195

Summary & Conclusion

It is not enough just produce the vegetables; it must be produced

efficiently and marketed successfully. It is necessary to improve the

marketing system to aid development for two reasons; firstly it may

work as a disincentive to increased production; secondly, if the

market does not supply consumers with produce at reasonable

prices and at the time and place needed, and then the increased

production has no meaning in a welfare society (Singh, 2004)

Indian agriculture has witnessed tremendous transformations since

independence. Having achieved laudable success in agricultural

production in last 60 years, Indian agriculture is transformed from a

food deficit to a food surplus country. In the recent times, the policy

thrust has shifted towards agriculture diversification to address the

issues of nutritional security, produce marketing, employment, farm

income and sustainable use of natural resources.

The horticulture which includes fruits, vegetable, spices, flower,

medicinal and ornamental plants has proved beyond doubt its

potentiality for gainful diversification. The emerging trend worldwide

and also in the country which is indicative of paradigm shift in

dietary needs of the people with the rise in the income, which

demand for more horticulture produce. In horticulture, the vegetable

crops have been identified as the most remunerative crops for

replacing subsistence farming in rain fed, dry land, hills, arid and

coastal agro ecosystems. Being short duration crops and fewer

requirements for capital, vegetables are also best suited in the crop

6

Estelar

196

rotation. Such a diversification in favour of vegetable is sweeping

across the nation. With the production of 222.9 million tonnes, we

are today the second largest producers of these crops in the world.

The achievement in the development of horticulture is laudable, as

the sector is now contributes more than 30.5 per cent of GDP of

agriculture and has maintained the growth rate of more than 5 per

cent during the last two decades (Indian Economy 2011)

Supply chain management plays an essential role in keeping

business costs at a minimum and profitability as high as possible.

Supply chain management is defined as the design and operation of

physical, management information and financial systems needed to

transfer goods and services from point of production to point of

consumption in an effective and efficient manner so that losses are

minimized.

Uttarakhand, the 27th state of India, has huge potential of seasonal

and off seasonal vegetable production. The state is blessed with

conductive climate to grow a large number of vegetable with different

quality attributes round the year. Farmers are growing vegetables in

a very good amount. The annual production in Uttarakhand is 1.04

million tonnes from the area of about 80580 hectare. Uttarakhand

has a pleasant climate, which is a home place of different religions,

castes, occupations, cultures, speaking diverse languages and of

different food preferences.

The nature of the product on the one hand and the lack of

organized marketing system on the other have resulted in low

Estelar

197

producer’s price. There are production and marketing problems

challenging vegetable development in both the districts.

In spite of over-whelming importance of vegetables in our state no

systematic attempt has been made to compare the production

and marketing problems of vegetable in any region (Hill or Plains)

of Uttarakhand state. Uttarakhand opened new fields of

agricultural and agribusiness research since its formation in the

year 2000. No comparative study on the production and

marketing problems of the vegetables has been done so far. The

above problematic situation calls for a systematic investigation

into problems of production and vegetable marketing as a whole.

Keeping in the mind practical utility, present study was conducted

with the following specific objective:

1) To survey the vegetable production and marketing problems.

2) To study the existing major vegetable marketing system.

3) To work out :

Marketing efficiency, Marketing cost, Marketing margin,

and producer’s share in consumer’s rupee for as major

vegetable.

4) To identify the factors affecting vegetable production and

marketing.

5) To compare vegetable production and marketing problems in

Nainital and U.S. Nagar districts.

To evaluate the objective of the study, multistage random

sampling technique was adopted. Simple random sampling was

used to select the respondents (growers) and the selection of

vegetables was made on the basis of the maximum production

Estelar

198

and acreage under cultivation. Five vegetable marketing channels

were identified in which three most trendy vegetable supply

channels were selected.

The study was conducted in the Nainital and U.S. Nagar districts

of Uttarakhand. Based on the highest production and the acreage

under vegetable, Ramgarh and Dhari blocks from Nainital and

Kashipur and Bajpur blocks from U.S. Nagar district were

selected purposively. A cluster of two villages form each blocks of

both of districts were selected.

At the initial stage farmers were selected in each chain who sold

their produce in selected vegetable supply chain. In the second

stage, intermediaries involved in the supply chain especially in

vegetable supply chain channel I of vegetable marketing where

large number of intermediaries existed. In the third stage retailers

of each chain was selected. Similarly, in the final stage the

consumer who purchased the vegetables from each channel was

selected.

Firstly, in the channel-I of vegetable supply chain 20 farmers, 4

intermediaries, 5 traditional retailers and 20 consumers were

selected at randomly.

Secondly, in channel-II of vegetable supply chain 20 farmers, 5

cooperatives/retailers and 20 consumers were selected at

randomly.

Thirdly, in channel-III, vegetable supply chain 5 farmers and 20

consumers were selected at random from the local village and

Estelar

199

market level. Only 5 farmers were available doing direct trade

with these formats hence only these 5 farmers were selected.

However the total size of the sample with respect to farmers was

decided keeping in mind the time, resources and availability of

sample for the investigator.

Thus, total 90 farmers, 4 intermediaries, 10 retailers and 60

consumers were selected from the each district in aggregate for all

the channels of VSC. For the homogeneity of the result 4

vegetables namely tomato, pea, cabbage and potato which were

commonly belt in large quantities in all the selected channels of

VSC were selected for the study.

The secondary data of vegetable production of both the districts ware

collected from the district horticulture department (DHO) and other

government department. The primary data regarding the vegetable

production and marketing for the year 2010 were collected from the

farmers with respect to cost of marketing, value added and price

received by them. Similarly, the data on cost and return obtained by

the market intermediaries as well as by the retail formats were

obtained through interview through questionnaire schedule, which

contains indicators such as physical losses involved, quantity sold,

selling price and commission received by the intermediaries or by

any firm. Similarly, the data regarding the roles played by

intermediaries, factors influencing the vegetable production, supply

chain and marketing, problems and expectations of the farmers,

retail formats and consumers were also collected through structured

schedule by personal interview and discussion.

Estelar

200

Simple conventional method of tabular analysis was used to study

the pricing efficiency. Averages and percentage analysis were used to

examine the roles played by the intermediaries and contracting

firms, marketing efficiency, marketing cost, marketing margin,

Producer’s share in consumer’s rupee, factors affecting the production

and marketing, problems and expectations of the producers, retailers

and consumers in the vegetable supply chain was worked out.

Findings of the study

The most important findings of the study are summarized below.

Vegetable production and marketing problem status

The state of Uttarakhand is important in respect of vegetable

cultivation in the country. The productivity of vegetables is 9.86

MT/Ha in the state according to the Directorate of Horticulture and

Food Processing, Uttarakhand Udhyan Bhawan, Chaubatiya, 2010-

11. This sector is a good source of income and employment

generation. Kumaon region has produced almost 50 per cent of total

production of vegetable in the state in year 2010-11. Among 13

districts of Uttarakhand, Nainital district in Kumaon region accounts

for the highest production of 82711 MT. vegetable in the state, while

U.S. Nagar 65172 MT.

The present study pertains to the Uttarakhand states, Nainital and

U.S. Nagar districts in particular. The growth rates in the area and

production of different vegetable crops in Nainital and U.S. Nagar

district were observed for the period from 2006-07 to 2010-2011. The

vegetable production data indicated that Nainital and U.S. Nagar

Estelar

201

districts (Table 1.2 and 1.3) have diversity in their geographical

climate and agriculture practices especially for vegetables. The Four

major vegetables namely Tomato, Cabbage, Pea and Potato are

commonly belt in large vegetable production in both of the district.

While the area under vegetable and production is also being

increasing year by year.

The production of vegetables, being seasonal and off-seasonal (in

hills), localized to favoured agro-climatic conditions and the

perishability of the produce created several problems on production

and marketing fronts. In both of the study areas, the cultivation of

vegetables is carried out mostly by small and marginal farmers. The

vegetable growers are normally set with the problem of low

productivity, inadequate availability of good quality seeds,

inadequate extension services, unorganized marketing, inadequate

infrastructure and lack of high quality inputs and machinery for

technology dissemination. The severity of such problem is expected

to be more in hilly areas that are capable of producing and supplying

good quantity vegetables round the year but are poor in

infrastructure. This situation in turn leads to low returns realised by

producers-farmers. Future, the diversion of agricultural land to non-

agricultural uses is on rise in the state. The continuously

diminishing land holding coupled with the various constraints call

for various measures to be taken for improving production of crops

including vegetables. All these aspects are to be looked into while

planning any future strategy to increase vegetable production and

marketing in Uttarakhand.

Estelar

202

Major problems at farmers/producer’s level

On the basis of higher priority, the respondent of Nainital

districts were largely faced problems related with production

e.g. lack of irrigation, lack of information, manpower,

finance/credit, inputs, production levels, insect/pest, diseases,

poor linkages with extension agencies inadequate soil testing

facilities, risk aversion, Problems related to marketing included

transportation, standardisation and grading, infrastructure,

unfair deductions, storage, market-related information,

bargaining and low price received by the farmers for the

produces. There were also other, less important problems.

Farmers were aware about most of problems but unfortunately

they had no access by which they could overcome these

constraints. While U.S. Nagar district is much better due to

easy transportation, infrastructure and market availability.

Problems at middleman’s level

Most middlemen faced problems related to the uncertainty of

the arrival of producers and consumers, the arrival of

quantities of produce, standardisation and grading, storage,

information on the market prices, quality of produce, varied

mixture in produce and highly perishable nature of produce.

Existing major vegetable marketing system in the study

area

Mostly vegetable is traded through regional marketing system

in both of the study area of Uttarakhand. The town and villages

in the producing area serve as assembly markets. The markets

of production area feed the markets of consumption area.

Estelar

203

Haldwani, Nainital and Ramnagar from Nainital and Rudrapur,

Bajpur, khatima, Pantnagar and Kashipur from U.S. Nagar

districts are the largest vegetable consuming cities of vegetable

produce in kumaon division of Uttarakhand.

A wide variety of marketing agency ie village commission agent,

wholesalers, retailers, brokers, commission agents and others

operate at various stages of vegetable marketing. These markets

can be distinguished on the basis of market place and the

nature of the trade activities.

Five vegetable marketing channels were identified during the study

in both of district, in which three most trendy and common

vegetable supply channels (mostly used by the farmers) were as

follows:

Channel (I)

ProducersVillage Commission Agent/ WholesalersRetailers

Consumers

Channel (II)

Producers Cooperatives/RetailersConsumer

Channel (III)

ProducersConsumer

1- Producers to village commission agent/wholesalers to retailers

to consumer. Two middlemen used this. While 52.2%

respondents from Nainital and 58.9% from U.S. Nagar districts

were used it.

Estelar

204

2- Producers to cooperative/retailers to consumer. One

middleman used this. Where 32% from Nainital and only 17.8%

respondents from U.S. Nagar districts used it.

3- Producer to consumer. No middlemen used this (producers

himself play the role of middleman) and only 12.2% of

respondents from Nainital and 23.3% from U.S. Nagar used it.

The study revealed that vegetable was the high income generating

crops grown by farmers both in Ravi and Kharif season which

collectively covered 20 to 25% of total cropped area in both of the

districts. Tomato, pea, cabbage and potato were the very important

vegetables crops of the study area. Regarding disposal of the produce

channel-I (producer village commission agent/wholesaler retailer

consumer) was the important one being followed 52.2 to 58.9%

vegetable producers of both of districts who could dispose more than

60 percent of the total produce.

In channel-II (producers cooperative/retailer consumer) can play

an efficient role in terms of farmer’s high return in Nainital and U.S.

Nagar district while the producers share in consumers rupee is

(39.85%) and (39.28%) respectively.

And channel III (Producers Consumer) may be plays a good role for

small farmers of both of district who dispose there produce directly

farm level to consumer and get a good amount 42.80 to 46.50% in

consumers rupee but the numbers of these farmers were very

limited.

Estelar

205

Marketing efficiency, Marketing cost, Marketing margin

and Producer’s share in consumer’s rupee.

Marketing efficiency

The index of marketing efficiency for Nainital district was found out

to be 0.76, 0.90, and 0.96 for channel I, II and III of vegetable supply

chain respectively. Whereas in U.S. Nagar district the index of

marketing efficiency was found out to be 0.78, 0.87 and 1.02 for

channel I, II and III of vegetable supply chain respectively.

Hence, the index of marketing efficiency of the different formats

indicated for both of districts that channel III VSC was found to be

more efficient than channel II and I VSC because of low operational

costs and physical losses in the supply chain resulted in more

producers’ net price to total gross marketing margins.

It is advisable to the farmers of both of the district to sell their more

vegetable produce through channel III and II to be encouraged to

provide vegetables to consumers, even channel I and II of VSC

required more attention to improve their marketing efficiency.

Marketing cost

In Nainital district the cost incurred per kg of vegetables by channel

I, II and III was found out to be Rs. 1.28, Rs. 1.99 and Rs. 1.75

respectively. The total returns per kg of vegetables found out to be

Rs. 5.22, Rs. 4.55 and Rs. 4.73 in channel I, II and III respectively.

The net return realized by it for one kg of vegetables was Rs. 3.94,

Rs. 2.56 and Rs. 2.97 in channel I, II and III respectively.

In the same way, in U.S. Nagar district the cost incurred per kg of

vegetables by channel I, II and III was found out to be Rs. 1.21, Rs.

1.29 and Rs. 0.81 respectively. The total returns per kg of vegetables

found out to be Rs. 5.01, Rs. 4.30 and Rs. 4.84, in the channel I, II

Estelar

206

and III respectively. But the net return realized by it for one kg of

vegetables was Rs. 3.80, Rs. 3.01 and Rs. 4.04 in channel I, II and III

respectively. Hence, in both of districts the highest marketing cost

was incurred by channel II which followed by other channel in

vegetable supply chain.

Marketing Margin

Marketing margins measures the gap between net price received by

the cultivators and the price paid by the consumer. In the point of

view of marketing efficiency this gap has to be reduced to the bearest

minimum.

In Nainital district the marketing margin as percentage of consumer

price was found to be less in channel III of VSC (1.92%) as compared

to channel I (1.96%) and in channel II (1.99%) because of high gross

marketing margin in channel I and III as compared to channel II of

the VSC.

While in U.S. Nagar districts marketing margin percentage in

consumer’s price was found to be less in channel II of VSC (1.97%)

as compared to channel I (1.99%) and in channel III (2.06%) because

of high gross marketing margin in channel III as compared to other

formats of the VSC.

Producers share in consumer’s rupee

The producers share in the consumer rupee in Nainital districts was

found out to be higher in channel III VSC (42.80%) compared to

channel II (39.85%) and channel I (31.85%).

On other hand in U.S. Nagar district it was found out to be higher in

channel III VSC (46.50%) compared to channel II (39.28%) and

channel I (31.37%).

Estelar

207

Thus, the above data indicating that the producers share ranged

between 31.37 to 46.50% including both of the districts and rest

went to the middleman. The latter’s share need to be reduces in such

a way that it provides better remunerating to the producers without

affecting the vegetable marketing business adversely.

Factors, affecting vegetable production and marketing

Through the direct observation and discussion with the farmers of

both of the district’s it has been found that the following factors are

mostly affecting vegetable production and marketing:

Household assets endowment

Household’s labours: the farmers of both of districts had

difficulties to assign a member to look after the vegetables

production because there are lot of work needs to be done, such

as looking after cattle, weeding, house work, and other farm

activities.

Household’s assets/equipments: households belonging and

assets such as television, radio, bicycle, motor and farm

equipment are important causes effecting to farmer’s decisions.

Few programs on television and radio showed market information

or agriculture techniques, according to both of districts farmers.

So, even thought farmers have the media equipment, they still

cannot get any information related to their vegetables production

improvement or marketing information.

Household’s understanding/education: labour’ skill and

education are other dynamic factors. It directly affected two

components of vegetable production managements that are inputs

Estelar

208

application and new techniques practicing. According to key

informants interviewed farmers who have good transportation but

do not access vegetables inputs market level. Lack of knowledge

and skill in using for vegetable.

Household’s vegetable expenses/capital: capital is also another

factor in asset endowment. Farmers mainly used their own capital

for investing vegetable production. Their scale of growing

vegetables also depended on their limited capital. Vegetable

growers rarely took the credit or borrowed money to invest in their

vegetable production.

GOs and NGOs involvement

Techniques provided to farmers significantly affect farmers’

perception. It is not true that all techniques were accepted. The

specific lessons would be the cause. Few of farmers in Nainital

and U.S. Nagar districts have changed some of their old

techniques for growing vegetables. If GOs and NGOs did not play

any intervention, farmers might still keep their outdated

techniques which provide very low productivity. The GOs or NGOs

advocate replacing the old techniques with modern one. Farmers

have started initial step to apply the new techniques maximum

change was seen in the use of improved seeds. Thus Gos and

NGOs are really helpful to farmers.

Social relationship

Friendship: Relatives, neighbours, or friends have been available

for building a good relationship with local vegetable producers in

trading process. There were three main internal reasons for

farmers to decide so. Broken relationship was the first reason.

Estelar

209

They were afraid that, their good relationship would get broken if

they decide to sell to another middleman or other places. They

believed that middleman would bring high price to their

vegetables’ product because of their good relationship. So, they

did not spend more time in accessing with other market actors.

Loosing good collector who can buy their product in the future

was another worry of farmers. They thought that it would only be

good for today or this season if they choose another market actor

and the well known middleman would not buy their product

anymore the next season or harvest, if no other buyer turns up in

next season. No matter if the benefit is not high, even the benefit

is less, farmers decided to sell their produce to only one trader,

who has very good relationship with them for getting sustainable

profits.

Trust: The farmers of both the districts do not help each other in

vegetable production. Each household grew and sold their

vegetable commodities in very individual way. This condition was

wonderful for me why they thought so. That is still the question

related to the trust in vegetable selling process within farmers.

Farmers did not trust each other to organize a vegetable group’s

community as come out from the household group discussion.

They had no believes that in group they can supply enough

quantity with required quality to hotels and restaurants in the

nearby city, If their group fails in supplying required vegetables to

those stakeholders, they have to compensate the losses as they

broke the contract. The worry about trust is the core problem

which blocks the cooperation of farmers for vegetables trading.

132

Estelar

210

This made farmers sell their vegetables product in individual

perception model.

Vegetable price fluctuation from different stakeholders

The price fluctuation made bad impact on farmers’ decision in

terms of production investment level. Many farmers from group

discussion replied that, they do not dare to expand their scale

because it needs higher investment. Neither government nor

private sectors guarantee the prices of each vegetable commodity.

And, vegetables’ prices always fall during harvesting season

without controlling from authorities. So, it is risky for vegetable

growers to enlarge their level of investment. However, price

fluctuation is the significant factor in trading, creating obstacle for

expanding investment level.

Natural conditions (weather and land status)

Natural condition is likely to affect farmers’ view. In group

discussion with farmers of U.S. Nagar and Nainital districts,

farmers agreed that weather and land status are the factors

affecting most of their decision in scale and seasonality and off-

seasonal vegetables. The farmers of U.S. Nagar claimed that

vegetables do not need too much water. If they take the risk to

grow in rainy season, their vegetables get damaged by excesses

moisture. So, they prefer to grow in dry seasons only because it is

the best choice to avoid the natural risk. In hilly area lack of

moisture problem and farmers preferred to grow vegetable in rainy

season only. The farmers also claimed that they cannot increase

their production scale due to lack of high area that would help to

avoid huge water and dryness respectively in U.S. Nagar and

Estelar

211

Nainital districts. Surely, it is important factor blocking farmer’s

interest in expansion of the land scale for investment in intensive

way.

Food security thought

Food security is another main factor for determination. The

farmers of both of study area told that they allocated a very small

piece of land to grow vegetables as compared with the rice and

wheat cultivated land. Farmers in both of districts allocated little

land for vegetable even they knew that it could provide high

income to their families. The thought of food security had brought

farmers to decide so. They trusted on rice and wheat production

rather than vegetables.

Compare vegetable production and marketing problems in

both of districts.

The steady growth in the production and marketing of vegetable

was not without problem. Problem stretched from input supply

late to marketing. Understanding problems and opportunities

with priorities was very important both research and

development initiatives. A number of frequent rapid field survey

supported with group discussion was undertaken and the

following problems were indentified in both of districts in order

of importance. For sake of clear understanding problems are

divided into production and marketing section in tabular

format ahead:

Estelar

212

Problem reported by producers/Farmers

% of respondents

reported

Nainital U.S. Nagar

PRODUCTION RELATED

Lack of information regarding

horticulture varieties

75.56

62.22

Lack knowledge of scientific

techniques of crop production 83.33 71.11

Non-availability of financial Credit 78.89 68.89

Non-availability of timely inputs

(Seed, fertiliser, pesticide etc) 76.67 55.56

Low level of crop production (off-

seasonal vegetable) 78.89 58.89

Non-availability of irrigation facility

from govt. Sources 83.33 42.22

Problem of insect, pests and diseases 84.44 74.44

Lack of synchronous maturity in

horticulture crops 72.22 68.89

Problem of theft of produce 52.22 36.67

Problem of wild animal and monkeys 83.33 72.22

MARKETING RELATED

Non-availability of transportation or

cheap transportation

78.89 16.67

Lack of information regarding

standardization and grading at

producers level

84.44 62.22

Poor infrastructure of market place 66.67 63.33

Unfair deduction by marketing

agents 61.11 51.11

Non-availability of storage facilities at

village/producer level 62.22 47.78

Non-availability of marketing related

information regarding price of

produce and their trends at

86.67 75.56

Estelar

213

producers level

Too much bargaining regarding price

of produce. 63.33 54.44

Problem reported at middleman’s level

Arrival of producers and consumer in

Haldwani market always uncertain 91.11 86.67

Arrival quantity of produce with

producers always uncertain 80.00 75.56

Lack of standardization and grading

of produce 74.44 67.78

Lack of storage facility at middle

man’s level 62.22 53.33

Lack of information regarding market

prices of produce at middle man’s

level

65.56 58.89

Lack of quality produce 77.78 81.11

Varied mixture in produce 84.44 72.22

Highly perishable nature of produce 87.78 91.11

Problem reported at consumer level

Problem of non-availability of quality

produce 66.67 62.22

Problem of varied mixture of produce 68.89 66.67

High level bargaining used 71.11 65.56

Very high fluctuation in price of

produce 62.22 64.44

Problem related to freshness of

produce 53.33 51.11

Problem of non-availability of

standardization and graded produce 57.78 52.22

Problem related to poor Unhygienic

storability of vegetable produce 81.11 84.44

Problem of cheating during weighing

of produce 64.44 68.89

Estelar

197

Policy Recommendations

On the basis of the results the study makes major recommendations over the constraints for enhancing

vegetable production and marketing in both of districts. The constraints and recommendations are

categorized into seven major aspects which are presented as follows:

Categories Constraints Recommendations

Technology/

production

development

Technology is lacking at

production level.

Cultivation practices are not

well known to the farmers,

focused on the management of

the crop.

Lack of improved seed with

large produce size, good quality

fertilizer etc.

Quality maintenance (poor

grading and packaging of

vegetables)

High wilting problem.

Government /DADO /Private /NGOs intervention regarding

organize training to the producer (cultivation techniques with

low cost technology approach) on vegetable production

technology focused on management, critical stages (flowering

stage, pod formation stage) to be note down on the crop

calendar for its better management and post harvest

management techniques should be focused.

Produce quality seed for growing seasonal/off-seasonal

vegetable crop by developing community based seed producers

(CBSP) groups in the village level.

Provide new high yielding, disease resistant and bold produce

varieties for better yield(Local NGOs, DADOs and Village Level

Agent)

Marketing Lack of knowledge /

information regarding market

price poor women are

underpaid than market price.

No price regulation

Roads are graveled

Pricing system should be done scientifically with the

involvement of representative of farmes’

Government /Village Level Agent /NGO/ DADOs intervention

regarding pricing system and broadcasting of market

information through community radio and local newspaper,

Pricing techniques should be developed on the basis of

214

Estelar

198

parameters involved during production period (Inputs,

processing, cleaning, grading and transportation).

Government should construct black topped road in rural hilly

area, so that the produce can be transported in an easy

manner and in a cost effective way.

Input supply Unavailability of quality seed

(quality assured from

government), fertilizers

(fertilizes without quality

testing), pesticides etc. good

quality variety (high yielding) is

lacking.

High price of agriculture inputs

(cost of seeds, fertilizers etc)

Processing in receiving loan is

lengthy. After registration with

application for loan, the loan

will be released lately i.e. one-

two months.

New varieties in place of old

variety (diseased, low yielding),

forced to grow this variety as

there are no option for this

variety.

Quality assured seeds (germination>70%, purity>85%) from

National seed company, Private seed company, CBSPs should

provide in reasonable price and in accessible manner.

Fertilizers should be provided through the government

channel not through open boarder movement. Open boarders

has forced farmers’ to use low quality fertilizers in a high rate.

This should be controlled through government sector. Or

should encourage private sector for fertilizer supply. Sudden

check on dealers for the quality and price of fertilizers should

be done.

Loan sanction process should be quick and in a simplified

manner.

Government should promote newly released and high yielding

varieties in the area, where they are not introduced, through

information required document (IRD) or publications.

Management

and

organization

No producers/ farmers or

retailers association for

advocacy.

Association of stakeholders (DADO, retailers, farmers), should

be made for advocacy. Facilitation to make association,

through a meeting. Initiatives can be taken by NGOs, or

215

Estelar

199

Farmers’ voice is not taken

seriously in the house.

Government.

Farmers’ association should be aware and brought into action

proactively for incorporating their voice. Awareness program

can be done through Farmers’ political wings.

Policy Lack of policy regarding price

fixation and crop insurance.

Lack of subsidy provision in

agriculture inputs.

Government should facilitate to established agriculture

insurance and provide subsidy provision to poor farmers (in

energy, fertilizer, seed etc.)

Price fixation can be discussed in a policy level, so that the

farmers’ are not in vain. Price fixation committee for vegetable

produce can be done in a district level headed by DADO.

Lobby with government department to fix the minimum

support price of the vegetable products and compensation for

crop failure due to natural calamities.

Infrastructure Inadequate storage facilities

during vegetable collection and

off-seasons.

Inadequate irrigation facilities.

Lack of grading and packaging

material in farmer’s level.

Poor quality rural road for

transportation.

DDC/VDC have the budget for infrastructure building. So they

can facilitate and support to develop storage, irrigation facility

those area where vegetable production are extremely high.

Can recommend a group/cooperative in DADO for irrigation

facilities.

A meeting with DADO to recommend the potential seed

producers in the district for receiving the fund from

Government for establishing POST HARVEST CENTER

through Engineering department of agriculture.

Crete pressure group to channelize the total government

budget to rural road construction.

Finance Deposit needed to get loan.

Long and tedious process of

loan sanction.

Loan should be provided in a simplify manner, for that the

process can be shortened. (Collateral and a application can

release the loan for the farmers)

216

Estelar

200

High interest rate for short

term loan.

Limited access of farmers to

bank for vegetable farming.

Government / Market regulatory authorities should provide

loan to the farmers in a low interest rate (Low interest for

agriculture). This would be an attraction for poor farmers and

provide confidence and encourage cultivating the vegetable

crops.

Community based own microfinance institute (MFIs) should be

established in block level for easily receiving the loan to the

farmers.

Develop trust between bank and entrepreneur through

coordination, linkage and preparing business plan to reduce

risk factor of bank.

217

Estelar

216

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abay, A, (2007). Vegetable marketing chain analysis in the case

of Fogera Wereda, in Amehara National regional state of

Ethiopia. An M.Sc. Thesis Presented to School of Graduate

Studies of Haramaya University

Anil Kumar and Arora., (1999). Post harvest management of

Vegetables in Uttar Pradesh hills. Ind. J. Agric. Mktg, 13 (2)

: 6-14.

Annual Report, (2011). Department of Agriculture and Cooperation

Ministry of Agriculture Government of India March, Indian

Economy 2011

Arora, V.P.S. (2005). Marketing and Export of horticultural

products of Uttaranchal, Indian Journal of Agriculture

Marketing (Conf. Spl.), 19 (2)

Babu, K. Dinesh and Datta, K.K. (2004). Prospects and

problems of vegetables Production in North-Eastern Region

in India. ICAR Research Complex for North-Eastern Hill

Region, Umiam, Meghalaya.

Bokelmann, W. and Lenz., (2000). Prerequisites for value adding

partnerships between trade and producers in the vegetable-

Growing sector. Acta Hort, 536 : 589-595

Burhan, A., A. Ghafoor and H. Badar. (2005), Forecasting and

Growth Trends of Production and Export of Kinnow from

Pakistan. Journal of Agriculture Social Sciences.

7

Estelar

217

Bülent Sezen., (2004). “Expected profit approach used in

discount pricing decisions for perishable products”. Int J.

of Retail and Distribution Management, 32 (4) : 223-229.

Census (2011). www.census2011.co.in

Chakraborty, kiran Sankar (2005). marketing cost and margins

of agricultural produce in Tripura agriculture general page

no 4-8 Regional Director, IGNOU centre, Agartala.

Directorate of Economics & Statistics, Uttarakhand (2011-

12). Published Uttarakhand at a glance 2011-12, 100/,

Neshivilla Road, Deharadun, Uttarakhand (248001)

Directorate of Horticulture and food processing (2010-11).

Uttarakhand Udhyan Bhawan, Chaubatiya, Ranikhet,

Almora. Uttarakhand, India

Dixie., (2005). Marketing extension guide horticulture

marketing. An introduction to horticultural marketing. FAO

of the United Nations, Rome

FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), (2005a). Addressing

marketing and processing constraints that inhibit agri-food

exports: A guide for policy analysts and planners.

Agricultural Service Bulletin 160. Rome. Italy. 109p

Gajanana, T. M., Sreenivasa D. Murthy and Sudha M., (2002).

Post-harvest loss assessment in vegetables: A case study of

tomato, In: Proceedings of International Conference on

Vegetables, November 11-14, 2002, Bangalore, pp. 437-

441.

Estelar

218

Gandhi Vasant, P and Namboodiri N. V. (2002), Fruits and

vegetable Marketing and Its Efficiency in India, study

report submitted to Indian Institute of Management, India

Ganesh Kumar, B., Pramanik, S.C. and Shakila Nawaz.,

(2004), Economics of production and marketing of

vegetables in Andaman and Nicobar islands. Ind. J. Agric.

Mktg, 18 (2) : 36-40.

Gilbert, C. L. (2007). Value Chain Analysis and Market Power in

Commodity Processing with Application to the Cocoa and

Coffee Sectors. FAO Commodities and Trade Proceedings.

2007; (2): 267-297.

Haji Jema, (2008). Doctoral Thesis Swedish University of

Agricultural Sciences Uppsala (2008): Economic Efficiency

and Marketing performance of Vegetable Production in the

Eastern and Central Parts of Ethiopia. Faculty of Natural

Resources and Agricultural Sciences Department of

Economics Uppsala. Pp 1-64

Horticulture Department (2011). Government of India, 2011.

Hau, A. M., Matthias V. O., (2002). “Market Efficiency of Fruits

and vegetables in Northern Thailand”. Agric. Econ. and

Social Sci. in the Tropics and Subtropics, Uni. of

Hohenheim.

Indian Horticulture (2008). May-June, 2008 Page No.5

Estelar

219

Jairath, M. S. and Agarwal, N. L. (2001) Technological Changes

in Agriculture Marketing, The Bihar Journal of Agriculture

Marketing, Vol. IX, No. 2, April-June 2001.

Jema (2008). indicated further, marketing margins widen as

supply increase, supporting the argument that large

volume of shipment of perishable commodity reduces farm

prices.

Jema, H, (2008). Economic efficiency and marketing

performance of vegetable production in the eastern and

central parts of Ethiopia. Ph.D. Dissertation. Uppsala.

Loanna Reziti., (2003). “An investigation into the relationship

between producer, wholesale and retail prices of Greek

agricultural products”, A study by Center of Planning and

Econ. Research (KEPE).

Lunndy, M., M.V. Gottret, W. Cifuentes, C. F. Ostertag,

R.Best, D. Peters and S.Ferris, (2004). Increasing the

competitiveness of market chains for small holder

producers. Manual 3: Territorial approach to rural agro-

enterprise development. International Centre for Tropical

Agriculture. Colombia.117p

Lumpkin, T.A., K. Weinberger and S. Moore, (2005). Increasing

income through fruits and vegetable production:

Mark Gehlhar., (2006), "Brazil Retail Industry Forecast 2006-

2010". Int. Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer

Research, 11 (14) 105-123.

Estelar

220

Mc Laughlin, E. W., (2004). The dynamics of fresh fruit and

vegetable pricing in the supermarket channel. Preventive

Medicine, 39 : 581-587. Opportunities and challenges,

Marrakech, Morocco. 10p

Million Tadesse and Belay Kassa, (2004). Ethiopian

Agricultural Research Organization, Addis Ababa,

Ethiopia.21-30p.

Mohammed Jaffera, A and Namasivayam, N., (2005),

“Marketing cost of banana in Theni district, Tamil Nadu”.

Ind. J. Agric. Mktg. 41 (2) : 32-34.

Moti Jaleta, (2007). Econometric analysis of horticultural

production and marketing in Central and Eastern Ethiopia.

PhD Dissertation. Wageningen University. The Netherlands.

101p

Narayana Reddy, P., (2004). Efficiency benefits pass on to

consumers: New development in retail market environment

in India, Ind. J. Mktg, 34 : 23-25.

Nath, K. M., (2004). Promoting small scale fruits and vegetables

processing industries through Cluster Development Programmes.

Ind. Food Packers. 58 (3) : 78-81

Pandey, N.K., Arun Pandit., Nalini R. Kumar and Rana, R. K.,

(2003). Price spread analysis of potato marketing at

Shimla. J. Ind. Potato Assoc. 30 (1-2): 99-200.

Pankaj Ghemavat and Ken A. Mark., (2000). Strategies of

sourcing and pricing. American J. Agric. Econ. 34 (4) : 125-

137.

Estelar

221

Piadozo Ma. Eden. S., Fujishima, Hiroji and Fujimoto Akimi,

(2007). Problems of the marketing system for vegetable in

Banguet and Laguna. (Philippines): a case study of

vegetable grown.2007 Pp (101-113).

Pokhrel, D. M., (2005). Citrus marketing system in the

mountains of Nepal: a study based on market structure,

conduct and performance analyses. PhD dissertation

submitted to School of Environment, Resources and

Development, Asian institute of Technology, Thailand.

Poot, E. H., Dekker, P.A.R., Jonkman, B. and Splinter, G.M.,

(2000). Chain information to support Dutch Supply Chain

effectiveness. Acta Hort., 536 : 645-650.

Prasad, J. (2001). vegetables production and marketing in Bihar,

The Bihar journal marketing Vol. IX, No.3 July-Sep.

Ramakumar, R., (2001). Costs and margins in coconut

marketing: some evidence from Kerala. Indian J. Agric

Economics. 56 (4):668-680

Sen, C. and Maurya, R. P., (1998). Marketing of vegetables in

Sewapuri Block. Agric. Mktg. 41 (2) : 29-31.

Shin, K.U. (2001). Recent development in vegetable and fruits

marketing, marketing of vegetables and fruits in Asia and

the Pacific. Report of APO seminar, PP 23-34, Asian

Productivity Organization, Tokyo.

Sindhu, D.S. (1997). Measures to enhance the efficiency of

agricultural marketing system of agricultural products. PP

104-132, Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo.

Estelar

222

Singh, Manoj (2010). Value chain analysis of off season

vegetable in Uttarakhnad. A report submitted to GTZ, RED

Programm, Uttarakhand.

Singh, S. and Chauhan, S. K. (2004). Marketing of Vegetables in

Himachal Pradesh, Journal of Agriculture Marketing, Oct-

Dec 2004, Pp 5-10

Singh, K. Manoj (2004), Economics of Production and Marketing

of Vegetables in Madhya Pradesh, India, Indian Institute of

Forest Management, Nehru Nagar, Bhopal, M.P. 462003

Somayajulu G. and Venkataramana. V., (2002). “Issues and

challenges for organized retailing in India”. Ind. J. Mktg. 31

(3) : 16-21.

Somayajulu. G. and Venkataramana.V., (2002). “Issues and

challenges for organized retailing in India”. Ind. J. Mktg. 31

(3) : 16-21.

Sreenivas Murthy, D., Gajanana, T.M., Sudha, M. and

Dakshinamoorthy, V., (2007). Marketing Losses and their

impact on marketing margins : A case study of banana in

Karnataka. Agric. Econ. Res. Rev., 20 (1) : 49-60.

Srivastava.S, K. and Arora.V.P.S. , (1996). Inter and intra-day

var iat ions in vegetable prices. Agr icul tural Market ing.

39(1) : 6-7.

Subrahmanyam, K.V. and T.M. Gajanana. (2000). Cooperative

Marketing of Fruits and Vegetables in India. New Delhi:

Concept Publishing Company.

Estelar

223

Suryavanshi, B. P., Nagure, D. V., Yadav, M. U., Solanke, A. S.

and Phuke, K. D. (2006). An Economic Analysis of Tomato

Marketing in Latur District of Marathwada. Region Journal

of Soils and Crops. 16(1): 135-138.

The Hindu, (2007). Survey of Indian Agriculture.

Umar Ujala (2012), Daily News Paper Umar Ujala (Dehradun

Edition) 9 April 2012 (Horticulture Department Uttarakhand)

Uttarakhand at a Glance (2012), Directorate of Economics &

Statistics, Uttarakhand, 2011-12

Vijay Durga Prasad, V., (2007). “The Spread of organized

retailing in India- with special reference to Vijayawada

city”. Ind J. Mktg. 47 (5) : 3-9.

Venkateshwarlu, H. and Ranjani.C.V., (2007). “Small vs Mall”,

Ind. J. Mktg, 47 (10) : 29-34.

Estelar

i

APPENDIX – I No :

Date : FARMER

1. Name of the respondent : 2. Village : 3. Taluk : 4. Name the vegetables that are grown : 5. To whom you sell vegetables : 6. Disposal of the produce to different agencies

Sl. No.

Vegetables Frequency / time of

sale

Qty sold (qtls)

Place of

sale

Agency income

sold

Price received (per qtl)

Total amount

Commission

Basic Value

7. Are you have an agreement to sell to particular agency Yes/No. If yes

Sl. No.

Vegetables Frequency of delivery

Qty to be delivered at each

time

Price at which it is delivered

Total value

Total qty delivered in a week

Total amount

8 A. Mode of packing and its costs

Sl. No.

Mode of packing Qty packed Cost incurred Total cost (per qtl)

1. Gunny bag a. Labour

2. Wooden boxes b. Material

3. Other specify

a.

b.

Estelar

ii

B. Mode of transportation and its cost

Mode of transport

Qty transported

Distance covered

Hired / owned

transport

Transportation cost per qtl.

Total transport

cost

Cost incurred

Loading charges

Total loading charges

Unloading charges

Total unloading charges

C. Any other cost incurred in selling the produce

Item of cost Amount (per bag) Total amount Remarks

Labour charges for

cleaning at farm level

Loading and unloading

Weigh man charges

Commission charges

Other specify

i.

ii.

iii.

9. Reason for the sale of produce at a particular agency i.e., where they sell.

a. Provide credit facility

b. Proximity

c. Cut in margins – may be through

i. Reduction in number of intermediaries

ii. Less charges for the service

iii. Less physical loss

d. Service rendered by them

e. Provision for technical guidance

f. Getting storage and transport facility by them

g. Absence of middlemen

h. Spot payment

i. Remunerative price

j. Correct weight

k. Less charges

l. Others specify

i. Contract arrangement with them for quantity

ii. Contract arrangement with them for quality

iii. Contract arrangement with them for price

10. Problems faced by the farmers

a. Far off location of selling unit

Estelar

iii

b. Transportation facility (i) Inadequate

(ii) Costly

c. Lack of market information

d. Malpractices of buyers

e. Lack of grading facility

f. Lack of packing facility

g. Lack of storage facility

h. Lack of cold shelf facility

i. Lack of financial assistance from any company

j. Delay in payment and sale proceeds

k. Other specify

i. Lack of contracting agencies

ii. Dishonouring of contract

iii.

11. Expectations of the farmer

a. Nearness of selling unit/place

b. Good transportation facility

c. Market information at right time

d. No malpractices should be followed at selling unit

e. Good grading

f. Good storage facility

g. Good packing facility s

h. Cold shelf facilities during storage of produce

i. Credit facilities by companies

j. Immediate payment after the sale of produce

k. Presence of contract sales

l. Other specify – i. ii. iii.

Estelar

iv

Appendix – II

INTERMEDIARIES

1. Name of Respondent : 2. Age : 3. Education : 4. Type of ownership : Individual/partnership / any other 5. Investment made in business :

a. Owned funds b. Borrowed funds c. Interest rate on borrowed funds

6. Vegetables handled : a. b. c. d.

7. From how long you are in the business : 8. Do you make outright purchases in the field and transport on your own ? 9. What facilities do you provide to the producer who brings his produce for sale

Sl. No.

Particulars Yes/ No

Qty Price Total value

I. Advisory roles

a. The time of planting

b. Varieties to be planted

II Extending physical facilities

a. Supplying the pesticides

b. Supplying the seeds

c. Supplying the fertilizers

d Supplying the credit

e. Procuring at the farmer door steps

f. Provides the transport facility

g. Are they are grading at farmer level or by trader

h. Quantity procured : is any fixed quantity, if yes,

quantity for procurement / any amount

i. Time of delivery of produce and place of

delivery of produce by the clients

II. Physical functions

a. Assembling activities/ cleaning, grading activities

b. Packing activities

c. Storage activities

III. Credit facilities

IV. Retailing activities

V. Other specify a. b. c. d.

Estelar

v

10. Do you grade the vegetables ? Yes / No

If yes, what is the basis for it a. Size

b. Colour

c. Freshness

11. Physical loss in different activity i. Assembling and transportation

Sl. No.

Name of the

vegetables

% of waste

Qty Value % of good grade

Qty Value

% of qty

FAQ

Value Remaining %

Qty Value

ii. Cleaning and grading

Sl. No.

Name of the

vegetables

% of waste

Qty Value % of good grade

Qty Value

% of qty

FAQ

Value Remaining %

Qty Value

iii. Sales and distribution

Sl. No.

Name of the

vegetables

% of waste

Qty Value % of good grade

Qty Value

% of qty

FAQ

Value Remaining %

Qty Value

Estelar

vi

12. Mode of packing and its cost

Sl. No.

Mode of packing Qty packed

Cost incurred

Total cost (per qtl)

a. Gunny bag

b. Wooden box

c. Other specify

i. ii.

B. Mode of transportation and its cost

13. Labour employed in marketing

Sl. No.

Employees Number Nature of work

Salary Any other cost

Total cost

14. Weigh man charges

15. Commission charges

16. Income tax

17. Licence fee

18. Shop rent (including electricity and other charges

19. Market fee

20. Establishment charges

21. Maintenance charges

22. Taxes paid

23. Any other cost (specify)

a.

b.

c.

d.

Mode of transportation

Qty transported

Distance covered

Hired / owned

Cost incurred Transportation cost per

qtl

Total transportation

cost Loading charges

Total loading charges

Unloading charges

Total unloading charges

Estelar

vii

24. Vegetable transaction per day A. Purchase / Procurement

Sl. No.

Vegetable Qty purchased

From whom

purchased

Price at which it

was purchased

Time or frequency

of purchased

Total quantity

Total value

B. Sales

Sl. No.

Vegetable Qty sold

To whom

produce was sold

Price at

which it was sold

Total value of

the product

sold

Method of sale

Commission charged

Basis Total amount

25. Physical loss in different activity i. Assembling and transportation

Sl. No.

Name of the

vegetables

% of waste

Qty Value % of good grade

Qty Value

% of qty

FAQ

Value Remaining %

Qty Value

ii. Cleaning and grading

Sl. No.

Name of the

vegetables

% of waste

Qty Value % of good grade

Qty Value

% of qty

FAQ

Value Remaining %

Qty Value

Estelar

viii

iii. Sales and distribution

Sl. No.

Name of the

vegetables

% of waste

Qty Value % of good grade

Qty Value

% of qty

FAQ

Value Remaining %

Qty Value

26. Problems faced by intermediaries

A. Commission agent

1. Lack of transportation facility

2. Absence of grading facility

3. Low sale absorption capacity of market

4. Too much price fluctuation

5. Lack of storage facilities

6. Lack of knowledge about neighbouring market

7. High tax payment

8. High licence and other market fee

9. Other specify

i.

ii.

B. Wholesaler

1. Wholesale market is too conjusted

2. High rent charges

3. Lack of transportation facility

4. Absence of grading facility

5. Low sale absorption capacity of market

6. Lack of storage facilities

7. High tax payment

8. Too much price fluctuation

9. Other specify

i.

ii.

Estelar

ix

Appendix III

RETAILERS

1. Name :

2. Place :

3. Year of establishment :

4. Owned /rented/leased :

5. Ownership of the business : Sole proprietor / Partnership

6. If owned average rent for the same in : Rs.

that area

7. If leased : Rs. _______ Per _______Years

8. Initial investment incurred to set up the shop : Rs. ___________

9. Vegetables usually handled :

10. Do you have cold shelf facility ? : Yes / No.

a. Rent :

b. Electricity :

c. Maintenance :

d. Others :

11. What are the taxes you pay to the Govt : Rs.

How much

12. Employment pattern

Number Salary / month (Rs.)

Family Male

Female

Hired Male

Female

13. Do you grade vegetables : Yes / No

If yes, basis of grading :

14. Do you incur any transportation cost ? : Yes / No

If yes, total Cost. Rs. _________ / Unit

15. Do you incur any packing cost ? : Yes / No.

If yes Total cost Rs. __________/Unit

16. Cost of transaction for the retailers

a. Vegetable purchase

Sl. No.

Name of vegetables

Qty purchased

Price unit

Total value

Frequency of

purchased

From whom

purchased

Qty purchased

Values per

month

Estelar

x

b. Vegetable sold:

Sl. No.

Name of vegetable

Qty sold

Price / unit

Total value

Qty unsold

Wastage To whom sold

Remarks

Qty Value

Qty per month

Value per

month

17. Total quantity of selected commodities handled daily and their value

Sl. No.

Particulars Commodity Qty Price Value

1. Total quantity procured daily i. ii. iii. iv.

2. Total quantity sold daily i. ii. iii. iv.

3. Total cost per day including cost of procurement

4. Total cost per day including sale of procurement

18. Planning for procurement of vegetables (or) How do you decide about the quantity of stocks to be purchased

Sl. No.

Particulars

Tomato Pea Cabbage Potato

Qty Value Qty Value Qty Value Qty Value

I. Buying activities

Buy the same quantity

every time

Buy based on previous

days/weeks/months sale

Buy based on coming

days / weeks / months

expected demand

II.

Agency from whom he

buys :

i. Farmers

ii. Intermediaries

(Wholesaler/commission agent)

III. Inventory maintained

i. Every day

ii. Every week

Estelar

xi

19. Do you provide any facilities to the producer who brings his produce for sale

Sl. No.

Particulars Yes/No Qty Price Total value

I. Advisory roles

a. The time of planting

b. Varieties to be planted

II. Extending the physical facilities

a. Supplying the seeds

b. Supplying the pesticides

c. Supplying the fertilizers

d. Procuring at the farmer door steps / provides the transport facility

e. Are they are grading at farmer level or by trader

f. Quantity procured is any fixed quantity procurement/ any amount

g. Time of delivery of produce and place of delivery of produce

II. Physical functions

a. Assembling activities / cleaning, grading activities

b. Packing activities

c. Storage activities

III. Credit facilities

IV. Retailing activities

V. Other specify i. ii. iii.

20. Problems faced by the retailer

a. Inadequate physical facilities b. Absence of grading facilities

c. Absence of storage facility

d. Lack of transportation facility

e. Price fluctuation (wide and low)

f. Non-availability of suitable weighing facilities

g. Failing in assessment of demand

h. Procurement problems

i. More physical loss of produce / storage loss

j. Timely supply

k. Other specify

i.

ii.

iii.

21. Expectation of the retailer

a. Good physical facilities

b. Less charges

c. Less price fluctuation

d. Good grading, storage and packing facility

e. Good transportation facility

f. Meeting he customer requirement / Rendering all customer service

g. Right planning for procurement

h. Less handling loss of produce

i. Right market information

j. Timely availability of produce

k. Timely supply to consumer

l. Assessing the demand at right time

Estelar

xii

Appendix IV

CONSUMERS

1. Name :

2. Age : ________ Yrs _________

3. Occupation : Employee / Employer

4. Sex : Male / Female

5. Education : Primary / School / High school / PUC / Graduate / PG

6. Family size : Male Female

Adults

Children

7. No. of people employed :

8. Family income per month (Rs.) : <10,000 / 10-15000 / 15-20000 / 20-25000/

25-30000 / 30-40000 / >40000

9. Monthly expenditure on vegetables (Rs.) :

10. From where you are buying the vegetables

Sl.

No.

Particulars

Tomato Pea Cabbage Potato

Qty Value Qty Value Qty Value Qty Value

Retail outlets

Local

/producers

vender

Any other

11. Frequency of purchase : Daily / Once a week / Twice a week

12. Amount spent on vegetables (Rs.) in each : Vegetables Price

purchase for selected commodities

13. Mode of payment :

14. Reason for purchasing vegetable at a :

particular outlet

a. Timely availability :

b. Proximity :

c. Quality of produce :

d. Timing :

e. Common phobia to enter multinational :

stores

f. Visual merchandising and store design :

g. Promoted by promotional tools and :

Estelar

xiii

credit sales

h. Advertisement :

i. Wide range of products are available :

j. Price :

Reasonable

High

Discount

k. Good services rendered by the outlets :

l. Vegetables which are very good :

m. Others specify

i. Better suited time

ii.

iii.

15. Problems faced by the consumers :

a. No timely availability of produce

b. Absence of wide range of products

c. Very high prices

d. Quality of product is unsatisfactory

e. Unsatisfactory responses and services rendered at a retail outlet

f. No proper promotional tools and sales on credit

g. Inconvenience / not nearness of the retail outlets

h. Unhygienic condition

i. No proper store design and visual merchandising

j. No proper packing

k. No facility for feed back

l. Timings of the retail outlet

m. Other specify

i.

ii.

iii.

16. Expectation of consumers

1. Timely availability of produce

2. Less price

3. Good quality of produce

4. Convenience/nearness of retail outlets

5. Maintain hygienic condition

6. Good service and response by retailers

7. Availability of wide range of products

8. Good sore design visual merchandising

9. Good packing facility

10. More credit sales

11. Timings of retail outlets should be extended

Estelar

xiv

12. Other specify

i.

ii.

iii.

Estelar