Follow
International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences (IJCMAS)
IJCMAS is now DOI (CrossRef) registered Research Journal. The DOIs are assigned to all published IJCMAS Articles.
Index Copernicus ICI Journals Master List 2018 - IJCMAS--ICV 2018: 95.39 For more details click here
National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS) : NAAS Score: *5.38 (2020) [Effective from January 1, 2020]For more details click here

Login as a Reviewer

Indexed in



National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS)
NAAS Score: *5.38 (2020)
[Effective from January 1, 2020]
For more details click here

ICV 2018: 95.39
Index Copernicus ICI Journals Master List 2018 - IJCMAS--ICV 2018: 95.39
For more details click here

See Guidelines to Authors
Current Issues

Original Research Articles

PRINT ISSN : 2319-7692
Online ISSN : 2319-7706
Issues : 12 per year
Publisher : Excellent Publishers
Email : editorijcmas@gmail.com / submit@ijcmas.com
Editor-in-chief: Dr.M.Prakash
Index Copernicus ICV 2018: 95.39
NAAS RATING 2020: 5.38

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci.2018.7(7): 2288-2294
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2018.707.267


Economic Analysis of Marketing of Chickpea in Buldhana District of Maharashtra State S.P. Dalvi, K.V. Deshmukh an
S.P. Dalvi, K.V. Deshmukh and R.D. Shelke
Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, Latur, India
*Corresponding author
Abstract:

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L) is one of the major pulse crops grown in India. Chickpea has the richest, cheapest and easiest source of best quality proteins and fats. In present study, there are following routs are found in marketing of chickpea I) Producer-village-retailer-wholesaler-dal processor, II) Producer-wholesaler-dal processor and III) Producer-dal processor, these three marketing channels were found in marketing of chickpea. The total marketed surplus on chickpea farm was 12.19 q, out of which 2.31 q, 7.55 q and 2.33 q was marketed thought channel I, II, and III respectively. Marketing cost incurred by producer in the crops was comparatively low than other channels III i.e. Rs. 41.32. When it was marketed through channel II, producer incurred Rs.111.18 as marketing cost. When the produce marketed through channel- I producer paid comparatively more cost than other channels i.e. Rs.149.59.Marketing cost incurred by producer, village trader and wholesaler in channel-I, Rs. 66.00, Rs. 31.11 and Rs. 54.48 as marketing cost and channel-II of producer Rs. 57.09 and wholesaler Rs. 54.09 and channel- III of producer Rs. 41.32 per quintal as marketing cost respectively. In case of price spread in channel-I was very high i.e. Rs. 613.98 because it was more number of middle man available between producer and consumer. In case of channel- II, price spread by processor 5306.99 per quintal of which producer received 94.21 per cent share i.e. Rs. 5000.10 in price spread Rs. 306.49. In channel- III price spread by processor was Rs. 5154.42 of which producer share was 98.95 per cent i.e. Rs. 53.96


Keywords: Marketing channel, Marketing cost, Market margin and Price spread
Download this article as Download

How to cite this article:

Dalvi, S.P., K.V. Deshmukh and Shelke, R.D. 2018. Economic Analysis of Marketing of Chickpea in Buldhana District of Maharashtra State.Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci. 7(7): 2288-2294. doi: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2018.707.267