ADOPTION PATTERN OF IMPROVED PADDY VARIETIES AND THEIR CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS IN HILLY AREA OF ALMORA DISTRICT, UTTARAKHAND, INDIA

S.V. SINGH¹*, N. BARKER², J. SINGH³, J.K. SINGH⁴, R.V. YADAV^5
1Department of Agricultural Economics, S. H. University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences, Prayagraj, 211007, Uttar Pradesh, India
²Department of Agricultural Economics, S. H. University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences, Prayagraj, 211007, Uttar Pradesh, India
³Department of Agricultural Economics, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, 263145 India
⁴Department of Agricultural Economics, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, 263145 India
⁵Department of Agricultural Economics, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, 263145 India
* Corresponding Author : shaktivardhan007@gmail.com

Received : 02-07-2020     Accepted : 22-07-2020     Published : 30-07-2020
Volume : 12     Issue : 7       Pages : 749 - 754
Genetics 12.7 (2020):749-754

Keywords : Diffusion, Fragile, Varieties, Bio-physical, Establishment
Academic Editor : Vipul N Kapadia, Dr R. L. Moharana
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Agricultural Economics, S.H. University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences, Prayagraj, 211007, Uttar Pradesh, India
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

This paper describes the production practices of paddy in two distinct growing environments in hills of Uttarakhand where average productivity of paddy is not only lower but also stagnated from several decades. Analysis revealed the cropping pattern, characteristics of farming system and households, cost and returns, extent of adoption of improved paddy varieties and constraints in their diffusion in hilly district Almora. Data on different aspects of paddy cultivation were collected 60 randomly selected farmers from two villages namely: Adhuria and Balai from Almora district. Descriptive statistics were applied and tabular analysis was done to ascertain the mean, average, percentage values of collected data. Paddy was the major cereal in the surveyed area during kharif season and it accounts 89.53 and 10.47% area to total cropped area in marginal and small farm size, respectively. The majority of farmers belong to marginal category that was 93.33 and 96.67% to total farmers in terrace and valleys environment, respectively. On the other hand, very poor proportion of farmers falls in small category i.e. 6.67 and 3.33% in the respective environments. The total cost of cultivation of paddy was Rs.49806/- on marginal and Rs.46042/ha on small farm which is at par with gross returns. The average annual income of households in valleys was Rs.116547/- which was 69% higher as compared to terraces Rs.68934/-. Further research should be initiated to improve the productivity of paddy and its profitability; therefore, livelihood of farming community could be strengthened in the hills.

1. Singh S.V., Barker N., Singh J.K. and Singh J. (2020) International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 12 (13), 10019-10023.
2. Tiwari S.K. (2015) MSc. (Agril. Eco.) Thesis, Institute of agricultural sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh 221005, Enrol., 313896.
3. Afolami C. A., Obayelu A. E., Agbonlahor M. U. and Lawal-Adebowale O. A. (2012) J. Agril. Sci., 4(4), 233-244.
4. Chatterjjee P.K. and Banerjee S. (1976) Indian Journal for Agricultural Economics, XXXI (3), 248-249.
5. Krishna V.V. (2001) M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560065
6. Lal S. (1987a). Increasing Rice Production under Rain fed Low-land situation, New Delhi, 12.
7. Mohanadasan T.C. (1979) MSC (Agri) thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641003, 87-89.
8. Nagarajan S.S. (1998) Kisan world, 25(12).
9. Neha Lakra, Gauraha A.K. and Banafar K.N.S. (2017) International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 108-115.
10. Richard P.V. and Radha D.S. (2017) International Journal of Current Advanced Research, 6(8), 5246-5249.
11. Saha A. (2004) Determinants of adoption HYV rice in West Bengal. K.P. Bagchi and company, 170-200.
12. Saravanakumar V. and Kiruthika N. (2015) Res. J. Agric. Eco. & Stat., 6 (2), 249-255.
13. Singh H.N., Bisht M.S., Singh J. and Singh S.P. (2012) Agricultural Situation in India, 69(6), 317 - 325.
14. Singh H.N., Pandey S. and Lapitan A. (2006) In: Proceedings of the 2nd IRC 2006, held in New Delhi India during October 9-13, 2006 pp. 135.
15. Singh H.N., Singh S., Singh U.S., Singh J., Zaidi N.W. and Mohanty S. (2013) Indian Journal of Traditional Knowlwdge, 12 (3), 472 - 477.
16. Subramanian S.R., Ramamoorthy K. and Varadarajan S. (1973) Madras Agricultural Journal, 60(3),192-195.