Chief EditorHarjinder Singh
Print ISSN 0971-4456
Online ISSN 0976-0563
NAAS Rating 5.75
Full Research Article
Economics of Milk Production and Resource Use Efficiency of Milk Across Different Herd Size Categories in Chittoor District of Andhra Pradesh
First Online 23-07-2022|
Methods: Chittoor district of Andhra Pradesh was purposively selected for the present investigation. The primary data was collected from 80 respondents of which 40 each from two villages in the year 2021. The economics of milk production and the resource use efficiency of milk were computed based on collected data.
Result: The per-day gross cost for maintaining local cow, crossbred cow and buffalo was found to be ₹ 161.09, ₹ 246.16 and ₹ 196.07, respectively. The overall cost per litre of milk was found to be slightly high in the case of buffalo (₹ 31.45), followed by the local cow (₹ 31.33) and crossbred cow (₹ 19.69), respectively. The net returns per litre of milk were found to be highest in the case of the crossbred cow (₹ 7.45), followed by buffalo (₹ 3.66) and local cow (₹ 0.12). It was observed that the net return per litre of milk for local cows was very less due to high feed cost, labour cost and low productivity of milk. Green fodder, dry fodder and concentrate were observed underutilized whereas labour was found to be over-utilized.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sampling plan and data collection
Andhra Pradesh having 5th rank in total milk production in India (Anonymous, 2021) was selected purposively based on the highest per capita availability of milk among the Southern Indian States. From Andhra Pradesh, the Chittoor district was purposively selected based on the highest livestock bovine population. From the Chittoor district, one mandal Bangarupalem was selected randomly from which two villages Ragimanipenta and Mothagunta were selected randomly based on the multistage sampling technique. 40 respondents from each village comprising a total of 80 respondents were selected randomly. Further, these respondents were categorized into Small (1-3 milch animals), Medium (4-6 milch animals) and Large (7 and above milch animals) based on the number of milch animals per household by using the Cumulative Square Root Frequency Method.
Economics of milk production
Interest on fixed capital as well as depreciation on animals, cattle sheds and machinery is included in fixed cost. Depreciation was calculated by using the Capital Recovery Cost (CRC) method. The following formula was used for the CRC method:
R= The capital recovery cost (₹/annum).
Z= Initial/current value of the capital asset (₹).
r= Interest rate (%)
n= Useful life of assets (years).
Total CRC was calculated with this formula and further these fixed costs were apportioned to individual dairy animals based on the SAU (Standard Animal Units) as suggested by Sirohi et al., (2015) shown in Table 1. While calculating CRC for cattle, the interest rate ‘n’ was taken as 8 years for crossbred cows10 years for both local cows and buffalo. Some of the fixed costs were jointly used for animals of all age groups.
Variable cost consists of feed and fodder cost, labour cost and miscellaneous cost etc., feed and fodder costs were calculated on the prevailing market price in the study region. Labour cost was computed according to the work and wages paid to them. Family labour cost was estimated according to the wage rate prevailing in the study region.
Miscellaneous costs like veterinary expenses, costs of artificial insemination, medicines, vaccination and recurring expenses like the cost of repair, water charge, buckets, ropes, electricity charges etc., were calculated per milch animal per day as well as per SAU.
Further, gross cost, net cost, gross returns, net returns, cost per litre of milk and profits per litre of milk were worked out.
The expenditure incurred on green fodder, dry fodder, concentrate, labour and miscellaneous inputs per household or per farm were regressed on income from selling of milk by using the log-log functional form and also marginal value products of these inputs were calculated for resource use efficiency by using the formula:
bi= Regression coefficient of ith input.
Yi and Xi= Geometric means of Y and ith input.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A perusal of Table 2 reveals that the quantity of green fodder and concentrate was fed more for crossbred cows (17.55 kg), followed by buffalo (15.25 kg) and local cow (12.73 kg) across all herd size categories due to the high productivity of milk as compared to buffalo and local cow. The quantity of dry fodder was fed more to buffalo (6.72 kg), followed by the local cow (5.48 kg) and crossbred cow (5.48 kg).
Labour cost consists of family labour cost and hired labour cost is shown in Table 3. The overall costs of own labour and hired labour for local cow, crossbred cow and buffalo were ₹ 25.17 and ₹ 3.23, ₹ 36.15 and ₹ 5.96, ₹ 33.28 and ₹ 3.28, respectively. The total labour cost was highest for crossbred cows (₹ 42.11), followed by buffalo (₹ 36.56) and local cows (₹ 28.40), respectively. The overall percentage of family labour cost was higher than that of the hired labour cost which varies from 85.86 per cent for crossbred cows, 88.64 per cent for local cows and 91.02 per cent for buffalo, respectively. The costs of family labour decreased with the increase in the herd size category whereas the cost of hired labour increased with the increase in the herd size category. Similar findings were found in the earlier study by Kumari et al., (2020).
Maintenance cost and returns from milch cattle across different herd size categories
Table 4 revealed that the overall gross cost of rearing milch cattle was recorded highest at ₹ 255.03 in the case of cross-bred cow, followed by buffalo (₹ 196.07) and ₹ 161.09 (local cow). Out of gross cost, the share of total variable cost in the case of buffalo was observed to be 88.64% (₹ 173.79/animal/day), followed by cross-bred cow 87.79% (₹ 216.10/animal/day) and local cow being 87.74% (₹ 141.34/animal/day) separately. The major expenses incurred on feed and fodder costs could be calculated to be comparatively high in crossbred cows (₹ 162.27), followed by ₹ 130.59 in the case of buffalo and ₹ 109.66 for local cows, separately. Regarding the analysis of income, it was found that the overall income was estimated to be comparatively large ₹ 332.24 per animal/day for a crossbred cow followed by buffalo ₹ 213.92 per animal/day and ₹ 159.45/animal/day for the local cow. Finally, the overall returns per litre were obtained very high (₹ 7.54) for crossbred cow per animal/day, while it was found ₹ 3.66/animal/day in case of buffalo and lowest in case of local cow ₹ 0.12/animal/day.
Further cost and returns per animal per day from milch cattle across different herd size categories were analysed and found that the average daily gross cost of rearing a milch local cow was found to be higher for the large herd size category (₹ 176.83), followed by the medium herd size category (₹ 165.47) and small herd size category (₹ 149.75), respectively. The major share of the total variable cost was occupied by the feed and fodder cost accounted for 77.58 per cent, followed by labour cost at 20.09 per cent and vet. and misc. cost at 2.33 per cent, respectively.
From the in-depth analysis of herd size categories, it was observed that the profit per litre of milk was found to be negative for the small herd size category (₹ 1.41) due to the high cost of feed and fodder and lower milk yield in case of the local cow, whereas profit per litre was observed to be positive in the case of other herd size categories because of the high productivity of milk.
The cost of milk per litre of the crossbred cow was observed to be high in the case of the small herd size category (₹ 19.92), followed by the medium herd size category (₹ 19.60) and least in the case of the large herd size category (₹ 19.39), respectively. The profit per litre of milk was highest in the case of the large herd size category (₹ 8.36), followed by the medium herd size category (₹ 7.54) and small herd size category (₹ 6.85), respectively.
In the case of buffalo, the cost per litre of milk was observed to be high in the case of the small herd size category (₹ 31.87), followed by the medium herd size category (₹ 31.14) and least in the case of the large herd size category (₹ 31.10). The profit per litre of milk of buffalo was observed highest in the case of the large herd size category (₹ 4.52), followed by the medium herd size category (₹ 3.93) and small herd size category (₹ 2.96). Similar findings were reported by Kumari et al., (2020), Kumari and Malhotra (2018), Lakshmipriya and Raju (2019) and Satyanarayana et al., (2022).
Milk production function
Many functional forms were tried but the log-log functional form was observed to be the best fit (Table 5). In the case of the small herd size category, the expenditure incurred on green fodder, dry fodder and concentrate was found to be positive and significant and explained 71.00 per cent of the total variation. Therefore, a one per cent increase in expenditure on green fodder, dry fodder and concentrate per farm per day leads to a 0.470 per cent, 0.538 per cent and 0.617 per cent increase in income from milk per farm per day, respectively. In the case of the medium herd size category, the expenditure on green fodder, concentrate and labour was observed to be positive and significant and explained 75.00 per cent of the total variation. In the case of the large herd size category, the expenditure on green fodder (0.743) and labour (1.027) was found to be positive and significant leading to an increased income per household per day. On average, for the overall category, the income from the sale of milk was increased by 0.591 per cent, 0.143 per cent, 0.305 per cent and 0.179 per cent with a one per cent increase in expenditure on green fodder, dry fodder, concentrate and labour, respectively. Similar findings were reported by Kumari et al., (2020) and Rangnath et al., (2015). In nutshell, results reveal that the coefficient on green fodder was found to be positive and significant in all herds size categories. Similar findings were reported by Choodambigai (2011).
Resource use efficiency
The ratio of MVP to the factor prices provides a measure of resource use efficiency. This ratio should be compared with unity to determine in which direction a resource will be used. A perusal of Table 6 implies that in the case of the small herd size category, MVPs of green fodder (1.487), dry fodder (9.062) and concentrate (2.444) were significantly positive and greater than unity which implies that these are underutilized and a further increase in these inputs can increase the income from milk production (Choodambigai, 2011). In the case of the medium herd size category, MVPs of green fodder (2.152) and concentrate (2.876) were significantly greater than unity, indicating their underutilization whereas MVP of labour (0.875) was observed to be less than unity signifying its overutilization. This means an increase in the use of green fodder and concentrate and a decrease in the use of labour can increase the income from milk production. In the case of the large herd size category, MVPs of green fodder (2.498) and labour (3.655) were found to be significantly greater than unity indicating their underutilization which concluded that an increase in the use of these resources can increase the returns from milk production whereas that of concentrate (1.053) was not significant but equal to unity indicating that it was optimally used. Further, for the overall category, the MVPs of green fodder (1.968), dry fodder (2.439) and concentrate (1.277) were significantly greater than unity signifying their underutilization whereas that of labour (0.673) was significantly less than unity indicating its overutilization. (Tanwar et al., 2015, Meena et al., 2019). This implies that a further increase in the use of green fodder, dry fodder and concentrate and a decrease in the use of labour can increase the returns from milk production.
Conflict of interest
- Analogous. (2021). National Dairy Development Board (NDDB), (2021). Annual report 2020-21, http://www.nddb. coop/ sites/default/files/pdfs/NDDB_AR_2020-21_Eng.pdf.
- Anonymous, (2019). 20th Livestock Census Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India, New Delhi. Page. No. 16.
- Anonymous, (2021). United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Services.Global Agricultural Information Network. Report Number: IN2021-0122 Page No. 5.
- Choodambigai Ramalinga, S. (2011). Economic profile of milk production in Coimbatore. International Journal of Current Research. 3(7): 260-263.
- Kumari, B. and Malhotra, R. (2018). Milk production function and resource use efficiency of women dairy co-operatives in Begusarai district of Bihar. Indian Journal of Dairy Science. 71(1): 98-101.
- Kumari, B., Chandel, B.S. and Lal, P. (2020). Economics of milk production in eastern region of India. Indian Journal of Dairy Science. 73(5): 449-456.
- Lakshmipriya, P. and Raju, R. (2019). Economics of milk production in Andhra Pradesh. Journal of Green Farming. 10(3): 376-381.
- Meena, G.L., Sharma, L., Burark, S.S. and Singh, H. (2019). Milk production function and resource use efficiency in Rajasthan. Journal of Animal Research. 9(4): 1-6.
- Rangnath, Sachin, P. Agarwal S.B. and Das, Goutam (2015). Study on resource use efficiency in milk production in the Scarcity Zone of Western Maharashtra, India. Indian J. Anim. Res. 49(4): 523-526.
- Satyanarayana Rao, B.V.V., Anitha, A., Jagadeeswara Rao, S. and Subrahmanyeswari, B. (2022). Cost and Returns of Milk Production from Dairy Animals in East Godavari District of Andhra Pradesh. Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics and Sociology. 40(4): 39-46.
- Sirohi, S., Bardhan, D. and Chand, P. (2015). Costs and Returns in Milk Production: Developing Standardized Methodology and Estimates for Various Production Systems. Project Report submitted to Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
- Tanwar, P.S., Kumar, Y. and Sankhala, G. (2015). Production function and resource use efficiency of milk in different categories of member and non-member families of dairy cooperatives in Jaipur (Rajasthan). Indian Journal of Dairy Science. 68(5): 514-518.
The Asian Journal of Dairy and Food Research (AJDFR) follows a disclaimer policy that outlines the responsibilities of the journal, authors, reviewers, and readers. The policy is designed to ensure that all published content is accurate and meets ethical standards, and to protect the journal from any legal liability.
The AJDFR does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of the content published in the journal. The opinions expressed in published articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the journal or its editorial board. The journal does not accept any responsibility for any errors or omissions in the content published in the journal.
Authors are responsible for ensuring that their work is original, accurate, and meets ethical standards. They are also responsible for obtaining permission to use copyrighted material and for providing appropriate attribution.
Reviewers are responsible for ensuring that the content of articles is accurate, original, and meets ethical standards. They are also responsible for maintaining confidentiality and disclosing any conflicts of interest.
Readers are responsible for evaluating the content of articles and for making their own judgments about the accuracy and reliability of the information presented. They are also responsible for complying with copyright laws and ethical standards when using the content of articles.
AJDFR is committed to ensuring that all published content meets ethical standards and that all parties involved in the publishing process understand their responsibilities. The disclaimer policy is designed to protect the journal from any legal liability and to ensure that readers can rely on the accuracy and reliability of the content published in the journal.
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.