The relationship between the size of Farm in hectares and the productiveness in Yield/hectares is heatedly debated issues in Indian agribusiness economic sciences. This issue was foremost raised by AK Sen in 1960s with regard to Indian economic system. The major aim of this paper would be to analyse the relationship and the major factors act uponing this relationship along with its deduction. The size of keeping depends on certain factors and the productiveness besides depends on certain economic factors. These factors such as irrigation, birthrate, labour and capital input have an influence on the relationship between the size of land keeping and productiveness. Most of the economic expert like AK Sen and Saini have done their analysis and considered this relationship to be reverse. States like USA and Australia have really big retentions and the relationship between size of farm and productiveness is non reverse in such instances. The application of Green revolution has been believed to alter the opposite relationship to a straight relative relationship, but still it has been non really clear. Some analysis has been done in the paper related to aggregated informations with respect to present position of this relationship by comparing the factors of productiveness with the size of keeping. Furthermore the mean size of retention has been diminishing with clip due to increase in population and some other factors. At the same clip the authorities has tried to implement policies like land ceiling and consolidation of land in some comparatively developed provinces to work out the job of overly big retentions ( in Indian norm ) and little and disconnected land severally.

2.0 Farm land Holdings, Productivity and the factors act uponing them independently

Agricultural keeping indicates the mean size of agricultural land held by the husbandmans in India.. An economic household land keeping can be defined as one which could supply a sensible criterion of life to the agriculturist and give full employment for a household of a normal size. There are five classs of husbandmans in India harmonizing to their retentions. A ) Fringy husbandmans ( ?1 hectare ) , B ) Small husbandman ( 1 to 2 hecteres ) , c ) Semi medium husbandmans ( 2 to 4 Hectors ) , vitamin D ) Medium husbandmans ( 4 to 10 hectores ) , vitamin E ) Large husbandmans ( & A ; gt ; 10 Hectors ) . The size of keeping would ideally depend on method of cultivation and nature of the harvest.

Productivity here refers to the productiveness of harvest end product so productivity in agribusiness is measured as the end product of the harvest per unit country. Its unit is yield/hectares. At a national degree the demand for agricultural merchandise will maintain lifting due to increasing population of India and high GDP growing rate so the supply of agricultural merchandises has to fit up the increasing demand to maintain the monetary values sensible. Hence agricultural farm land productiveness becomes an of import parametric quantity for the economic system. India being a immense state, these factors vary a batch from part to part but unreal agencies can be used to heighten the factors of birthrate and irrigation. The undermentioned list gives us the factors of productiveness

Birthrate of land – Natural birthrate can non be changed but input of fertilisers, farm pace manure and foods can better the birthrate but all these will increase the cost.

Irrigation installation – Any irrigation undertaking requires heavy investing and it depends on the degree of belowground H2O and nearest beginning of fresh H2O supply.

Labor supply and quality of labour – Labor supply will depend on the presence of any other range of employment and quality will depend on traditional work civilization and climatic conditions and both the factors vary a batch in India.

Climatic status – Floods and drouth due to unpredictable nature of monsoon affect the productiveness.

Since last three decennaries economic experts have been debating over issue of relationship between the size of farms and agricultural productiveness in India. The argument was initiated by Prof. Amartya Sen in 1962. Harmonizing to him with addition in size of farm retention, productiveness diminutions and therefore the productiveness is more on little farms as compared to big farms. India has a labour excess economic system. The chance cost of labour is low. Small farms use much of household labour to the extent that fringy productiveness of labour attacks zero. In instance of little farms, end product per acre is maximized while in the instance of big farms utilizing hired labour, end product per unit of labour is maximized. The strength of cultivation in instance of little farm is greater than that of the big farm. Furthermore, heavy input of labour on little farm is non on one harvest merely but in two or more harvests produced in the same piece of land during a given production twelvemonth. It is more so in instance of irrigated land. Self-employment in the household farm equalizes the chance cost which is non different from market pay. Statistical cogency of the opposite relationship between farm size and productiveness is a confirmed phenomenon in Indian agribusiness prior to Green Revolution. Green revolution is a capital intensive programme which was implemented in 1960s for growing of agricultural production. This capital was invested in the signifier of of import factors of production like irrigation, fertiliser, Mechanization, Manure, pesticides, foods. The aim of the undermentioned analysis would be to find all the factors like irrigation, fertilisers, Farm Yard Manure and foods vary with the size of farm for the present set of informations

3.0 Aggregated informations analysis

For all the graphs below in X-axis, 1 = Marginal retention, 2 = Small Holding, 3 = Semi-Medium retention, 4 = Medium Holding, 5 = Large keeping.

In Y-axis, chart A ) , B ) , C ) , E ) , F ) are values of per centum and D ) is ratio value.

The computations of these per centum value from been mentioned in tabular arraies in appendix

Graph A ) and B ) have been taken from table 1.C ) , D ) , F ) from table 2

As per the graph A ) above we can happen that the fringy retention has the larger country of farm entirely irrigated about 46 % and we can besides detect that the per centum of the entirely irrigated land decreases with addition in the size of the keeping with big retentions demoing the lowest per centum of entirely irrigated country that is approximately 21 % .

The 2nd graph B ) shows us the per centum of country of different size of keeping for entirely unirrigated farm land and it show us, a batch of spread between the fringy retention ( 44 % ) and big retentions ( 55 % ) in footings of per centum alteration.

As observed from the graph C ) the application of fertilisers lessenings with the addition in the size of keeping with the fringy keeping holding an country of 77 % and big retentions holding an country of 52 % under the application of fertilisers.

The graph D ) related to foods does non demo us the % of country but it shows us the measure to country ratio. In this instance the incline of the graph is steeper and it shows us tendency that the consumption of foods reduces with the addition in the size of keeping. The fringy retention has a ratio of 126 and the big retention has a ratio of 56.

In instance of farm pace manure graph E ) there is a little addition in the per centum application from fringy keeping to little keeping but after that the autumn continues. Here the little retentions has the highest per centum of application that is 34 % and the big retention has the lowest per centum that is 18 % .

Application of pesticides in a in farming area is an of import preventative step to forestall plagues. The graph F ) does non demo a negative tendency wholly in relation to per centum of country with relation to keeping size but the big farm land shows a dip in 4 % .

The informations above is for 2001 agribusiness nose count which is the latest. In station green revolution period the application extra inputs i.e. factors of production like irrigation, fertilisers, farm pace manure, foods, pesticides shows that their strengths of application is reciprocally relative to size of land. ( As studied above with assorted informations and matching graphs. ) . In other words the application of extra factors of production is more in instance of little farms compared to big farms. The end point end product which is straight relative to application of input to a sensible extent must increase output proportionally. Therefore logically it follows that after green revolution besides the opposite relationship between size of farm and productiveness should keep good. It ‘s non a direct cause and consequence relationship between all the factors of productiveness and farm size but there might be some common factors which might be impacting these relationship. On the other manus there can be an alternate hypothesis to this, saying big farm land are in of course fertile and irrigated parts of this state so they do non necessitate unreal irrigation or fertilisers to heighten their productiveness. Therefore a direct opposite relationship can non be established between Farm size and productiveness by merely utilizing aggregated informations related to factors of productiveness. If we observe the distribution of assorted size of keeping throughout India in table 3 of appendix larger and medium size retentions are largely found in bigger provinces like Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra which are non dumbly populated but have a larger country. The more dumbly populated provinces like West Bengal and Kerala have more figure of fringy and little retentions. The natural factors of productiveness are distributed among these provinces so the chief hypothesis can non be rejected. The alternate hypothesis can be true in some parts but non true everyplace because the different sizes of keeping have been distributed as per denseness of population and non as per natural factors of production. Although it can be said that opposite relationship between productiveness and farms size is present in some countries of India but it is non a general jurisprudence for the whole state.

4.0 Methodology for analysing disaggregated informations

The analysis above shows us the analysis done for aggregated informations but this same analysis can besides be done utilizing disaggregated sample informations taken from assorted small towns. If the sample informations is taken from nearby small towns so the conditions like Fertility, Irrigation, climatic status and labour can be assumed to be changeless.

Y1, Y2, Y3, — — — — -Y100 can be the information set for productiveness in yields/hectares

X1, X2, X3, — — — — -X100 can be the information set for size of keeping hectares

The informations above can merely be obtained by making a making a direct study in a peculiar country holding common factors of productiveness. Then we can make a arrested development analysis for the dataset holding Y = Productivity and X = Size of farm land. The relationship therefore obtained either positive or negative can be used to happen out the relationship between productiveness and size of farm for a peculiar country at a micro degree. And this method can be used in assorted countries of the state holding same factors of productiveness. And so the tendencies can be observed whether its positive or negative or has no affect. This sort of analysis utilizing disaggregated informations can be done by besides taking the same harvest.

5.0 Labor as a factor

As discussed before labour input is an of import standards for better productiveness in farm land and becomes more of import if the procedure in more manual.In Indian agribusiness the Farm land labour can be divided into two type, household member workers and the other is hired workers. By and large in instance of smaller size of keeping the household members are largely involved in the cultivation procedure and in larger farms it is a mix of both. In instance of a fringy and little keeping where in most of the instances merely the household members are involved in farm cultivation the fringy productiveness is non a factor. If required all the household members can be involved in the agribusiness productiveness procedure because the state of affairs is more despairing and as consequence the strength of cultivation is besides more. The proprietor of smaller farm land does non hold to employee hired provincials but in instance of larger farms the state of affairs alterations. In instance of larger farm land the proprietor has to take the fringy productiveness of hired labour into consideration. As the strength of cultivation for the little farm is more, the application of fertilisers, farm pace manure and foods might be affected as per the aggregated information analysis done earlier. As the little farm proprietor is more despairing even he can utilize manual agencies of irrigation to water his land and its non possible in big farms due to its big size. It can be argued that the big farm proprietor would hold more entree to mechanized methods and capital for investing so his productiveness can be higher at least after green revolution. Here the job looks more similar direction of farm input resources instead than their handiness. The better direction of resources for little farm proprietor with more intensive cultivation has a bigger impact on productiveness than the impact of advantage the big farm proprietor has in footings of more mechanisation and capital handiness. But the features of land size retentions that is decrease in the mean size of keeping with clip.

Even the relationship between irrigation and fertilisers is besides really direct. If one wants for apply more fertilisers so the irrigation installations have to be really good so as per the irrigation informations and fertilisers informations both seem to follow the same form even if we consider labour non be a major factor here. This is clearly apparent in Table 2 where more fertilisers are ever applied when irrigation is high.

6.0 Changing form of Size of Farm land keeping with clip

The tabular arraies 4 and 5 in appendix shows us the distribution of retentions in assorted provinces of India but there is one more of import factors to this analysis that is the mean size of retentions have been diminishing with clip. The figure of fringy retentions and little retentions have increased and the besides country under fringy retentions and little retentions have increased. At the same clip the figure of Medium and Large retentions have decreased and besides has the country under them decreased. There are two major ground for such a tendency, they are as follows

Increasing population – With the rapid addition in population the same country of arable land is acquiring divided among more people. As a consequence of this the size of the retentions is cut downing and country under fringy and little farms addition. To command the growing of rural population is even tougher in rural India due to miss of consciousness of people due to limited instruction.

Law of heritage – Under Hindu every bit good as Muslim Law of heritage the landed belongings of a individual has to be every bit divided among all his boies and girls which has led to more and more division of land and hence addition in fringy and little farms. Even if the land size is big now, it will acquire sub-divided when it goes to the following coevals.

Decline in the joint household system – Earlier batch of households used to be joint households but this has declined over clip and people by and large prefer to remain with merely individual households. As a consequence the farm land is besides divided more.

Slow growing in handcraft industry – In the small towns the handcraft industry used to a beginning of employment for the small town labour. But it has non grown sustainably with addition in rural labour so the rural population have had to depend more on agribusiness as a beginning of employment.

7.0 Problems related to subdivision of land retentions

If the atomization and subdivision of land continues at this rate so mean size of the retentions will go even smaller and there will be more fringy retentions. Application of new engineering becomes more hard. A batch of arable land will be lost in doing boundaries. One may reason that every bit in instance of India the productiveness of farm land will be more due to more intensive cultivation. But the per capita income of the having household of the farm reduces with reduced farm land. Furthermore if the whole household is involved to increase the strength of cultivation the labour might be under employed for the same return. If the labour is flexible so he can travel to a bigger farm as provincial if there is a demand. As seen from the statics the figure of big retentions is cut downing in the state and hence is the employment chance for hired provincials. Another factor which limits the labour flexibleness is when labour attempts to travel from one part to another linguistic communication is a large barrier. Although Hindi is India ‘s national linguistic communication and English is the official one still batch of rural population speaks merely the local linguistic communications and to be more specific merely the local idiom. Skill becomes a barrier when the labour wants to travel to industry in urban sector.

As per our analysis boulder clay now the opposite relationship between the productiveness and size of farm does keep good at least in some countries of the state if non throughout the state. At the same clip if the farm land gets more divided and sub-divided the keeping no longer remains economic for a individual household. The ideal keeping size has to be someplace between the smaller and big retentions of around 4-5 hectares. The farm size are big and they are good managed and supervised by utilizing modern methodological analysis like it is done in USA and Australia they achieve high productiveness. But the same thing is non easy to accomplish in India as discussed beforehand. The authorities has introduce land ceiling in some developed provinces. This means that household having overly big farm land have to give up their inordinate land to public governments and it will be distributed among households holding uneconomic retentions. This procedure is non at all easy because if the land is fertile than none of the owning households would wish to give up their land and besides have to believe about their future coevalss. Furthermore any sort of ceiling will travel against the market forces of demand and supply and impact the monetary values of land. When we talk about division and atomization so in many instances the farm land of a individual proprietor is scattered throughout the small town. In that instance all the land in the small town can be converted into a compact block and so the same land can be proportionally distributed among all the households which is called consolidation of Farm land. In provinces like Punjab, Haryana and Madhya Pradesh this procedure has been taken up earnestly but in some other provinces like Assam and West Bengal the procedure has non even started. There are few grounds for which consolidation procedure is non easy. Peoples in India are more affiliated to their piece of land, if person has a better piece of land he would non wish to give them. Both land ceiling and consolidation of farm land are policies to make that optimum size of keeping but they have non been easy to implement for the factors as mentioned before.

8.0 Final comment

The opposite relationship between size of keeping and productiveness was considered to be really strong when it came for the first clip under observation of AK Sen. But after the green revolution this relationship should hold alteration to a straight relative one as per outlook. This might be go oning in some countries of India but still there are countries where the opposite relationship between size of farm and productiveness still exists. As per the aggregated information analysis the factors of productiveness are being affected by some common factors which helps to keep the opposite relationship between productiveness and size of farm in some countries. As mentioned before these common factors are strength of labour and jobs of direction and supervising in big farms. At the same clip the size of the land keeping have been cut downing which is taking to more uneconomic retentions for little farm proprietors. At this point the authorities should implement the policy of land ceiling and consolidation of retentions judiciously in order to increase the figure of semi-medium and medium size keeping where optimum productiveness can be achieved along with economic retention. In long term consolidation of retentions and concerted agriculture should be encouraged in an organized manner. The proper direction of labour along with other factors of productiveness and use of mechanised engineering in big farms would travel a long manner to better productiveness in larger amalgamate farms. This would be made easier if lesser population is dependent on agribusiness merely if more employment chances are created in other sectors and the rural population ascents to new accomplishment demands of the market.