Parameters of Production of Selected
Food Commodities at the State Level
A research paper prepared under the project
Agricultural Outlook and Situation Analysis Reports
National Council of Applied Economic Research
Parisila Bhawan, 11, I.P Estate, New Delhi
i
ii
Parameters of Production of Selected
Food Commodities at the State Level
National Council of Applied Economic Research
New Delhi
iii
Parameters of Production of Selected Food Commodities at the
State Level
Introduction
Comparison of production performance across states provides an assessment of the
differences across states that also reflect the potential for catching up with the best
performers. Factors influencing agricultural growth at an aggregate level include agroclimatic conditions, irrigation availability, input use levels and agronomic practices that
influence production and productivity of crops across the states. Production performance is
also influenced by markets, implementation of various government production programs and
policies besides the infrastructure for agriculture.
Production growth is contributed by growth in crop area and yield per hectare of crop area.
The relative contribution of area and yield to crop production also may vary depending upon
the adoption of technology by states and potential for area growth. Besides growth,
variability in production is also an important criterion to be considered from a policy
perspective. Achieving higher and stable yield levels would be a policy goal to increase food
production when expansion of land area is not feasible.
In this report we provide an assessment of the relative performance of various states with
regard to growth and variability in area, yield and production of major crops and also to
measure the contribution of area and yield in production growth over the past decade1.
An attempt has also been made to assess the changing pattern of growth and variability of crop area,
production and yield over time. This analysis provides insights on whether factors influencing crop
production such as policy changes, input use changes and climate change etc. have caused a shift in
the growth and variability of crops over time. A ten-year moving compound growth rates and
coefficient of variations have been estimated for the past several decades for major crops in important
producing states and at the national level2.
1 Rice:
The trends in area, yield, and production for rice in the recent decade of 2000-01 to 2011-12
(Figure 1) show that the highest growth in rice production was registered by Gujarat, a
relatively small rice growing state, followed by Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana,
Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand and Orissa, with the annual growth rate ranging from nine to
around three per cent. However, some major rice producing states such as West Bengal,
Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu have registered only a modest growth in
production, below the all India growth rate of 1.8 per cent. While Bihar registered a negative
production growth rate during the period of 20001-02 to 2011-12, we should also note that
rice production in Bihar registered remarkable growth in 2011-12 which has been maintained
1
The computation methodologies are discussed in Appendix 1.
2
While coefficient of variation has been used for assessing variability, it should be pointed out that this measure
includes the variation from mean arising from growth itself, besides the year to year fluctuations. An alternative
measure such as the ratio of mean square error from trend growth to the mean overcomes this weakness of CV.
A comparison of the results using the CV with the alternative measure showedonly a few variations in the
results and therefore we have retained the analysis with CV as a measure of variability.
1
in the subsequent year of 2012-13 as well. Rice production in Bihar increased from 3.1
million tonnes in 2010-11 to 7.2 million tonnes in 2011-12 and it is estimated at 7.3 million
tonnes in 2012-13. Much of the increase has come from yield improvement. Rice production
also increased by about 2 million tonnes in Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal in 2011-12 over
the previous year and the output was sustained at the new high in the subsequent year.
The highest growth in rice production was registered by Gujarat, a relatively small rice
growing state, followed by Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Andhra Pradesh,
Jharkhand and Orissa, with the growth rate ranging from nine to around three per cent.
However, some major rice producing states such as West Bengal, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, and
Tamil Nadu have registered only a modest growth in production, below the all India growth
rate of 1.8 per cent. Bihar was the only state, which registered a negative production growth
rate (Figure 1). It should be, however, noted that Bihar rice yields nearly doubled in 2011-12
over the previous year and have been maintained at that level.
Figure.1. Trends in Area, Yield and Production of Rice across States: Trend Growth
Rates, 2000-01 to 2011-12
10.00
8.00
CGR %
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
-2.00
-4.00
Area
Gujara Chattis M.P.
t
garh
3.26 -0.20 -0.87
Harya
na
2.29
A.P.
2.00
Jharrk Orissa Karnat Punjab Mahar
hand
aka
ashtra
-2.51 -0.56 1.37
1.02
0.03
T.N.
Assam UP+UK
W.
Bihar
Bengal
-0.73 -1.23
INDIA
0.39
-0.25
0.37
Yield
5.58
5.45
4.73
1.23
0.95
5.46
3.37
1.20
0.99
1.87
1.29
1.69
0.60
0.89
0.60
0.00
1.82
Production
9.02
5.23
3.82
3.54
2.97
2.82
2.79
2.59
2.02
1.91
1.69
1.43
0.97
0.16
-0.64
1.82
The highest yield growth was registered by Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa, and Madhya
Pradesh, besides Gujarat, reflecting the success of the government programs such as
“Bringing Green Revolution to Eastern India States” (BGREI) and the National Food
Security Mission (NFSM). At the all India level yield growth was 1.82 percent.
Most states registered a marginal or negative growth rate in rice area, with the exception of
Gujarat, Haryana, and Andhra Pradesh. At the all India level, the area growth rate was
negligible.
Measured in terms of coefficient of variation, the higher production variability was registered
mostly in BGREI states of Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Bihar implying these states, despite
registering a higher growth, have also experienced greater variability. As expected,
2
production variability was lower in the mostly irrigated states such as Punjab, Uttar Pradesh,
and Haryana. West Bengal and Assam were exceptions, where despite lower irrigation
coverage and lager dependence on monsoon rains, the production variability is lower. This is
perhaps due to the fact that these states produce two or more rice crops in a year, thus
offsetting the decline in one season by higher production in the next season. Most of the
production variability is attributed to fluctuations in yield, but area fluctuation is also
significant in a number of states with Jharkhand, Gujarat, and Andhra Pradesh experiencing
greater variability in area under rice than in the other states. In Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh,
area under rice increased at an average rate significantly higher than in the other states,
whereas in Jharkhand the area under rice declined sharply. At the national level coefficient of
variation of production, area, and yield was 9.4%, 3.0% and 7.9% respectively.
Figure 2. Pattern of Variability in Rice Area, Yield and Production across States:
Coefficient of Variation (%), 2000-01 to 2011-12
40.00
35.00
30.00
CY %
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
UP+
UK
Assa
m
Hary
ana
Area
W. Punja
Beng
b
al
5.21 4.17
5.68
5.05
9.78
Maha A.P. Oriss Karn T.N.
rashtr
a
ataka
a
1.56 15.69 3.38 10.38 11.21
Yield
3.94
5.15
7.37
9.93
8.43
14.44
18.49 16.79 16.59 23.28 25.54 25.15 21.97 25.73
7.93
Production
5.72
8.08
11.37 13.33 13.38 15.29 18.59 19.21 22.98 23.77 23.90 25.56 27.93 31.00 38.62
9.46
6.11
M.P.
5.15
Chatt Bihar Gujar Jharr INDI
isgar
at
khan
A
h
d
1.16 7.20 14.22 20.22 3.08
Analysis of contribution of area and yield to production change reveals that in most states,
with the exception of Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal, yield was the major factor
contributing to the production growth. The yield contribution is higher in Chhattisgarh,
followed by Maharashtra, Orissa, Bihar and Haryana whereas in Andhra Pradesh and West
Bengal area contributed to more than three-fourth of the production growth. At all India
level, yield contribution was about 2/3rd and area about 1/3rd(Figure 3).
3
Figure 3. Contribution of Growth Rates of Area and Yield to Growth Rate of
Production of Rice: %, 2000-01 to 2011-12
100.00
90.00
% Contribution
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Area
Chatti Mahar Orissa M.P.
sgarh ashtra
1.95
3.52
7.00
Bihar Harya Karnat Punja Gujara T.N.
na
aka
b
t
Assa UP+U Jharrk W.
A.P. INDI
m
K
hand Benga
A
l
12.99 16.87 21.34 31.27 37.01 38.06 41.97 43.03 49.16 53.01 73.46 79.91 31.28
Yield 98.05 96.48 93.00 87.01 83.13 78.66 68.73 62.99 61.94 58.03 56.97 50.84 46.99 26.54 20.09 68.72
Differentials in yields across states suggest the likely gains that can be had by raising the
yield levels in the lower yield states to the highest that is achieved among the states. While
agro-climatic and technological conditions may constrain the low yield states from reaching
the highest yield levels achieved elsewhere, the yield gaps- difference between the highest
yield and actual yields in individual states point to such likely differences at the micro level
also. Figure 2.1.4 illustrates the average production, yield, and yield gap between a state’s
average yield and the highest yield among all states.
The largest yield gap is seen in states of Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Bihar and
Uttar Pradesh. The potential to increase rice production by bridging the yield gap is confined
mainly to the eastern states (Figure 4).
Figure 4. Pattern of Average Production (Thousand tonnes), Yield (kg/ha)and Yield
Gap (% from highest yield) for Rice across States
Poduction (TMT) Yield (Kg/ha) Yield Gap (kg/Ha)
16,000.00
14,000.00
12,000.00
10,000.00
8,000.00
6,000.00
4,000.00
2,000.00
0.00
-2,000.00
-4,000.00
WB
UP+UK
AP
Punjab Orissa
TN
Chattis
garh
Bihar
Assam
Karnata Haryan Mahara Jharkha
ka
a
shtra
nd
MP
Gujarat
P
14,385. 12,299. 11,560. 10,114. 6,318.9 5,565.1 4,683.1 4,667.3 3,860.5 3,675.9 3,170.8 2,474.8 2,149.6 1,494.3 1,217.7
Y
2,535.2 2,070.3 3,032.5 3,795.2 1,439.7 2,966.8 1,248.0 1,371.0 1,558.1 2,624.9 2,903.2 1,623.9 1,546.8 907.16 1,720.3
YG -1,259. -1,724. -762.75
0.00
-2,355. -828.41 -2,547. -2,424. -2,237. -1,170. -892.02 -2,171. -2,248. -2,888. -2,074.
4
In the case of rice, there has been a significant upward shift in production growth during the
decade ending 2012-13, after remaining subdued during previous decades. The higher
production growth was supported by high yield growth, whereas area growth was low.
Higher production growth, however, coincided with higher production variability, mostly in
yields (Figure 5).
Figure 5. Trends in Growth (%) and Variability (CV%) Area, Production and Yield of
Rice at All India Level: Rolling Estimates for Previous 10-years
12.0
10.0
CV %/CGR %
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
-2.0
2000- 2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- 2005- 2006- 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 201201
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
Area CGR
0.4
0.5
-0.1
0.0
-0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
-0.7
-0.4
-0.2
0.3
Production CGR
1.2
2.0
-0.1
0.9
0.1
1.6
1.3
1.4
1.3
-0.1
1.1
1.1
3.5
Yield CGR
0.8
1.6
0.0
0.9
0.3
1.4
1.2
1.3
1.1
0.6
1.5
1.3
3.2
Area CV
2.5
2.7
3.1
2.9
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.2
3.1
2.9
Production CV
6.6
7.5
8.0
7.3
7.2
7.6
7.5
7.9
8.4
8.3
8.6
9.6
10.5
Yield CV
4.5
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.4
6.0
6.1
6.6
6.7
6.6
7.0
7.7
8.9
At the state level, production growth saw a significant increase in recent years mainly in the
eastern states of Chhattisgarh, Orissa, and to a lesser extent in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh,
mainly driven by high yield growth. This could be reflective of the positive impact of
government programs such as BGREI. Andhra Pradesh and Haryana also registered high
production growth rates in the most recent decade. No significant trend in production
variability was observed in any state except in Assam and to a lesser extent in Bihar. There
has been a modest declining trend in production variations in Tamil Nadu and Orissa.
The overall trends and patterns in area and yield, the two parameters of production reviewed
above indicates that where average yield levels are low and growth rates are also low, there is
a need for steps to support adoption of practices by the farmers that helps in the improvement
in land productivity. In states where yield are high and growth is low, the steps needed are
research efforts to raise the production frontier and disseminate the new technologies that
help raise the productivity. Efforts may also be needed to provide incentives for processing
and developing new markets. The programs such as RKVY, NFSM and BGREI provide such
a framework for policy actions. We have summarised the overall patterns that emerge from a
review of trends and patterns of yield of rice at the state level in Figure 6.
5
Figure 6. Pattern of growth and variability in yields during 2000-01 to 20011-12: Rice
Yield growth
Yield
Low (<= 2 tonnes/ ha)
High (>2 tonnes/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high
CV: low
CV: high
(<=10%)
(>10%)
(<=10%)
(>10%)
Low
Assam
Bihar
UP
(<=1.5% per year)
West Bengal
High
(>1.5% per year)
Chhattisgarh
Gujarat
Jharkhand
MP
Maharashtra
Odisha
Haryana
Punjab
Andhra Pradesh
Karnataka
Tamil Nadu
There are seven states where the average yield levels are relatively high (above 2 tonnes per
ha) and five states where the growth rate of yields is also high (above 1.5 per cent per year).
Among the states where yields are high but variability is also high are the southern states of
Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. In Punjab and Haryana the yield and yield
growth are high and variability in yields is low.
The states with low yields are Assam and Bihar, with the latter also experiencing more
variability. In six states of Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Jharkhand, MP, Maharashtra and Odisha,
the yields are low but growth rate of yields is high. In these states, greater attention is
required to provide protective measures such as improved irrigation or alternative varieties
that can withstand fluctuations in rainfall and weather conditions.
2. Wheat
Across the major states, the highest growth rate in production over the last decade was
recorded by Gujarat followed by Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan whereas the
lowest production growth was mostly in major wheat growing states such as Punjab, Uttar
Pradesh and Bihar. West Bengal, although not a major wheat growing state, registered a
negative growth rate. Production growth in Haryana was a modest 2.53 per cent, marginally
lower than the national level growth rate of 2.65 per cent. The area growth was the highest in
Maharashtra while yield growth was higher in Gujarat, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh
than in the other states, almost twice the national growth rate of 1.29 per cent (Figure 6).
6
Figure 6: Trends in Area, Yield and Production of Wheat across States: Trend Growth
Rates, 2000-01 to 2011-12
16.00
14.00
12.00
CGR %
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
-2.00
-4.00
Gujarat
Area
12.91
Mahrashtr
a
4.40
M.P.
Rajasthan
Haryana
UP+UK
Bihar
Punjab
2.39
2.39
0.96
0.53
0.32
0.36
W.
Bengal
-3.41
INDIA
Yield
2.66
2.76
2.74
1.76
1.56
1.42
0.72
0.62
2.00
1.29
Production
15.92
7.29
5.19
4.19
2.53
1.96
1.03
0.98
-1.49
2.65
1.35
Along with high growth, Gujarat also experienced high production variability of wheat.
Production variability was also high in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Rajasthan,
whereas major wheat growing states of Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, and Bihar experienced smaller
variability in production. Production variability was largely spurred by variability in area
rather than in yield in states such as Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Gujarat. At the national
level average year-to-year variability was around 11%, 5.2% in area and 6.2% in yield. The
national level growth rate of area was greater than growth rate of yield (Figure 7).
CV %
Figure 7. Pattern of Variability in Wheat Area, Yield and Production across States:
Coefficient of Variation (%), 2000-01 to 2011-12
50.00
45.00
40.00
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
Punjab
UP+UK
Haryana
2.54
W.
Bengal
13.16
Area
1.44
Yield
5.26
Production
5.97
Bihar
Rajasthan
M.P.
6.98
10.19
9.33
9.96
3.91
2.79
12.95
7.93
10.01
7.85
11.47
12.03
17.86
7
Gujarat
INDIA
11.14
Mahrashtr
a
23.70
40.66
5.18
13.91
12.41
13.12
6.15
25.68
34.20
49.23
11.13
Decomposition of production growth indicates that yield was the major contributing factor
for the production increase in most states, except in Gujarat, Maharashtra, and Rajasthan,
where area increase was more important. At the national level yield contribution accounted
for almost 60 per cent of the increase in wheat production and area increase around 40%
(Figure 8).
Figure 8. Contribution of Growth Rates of Area and Yield to Growth Rate of
Production of Wheat: %, 2000-01 to 2011-12
100.00
90.00
% Contribution
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Punjab
Haryana
UP+UK
Bihar
M.P.
W. Bengal
Gujarat
Area
8.21
13.84
14.23
20.39
39.79
40.19
63.05
Yield
91.79
86.16
85.77
79.61
60.21
59.81
36.95
Maharasht Rajasthan
ra
67.74
76.71
32.26
23.29
INDIA
41.19
58.81
The highest average yield was in Punjab at 4,400 kg/ha and the deviation from this highest
yield in various states ranged from 3 tonnes/ha in Maharashtra to 200 kg/ha in Haryana. In
the major wheat growing state of Uttar Pradesh, the yield gap is around 1,600 kg/ha and in
Madhya Pradesh 2,700 kg/ha (Figure 9).
Figure 9 Pattern of Average Production (Thousand tonnes), Yield (kg/ha)and Yield Gap
(% from highest yield) for Wheat across States
Poduction (TMT), Yield (Kg/Ha), and
Yield Gap (Kg/Ha)
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
-5,000
UP+UK
Punjab
Haryana
M.P.
Rajasthan
Bihar
Gujarat
Maharashtra
P
26,910
15,323
10,103
6,979
6,647
4,102
2,403
1,390
882
Y
2,769
4,415
4,216
1,746
2,849
1,946
2,606
1,437
2,416
YG
-1,646
0
-199
-2,669
-1,566
-2,468
-1,809
-2,978
-1,999
8
W. Bengal
The potential for increasing wheat production by bridging the yield gap appears to be
significant.
The trends in CV and CG of area, production, and yield of wheat at the national level over
time show that since 2010-11 there has been an increasing trend in the CGR of area,
production, and yield of wheat, after remaining low during 2004-05 through 2009-10.
However, with increasing growth rates and partly because of this increase in growth rates
itself, production fluctuation has also widened (Figure 10). The fluctuations are also
indicative of the continued influence of rainfall on crop production.
Figure 10 Trends in Growth (%) and Variability (CV%) Area, Production and Yield of
Wheat at All India Level: Rolling Estimates for Previous 10-years
14.0
12.0
CV % /CGR%
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
Area CGR
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
-01 -02 -03 -04 -05 -06 -07 -08 -09 -10 -11 -12 -13
0.6
1.1
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.5
0.7
0.4
0.1
0.3
1.1
1.1
1.6
Production CGR 2.2
2.5
1.3
1.7
0.4
1.0
0.8
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.0
2.4
3.3
Yield CGR
1.6
1.3
1.1
1.2
0.1
0.5
0.1
1.1
1.1
0.2
0.9
1.3
1.6
Area CV
5.2
4.9
3.8
3.4
3.2
3.1
3.1
3.4
3.5
3.9
4.5
5.1
5.5
Production CV
10.8 10.1
8.5
7.2
5.8
5.5
4.8
5.8
6.3
6.9
8.7
11.2 12.5
Yield CV
6.5
5.8
4.9
3.9
3.8
3.3
3.6
3.7
3.6
4.5
6.3
6.2
7.1
At the state level, production growth rate has recorded significant increases in recent decade
in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan as also the variability in production. The high production
growth in Madhya Pradesh was driven both by high growth rate in area as well as in yield
while in Rajasthan the high growth rate was propelled mainly by high area growth In other
major wheat growing states such as Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, and Haryana, the increase in
growth rates was modest mostly driven by yield, and production fluctuation has been less
significant indicative of a plateauing of production. In Bihar, however, there was a significant
increase in growth rate in the most recent decade mainly due to high yield growth rate.
We have summarised the overall patterns that emerge from a review of trends and patterns of
yield of wheat at the state level in Figure 11.
9
Figure 11. Pattern of growth and variability in yields during 2000-01 to 20011-12:
Wheat
Yield growth
Yield
Low (<= 2.8 tonnes/ ha)
High (>2.8 tonnes/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high
CV: low
CV: high
(<=10%)
(>10%)
(<=10%)
(>10%)
Low
UP
Bihar
Punjab
(<=1.5% per year)
West Bengal
High
(>1.5% per year)
Gujarat
Madhya
Pradesh
Maharashtra
Haryana
Rajasthan
The low yield and low growth states are UP, Bihar and West Bengal, among which UP
accounts for almost a third of India’s wheat area. Efforts to improve yields in these states are
likely to have significant production gains. The states currently with low yields but
experiencing significant growth in yield are Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra.
Along with growth, these states also experienced high variability in yields. Therefore,
measures to reduce the impact of yield fluctuations would lead to stable growth.
The states having high yield and lower variability are Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan. Punjab
has now reached a plateau in yields in the sense that growth rate of wheat yield in Punjab is
relatively low. In the case of yield, therefore, efforts to improve yield potential through new
varieties and new techniques of crop production are likely to be the main source of yield
growth in these states.
3 Maize
The three highest CGRs in maize production during the past decade were registered by Tamil
Nadu (28.5%) followed by West Bengal (18.8%) and Maharashtra (18.7%). Karnataka and
Andhra Pradesh were the only two other states where production increased by about 10 per
cent or more per year in the last decade. Most of the increase was attributed to growth in area,
except in Tamil Nadu, where yield growth was the highest. In Uttar Pradesh and Madhya
Pradesh, production growth rate was negative. At the national level, production growth was
5.8% equally contributed by area (2.8% per year) and yield (2.9% per year) (Figure 12).
10
Figure 12 Trends in Area, Yield and Production of Maize across States: Trend Growth
Rates, 2000-01 to 2011-12
30.00
25.00
CGR %
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
-5.00
T.N.
W.
Mahar
Bengal ashtra
12.35 10.92
Karnat
aka
8.37
A.P.
Area
11.93
0.80
-0.61
-0.22
UP+U
K
-1.72
-0.22
2.79
Yield
14.78
5.70
7.00
1.84
4.32
3.06
0.98
4.18
-0.06
0.80
0.38
0.42
-2.97
2.93
Production
28.48
18.76
18.69
10.37
9.75
3.92
2.69
2.16
0.74
0.18
0.16
-1.30
-3.18
5.80
5.20
Rajasth Gujarat Punjab
an
0.84
1.69
-1.94
Bihar
J&K
H.P.
M.P.
INDIA
However, the high production growth rate was also associated with high production
variability, which ranged from 80% in Tamil Nadu to 36% in Andhra Pradesh (Figure 13).
Fig13 Pattern of Variability in Maize Area, Yield and Production across States:
Coefficient of Variation (%), 2000-01 to 2011-12
90.00
80.00
70.00
CV %
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Bihar
J&K
Punjab
Area
3.53
2.72
7.81
Yield
7.21
9.78
17.11
Production
7.87
9.33
12.73
H.P.
M.P.
2.62
UP+U
K
9.13
15.29
11.62
20.87
26.37
31.35
15.73
16.58
22.43
29.68
32.18
2.84
Rajasth Gujarat
an
4.89
8.64
A.P.
19.63
Karnat
aka
29.01
Mahar
W.
ashtra Bengal
37.59 40.68
T.N.
INDIA
36.88
9.97
20.77
15.97
25.07
22.54
54.86
13.38
35.57
38.31
57.61
57.76
80.21
22.26
Yield was the major factor contributing to production whereas the role of area contribution
was minimal in most states with the exception of West Bengal. The contribution of area
11
growth to production growth was 30 per cent or more in the case of Andhra Pradesh,
Karnataka, UP and West Bengal.
Figure 14 Contribution of Growth Rates of Area and Yield to Growth Rate of
Production of Maize: %, 2000-01 to 2011-12
100.00
90.00
% Contribution
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Bihar
Gujarat
H.P.
J&K
M.P.
Mahara Rajasth Punjab
shtra
an
6.12
9.06
14.45
Area
0.44
4.86
5.10
5.55
6.05
Yield
99.56
95.14
94.90
94.45
93.95
93.88
90.94
85.55
T.N.
A.P.
30.01
Karnat
aka
33.57
UP+U
K
36.25
W.
INDIA
Bengal
71.14 11.44
17.40
82.60
69.99
66.43
63.75
28.86
88.56
The yield gap is highest in Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, MP and Gujarat with the deficit relative
to maximum yield is more than 2 tonnes per hectare. In Karnataka, Bihar and Maharashtra,
the yield gap is between 1 and 2 tonnes per hectare. Hence significant future increase in
maize production can come from yield improvement in these states (Figure 15).
Production (TMT), Yield (Kg/Ha), Yield Gap
(kg/Ha)
Figure 15.Pattern of Average Production (Thousand tonnes), Yield (kg/ha)and Yield
Gap (% from highest yield) for Maize across States
4000.0
3000.0
2000.0
1000.0
0.0
-1000.0
-2000.0
-3000.0
P
Karnata Bihar
ka
2730.3 2660.4 1504.0
Rajasth Mahara UP+UK M.P.
an
shtra
1464.1 1291.5 1273.2 1271.9
675.7
660.9
632.9
510.1
457.3
W.
Bengal
214.0
Y
3819.0
1389.6
2251.3
3021.8
1331.7
1601.1
3085.3
3036.2
-1061.9 -1435.1 -2429.4 -1682.0 -2351.7 -2344.6 -1567.7
-797.1
-2487.2 -2217.8
-733.6
-782.7
YG
A.P.
0.0
2757.1
2383.8
2137.0
1467.3
12
1474.4
H.P.
T.N.
Gujarat
J&K
Punjab
Maize production growth at the national level has registered a generally upward trend over
the past decade except for occasional marginal dips. Yield was the major contributory factor
for higher production growth. Production variability has tended to stabilize in recent
decades, whereas yield variability has declined (Figure 16).
Figure 16 Trends in Growth (%) and Variability (CV%) Area, Production and Yield of
Maize at All India Level: Rolling Estimates for Previous 10-years
CV % / CGR %
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
Area CGR
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
-01 -02 -03 -04 -05 -06 -07 -08 -09 -10 -11 -12 -13
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.9
1.8
2.2
2.1
2.3
2.5
2.3
2.4
2.7
2.5
Production CGR 2.7
4.6
1.0
4.1
4.3
4.1
3.1
5.2
5.3
3.5
5.5
4.7
6.5
Yield CGR
1.7
3.5
0.0
2.2
2.5
1.9
1.0
2.9
2.7
1.1
3.1
2.0
3.9
Area CV
3.9
4.1
4.1
6.0
7.1
8.1
8.8
9.7
10.0
9.6
9.4
9.3
8.2
Production CV
12.3 14.1 11.5 15.5 15.9 14.9 13.9 18.4 20.6 19.2 21.0 21.3 21.3
Yield CV
9.0
10.5
8.4
9.9
9.7
7.8
6.5
9.5
11.4 11.0 12.7 13.1 14.0
States which recorded an upward trend in production growth include Andhra Pradesh, Bihar,
Karnataka, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, whereas the growth trend was insignificant or
negative in most other states. Yield variability has increased in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, and
Rajasthan.
Among the major states having low yields, growth of yield is at a relatively higher rate in the
case of Maharashtra and Rajasthan (Figure 17). Measures to support the growth in the form
of marketing support, infrastructure would sustain yield growth as the states catch up with the
higher yield states.
In the higher yield states of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Punjab and West Bengal, the
variability in yield is also relatively high. Therefore, measures to reduce variability in yields
while maintaining growth would produce more stable growth.
13
Figure 17. Pattern of growth and variability in yields during 2000-01 to 20011-12:
Maize
Yield growth
Yield
Low (<= 2 tonnes/ ha)
High (>2 tonnes/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high
CV: low
CV: high
(<=10%)
(>10%)
(<=10%)
(>10%)
Low
Bihar
Gujarat
(<=3% per year)
Jammu &
Himachal Pradesh
Kashmir
Karnataka
UP
High
Maharashtra
Tamil Nadu
(>3% per year)
Rajasthan
Andhra Pradesh
Punjab
West Bengal
4 Bajra
Bajra production growth was high in Haryana, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh exceeding 4.5
per cent per year, whereas in Gujarat and Maharashtra the growth rate was negligible or
negative. During the last decade, bajra production increased by 3.5 per cent per year in
Karnataka and UP. Area growth was minimal at the national level and the production growth
was driven by yield increases in most states. At the national level annual production growth
was 2.9%, fuelled by 3.3% growth in yield despite a marginal negative growth in area (Figure
18).
Figure 18 Trends in Area, Yield and Production of Bajra across States: Trend Growth
Rates, 2000-01 to 2011-12
8.00
6.00
CGR %
4.00
2.00
0.00
-2.00
-4.00
-6.00
Area
Gujarat
-2.27
Haryana
0.58
India
-0.37
Karnataka
-0.83
M.P.
0.02
Yield
2.47
5.39
3.25
4.36
Production
0.15
6.00
2.88
3.49
14
Maharashtra
-5.64
Rajasthan
1.58
UP
0.34
4.65
4.26
4.41
3.15
4.67
-1.61
6.06
3.50
Being a mostly rainfed crop, variability in production is high in bajra, both due to variability
in yield and to a lesser extent by volatility in area. At the national level the CV of production
is at around 24%, 20% in yield and 7.6% in area (Figure 19).
Fig 19 Pattern of Variability in Bajra Area, Yield and Production across States:
Coefficient of Variation (%), 2000-01 to 2011-12
45.00
40.00
35.00
CV %
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
Area
Gujarat
12.37
Haryana
6.23
India
7.61
Karnataka
23.03
M.P.
6.64
Maharashtra
22.79
Rajasthan
13.00
UP
4.37
Yield
16.06
22.90
20.11
31.59
21.23
18.77
36.61
12.94
Production
20.37
25.95
23.64
40.97
21.95
17.30
44.08
14.61
More than 70% of the contribution to the production growth is from yield at the all India
level and in most states except in Maharashtra, where it was only 46% (Figure 20).
Among major bajra producing states, the yield gap is largest in Rajasthan, Karnataka and
Maharashtra. Hence future growth in bajra production should be focused on these three
states by narrowing the yield gap (Figure 21).
Figure 20: Contribution of Growth Rates of Area and Yield to Growth Rate of
Production of Bajra: %, 2000-01 to 2011-12
90.00
80.00
% Contribution
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Area
Gujarat
26.34
Haryana
22.71
India
28.85
Karnataka
36.42
M.P.
16.15
Maharashtra
53.69
Rajasthan
24.14
UP
14.54
Yield
73.66
77.29
71.15
63.58
83.85
46.31
75.86
85.46
15
Production (TMT), Yield (Kg/Ha) and
Yield Gap (Kg./Ha)
Figure 21.Pattern of Average Production (Thousand tonnes), Yield (kg/ha)and Yield
Gap (% from highest yield) for Bajra across States
4000.0
3500.0
3000.0
2500.0
2000.0
1500.0
1000.0
500.0
0.0
-500.0
-1000.0
Rajasthan
3510.4
UP
1284.3
Gujarat
1098.8
Y
688.4
1487.3
YG
-824.0
-25.1
P
Maharashtra
973.2
Haryana
911.5
M.P.
248.8
Karnataka
244.1
1229.0
771.0
1512.4
1416.5
700.2
-283.5
-741.4
0.0
-95.9
-812.2
At all India level, production growth rate has shown a generally upward trend, almost entirely
driven by yield growth whereas area growth rate has registered a negative trend. Area
variability, although high, has generally remained flat except for the most recent decade
(Figure 22).
Figure 22 Trends in Growth (%) and Variability (CV%) Area, Production and Yield of
Bajra at All India Level: Rolling Estimates for Previous 10-years
35.0
30.0
25.0
CV %/ CGR %
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
-5.0
-10.0
Area CGR
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
-01 -02 -03 -04 -05 -06 -07 -08 -09 -10 -11 -12 -13
0.6
-0.9
0.3
-0.4 -0.3 -0.5
0.0
-0.2 -0.7 -0.5
Production CGR -0.2
-0.6 -0.5 -2.8
5.4
-5.6
8.4
0.9
3.3
0.6
2.4
2.3
1.1
4.0
2.0
5.8
Yield CGR
0.4
5.8
-2.8
7.7
1.9
3.0
1.1
2.7
2.8
1.1
4.2
2.7
6.3
Area CV
5.2
4.9
8.0
8.0
8.1
7.7
7.7
7.5
7.7
7.8
7.7
7.8
10.2
Production CV
19.7 20.6 20.5 29.2 26.6 26.5 24.2 25.3 25.2 25.7 24.3 23.4 23.3
Yield CV
17.5 19.1 16.0 23.2 20.3 19.9 17.8 19.3 19.9 20.0 19.1 19.0 20.1
16
Although Karnataka, Maharashtra and Rajasthan have relatively lower yields, yields have
increased there at a faster pace during the last decade. In Haryana and Madhya Pradesh,
yields are relatively high, yield growth is also high but yield variability measured by CV is
more than 20 per cent (Figure 23). Therefore, yield growth stabilising measures in Haryana,
MP, Karnataka, Maharashtra and Rajasthan and yield enhancing measures in Karnataka,
Maharashtra and Rajasthan will have significant impact on sustaining production growth. In
Gujarat and UP, technology improvements in terms of higher yielding varieties of bajra
would be required to increase the yields further.
Figure 23. Pattern of growth and variability in yields during 2000-01 to 20011-12: Bajra
Yield growth
Yield
Low (<= 1 tonne/ ha)
High (>1 tonne/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high
CV: low
CV: high (>20%)
(<=20%)
(>20%)
(<=20%)
Low
Gujarat
(<=3.5% per year)
UP
High
Karnataka
Haryana
(>3.5% per year)
Maharashtra
Madhya Pradesh
Rajasthan
5 Jowar
With the exception of Rajasthan, all major states registered a decline in jowar production
during the period 2000-01 to 2011-12, largely due a declining trend in area. At the national
level, production declined at the rate of -1% per year during the period of 2000-01 to 201112. Area also declined by 3.6% per year but yield rose by 2.7% per year to reduce the
production decline. In Rajasthan area increased by a modest rate of 0.2 per cent per year and
production by 7.66 per cent (Figure 24).
Competition from other crops such as soybean, maize and cotton has led to decline in jowar
acreage. Most states have registered a positive growth rate in yield, which ranged from as
high as 7.4% in Rajasthan to 0.5% in Uttar Pradesh.
17
CGR %
Figure 24 Trends in Area, Yield and Production of Jowar across States: Trend Growth
Rates, 2000-01 to 2011-12
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
-2.00
-4.00
-6.00
-8.00
-10.00
Rajasthan
Karnataka
M.P.
T.N.
U.P.
A.P.
India
-4.52
Maharshtr
a
-3.04
Area
0.20
-4.01
-4.99
Yield
7.44
5.13
5.44
-5.45
-9.03
-3.56
3.55
1.45
0.53
4.02
Production
7.66
0.92
0.17
2.66
-1.12
-1.63
-4.95
-5.37
-1.00
Production variability was the highest in Rajasthan with CV at 52% even as it registered high
rate of growth of production. The CV of production was the lowest in Maharashtra at 11.7%
(Figure 25). At the national level, production variability measured by CV was a modest
7.2%, with area variability at 13% and yield variability at 11.5%.
Figure 25. Pattern of Variability in Jowar Area, Yield and Production across States:
Coefficient of Variation (%), 2000-01 to 2011-12
60.00
50.00
CV %
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
T.N.
M.P.
Karnataka
U.P.
A.P.
Rajasthan
India
Area
Maharshtr
a
11.85
19.58
20.32
14.83
22.53
34.68
11.23
13.13
Yield
9.33
21.52
20.92
25.22
8.36
19.95
48.77
11.57
Production
11.72
11.89
18.64
19.27
22.37
23.57
52.27
7.23
Yield contributed relatively more to production change, which at the national level was
almost 92% and ranged from almost 100% in Karnataka to 56% in Uttar Pradesh (Figure 26).
18
Figure 26. Contribution of Growth Rates of Area and Yield to Growth Rate of
Production of Jowar: %, 2000-01 to 2011-12
100.00
90.00
% Contribution
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Area
Karnataka
1.06
Rajasthan
7.93
T.N.
16.98
Maharshtra
34.98
A.P.
39.56
M.P.
39.76
U.P.
43.37
India
8.39
Yield
98.94
92.07
83.02
65.02
60.44
60.24
56.63
91.61
With the exception of Rajasthan, the yield gap in jowar is not significant in most states
(Figure 27) implying that potential for increasing production from bridging the yield gap at
the present level of technology is limited. However, some scope exists in Maharashtra and
Karnataka with about 5 million hectares of area under jowar where the yields are lower than
the best yields.
Production (TMT). Yield (Kg/Ha) and Yield
Gap (Kg/Ha)
Figure 27.Pattern of Average Production (Thousand tonnes), Yield (kg/ha)and Yield
Gap (% from highest yield) for Jowar across States
4000.0
3500.0
3000.0
2500.0
2000.0
1500.0
1000.0
500.0
0.0
-500.0
-1000.0
P
Maharshtra
3605.7
Karnataka
1402.0
M.P.
617.9
A.P.
517.5
Rajasthan
294.9
T.N.
249.9
U.P.
240.5
Y
814.7
948.9
1117.0
1190.3
463.2
865.5
982.2
YG
-375.6
-241.5
-73.4
0.0
-727.2
-324.9
-208.2
Jowar has shown a slowdown in production growth rate in recent decades almost entirely
driven by declining area growth rate. Production variability has also widened during the
most recent decade compared with previous performance due to area variability (Figure 28).
19
With the exception of Rajasthan, there has been a slowdown in jowar production growth in
most states with the largest growing state Maharashtra registering the steepest decline.
Almost all the major growing states continuously registered a worsening area growth. Trend
in yield growth turned negative during the most recent decade in Maharashtra but showed
some improvement in Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh.
Figure 28 Trends in Growth (%) and Variability (CV%) Area, Production and Yield of
Jowar at All India Level: Rolling Estimates for Previous 10-years
25.0
CV %/CGR %
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
-5.0
-10.0
Area CGR
200
001
200
102
200
203
200
304
200
405
200
506
200
607
200
708
200
809
200
910
201
011
201
112
201
213
-3.4 -2.1 -3.0 -2.8 -2.1 -2.4 -2.7 -3.0 -2.4 -2.5 -2.6 -4.0 -3.6
Production CGR -3.9 -0.6 -5.3 -4.8 -1.9 -1.8 -3.8
0.5
-1.4 -2.3 -0.7 -2.1 -2.5
Yield CGR
-0.6
-2.4 -2.0
0.2
0.6
-1.1
3.5
1.0
0.1
Area CV
12.3 10.6 11.3 10.3
8.8
9.1
9.1
9.2
9.7
10.4 10.5 12.8 13.9
Production CV
19.0 19.2 20.5 18.0 15.3 15.3 15.0
7.8
7.9
7.8
Yield CV
12.1 12.3 10.6
11.3 11.1 11.1 11.7 11.6 11.0
1.5
9.8
9.1
9.5
9.6
2.0
5.4
2.0
7.4
1.1
10.7
Maharashtra is in the low yield zone with lower variability in yield. Karnataka, Rajasthan and
Tamil Nadu have lower growth rate of yield and also higher variability. In these states, efforts
to raise yields would be appropriate. In UP, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, measures
to maintain stable growth and focus on technology improvements to push the yield frontier
would be necessary (Figure 29).
Figure 29. Pattern of growth and variability in yields during 2000-01 to 20011-12:
Jowar
Yield growth
Low
(<=3% per year)
High
(>3% per year)
Yield
Low (<= 0.9 tonnes/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high
(<=15%)
(>15%)
Maharashtra
Karnataka
Rajasthan
Tamil Nadu
20
High (>0.9 tonnes/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high (>15%)
(<=15%)
UP
Andhra Pradesh
Madhya Pradesh
6 Gram
There has been significant growth in the production of gram in the period 2000-01 to 201112. With the exception of Uttar Pradesh and Haryana, all the major states growing gram have
registered a significant growth in gram production (Figure 30). The highest growth of 27%
was registered in Gujarat, followed by Maharashtra (11.5%) and Andhra Pradesh. Karnataka
and Chhattisgarh also registered high growth rates of 9.5 to 10.0% per year during the period.
Only Uttar Pradesh registered a negative production growth due to declining trend in area. At
the all India level, production growth rate is about 6%, mostly due to high growth rate in area
(4.4%) and to a limited extent from yield (1.7%).
Figure 30 Trends in Area, Yield and Production of Gram across States: Trend Growth
Rates, 2000-01 to 2011-12
30.00
25.00
CGR %
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
-5.00
Gujarat
Area
18.81
Maharas
htra
6.33
A.P.
9.31
Karnata
ka
8.39
Chattisg Rajastha
arh
n
4.70
7.09
M.P.
Haryana
UP
INDIA
2.75
-1.55
-4.37
4.16
Yield
7.47
4.85
0.49
1.20
4.54
0.96
1.71
1.83
0.66
1.73
Production
27.68
11.49
9.84
9.69
9.45
8.12
4.51
0.25
-3.73
5.97
Being a largely rainfed crop, production fluctuations are high in gram with the estimated CV
ranging from about 60% in Gujarat to 22% in Uttar Pradesh, mainly due to fluctuations in
area (Figure 31). At the national level, the CV in production is 22%, 15% in area and 8% in
yield.
Figure 31 Pattern of Variability in Gram Area, Yield and Production across States:
Coefficient of Variation (%), 2000-01 to 2011-12
70.00
60.00
CV %
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
UP
M.P.
Haryana Chattisg
arh
22.84
16.74
A.P.
Area
18.10
12.34
Yield
13.74
13.40
20.55
20.50
17.12
15.50
19.58
20.86
25.84
8.24
Production
21.51
22.59
31.49
32.03
39.46
42.44
43.36
46.15
61.38
22.06
32.09
21
Karnata Maharas Rajastha
ka
htra
n
33.93
25.64
31.87
Gujarat
INDIA
50.90
15.29
Decomposition of Production change into area and yield contributions shows that production
growth was explained mainly by yield changes in some states (Chhattisgarh, Madhya
Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh) and by area in Maharashtra, Haryana
and Gujarat leading to equal contributions of area and yield to production growth at the
national level (Figure 32).
Figure 32 Contribution of Growth Rates of Area and Yield to Growth Rate of
Production of Gram: %, 2000-01 to 2011-12
90.00
% Contribution
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
M.P.
UP
Area
Chattisg
arh
16.14
30.59
Karnatak
a
36.51
26.27
Yield
83.86
73.73
A.P.
36.90
69.41
63.49
63.10
Maharas Rajastha
htra
n
53.29
55.67
46.71
44.33
Haryana
Gujarat
INDIA
56.58
75.26
49.98
43.42
24.74
50.02
Andhra Pradesh has the highest average yield of 1207 kg/ha among the major states growing
gram. The yield gap is the highest in Karnataka, Rajasthan and Maharashtra with the
differential from the highest yield at more than 0.5 tonnes per hectare. The other states have a
yield gap of 0.3 to 0.5 tonnes per hectare (Figure 33).
Figure 33.Pattern of Average Production (Thousand tonnes), Yield (kg/ha)and Yield
Gap (% from highest yield) for Gram across States
2500.0
2000.0
1500.0
1000.0
500.0
0.0
-500.0
-1000.0
M.P.
Rajasthan
754.7
Maharasht
ra
740.4
P
2455.2
Y
910.2
689.9
684.3
YG
-296.7
-517.1
-522.7
UP
A.P.
Karnataka
631.7
575.9
915.5
1207.0
-291.4
0.0
22
Gujarat
345.5
Chattisgar
h
172.8
Haryana
136.4
85.3
553.6
790.6
850.2
789.6
-653.4
-416.4
-356.8
-417.3
Decadal gram production growth has generally trended upward since 2009-10 except for a
drop in 2010-11, driven both by area growth and yield growth. Production variability has
tended to stabilize (Figure 34). Gram has thus emerged as a high growth low variability
pulse crop reflective of the government policy of providing high support prices and the
positive impact of the NFSM.
Figure 34 Trends in Growth (%) and Variability (CV%) Area, Production and Yield of
Gram at All India Level: Rolling Estimates for Previous 10-years
25.0
20.0
Axis Title
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
-5.0
Area CGR
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
-01 -02 -03 -04 -05 -06 -07 -08 -09 -10 -11 -12 -13
-3.3
1.3
-0.8
0.9
-1.1 -0.2
0.8
0.0
-0.6
2.6
5.3
2.4
3.4
Production CGR -2.9
2.6
-0.4
1.3
-1.5
1.1
1.2
-0.6
0.3
3.5
7.1
3.2
6.9
Yield CGR
0.4
1.3
0.4
0.3
-0.4
1.3
0.3
-0.6
1.0
0.9
1.7
0.8
3.4
Area CV
14.2 14.1 13.5 13.4 13.2 12.8 13.1 13.4 13.8 13.1 15.5 12.7 12.2
Production CV
17.8 17.8 17.6 16.5 16.1 15.2 15.6 15.6 17.3 18.9 21.9 19.1 21.1
Yield CV
7.4
7.5
7.8
6.5
6.5
6.2
5.0
5.3
6.3
7.3
7.8
7.8
10.2
Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Rajasthan are states which registered
significant production growth in recent decade. Madhya Pradesh recorded the highest growth
rate in yield during the most recent decade. In Andhra Pradesh, although the production
growth continues to remain strong, it has slowed down from the double digit growth rate
experienced since 2005-06. Uttar Pradesh was the only state which registered a negative
production growth rate during all the decades
In terms of variations in the parameters of productivity and variability, the variations in the
performance across states suggests that focus on promoting yield enhancing agronomic
practices along with growth stabilising measures would be appropriate in Haryana, Rajasthan
and Karnataka. In Madhya Pradesh, UP and Andhra Pradesh, where yields are relatively high,
the issue is further improvement through new varieties and practices by which yield
fluctuations are reduced (Figure 35).
23
Figure 35. Pattern of growth and variability in yields during 2000-01 to 20011-12:
Gram
Yield growth
Yield
Low (<= 0.9 tonnes/ ha)
High (>0.9 tonnes/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high
CV: low
CV: high
(<=15%)
(>15%)
(<=15%)
(>15%)
Low
Haryana
Madhya
Andhra Pradesh
(<=2% per year)
Karnataka
Pradesh
Rajasthan
UP
High
(>2% per year)
Chhattisgarh
Gujarat
Maharashtra
7 Tur
Karnataka, Gujarat and Orissa registered production growth of 4-7 per cent per year during
the period 2000-01 to 2012-12. Maharashtra and MP registered moderate production growth
of 1-2 per cent per year and AP and UP experienced growth rate of less than one per cent. In
Uttar Pradesh growth rate of production was negative with both area and yield showing
declining trend. At the national level production growth was 1.85% due to a 1.31% growth in
area and 0.54% increase in yield (Figure 36).
Figure 36 Trends in Area, Yield and Production of Tur across States: Trend Growth
Rates, 2000-01 to 2011-12
8.00
6.00
CGR %
4.00
2.00
0.00
-2.00
-4.00
-6.00
Karnataka
Gujarat
Orissa
M.P.
0.48
Maharshtr
a
1.32
Area
3.86
-2.07
Yield
2.98
7.59
Production
6.96
5.36
A.P.
U.P.
India
4.27
1.20
4.07
0.86
-2.03
1.31
-2.48
-0.61
-2.88
4.77
2.53
1.49
0.54
0.25
-4.85
1.85
Production variability, CV, was generally high exceeding 10 per cent at the national level.
Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh experienced variability in excess of 20
per cent of the average annual production during the period 2000-01 to 2011-12. It was close
to 20 per cent even in the remaining three states of Odisha, Maharashtra and MP indicating
the vulnerability of production to weather fluctuations (Figure 37).
24
Figure 37 Pattern of Variability in Tur Area, Yield and Production across States:
Coefficient of Variation (%), 2000-01 to 2011-12
40.00
35.00
30.00
CV%
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
Orissa
Area
6.36
Maharshtr
a
7.74
M.P.
Gujarat
U.P.
A.P.
Karnataka
India
21.48
10.09
9.71
12.94
18.48
Yield
15.63
13.36
19.92
27.94
17.00
21.70
24.26
8.25
8.33
Production
17.39
17.65
19.56
21.99
22.89
24.53
35.85
11.49
Increase in yield contributed relatively more than expansion in area to production growth in
all the major states growing tur. In MP, area had declined. At the national level yield increase
contributed to 66% of the growth in production (Figure 38).
Figure 38 Contribution of Growth Rates of Area and Yield to Growth Rate of
Production of Tur: %, 2000-01 to 2011-12
120.00
% Contribution
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
-20.00
Area
M.P.
-9.83
Gujarat
-0.98
U.P.
16.34
Maharshtra
20.98
Karnataka
28.24
A.P.
35.41
Orissa
46.17
India
34.08
Yield
109.83
100.98
83.66
79.02
71.76
64.59
53.83
65.92
The highest average yield was in Uttar Pradesh and the yield gap is the highest, about 0.5
tonnes per hectare, in the southern states of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh (Figure 39).
Focusing efforts on yield improvements in these two states can lead to significant gains in
production as these states together account for about 0.5 million tonnes of production .
25
Production (TMT), Yield (Kg/Ha), Yield Gap
(Kg/Ha)
Figure 39.Pattern of Average Production (Thousand tonnes), Yield (kg/ha)and Yield
Gap (% from highest yield) for Tur across States
1000.0
800.0
600.0
400.0
200.0
0.0
-200.0
-400.0
-600.0
Maharshtra
802.0
U.P.
353.0
Y
718.8
966.2
506.4
701.5
851.9
447.6
747.8
YG
-247.4
0.0
-459.8
-264.7
-114.3
-518.6
-218.4
P
Karnataka
318.6
M.P.
241.9
Gujarat
234.2
A.P.
214.5
Orissa
100.3
Tur production growth rate has shown a significant increase during the most recent decade
mainly due to higher yield growth. Decadal production variability has remained more or less
static (Figure 39). Thus it appears, tur like gram, has also benefitted from the government’s
production enhancement program envisaged in NFSM. The highest production growth rate in
the most recent decade was registered by Madhya Pradesh, propelled by area growth,
followed by Andhra Pradesh. Although production growth in Karnataka is high, there has
been a slowdown in the most recent decade vis-a-vis earlier decades. Yield growth remained
highest in Gujarat. In Uttar Pradesh, although the production growth is showing some
improvement, it continued to remain in the negative territory
Figure 39 Trends in Growth (%) and Variability (CV%) Area, Production and Yield of
Tur at All India Level: Rolling Estimates for Previous 10-years
CV % / CGR %
16.0
14.0
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
-2.0
-4.0
Area CGR
2000- 2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- 2005- 2006- 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 201201
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
0.1
-0.8
-0.6
0.0
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.9
-0.2
0.1
1.7
1.7
1.4
Production CGR -0.7
0.5
-0.6
-1.2
0.8
1.6
-1.3
4.7
-1.6
-0.8
2.2
1.5
3.0
Yield CGR
-0.8
1.3
0.0
-1.2
0.3
1.2
-1.4
3.8
-1.4
-0.9
0.5
-0.2
1.6
Area CV
3.1
3.3
3.0
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.9
3.6
3.5
3.5
8.0
8.7
8.4
Production CV
11.9 12.1 11.9 11.9 11.2 11.6 11.6 13.9 11.5 11.2 11.9 11.5 12.3
Yield CV
12.0 12.0 11.1 11.0 10.5 10.9 11.0 12.1
26
9.9
9.3
8.6
8.0
8.7
Although Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh have lower yields, they have registered growth rate
of yield of tur in excess of 2 per cent per year. Therefore, sustaining the higher growth rate of
yield is important in a number of states where the average yields during the decade were less
than 0.7 tonnes per hectare. After registering higher yield levels, growth rate of yield had
remained low in a number of northern and eastern states. In these states, efforts to identify
new varieties and practices to push the yield frontier would be needed (Figure 40).
Figure 40. Pattern of growth and variability in yields during 2000-01 to 20011-12: Tur
Yield growth
Yield
Low (<= 0.7 tonnes/ ha)
High (>0.7 tonnes/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high
CV: low
CV: high
(<=15%)
(>15%)
(<=15%)
(>15%)
Low
Tamil Nadu
Bihar
Haryana
(<=2% per year)
Madhya
Jharkhand
Pradesh
UP
West Bengal
High
Chhattisgarh Andhra Pradesh
(>2% per year)
Odisha
Gujarat
Karnataka
Maharashtra
Rajasthan
8 Rapeseed/Mustard
Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Gujarat registered the three highest production growth rate in
rapeseed/mustard and this growth was supported by significant area growth as well (Figure
41). The growth was negative in Uttar Pradesh (-1.17%) or less than 1 per cent per year in
UP (-1.17%) and West Bengal (0.36%) due to negative growth of area. At the national level
production growth was an impressive 4.6% due to both increases in area (2.6%) and yield
(2.0%).
Figure 41 Trends in Area, Yield and Production of Rapeseed and Mustard across
States: Trend Growth Rates, 2000-01 to 2011-12
10.00
8.00
CGR %
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
-2.00
-4.00
Area
M.P.
5.94
Rajasthan
5.54
Gujarat
1.15
Haryana
-0.26
W.Bengal
-0.63
Yield
3.25
2.12
2.52
1.97
Production
9.37
7.78
3.70
1.71
27
U.P.
-3.03
INDIA
2.56
0.99
1.92
1.97
0.36
-1.17
4.58
However, higher production is also associated with higher variability with CV being highest
in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and Gujarat (Figure 42). At the all India level production
variability was 22.4%, 16.6% variability in area and 9.8% in yield.
Figure 42 Pattern of Variability in Rapeseed and Mustard Area, Yield and Production
across States: Coefficient of Variation (%), 2000-01 to 2011-12
40.00
35.00
CV %
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
Area
W.Bengal
4.08
U.P.
14.09
Haryana
15.75
Gujarat
24.73
M.P.
23.60
Rajasthan
31.28
Yield
Production
INDIA
16.57
11.00
8.44
17.29
13.79
14.85
12.72
9.76
11.58
12.93
15.89
29.76
33.58
36.54
22.37
Area change contributed to 58% to production change and yield change 42%, at the national
level with yield change contribution the largest in West Bengal and Haryana (Figure 43).
% Contribution
Figure 43 Contribution of Growth Rates of Area and Yield to Growth Rate of
Production of Rapeseed & Mustard: %, 2000-01 to 2011-12
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Area
W.Bengal
9.10
Haryana
18.93
M.P.
50.49
Gujarat
61.85
Rajasthan
68.62
U.P.
69.44
INDIA
57.92
Yield
90.90
81.07
49.51
38.15
31.38
30.56
42.08
With Haryana recoding the highest yield of 1,422 kg/ha, the yield gap among states is largest
in West Bengal followed by Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan. The yield gap is
the lowest in Gujarat (Figure 44). By bridging the yield gap, particularly in major producing
states like Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, there is a large potential to increase rapeseed/mustard
production in the country.
28
Production (TMT), Yield (Kg/Ha), Yield Gap
(Kg/Ha)
Figure 44.Pattern of Average Production (Thousand tonnes), Yield (kg/ha)and Yield
Gap (% from highest yield) for Rapeseed & Mustard across States
3000.0
2500.0
2000.0
1500.0
1000.0
500.0
0.0
-500.0
-1000.0
P
Rajasthan
2972.4
U.P.
836.2
Haryana
788.6
Y
1118.8
1066.8
1421.7
YG
-302.9
-354.8
0.0
M.P.
638.7
W.Bengal
380.9
Gujarat
363.1
977.9
896.9
1381.7
-443.8
-524.8
-39.9
Production growth slowed significantly during the most recent decade from the high growth
of the preceding decade. However, the production variability has tended to stabilize (Figure
45).
All major producing states have registered a deceleration in production growth during the
most recent decade, the sharpest decline in Rajasthan, followed by Haryana and Madhya
Pradesh due to a deceleration in yield growth. There was no significant change in
production, area, and yield variability in most states, which continued to remain high.
Figure 45 Trends in Growth (%) and Variability (CV%) Area, Production and Yield of
Rapeseed & Mustard at All India Level: Rolling Estimates for Previous 10-years
30.0
CV % / CGR %
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
-5.0
Area CGR
2000- 2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- 2005- 2006- 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 201101
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
-2.3
-2.3
-2.8
-1.3
1.7
1.0
0.3
-1.7
-0.3
-0.7
4.0
1.4
Production CGR -2.0
-1.3
-1.9
1.5
2.5
2.8
1.0
2.0
2.2
1.2
6.3
2.4
Yield CGR
0.3
1.0
0.9
2.9
0.8
1.8
0.7
3.8
2.5
1.9
2.2
1.0
Area CV
10.7 12.0 14.4
14.7 16.2 17.2 17.3 17.4 16.8 16.8
17.4 15.0
Production CV
12.7 12.9 15.7
16.0 19.4 22.9 23.8 23.8 22.8 22.5
23.5 19.8
Yield CV
10.9 11.5 11.6
13.4 13.3 14.1 14.4 14.4 10.3
10.1
29
9.9
9.2
The efforts to improve yield are required in West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh. Although MP
has registered high annual growth rate of 2 per cent during the period of 2000-01 to 2011-12,
the average yields remain lower than one tonne per hectare (Figure 46).
In the high yield states, growth rate has slackened in UP and Haryana while it remains above
2 per cent in Gujarat and Rajasthan. Gujarat and Rajasthan are high yield, high growth and
lower variability states for rapeseed and mustard. Sustaining these conditions will require that
markets remain favourable.
Figure 46. Pattern of growth and variability in yields during 2000-01 to 20011-12:
Rapeseed & Mustard
Yield growth
Yield
Low (<= 1 tonne/ ha)
High (>1 tonne/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high
CV: low
CV: high
(<=15%)
(>15%)
(<=15%)
(>15%)
Low
West Bengal
UP
Haryana
(<=2% per year)
India
High
Madhya
Gujarat
(>2% per year)
Pradesh
Rajasthan
9 Groundnut
Rajasthan and Gujarat registered the two highest rates of growth in production of groundnut
during the period 2000-01 to 2011-12. Among the two, Rajasthan had less than 0.3 million
hectares under groundnut whereas Gujarat had an average of 1.8 million hectares. The
production growth rate was negative in Karnataka where groundnut was grown in about
870,000 hectares during 2000-01 to 2011-12 (Figure 47). There was a decline in area under
groundnut in all the major states growing the crop except Rajasthan. Even in Gujarat where
production growth was the highest among the states, area under the crop had declined. At the
national level, production growth rate was a modest 1.44%, the higher growth rate in yield
more than offsetting the negative growth in area.
30
Figure 47 Trends in Area, Yield and Production of Groundnut across States: Trend
Growth Rates, 2000-01 to 2011-12
12.00
10.00
8.00
CGR %
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
-2.00
-4.00
-6.00
Rajasthan
Gujarat
M.P.
T.N.
A.P.
Karnataka
India
-1.65
Maharasht
ra
-3.42
Area
5.56
-0.73
-0.73
-4.90
Yield
5.77
7.58
3.79
3.73
-1.93
-1.30
0.14
1.16
-0.48
Production
2.78
11.65
6.79
3.03
-1.35
-1.52
-2.30
-2.40
1.44
Production variability was the highest in Gujarat, which also experienced the highest growth
rate of production, followed by Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka (Figure 48). Being
a mostly rainfed crop, yield fluctuations are the main factor responsible for the production
variability. At the national level, production CV was around 22%, with yield variability at
21%.
CV %
Fig 48 Pattern of Variability in Groundnut Area, Yield and Production across States:
Coefficient of Variation (%), 2000-01 to 2011-12
50.00
45.00
40.00
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
Area
Maharasht
ra
15.09
Yield
10.10
Production
12.56
T.N.
M.P.
Karnataka
A.P.
Rajasthan
Gujarat
India
19.85
4.24
12.65
13.92
21.20
5.90
7.66
18.26
22.28
21.20
31.10
27.52
43.83
20.56
16.58
23.09
30.99
41.25
43.44
45.15
21.59
As indicated by the decline in crop area across the states it was the improvement in yield that
helped growth of groundnut production during the period 2000-01 to 2011-12.
Decomposition of production growth into growth of area and yield shows that at the national
level, yield growth accounted for 86 per cent of growth in Production. In Maharashtra and
Tamil Nadu, area growth accounted for 44-52 per cent of production increase. In the other
states, contribution of yield to production growth was above 60 per cent (Figure 49).
31
Figure 49 Contribution of Growth Rates of Area and Yield to Growth Rate of
Production of Groundnut: %, 2000-01 to 2011-12
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Gujarat
Rajasthan
M.P.
A.P.
Karnataka
Area
2.10
5.43
9.76
31.29
32.63
Maharashtr
a
44.73
Yield
97.90
94.57
90.24
68.71
67.37
55.27
T.N.
India
52.69
14.37
47.31
85.63
The highest average yield during the period 2000-01 to 2011-12 was in Tamil Nadu at close
to 2000 kg/ha and the yield gap is the largest in neighbouring Karnataka at 1,250 kg/ha,
followed by another neighbouring state of Andhra Pradesh (Figure 50). It will be worth
investigating the reason for this large yield gap among the southern states with more or less
similar growing conditions.
Production (TMT), Yield (Kg/Ha), Yield Gap
(Kg/Ha)
Figure 50.Pattern of Average Production (Thousand tonnes), Yield (kg/ha)and Yield
Gap (% from highest yield) for Groundnut across States
2500.0
2000.0
1500.0
1000.0
500.0
0.0
-500.0
-1000.0
-1500.0
P
Gujarat
2451.5
A.P.
1367.8
T.N.
1018.6
Y
YG
Karnataka
617.0
Rajasthan
430.0
Maharashtra
429.8
M.P.
233.7
1305.8
827.1
-642.0
-1120.7
1947.7
699.4
1432.8
1096.0
1129.5
0.0
-1248.3
-515.0
-851.7
-818.2
Production growth rate has shown a significant improvement in the most recent decade,
contributed almost equally by area growth and yield growth. Production fluctuation has also
slowed down, mainly due to yield stabilization (Figure 51).
32
Figure 51 Trends in Growth (%) and Variability (CV%) Area, Production and Yield of
Groundnut at All India Level: Rolling Estimates for Previous 10-years
CV % / CGR %
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
-5.0
-10.0
Area CGR
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
-01 -02 -03 -04 -05 -06 -07 -08 -09 -10 -11 -12 -13
-2.1 -2.9 -2.9 -2.9 -1.5 -1.0 -2.7 -1.1 -1.6 -2.0 -1.0 -1.5
1.4
Production CGR -1.4 -0.1 -6.4
0.3
-1.6
0.5
-4.0
2.0
-2.0
0.3
2.3
-0.1
3.0
Yield CGR
0.7
2.9
3.4
-0.1
1.5
-1.3
3.1
-0.4
2.4
3.4
1.5
1.6
Area CV
8.7
10.1 10.7 11.2
9.7
8.6
9.4
8.2
7.8
7.2
6.7
7.6
8.4
Production CV
13.5 13.7 19.9 19.5 19.6 19.5 22.1 23.9 23.9 23.5 22.7 22.4 12.3
Yield CV
12.4 12.7 14.9 18.3 18.0 18.4 19.2 22.2 22.1 22.2 21.1 20.8
-3.7
8.7
In Gujarat, the production growth has slowed down during the most recent decade from the
double digit growth experienced during the preceding decade. Production growth rate has
improved in Madhya Pradesh, but slowed in Rajasthan despite being highest among states.
Production variability continued to remain high in all major growing states
Seven out of nine states have an average yield of more than 1 tonne per hectare. Only Andhra
Pradesh and Karnataka have registered lower average yield, below 1 tonne per ha (Figure
52).Measures to support adoption of inputs and practices to raise yields would be appropriate
in these two states.
In the other states average yield is above 1 tonne per ha. Only in Maharashtra, yield growth
rate is below 3 per cent per year. Therefore, measures supporting stable yield growth would
be needed to maintain growth of production of groundnut. Production variability is also a
concern in most of the states indicating the need for policies that help reduce vulnerability of
yields to fluctuations in weather.
33
Figure 52. Pattern of growth and variability in yields during 2000-01 to 20011-12:
Groundnut
Yield growth
Yield
Low (<= 1 tonne/ ha)
High (>1 tonne/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high
CV: low
CV: high
(<=20%)
(>20%)
(<=20%)
(>20%)
Low
Andhra
Maharashtra
(<=3% per year)
Pradesh
Karnataka
High
Tamil Nadu
Gujarat
(>3% per year)
Madhya
Pradesh
Rajasthan
10 Soybean
The highest production growth rate was in Andhra Pradesh (25.5%), a relatively new
producing state, followed by Madhya Pradesh (10.5%), Rajasthan (9.9%), and Maharashtra
(7.4%). At the national level, production growth was an impressive 8.8% fuelled by 5.2%
increase in area and 3.4% in yield (Figure 53).
Figure 53 Trends in Area, Yield and Production of Soybean across States: Trend
Growth Rates, 2000-01 to 2011-12
30.00
25.00
CGR %
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
-5.00
Area
A.P.
22.01
M.P.
10.67
Rajasthan
4.09
Maharashtra
2.75
INDIA
5.17
Yield
2.89
-0.15
5.56
4.49
3.42
Production
25.53
10.50
9.88
7.36
8.77
Production variability is highest in Andhra Pradesh, followed by Madhya Pradesh and
Rajasthan and the lowest in Maharashtra (Figure 54). At the national level, production
variability is about 31%, with area variability and yield variability contributing almost
equally.
34
Figure 54 Pattern of Variability in Soybean Area, Yield and Production across States:
Coefficient of Variation (%), 2000-01 to 2011-12
60.00
50.00
CV %
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Area
Maharashtra
11.13
Rajasthan
18.63
M.P.
34.16
A.P.
53.24
INDIA
18.42
Yield
18.39
27.13
21.59
26.74
16.35
Production
26.76
36.31
40.36
55.90
30.60
Yield change contributed the most to the production change in all major producing states and
at the national level (Figure 55).
Figure 55 Contribution of Growth Rates of Area and Yield to Growth Rate of
Production of Soybean: %, 2000-01 to 2011-12
120.00
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
-20.00
Area
M.P.
-12.93
Maharashtra
1.18
Rajasthan
18.72
A.P.
40.32
INDIA
0.36
Yield
112.93
98.82
81.28
59.68
99.64
The highest average yield of 1,426 kg/ha during the period 2000-01 to 2011-12 was realized
in Andhra Pradesh, and the lowest in Madhya Pradesh, the largest soybean growing state
(Figure 56). Although AP has the highest yield and MP the lowest, the latter accounts for
more than three times the output of AP. In other words, systematic efforts would be needed to
35
examine the potential to raise productivity within the state also. Bridging the yield gap across
states could raise total soybean production in the country.
Production (TMT), Yield (Kg/Ha), Yield Gap
(Kg/Ha)
Figure 56.Pattern of Average Production (Thousand tonnes), Yield (kg/ha)and Yield
Gap (% from highest yield) for Soybean across States
5000.0
4000.0
3000.0
2000.0
1000.0
0.0
-1000.0
M.P.
4851.4
Maharashtra
2581.0
Rajasthan
825.7
A.P.
131.0
Y
998.8
1179.9
1163.1
1426.3
YG
-427.4
-246.4
-263.2
0.0
P
Production growth slowed significantly during the most recent decade from the high growth
of the preceding decade. However, the production variability has tended to stabilize (Figure
57).
Figure 57 Trends in Growth (%) and Variability (CV%) Area, Production and Yield of
Soybean at All India Level: Rolling Estimates for Previous 10-years
CV % / CGR %
40.00
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
-5.00
2000- 2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- 2005- 2006- 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 201101
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
Area CV
27.66 22.36 17.69 14.50 14.25 12.36 12.89 14.20 16.35 17.99 17.84 17.76
Production CV
33.69 28.61 22.47 21.07 20.20 18.58 19.59 24.33 25.35 26.16 30.14 28.42
Yield CV
11.81 11.92 12.42 13.34 13.53 13.31 13.36 14.57 14.53 14.41 16.37 15.07
Area CGR
8.70
6.46
4.43
3.75
5.24
3.95
3.95
3.65
3.54
4.15
3.73
4.33
Production CGR 6.65
8.25
2.93
4.64
5.21
4.50
4.63
4.93
3.02
3.16
8.33
6.74
-1.89 1.68 -1.44 0.86 -0.02 0.54
0.66
1.23 -0.50 -0.96 4.44
2.31
Yield CGR
Taking 1 tonne per hectare as the threshold level of yield for soybean, only Maharashtra falls
below this yield. Although yield growth in the state is high, further improvements to catch up
with the best yields would increase overall production as Maharashtra has the second largest
36
are under the crop after MP (Figure 58).Reducing vulnerability to yield fluctuations would
also help in more stable growth of output.
Figure 58. Pattern of growth and variability in yields during 2000-01 to 20011-12:
Soybean
Yield growth
Yield
Low (<= 1 tonne/ ha)
High (>1 tonne/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high
CV: low
CV: high (>20%)
(<=20%)
(>20%)
(<=20%)
Low
Andhra Pradesh
(<=3% per year)
Madhya Pradesh
High
(>3% per year)
Maharashtra
Rajasthan
11 Sugarcane
Maharashtra registered the highest rate of increase in production during the period of 2000-01
to 2011-12 among all the major cane growing states. Expansion of area and yield contributed
to the growth in production. The production growth was the lowest in Punjab among the
various states, mainly due to a negative growth rate in area. In the largest sugarcane growing
state of Uttar Pradesh, annual production growth was a modest 0.8%, 0.53% growth in area
and 0.23% growth in yield. At the national level annual production growth was 2.1%, 1.34%
in area and 0.75% in yield (Figure 59).
Figure 59 Trends in Area, Yield and Production of Sugarcane across States: Trend
Growth Rates, 2000-01 to 2011-12
10.00
8.00
6.00
CGR %
4.00
2.00
0.00
-2.00
-4.00
-6.00
-8.00
Bihar
T.N.
Area
Mahara
shtra
7.11
1.94
Karnata
ka
0.89
6.37
Yield
1.45
1.21
0.97
0.60
Production
8.66
7.66
2.93
1.49
UP
Gujarat
A.P.
UK
Punjab
India
-1.91
Haryan
a
-6.55
0.53
0.56
-1.47
0.23
-0.12
0.37
-6.33
1.34
-0.06
2.26
0.29
0.75
0.76
0.44
-1.11
-1.96
-4.44
-6.06
2.10
Along with growth, production was also characterised by variability in terms of CV in
Maharashtra. Bihar and Maharashtra registered the highest CV for sugarcane production and
area. In Uttar Pradesh production variability was the lowest at 6.7%, accompanying low
37
growth of production, with no significant year-to-year variations in area. At all India level
CV was 14.2%, 10.5% in area and 5.2% in yield (Figure 60). Being a highly irrigated crop,
the variability in production of sugarcane is among the lowest across food crops.
Figure 60 Pattern of Variability in Sugarcane Area, Yield and Production across States:
Coefficient of Variation (%), 2000-01 to 2011-12
60.00
50.00
CV %
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
UP
Gujarat
UK
A.P.
T.N.
Punjab
17.95
Haryan
a
27.56
Area
4.73
9.98
10.61
12.78
Yield
4.18
5.51
6.48
6.54
5.74
10.12
6.94
10.35
11.16
10.41
Production
6.69
8.92
11.32
15.81
5.15
21.79
22.03
30.04
32.80
41.28
50.48
14.17
29.08
Karnata Mahara
ka
shtra
26.06
35.94
Bihar
India
38.23
10.48
The relative influence of yield changes on production growth was the largest in Uttar Pradesh
at 60.7% even though the overall rate of increase in production was among the lowest in the
state. At the national level the relative influence of yield and area changes on production
change was 23.6% and 76.4% respectively (Figure 61). Sugarcane is one crop where area
changes have dominated production growth among the various crops considered in this
analysis.
Figure 61: Contribution of Growth Rates of Area and Yield to Growth Rate of
Production of Sugarcane: %, 2000-01 to 2011-12
140.00
120.00
% Conbtribution
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
-20.00
-40.00
UP
UK
A.P.
Bihar
Area
39.32
42.68
68.08
70.10
Yield
60.68
57.32
31.92
29.90
Karnata Mahara
ka
shtra
71.21
82.82
28.79
17.18
38
T.N.
Haryana
Punjab
Gujarat
India
83.11
83.28
85.29
128.88
76.40
16.89
16.72
14.71
-28.88
23.60
The highest yield was in Tamil Nadu at 103 tonnes/ha. While the yield gap is narrow in
Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, and Maharashtra it is higher in most north Indian states with
Bihar topping the list. In the largest sugarcane growing state of Uttar Pradesh, the yield gap
is about 46 tonnes/ha (Figure 62).
Production (TMT), Yield (Kg/Ha), Yield Gap
(Kg/Ha)
Figure 62.Pattern of Average Production (Thousand tonnes), Yield (kg/ha) and Yield
Gap (% from highest yield) for Sugarcane across States
120000.0
100000.0
80000.0
60000.0
40000.0
20000.0
0.0
-20000.0
-40000.0
-60000.0
UP
P
Maharas
T.N.
htra
119675.3 56898.9 31725.4
Karnata
ka
28677.5
A.P.
Gujarat
Y
57348.2
16695.9
13857.5
7959.7
6707.4
6155.3
5859.1
76990.4 103064.7 85783.9
77579.6
71905.2
63384.4
58340.2
61054.7
43896.5
YG -45716.5 -26074.2
0.0
Haryana
UK
Punjab
Bihar
-17280.8 -25485.1 -31159.4 -39680.3 -44724.4 -42010.0 -59168.2
There has been no significant change in the decadal production, area, and yield growth over past three
years. Production variability also remained more or less stable (Figure 63).
Figure 63 Trends in Growth (%) and Variability (CV%) Area, Production and Yield of
Sugarcane at All India Level: Rolling Estimates for Previous 10-years
CV % / CGR %
16.0
14.0
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
-2.0
2000- 2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- 2005- 2006- 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 201101
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
Area CGR
1.4
1.3
2.2
1.3
0.1
1.9
2.3
0.8
-0.1
1.1
1.2
0.9
Production CGR
1.9
1.4
2.1
0.2
0.0
2.3
2.0
-0.1
-0.2
1.3
1.8
1.6
Yield CGR
0.4
0.2
0.0
-1.1
-0.1
0.3
-0.3
-0.9
-0.1
0.2
0.6
0.6
Area CV
7.3
7.7
8.3
7.4
6.2
5.8
9.2
10.6 10.1
9.9
10.3 10.9
Production CV
9.6
9.3
9.0
8.6
8.0
8.0
11.4 12.8 12.8 12.8
13.6 14.8
Yield CV
3.9
3.7
4.2
5.4
5.6
5.3
5.4
4.9
39
5.4
5.3
5.1
5.3
Tamil Nadu was the only state which showed an improvement in decadal production growth recently,
while most other states showed a static or slower growth rate compared to the preceding decade.
There has been no significant change in production variability with Maharashtra topping the list
followed by Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh.
production variability.
Uttar Pradesh experienced the least
UP is one large state where the cane yields are lower than the other major cane growing states
and it also has the largest area under the crop. Improvement in crop yields in the state,
therefore, can have a significant impact on crop output. The overall variability in yield is
relatively less than in the case of other crops. Only Karnataka and Maharashtra have CV of
more than 10 per cent in yield as compared to the other states. Karnataka has also registered
lower growth rate of production although it has yield level after Tamil Nadu (Figure 64).
Efforts to raise the yield frontier appear to be important initiative needed in the case of
sugarcane to sustain the current annual rate of increase in production of 2.1 per cent per year.
Figure 64. Pattern of growth and variability in yields during 2000-01 to 20011-12:
Sugarcane
Yield growth
Yield
Low (<= 70 tonnes/ ha)
High (>70 tonnes/ ha)
CV: low
CV: high
CV: low
CV: high
(<=10%)
(>10%)
(<=10%)
(>10%)
Low
AP
(<=1% per year)
Gujarat
Punjab
Karnataka
Tamil Nadu
UP
High
Bihar
Haryana
Maharashtra
(>1% per year)
Conclusion
The overall trends and patterns in rice area and yield, the two parameters of production
reviewed indicates that where average yield levels are low and growth rates are also low,
such as most eastern states, there is a need for steps to support adoption of practices by the
farmers that helps in the improvement in land productivity. In states where yields are high
and growth is low (U.P. and West Bengal), the steps needed are research efforts to raise the
production frontier and disseminate the new technologies that help raise the productivity.
Efforts may also be needed to provide incentives for processing and developing new markets.
The programs such as RKVY, NFSM and BGREI provide such a framework for policy
actions.
In the case of wheat, the low yield and low growth states are UP, Bihar and West Bengal,
among which UP accounts for almost a third of India’s wheat area. Efforts to improve yields
in these states are likely to have significant production gains. Measures to reduce the impact
of yield fluctuations in states such as Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra would lead
to stable growth.
40
Among coarse grains, maize production growth at the national level has registered a generally
upward trend over the past decade except for occasional marginal dips. Yield was the major
contributory factor for higher production growth. Production variability has tended to
stabilize in recent decades, whereas yield variability has declined.
Among pulses, gram has emerged as a high growth low variability pulse crop reflective of the
government policy of providing high support prices and the positive impact of the NFSM.
Tur production growth rate has also shown a significant increase during the most recent
decade mainly due to higher yield growth. Thus it appears, tur like gram, has also benefitted
from the government’s production enhancement program envisaged in NFSM.
All major rapeseed/mustard producing states have registered a deceleration in production
growth during the most recent decade, the sharpest decline in Rajasthan, followed by
Haryana and Madhya Pradesh due to a deceleration in yield growth. Groundnut production
growth rate has shown a significant improvement in the most recent decade, contributed
almost equally by area growth and yield growth. Production fluctuation has also slowed
down, mainly due to yield stabilization. Soybean production growth slowed significantly
during the most recent decade from the high growth of the preceding decade. However, the
production variability has tended to stabilize. Bridging the yield gap across states could raise
total soybean production in the country.
UP is one state where sugarcane cane yields are lower than the other major cane growing
states and it also has the largest area under the crop. Improvement in crop yields in the state,
therefore, can have a significant impact on sugarcane output. The overall variability in yield
is relatively less for sugarcane than in the case of other crops.
41
Appendix I: Calculation of Growth, Variability and
Decomposition of Growth of Production
The compound growth rate (CGR) of area, production and yield was calculated as follows:
Let yt denotes the observation (agricultural production, productivity, or area) at time t and let
r be the compound growth rate. Then,
yt = y0 (1 + r)t
Taking logarithms on both sides:
Iog (yt) = A + B*t
where, A = log (y0 ), and B = log ( 1 + r ).
Equation (2) is fitted to data using “method of least squares” and goodness of fit is assessed
by the coefficient of determination R2. The compound growth rate r is estimated as:
r = antilog (B) – 1
To measure the variability in production, the Coefficient of Variation (CV) for production,
area, and yield is used. The CV is computed using the formula:
CV = SD/AVG
Where SD is the Standard Deviation and AVG is the arithmetic mean derived from the data.
To assess the relative contribution of yield and area to production is the Sackrin Method as
discussed below is used:
Pt = At * Yt
wherePt is production, At is the area and Yt is the yield in year t.
logPt =log At + log Yt
(logPt – log Pt-1) =( log At – log At-1 )+ (log Yt – log Yt-1)
Or
X1 = X2 + X3
where X1 = (log Pt – log Pt-1); X2 = ( log At – log At-1 ) and X3 = (log Yt – log Yt-1)
42
dX2/dX1 + dX3/dX1 = 1 where d denotes the differentiation.
Fitting linear regression equations:
X2 = c1 + d1 X1
X3 = c2+d2 X1
dX2/dX1 = d1 and dX3/dX1 = d2
Coefficients d1and d2 measures change in area and yield respectively for a unit change in
production. Furthermore, as d1+d2 = 1, d1 represents the relative contribution of area to
production and d2 represents the relative contribution of yield.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
Directorate of Economics and Statistics - http://eands.dacnet.nic.in
Department of Agriculture and Cooperation - www.agricoop.nic.in
National Food Security Mission - http://nfsm.gov.in
India Pulses & Grains Association, Mumbai – www.ipga.co.in
43