| Livestock Research for Rural Development 21 (5) 2009 | Guide for preparation of papers | LRRD News | Citation of this paper |
The attitude level of farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks was assessed in Tamil Nadu state in South India using 210 farmers (70 small, 70 medium and 70 large farmers) as sample size. An attitude scale was constructed to measure the attitude of farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks, following Likert method of summating rating, which was administered to assess the attitude of the farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks in agriculture.
Majority of the overall respondents (89 per cent) had favourable attitude followed by neutral (8.1 per cent) and unfavourable attitude (2.9 per cent). The profile of the farmers using draught bullocks was studied and association studies between the profile characteristics of the farmers and their attitude was also carried out.
Key words: Agriculture, attitude, draught bullocks, farmers, farm power
In spite of large scale application of tractors and electrical power in agriculture, still animal power plays an important role in India. The value produced by draught animals in India would be over Rs1000 billion whereas; mechanical sources of agricultural power depend on fossil fuel that has only limited life. Moreover, fossil fuel sources are fast depleting. According to current estimates, India’s petroleum and natural gas resources may last 25-30 years and coal 130-140 years (Sastry & Thomas 2005). The working group on Animal husbandry and Dairying, 11th five year plan (2007- 12), constituted by Government of India, observed that the role of cattle as the main source of draught power for agriculture and allied operations would continue to remain important. There is, therefore, a need for improving the working efficiency of the bullocks.
Whatever developmental works take place in Draught Animal Power (DAP) utilization, attitude of farmers towards draught animals play an important role in the efficient utilization of bullocks in farming practices. When the farmers have positive attitude towards the utilization of draught bullocks in agriculture, then only the actual utilization of the animals can be achieved. The use of DAP varies from one area to another depending on the historical background, farmers attitudes and incidences of livestock diseases (Kumwenda 2000). The draught animal owners’ attitude will be of huge practical utility to the training institutions to frame the programmes which can be implemented in future for efficient utilization of draught animal power. In this context, to find out the attitude level of farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks a study was carried out in Tamil Nadu state of South India since the farm power availability is less than 1kw/ha, in the above said area and the mechanization index for the crops like paddy and sorghum is only 8.2 % in southern parts of the country that grow more than 70% of paddy (Vasanthakumar et al 2007). So, in Tamil Nadu, the role of draught animals is dominant in agriculture as well as for carting.
Tamil Nadu is comprised of seven agro climatic zones based on rainfall distribution, irrigation pattern, soil characteristics, cropping pattern and other physical, ecological and social characteristics, and these are North Eastern Zone, North Western Zone, Western Zone, Cauvery Delta Zone, Southern Zone, High Rainfall Zone, and Hilly Zone (Ghosh 1991). To assess the attitude of farmers towards using draught bullocks, one district has been selected from each zone of Tamil Nadu based on bullocks population, Villupuram for North Eastern zone, Krishnagiri for North Western zone, Erode for western zone, Sivagangai for southern zone, Tanjavur for Cauvery Delta zone, Kanyakumari for high rainfall zone and Kolli hills for hilly zone, thus, comprising seven districts from all zones of Tamil Nadu. From each district, three village panchayat were selected and from the cluster of villages, the farmers possessing draught bullocks were stratified into small (up to 5 acres), medium (5-10 acres) and large farmers (>10 acres) based on land size and from each strata 10 farmers were selected randomly to represent different socio economic strata. Thus, the final sample from 7 districts was 210 with 70 small, 70 medium and 70 large farmers. The profile characteristics of the farmers were studied. An attitude scale was constructed to measure the attitude of farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks, following Likert method of summating rating. The final scale consist of 21 items representing various aspects of draught bullocks utilization in agriculture with positive and negative views (Table 1) which was administered to assess the attitude of the farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks in agriculture.
|
Table 1. Statements selected for inclusion in the final scale based on ‘t’ value and item total correlation |
||||
|
S.No. |
Statement |
t value |
Item total correlation |
Degree of statement |
|
1 |
Draught Animal Power system is boon for rural economy |
4.9 |
.33(*) |
+ |
|
2 |
I own bullocks since I am too poor to take up farm mechanization |
1.8 |
.46(**) |
- |
|
3 |
It is unfortunate that farmers are neglecting bullocks |
2.8 |
.59(**) |
+ |
|
4 |
Farm mechanization is the only way to meet out the energy demands for the growing population |
3.8 |
.34(*) |
- |
|
5 |
Using bullocks for farming is a time consuming process |
4.9 |
.37(**) |
- |
|
6 |
With increase in price of petroleum based products it is wise to encourage the use of draught power |
4.4 |
.49(**) |
+ |
|
7 |
There is no possibility of Draught Animal Power being totally replaced by tractor power system |
2.6 |
.69(**) |
+ |
|
8 |
I would always prefer bullocks over tractors to plough my fields |
7.2 |
.60(**) |
+ |
|
9 |
Continuous decrease in bullock population is a threat for small farmers |
5.7 |
.69(**) |
+ |
|
10 |
The use of draught bullocks enables farmers to integrate livestock and crop production |
5.8 |
.59(**) |
+ |
|
11 |
Involvement of work bullocks should be encouraged in more activities apart from agriculture |
3.4 |
.75(**) |
+ |
|
12 |
Custom hiring of mechanized implements is a better alternative to Draught Animal Power |
1.9 |
.49(**) |
- |
|
13 |
Using Draught Animal Power is detrimental to scientific and technological development |
3.3 |
.33(*) |
- |
|
14 |
Extension programmes backed by sound on farm research are required to determine ways of optimizing the value of draught animals |
4.6 |
.80(**) |
+ |
|
15 |
Draught Animal Power will have an important role in future because of fragmented lands in India |
6.1 |
.57(**) |
+ |
|
16 |
Change in cropping pattern discourage the use of draught bullocks in my farm |
2.3 |
.59(**) |
- |
|
17 |
High maintenance cost of bullocks pose a threat to the use of animal power in India |
5.2 |
.66(**) |
- |
|
18 |
Decrease in number of draught bullock users should be viewed as a positive outcome of social progress |
1.8 |
.51(**) |
- |
|
19 |
I believe the by-products of bullocks serve as a soil nutrient |
2.4 |
.47(**) |
+ |
|
20 |
Considering the cost of maintenance, keeping bullocks in small farms is not economical |
4.5 |
.74(**) |
- |
|
21 |
In future draught bullocks won’t have any place in farming operations |
2.8 |
.70(**) |
- |
|
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level |
||||
The farmers were asked to indicate the degree of agreement on a three point continuum namely agree, undecided and disagree with the weightages of 3, 2, 1 for positive statements and 1, 2 , 3 for negative statements respectively. The scores ranged from 21 to 63. Based on the total score of each respondent, they were classified into
Unfavourable attitude - 21 to 35
Neutral/Undecided - 36 to 49
Favourable attitude - 50 to 63
It could be observed from the table 2 that the overall average age was found to be 41.8 years. It could also be observed, that majority of the farmers were middle aged, followed by young and old age groups.
|
Table 2. Profile of the farmers |
|||
|
S.No. |
Variables |
Respondents (210) |
|
|
F |
% |
||
|
1 |
Age |
||
|
|
Young (<34) |
33 |
15.7 |
|
|
Middle (34 to 50) |
145 |
69.1 |
|
|
Old (>50) |
32 |
15.2 |
|
|
MeanąSD |
41.8ą8.1 |
|
|
2 |
Education |
||
|
|
Illiterate |
60 |
28.6 |
|
|
Can read |
17 |
8.1 |
|
|
Can read & write |
10 |
4.8 |
|
|
Primary |
58 |
27.6 |
|
|
High school |
15 |
7.1 |
|
|
Secondary |
40 |
19.1 |
|
|
Higher secondary |
10 |
4.8 |
|
3 |
Farm experience |
||
|
|
Low (<16) |
41 |
19.5 |
|
|
Medium (16 to 29) |
131 |
62.4 |
|
|
High (>29) |
38 |
18.1 |
|
|
MeanąSD |
22.5ą6.9 |
|
|
4 |
Knowledge level |
||
|
|
Low (<11) |
34 |
16.2 |
|
|
Medium (11-17) |
144 |
68.6 |
|
|
High (>17) |
32 |
15.2 |
|
|
MeanąSD |
13.8ą3.4 |
|
|
5 |
Family size |
||
|
|
Small (<4) |
25 |
11.9 |
|
|
Medium (4to6) |
159 |
75.7 |
|
|
Large (>6) |
26 |
12.4 |
|
|
MeanąSD |
4.9ą1.4 |
|
|
6 |
Source of information |
||
|
|
Low (<5) |
42 |
20.0 |
|
|
Medium (5-13) |
142 |
67.6 |
|
|
High (>13) |
26 |
12.4 |
|
|
MeanąSD |
8.3ą4.7 |
|
|
7 |
Herd size |
||
|
|
Low (<6) |
43 |
20.5 |
|
|
Medium (6-21) |
141 |
67.1 |
|
|
High (>21) |
26 |
12.4 |
|
|
MeanąSD |
13.9ą7.9 |
|
|
8 |
Draught bullock composition |
||
|
|
Low (<7) |
45 |
21.4 |
|
|
Med (7-10) |
144 |
68.6 |
|
|
High (>10) |
21 |
10.0 |
|
|
MeanąSD |
8.1ą1.9 |
|
|
9 |
Source of farm power |
||
|
|
Draught bullocks |
84 |
40.0 |
|
|
Bullocks+tractors |
100 |
47.6 |
|
|
Bullocks+tractors+power tiller |
26 |
12.4 |
|
10 |
Income |
||
|
|
Low (<26000) |
28 |
13.3 |
|
|
Medium (26000 - 92000) |
158 |
75.2 |
|
|
High (>92000) |
24 |
11.4 |
|
|
MeanąSD |
59155.2ą33.1 |
|
|
11 |
Ownership status |
||
|
|
Low (<7) |
84 |
40.0 |
|
|
Medium (7-9) |
108 |
51.4 |
|
|
High (>9) |
18 |
8.6 |
This finding is in agreement with the findings of Hiremath and Manjunatha (2005). It is evident from the table 2 that 28.6 per cent of the farmers were illiterate followed by primary education and secondary education. Losada et al (1995) also reported that majority of the draught animal users were illiterates. It was observed that the overall average farm experience was found to be 22.5 years and 62.4 per cent of the respondents possessed 16-29 years of farm experience. Over than half of the overall respondents had medium level of knowledge in the management of draught animals followed by low and high level of knowledge. The average family size was 4.9. The table shows that 75.7 per cent of the respondents had family size of 4-6 members. Majority of the respondents had medium level of source of information and medium level of herd size followed by low level and high herd size. The draught animal composition was assessed by considering the number of pairs, breed, age and value of the animals. From the total score, majority of the respondents had medium size of draught animal composition.
Though the percentage of farmers using tractors and draught bullocks in combine was high (47.6 per cent) equally 40 per cent of the overall farmers were using draught bullocks alone for their agricultural operations. But this was not the same with the different categories of farmers. It was found that the small farmers were mainly depended on bullocks (74.3 per cent) followed by bullocks and tractors and bullocks with tractors and tillers. This might be due to the fact that, the constraints involved in hiring tractors like high cost, unavailability of the tractors in the needed hours unapproachability to the field and small land size. Majority of the farmers fell in the income group of Rs.26000-92000/-. The ownership status was assessed by considering the ownership of the source of farm power like bullocks, buffaloes, tractors, power tillers, animal drawn implements and mechanical implements either it is owned, hired, shared or borrowed. From the total score, half of the farmers had medium ownership status.
The attitude level of farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks is presented in the table 3.
|
Table 3. Attitude of farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks |
|||||||||
|
S.No |
Category |
SF |
MF |
LF |
Overall |
||||
|
70 |
% |
70 |
% |
70 |
% |
210 |
% |
||
|
1 |
Unfavourable (21-35) |
0 |
0 |
3 |
4.3 |
3 |
4.3 |
6 |
2.9 |
|
2 |
Neutral (36-49) |
5 |
7.1 |
6 |
8.6 |
6 |
8.6 |
17 |
8.1 |
|
3 |
Favourable (50 – 63) |
65 |
92.7 |
61 |
87.1 |
61 |
87.1 |
187 |
89.1 |
|
(SF – Small farmers, MF – Medium farmers, LF – Large farmers) |
|||||||||
From the table 3, it is evident that majority of the overall respondents (89.05 per cent) had favourable attitude towards utilization of draught bullocks followed by neutral (8.09 per cent) and unfavourable (2.86 per cent). This might be due to the reason that the farmers by and large still depend on bullocks for certain farm operations, and they strongly believe that nothing could replace the performance of the bullocks. Since they feel like this, their attitude towards utilization of bullocks was also highly favourable across the different farmers’ categories. The attitude level was the same for the medium and large farmers, whereas, none of the small farmer had an unfavourable attitude towards the utilization of draught bullocks. In general the marginal and small farmers were depending more on bullocks than the farmers falling in other categories. That’s why they had favourable attitude towards utilization of bullocks. Though 89 per cent of the respondents had favourable attitude, 8.1 per cent farmers were showed neutral views meaning that they did not have favourable or unfavourable attitude towards the utilization of bullocks. This might be due to the reasons of farm mechanization, high cost of maintenance and labour problem involved in using draught bullocks.
The data were subjected into pearson correlation and multiple regression analysis to analyse the nature of relationship between the independent variables and attitude of farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks. The values of correlation coefficients (r) were then tested for statistical significance and the same has been presented in table 4.
|
Table 4. Association between the profile of the farmers and their attitude towards utilization of draught bullocks |
||||
|
S.No. |
Independent variables |
Correlation coefficient (‘r’ value) |
Multiple regression analysis (‘t’ value) |
|
|
1 |
Age |
.028 |
.904 |
|
|
2 |
Education |
.188(**) |
1.756 |
|
|
3 |
Farming Experience |
.024 |
-.420 |
|
|
4 |
Family size |
-.021 |
.801 |
|
|
5 |
Source of information |
.077 |
.932 |
|
|
6 |
Herd size |
.202(**) |
1.529 |
|
|
7 |
Bullock composition |
.063 |
-1.921 |
|
|
8 |
Source of Farm power |
.354(**) |
2.011* |
|
|
9 |
Income |
.723(**) |
11.979** |
|
|
10 |
Ownership status |
.280(**) |
.357 |
|
|
11 |
Knowledge |
.311(**) |
3.379** |
|
|
Co-efficient of Multiple determination (R2) |
0.582 |
|||
|
Variance ratio (F) |
25.01 |
|||
|
Dependant variable – Farmers’ attitude ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level |
||||
The results in the table 4 revealed that out of the 11 selected independent variables of the overall farmers six variables namely education (P<0.01), herd size (P<0.01), source of farm power (P<0.01), income (P<0.01), ownership status (P<0.01) and knowledge (P<0.01) were positively and significantly associated with attitude of farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks. Age, farming experience, source of information, bullock composition were positively but not significantly associated with attitude of overall farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks. The results indicated that there is significant association between the profile of the farmers and the attitude of farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks.
Among the eleven variables taken for the correlation, education has an influence with the attitude of the farmers. Education of an individual plays a major role in their attitude. Based on the education level of the farmers, their psychological evaluation may vary from one to another. In this study majority of the farmers were illiterate and have primary education. Since the education level was low, attitude towards traditional farming practices was more and dependence on bullock ploughing was also more and this play a strong role in their attitude towards, utilization of draught bullocks.
Herd size of the farmers also plays a major role in the attitude of farmers. The farmers largely had livestock as a subsidiary enterprise with agriculture. If the milch animal gives birth to male calf, the farmers used to rear it for draught purpose instead of purchasing from the market. Moreover, it’s natural, that farmers in India are integrating livestock and agriculture traditionally since ages. Hence, it was not surprising that herd size influenced the attitude of farmers. The source of farm power was mainly by bullocks for the respondents. Though they used tractors and power tillers, their dependence on bullocks was also high. This might be the reason for the significant relation with the attitude of farmers towards the use of bullocks.
Income level of the farmers had a significant relation with attitude of farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks, since the variation in income level is mainly influences the use of bullocks. The high income group was less among the respondents, may be the reason for the favourable attitude towards the use of bullocks. Hiring the mechanical devices on rent may prevent the farmers towards complete mechanization and dependence on bullocks for part of the work.
The result already indicated that majority of the farmers had medium (51.53 per cent) and low (40 per cent) ownership status of farm power might be the strong reason for the significant association with the utilization of bullocks. Since all farmers possessed bullocks and its implements as their own, they had positive attitude towards its use. They need not hire or invest money, when they have need. If the farmers possess tractors and power tillers as their own, they might not depend on bullocks. Though the ownership status of majority of the large farmers was medium (80 per cent), their attitude towards utilization of bullocks was favourable. The large farmers’ dependence on mechanical devices was more, but at the same time their affinity with bullocks was also more and they needed bullocks for certain specific operations.
The knowledge level about the use of draught bullocks has a significant role in the attitude of farmers towards utilization of draught bullocks. Since majority of the farmers (69.52 per cent) have medium level of knowledge with respect to general utilization and managemental practices, their attitude also more towards favourable side. This might have influenced their attitude and might be the reason for the significant relationship.
The analysis showed that coefficient of multiple determination R2 (0.582) indicates that 58.2 per cent of variation in the attitude of respondents was due to the combined influence of the independent variables considered in the analysis. The variance ratio (25.01) for R2 was found to be significant (P<0.01). The regression analysis further shows that the variables like source of farm power (P<0.05), knowledge (p<0.01) and income level of the respondents (P<0.01) had positively and significantly contributed towards the variability in the attitude of the farmers.
Ghosh S P 1991 Agro-climatic zone specific research: Indian perspective under NARP. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi
Hiremath S and Manjunatha L 2005 Livelihood profile of single bullock cart owners in a town of Karnataka. Indian Veterinary Journal 82:873-876
Kumwenda W F 2000 Animal drawn implement supply, distribution and services in Malawi. Empowering farmers with animal traction into 21st century 76-81. http://www.atnesa.org/Empowering99/Empowering99-Kumwenda-MW-www.pdf
Losada H, Neale M, Grande D, Vieyra J, Cortes J and Gonzalez H 1995 The use of draft animals in the southern hills of Mexico city. Livestock Research for Rural Development 7(1) http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd7/1/5.htm
Sastry N S R and Thomas C K 2005 Livestock Production Management, 4th Edition. Kalyani Publishers p 449
Vasanthakumar J, Philip H, Theodore R K and Nataraju M S 2007 New dimensions and approaches in extension pluralism for rural development, AGROBIOS, India 328p
Received 3 October 2008; Accepted 12 April 2009; Published 1 May 2009