

Tractor

Tubewell 0.5 6.3 12.6 1.4 17.6 48.0 3.9

*This area also produced fodder for a substantial number of non-draft animals.

The crops grown on rainfed farms were also different from the crops grown by the farmers in

other categories due to lack of availability of irrigation water. Generally the farmers grew millet for

fodder and grain during the Kharif season and wheat as a major crop during the Rabi season on these

farms. Although the average size of the rainfed farms understudy was 8.2 ha compared to 4.6 ha and 4.9

ha of canal irrigated farms and tubewell irrigated farms respectively but the farmers on the rainfed farms

were poorer than the farmers of the irrigated farms. The majority of farmers still use old practices that

have been handed down to them. These practices constitute intensive use of manual labor with little

input of capital.

Bullock energy was mostly used during land preparation and sowing operations on bullock

operated rainfed farms. Sowing of all the crops was mostly performed with the help of locally made seed

tube attached to the bullock drawn plow even on those farms where the main power source was a tractor.

Due to a narrow planting window, farmers in rainfed farms always took help at the time of sowing from

their neighbors on a reciprocal basis. Out of four, only one farmer on a tractor operated rainfed farms

used a tractor mounted drill for sowing of wheat.

Maximum use of tractors was made during threshing operation of wheat. This operation was

performed with tractor operated threshers on almost all rainfed farms. Out of six only one farmer on a

bullock operated farm threshed wheat with bullock treading method. The other use of tractors was noted

during land preparation on some bullock operated rainfed farms.

-43-

Canal Irrigated Farms.

On the farms with canal irrigation, use of overall energy consumption was higher than the

rainfed farms. The main reason for this high energy use was the higher cropping intensity on irrigated

farms. On canal irrigated farms cropping intensities were 153% and 168% with 5% and 25% of the farm

area under sugarcane crop on bullock and tractor operated farms respectively (Table 5.6). The quantity

of canal water available was sufficient for the Rabi crops. However, farmers sometimes had to borrow

water from each other, depending upon the level of immediate need of one farmer as against the quantity

of water available that could be spared by the other farmer. This arrangement was mutual in character

and worked on an exchange basis. The shortage of water was felt during the Kharif season when

particularly rice was grown. Accordingly 9 out of 31 hectares remained fallow in canal irrigated farms.

The number of hours per hectare that each permanent laborer worked during one year period of

study was the highest on the bullock operated farms with canal irrigation (Table 5.6). The main reason

for high use of labor was transplanting, manual harvesting and threshing of rice crop by the permanent

labor. The fellow farmers in the neighbor also helped at the time of sowing of crops on a give-and-take

basis. Threshing of rice crop was performed manually by beating the harvested crop against a wooden

block. In the case of sugarcane the standing crop was sold to mill owners.

Another factor for the high use of permanent labor on bullock operated farms with canal

irrigation was the high use of bullocks in this category. The number of hectares per draft animal was 2

which is lower than all categories except bullock operated farms with tubewell irrigation. On an average

usage of 78 kWh (211 h) per draft animal per year was observed which is highest among all the

categories in irrigated farms (Table 5.8).

There were two reasons for which tractors were used after the harvesting of rice crop. Firstly, the

soil becomes too hard for bullocks to plow and secondly, only a short time is left for sowing of wheat

crop. However, after first plowing with a tractor, farmers on bullock operated farms with canal irrigation

used bullocks for land preparation.

Tubewell Irrigated Farms.

The total energy use was the highest on farms with tubewell irrigation because of the high use of

electric/diesel engines for pumping groundwater.

Farms with tubewell irrigation used less permanent labor than farms with canal irrigation. This

could be due to low cropping intensity on tubewell irrigated farms. In Kharif season, 8 ha on bullock

operated farms could not be cultivated due to water logging and salinity and 13 ha on tractor operated

farms remained fallow due to flooding in tubewell irrigated farms. In those farms, cropping intensities

were 151% and 142% with 51% and 40% of the farm area under sugarcane crops in bullock and tractor

operated farms respectively (Table 5.6).

The use of casual labor on tubewell irrigated farms was higher than the canal irrigated farms and

rainfed farms since harvesting of sugarcane was done mainly by casual labor on tubewell irrigated farms.

Farmers in tubewell irrigated farms cannot grow rice due to the texture of soil that ranged from sandy to

loamy. Consequently, the farmers who can take two crops mostly preferred to grow sugarcane. The

sugarcane being a perennial crop, took a growing season equivalent to two crops like wheat and rice.

The farmers who cannot take two crops a year preferred to grow wheat crop only during the Rabi

cropping season.

Bullocks on tractor operated farms worked at substantially lower annual intensity than they did

on bullock operated farms. This indicates that the application of tractors caused a reduction in the

-44-

number of bullocks on the farms.

-45-

Table 5.8 Cropping intensities of raifed farms based on sown and harvested areas.

Farm

category

Farm

area

Total

cropped

area

Cropping

intensity*

Cropped

area

damaged

by

floods

Harvested

cropped

area

Harvested

area as

%age of

total

cropped

area

Cropping

intensity

(ha) (ha) (%) (ha) (ha) (%) (%)

Bullock

rainfed 49.3 63.5 129 25.0 38.5 61 78

Tractor

rainfed 32.9 45.9 140 9.0 36.9 80 112

* Based on area sown

** Based on area harvested