Economics of Production of Sugarcane in Orissa

Sample Design

The multi-stage stratified random sampling technique was adopted in the study.

In the first stage two blocks namely Dhenkanal Sadar and Kankadahada were

selected randomly, in the second stage, 16 villages were randomly selected at the

rate of 8 villages per block. This constituted 5 per cent of the total number of villages

of two selected blocks. In the final stage, list of sugarcane farmers was prepared

separately for both types of sample villages and 10 farm households from each of

the 16 sample villages were selected randomly.

Results and Discussion

An analysis of basic characteristics of the sample farms is considered to be of

significance as it provides relevant background information against which the analysis

is to be attempted. The detailed structures of the sample farms according to farm

size groups have been discussed.

Size of Holding

The distribution of holding according to different size groups is given in Table-1.

The average size of holding was estimated to be 2.44 ha. for Dhenkanal Sadar

(Region-I) and 1.89 ha. in Kankadahada Block (Region-II) of the sample district.

The operational size of holding of marginal, small, medium and large farmers are

found to be 0.91, 1.56, 2.68 and 6.34 ha. as against 0.85, 1.51,2.73 and 6.21 ha. respectively.

Table 1 : Distribution of holding in different size groups of

sample farms of blocks

Dhenkanal Sadar (Region-I)

Kankadahada (Region-II)

Average size of

Size groups

Total No.

Average size of

Total No. of

of sample

operational

sample

operational

farms

holding (in ha.).

farms

holding (in ha.).

1. (below 1.00 ha)

18

0.91

26

0.85

2. (1.01 to 2.00 ha)

28

1.56

29

1.51

3. (2.01 to 4 .00 ha.)

22

2.68

20

2.73

4. ( 4.00 and above )

12

6.34

5

6.21

Pooled

80

2.44

80

1.89

Type of Ownership of Land

Information relating to the land ownership are given in Table 2. It may be noted

from the table that more than three-fourth of their total operational holdings accounted

for owned land while the remaining were by way of leased in land on a share

63