Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive

Full Research Article

Food Instability Dynamics in Indian Fruits and Vegetables

G
Ganeshkumar D. Rede1,*
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5559-3259
P
Pratyush Kumari Rath2
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4621-5894
B
Bharati H. Rede3
S
Sandeep Dongre1
https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1014-1177
V
Vaijanteemala H. Kendre1
https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8829-1444
A
Abhijit Das4
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7626-9319
D
Dipankar Saikia5
https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1862-646X
1Symbiosis Institute of Business Management Nagpur, Symbiosis International (Deemed University), Pune, Nagpur-440 008, Maharashtra, India.
2Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani-431 402, Maharashtra, India.
3Dr. Sharadchandra Pawar College of Agriculture, Baramati-413 102, Maharashtra, India.
4Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, School of Agriculture, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara-144 411, Punjab, India.
5Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Assam down town University, Guwahati-781 026, Assam, India.

ABSTRACT

Background: India is one of the world’s largest producers of fruits and vegetables, yet fluctuations in area, production and productivity continue to create uncertainty in farm incomes, market supply and food security. Understanding the level and pattern of instability across states is therefore essential for balanced horticultural development.

Methods: The study assesses state-wise instability in the production of fruits and vegetables in India over the period 2001-2021, covering 27 central states. Time-series data on area, production and productivity were compiled from official sources. The Cuddy-Della Valle Index (CDVI) was used to measure instability after adjusting for time trends and instability levels were classified as low, moderate and high to facilitate meaningful comparison across states and periods.

Result: Results indicate that at the national level, both fruits and vegetables remained within the low instability level across all three dimensions, though fruits showed relatively higher instability in area and productivity, while vegetables showed comparatively higher instability in production. At the state level, several states recorded high instability levels. Maharashtra showed high instability in fruit area (33.85%). Arunachal Pradesh showed high instability in fruit production (54.18%), vegetable area (51.05%) and productivity (75.87%), while Nagaland showed high instability in fruit productivity (64.54%) and vegetable production (46.82%). These findings indicate that instability is concentrated in specific regions, particularly in northeastern and hill states, reflecting structural and agro-climatic constraints. The results highlight the need for state-specific crop planning, promotion of climate-resilient and high-yielding varieties, strengthened extension services and improved market infrastructure.

INTRODUCTION

Agriculture remains a cornerstone of India’s economy, supporting a large share of the population and contributing significantly to national income (Baruah and Mandal, 2025; Sidhu, 2025). Within this framework, fruits and vegetables have emerged as dynamic components of the agricultural sector due to their role in income diversification, nutritional security and export expansion (Gupta, 2022). India is the second-largest producer of horticultural crops globally, including fruits, vegetables, spices and plantation crops. As per the National Horticultural Database (2021-22), fruit production reached 102.48 million metric tonnes from 9.6 million hectares, while vegetable production stood at 200.45 million metric tonnes from 10.86 million hectares. These commodities and their processed products account for nearly 55 per cent of India’s agricultural exports, highlighting their economic significance.
       
The rapid growth of the horticultural sector reflects broader structural shifts in the Indian economy (Bhuyan and Kotoky, 2023; Kaur and Goyal, 2025). Rising incomes, urbanization, dietary diversification and integration with global markets have accelerated demand for high-value agricultural commodities. For farmers, diversification toward fruits and vegetables offers opportunities for higher returns and value addition. However, this growth trajectory is accompanied by spatial and temporal variability in area, production and productivity.
       
Agricultural production instability carries significant economic consequences. Fluctuations in output generate income uncertainty for producers, contribute to price volatility, influence investment behaviour and affect export reliability. Persistent variability may also signal structural inefficiencies, including inadequate infrastructure, climatic vulnerability and market imperfections. Economic theory suggests that sustainable agricultural development requires not only growth but also stability, as predictable production patterns support investment, technological adoption and food security (Singh and Byerlee, 1990; Weber and Sievers, 1985).
       
Although prior studies have examined growth performance and export trends in India’s horticultural sector (Bhuyan and Kotoky, 2023), most analyses are confined to national aggregates. Such approaches often mask substantial inter-state disparities arising from differences in agro-climatic conditions, resource endowments, infrastructure and technological adoption. The limited focus on state-level instability restricts the development of region-specific policy interventions to reduce risk and strengthen production systems.
       
In this context, the present study assesses state-wise instability in area, production and productivity of fruits and vegetables in India by constructing an instability index. It compares the magnitude of variability across central producing states, classifies states by the degree of instability observed and examines the economic implications of this instability for food security and sustainable sectoral growth.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study covers 27 Indian states. Goa was excluded due to its negligible contribution to total fruit and vegetable production and the unavailability of consistent time-series data. For states formed after 2001, data were merged with their respective parent states (e.g., Telangana with Andhra Pradesh and Uttarakhand with Uttar Pradesh) for the earlier years to ensure continuity and comparability across the entire study period. This harmonization avoids structural breaks in the time series and maintains analytical consistency.
       
The states included in the analysis are Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and West Bengal.
       
The study covers the period from 2001 to 2021 using annual time-series data on area, production and productivity for fruits and vegetables in India. The study period was divided into Period I (2001-2011) and Period II (2011-2021) for comparative analysis.
 
Data sources and preprocessing
 
Time-series data were sourced from Agriculture Statistics at a Glance, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India and the Handbook of Statistics on Indian States, Reserve Bank of India (Nayak and Singh, 2018). Data preprocessing included standardizing units, addressing minor missing observations through linear interpolation and examining outliers using trend diagnostics and cross-verification with official publications. Productivity was computed as the ratio of production to area. Statistical computations were performed using SPSS and Excel.
 
Measurement of instability
 
Instability is a critical parameter in agricultural economics because production is influenced by climatic uncertainty, price fluctuations and structural constraints (Rede et al., 2026). Measuring variability provides insight into risk exposure and structural resilience of production systems.
       
To quantify instability in area, production and productivity, the Cuddy-Della Valle Index (CDVI) was employed (Cuddy and Della Valle, 1978; Singh and Byerlee, 1990). The CDVI is a refined version of the coefficient of variation (CV) that adjusts for deterministic trends in time-series data. Since agricultural output often follows an upward or downward trend, the simple CV may overestimate variability. The CDVI addresses this limitation by incorporating the trend equation’s goodness-of-fit.
       
The Cuddy-Della Valle Index (Ix) was calculated as follows:
 
 
 
Where,
CV= Coefficient of variation.
R2= Adjusted R2 (ESS/TSS, i.e., ratio of explained variation to total variation).
       
By adjusting for trend effects, the CDVI provides a more accurate measure of pure instability rather than variability arising from systematic growth patterns.
 
Classification of instability levels
 
To improve interpretability, instability levels were classified as low (CDVI < 15 per cent), moderate (15-30 per cent) and high (>30 per cent) (Malik and Mohanty, 2023; Khan et al., 2024). This classification facilitates meaningful comparison across states and periods, enabling identification of relatively stable and highly volatile production systems.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Considering the goals of the current study, data were gathered from various sources. The state-wise instability index of fruits and vegetables was analysed using appropriate statistical methods, based on area, production and productivity (Kaur and Chauhan, 2024; Sethi et al., 2025). Agricultural production instability affects price stability and consumption patterns of agricultural commodities (Ahmed et al., 2025). Therefore, instability in area, production and productivity of fruits and vegetables was examined at both state and national levels. The Instability Index was computed for Period I (2001-2011), Period II (2011-2021) and the overall period (2001-2021) (Dey et al., 2020). The states formed after 2001 were merged with their parental states for consistency and Goa was excluded due to negligible contribution and lack of data. Thus, 27 states were considered. The Cuddy-Della Valle Index (CDVI) was used to measure instability over time (Jambhulkar et al., 2023). The study assessed both the magnitude and changes in instability across the two decades in fruits and vegetables (Rani et al., 2022).
 
The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of fruits in the area
 
The Instability Index (CDVI) of fruits in the area is presented in Table 1. At the national level, fruit area instability was 4.072 per cent in Period I, increased to 5.404 per cent in Period II and reached 9.073 per cent during the overall period. Although the increase between the sub-periods was moderate, the higher overall value indicates cumulative fluctuations over two decades. Compared to production and productivity, area instability was relatively higher, suggesting that changes in land allocation contributed significantly to variability in the fruit sector (Gowri et al., 2017).

Table 1: Instability index (CDVI) of fruits in area.


       
At the state level, substantial variation is observed. During Period I, Nagaland recorded the highest instability (45.541%), while Punjab recorded the lowest (2.216%) (Sharma et al., 2022). In Period II, Kerala showed the highest instability (18.267%), whereas Himachal Pradesh recorded the lowest (0.609%). Over the overall period, Maharashtra recorded the highest instability (33.847%), while West Bengal recorded the lowest (2.329%) (Pal et al., 2022). The consistently high instability in northeastern states and Maharashtra reflects climatic vulnerability, uneven horticultural expansion and structural limitations, while Punjab and West Bengal show more stable land-use patterns.
 
The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of fruits in production
 
The Instability Index (CDVI) of fruits in production is presented in Table 2. At the national level, production instability was 3.146 per cent in Period I, slightly declined to 3.067 per cent in Period II and stood at 3.673 per cent during the overall period (Soujanya et al., 2023). The marginal decline indicates some stabilization in fruit output. Production instability was lower than area and productivity instability during the overall period (Kumar et al., 2021), suggesting that yield adjustments partly offset area fluctuations.

Table 2: The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of fruits in production.


       
In Period I, Nagaland recorded the highest instability (84.249%), followed by Mizoram (45.536%), while West Bengal (4.971%) and Gujarat (5.442%) recorded the lowest (Norboo, 2023). During Period II, Himachal Pradesh (28.430%) and Arunachal Pradesh (24.497%) recorded the highest, while Punjab (1.414%) and Assam (2.749%) showed the lowest instability (Varalakshmi et al., 2023). Overall, Arunachal Pradesh (54.182%) and Nagaland (41.416%) remained most unstable, while Punjab (4.671%) and West Bengal (5.660%) were lowest (Kaur et al., 2021).
       
Most states experienced a decline in instability from Period I to II, though some, including Arunachal Pradesh, Haryana, Maharashtra, Sikkim, Tripura and West Bengal, showed increases. The persistently high instability in northeastern and hill states highlights vulnerability to climatic fluctuations and structural constraints, particularly for perennial crops (Mohan et al., 2022).
 
The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of fruits in productivity
 
The Instability Index (CDVI) of fruits in productivity is presented in Table 3. At the national level, productivity instability was 6.390 per cent in Period I, declined slightly to 6.086 percent in Period II and was 7.196 per cent during the overall period (Vanitha et al., 2021). Productivity instability remained higher than production instability but lower than area instability, indicating that yield variability contributed significantly to overall fruit sector fluctuations.

Table 3: The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of fruits in productivity.


       
In Period I, Nagaland recorded the highest instability (99.879%), followed by Mizoram (48.279%), while Karnataka (2.009%) and West Bengal (4.823%) recorded the lowest. During Period II, Himachal Pradesh (28.547%) and Kerala (26.210%) recorded the highest, whereas Punjab (1.271%) and Uttarakhand (1.296%) recorded the lowest (Jambhulkar et al., 2023). Overall, Nagaland (64.544%) and Mizoram (41.836%) remained most unstable, while Karnataka (2.674%) and Assam (4.913%) showed the least instability (Sharma et al., 2022).
       
Most states experienced a decline in productivity instability from Period I to Period II (Dey et al., 2020). During the overall period, Maharashtra showed the highest instability in area (33.847%), Himachal Pradesh in production (31.172%) and Nagaland in productivity (64.544%), indicating that instability varies by dimension across states.
 
The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in the area
 
The Instability Index (CDVI) of vegetable area is presented in Table 4. At the national level, instability declined from 4.930 per cent in Period I to 2.158 per cent in Period II, with an overall value of 3.912 per cent (Shreyana et al., 2022). During Period I, Mizoram (62.393%) and Nagaland (42.953%) recorded the highest instability, while West Bengal (2.550%) and Karnataka (2.718%) recorded the lowest (Sharma et al., 2022; Pal et al., 2022). In Period II, Arunachal Pradesh (56.150%) and Manipur (30.298%) were highest, West Bengal (1.497%) and Punjab (2.261%) lowest (Norboo, 2023). Overall, Arunachal Pradesh showed the highest instability (51.053%), West Bengal the lowest (2.224%) (Pal et al., 2022).

Table 4: The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in the area.


 
The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in production
 
The Instability Index (CDVI) of vegetable production is presented in Table 5. At the national level, instability declined from 7.215 percent in Period I to 1.758 per cent in Period II, with an overall value of 5.009 per cent (Vanitha et al., 2021). Nagaland and Mizoram recorded the highest instability, while Himachal Pradesh and Odisha showed the lowest (Sharma et al., 2022). In Period II, Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim were highest, Punjab and Himachal Pradesh lowest (Norboo, 2023).

Table 5: The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in production.


 
The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in productivity
 
The instability index (CDVI) for vegetable productivity is presented in Table 6. At the national level, instability declined from 5.041 per cent in Period I to 2.305 per cent in Period II, with an overall value of 3.878 percent (Vanitha et al., 2021). Productivity instability remained lower than area and production instability, indicating relatively stable yield performance in vegetables.

Table 6: The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in productivity.


       
Mizoram and Chhattisgarh recorded the highest instability in Period I, while Odisha and Gujarat recorded the lowest (Sharma et al., 2022). In Period II, Arunachal Pradesh and Kerala recorded the highest instability, whereas Tripura and Chhattisgarh recorded the lowest (Norboo, 2023; Jambhulkar et al., 2023). In the overall period, Arunachal Pradesh recorded the highest instability (75.875%), while Odisha (3.246%) and Himachal Pradesh (4.378%) recorded the lowest instability (Sharma et al., 2022).
       
Most states showed improvement from Period I to Period II. When comparing fruits and vegetables, fruits generally exhibited higher productivity instability, while vegetables showed relatively greater instability in production during the overall period.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that instability in India’s fruit and vegetable sector varies across crops and states. At the national level during 2001-2021, fruits remained within the low instability level in area (9.073%), production (3.673%) and productivity (7.196%), although fluctuations in area and productivity were relatively higher than in production. Vegetables also recorded a low instability level nationally in area (3.912%), production (5.009%) and productivity (3.878%), with production showing comparatively greater variation.
       
However, state-level results present a different picture. Maharashtra recorded a high instability level in fruit area, Arunachal Pradesh showed a high instability level in fruit production as well as vegetable area and productivity and Nagaland exhibited a high instability level in fruit productivity and vegetable production. These findings confirm that instability is region-specific and more pronounced in certain northeastern and hill states, reflecting structural constraints and agro-climatic uncertainties.
       
The policy implications of these results are direct and actionable. Higher instability in fruit area and productivity calls for interventions such as promotion of climate-resilient varieties, orchard rejuvenation programmes and assured irrigation support. In vegetables, greater production instability requires improved market intelligence and strengthening of storage and cold chain infrastructure to manage supply fluctuations.
       
Reducing instability is essential for farmer income security. Expanding crop insurance, region-specific extension services and informed crop planning can lower production risks. Overall, stabilizing fruit and vegetable production can reduce price volatility and enhance national food security.
 
Disclaimers
 
The views and conclusions expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of their affiliated institutions. The authors are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the information provided, but do not accept any liability for any direct or indirect losses resulting from the use of this content.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.

REFERENCES


  1. Ahmed, Z., Kadir, A., Alam, R. and Laskor, M.A.H. (2025). The impact of staple crop price instability and fragmented policy on food security and sustainable development: A case study from Bangladesh. Discover Sustainability. 6(1): 79.

  2. Baruah, S. and Mandal, R.K. (2025). Crucial achievements of Indian agriculture: A critical assessment. Journal of Information Systems Engineering and Management. 10: 487-497.

  3. Bhuyan, D. and Kotoky, A. (2023). Instability in production and productivity of horticultural crops in Assam. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 57(1): 123-127. doi: 10.18805/IJARe.A-5927.

  4. Cuddy, J. and Della Valle, P.A. (1978). Measuring the instability of time series data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics. 40: 79-85.

  5. Dey, A., Dinesh and Rashmi. (2020). Rice and wheat production in India: An over-time study on growth and instability. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 9(2): 158-161. 

  6. Gowri, U.M., Prabhu, R., Anbarassan, A. and Govindraj, M. (2017). Growth and trend analysis of major horticulture crops in Tamil Nadu. Statistical Approaches in Multidisciplinary Research. 29(4): 1-9. 

  7. Gupta, M.D. (2022). Growth trends and potential of horticulture in Northeast India. J. Hortl. Sci. 17(2): 530-542. 

  8. Jambhulkar, N.N., Biswajit, M., Jaiprakash, B., Mishra, S.K. and Pradhan, A.K. (2023). Growth and instability analysis of rice production: A district-level assessment in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand states of India. The Pharma Innovation Journal. 12(2): 813-819. 

  9. Kaur, K., Guleria, A. and Katoch, S. (2021). Assessment of the co- movement of kinnow prices among the domestic markets in Punjab. Journal of Agricultural Development and Policy. 31(1): 39-47. 

  10. Kaur, A. and Goyal, M. (2025). Impact of national horticulture mission on the production and trade scenario of fruits in India. Agricultural Research Journal. 62(2): 149-160.

  11. Kaur, S. and Chauhan, S. (2024). Dynamics of agricultural transformation in Punjab: Crop trends, instability and decomposition analysis. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 196(9): 855.

  12. Khan, M.N., Malik, A.M. and Khan, F. (2024). Performance and instability of oilseed crops in Pakistan. Proceedings of the Pakistan Academy of Sciences: B. Life and Environmental Sciences. 61(1): 77-87.

  13. Kumar, R., Jaulkar, A.M., Srivastava, S.C. and Singh, S. (2021). A study on the growth and instability of Paddy and Wheat crops in Gwalior District (Madhya Pradesh). The Pharma Innovation Journal. 10(5): 745-748. 

  14. Malik, B. and Mohanty, S.S. (2023). Fluctuations in agricultural production: A comparative study across selected countries. Journal of Studies in Dynamics and Change. 10(1): 9-26.

  15. Mohan, M.S., Vidhyavathi, A., Padmarani, S. and Balaji, P. (2022). Performance of Cashew processing units in Tamil Nadu: A case study in Kanyakumari. Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology. 41(23): 10-20. 

  16. Nayak, A.K. and Singh, N. (2018). Growth, instability and export performance of banana in India-An economic analysis. Agricultural Situation in India. 1(1): 25-33. 

  17. Norboo, J. (2023). Trends and patterns of agricultural growth in the North-West Himalaya, India. Journal of Research in Agriculture and Animal Science. 10(3): 1-10. 

  18. Pal, P.P., Nayak, P.P. and Mallick, R.K.  (2022). Revisiting the status of agricultural productivity in Odisha. Malaysian Business Management Journal. 1(1): 40-46. 

  19. Rani, S.U., Kumar, N.P.P., Paul, R.K., Padaria, R.N. and Geetha, M.L. (2022). Instability analysis of agricultural productivity: A district-level assessment in Karnataka State, India. International Journal of Environment and Climate Change. 12(1): 33-43. 

  20. Rede, D.G., Pratyush, R.K., Bharati, R.H., Dongre, S., Vaijanteemala, K.H. (2026). Food spice ginger: An economic analysis of growth trends in India. Asian Journal of Dairy and Food Research. 45(1): 113-118. doi: 10.18805/ajdfr.DR- 2367.

  21. Sethi, D., Shivalika, S., Kumar, V. and Sharma, K. (2025). Spatio- temporal changes in area, production and productivity of vegetables: A review. Agricultural Reviews. 46(5): 757-765.  doi: 10.18805/ag.R-2643.

  22. Sharma, A., Dey, A., Devegowda, S.R., Gautam, Y.  and Kumareswaran, T. (2022). Growth, instability and decomposition in area, production and productivity of horticultural crops in North- East India. Agro Economist-An International Journal. 9(2): 133-137. 

  23. Shreyana, B.C., Singh, M.H.G.L.S. L., Upadhyay, B. and Bairwa, H.L. (2022). Growth performance and instability of major vegetables of Rajasthan. The Pharma Innovation Journal. 11(8): 2133-2136. 

  24. Sidhu, R.S. (2025). Advancing sustainable growth in indian agriculture: Integrating technology, market and policy frameworks. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics. 80(1): 1-37.

  25. Singh, A.J. and Byerlee, D. (1990). Relative variability in wheat yields across countries and over time. Journal of Agricultural Economics. 41(1): 21-32. 

  26. Soujanya, C.K., Venkataramana, M.N. and Babu, B.N.P. (2023). Growth in production and export performance of Indian coffee in the international market. Mysore Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 57(2): 395-402. 

  27. Vanitha, R., S.M.S.S. and Singh, J.N. (2021). Growth trend in vegetable production-A time series analysis. Journal of Applied Horticulture. 23(3): 294-298. 

  28. Varalakshmi, A., Harish Nayak, G.H., Manjunath, M.G. and Vinay, H.T. (2023). Trend and forecasting of area, production and productivity of mango crop in Karnataka, India. Journal of Experimental Agriculture International. 45(5): 16-23. 

  29. Weber, A. and Sievers, M. (1985). Observations on the geography of wheat production instability. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture. 24(3): 201-211. 
Published In
Asian Journal of Dairy and Food Research
Article Metrics
Metrics Icon
0
Views
0
Citations
Reviewed By
Share Article
Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Full Research Article

    Food Instability Dynamics in Indian Fruits and Vegetables

    G
    Ganeshkumar D. Rede1,*
    https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5559-3259
    P
    Pratyush Kumari Rath2
    https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4621-5894
    B
    Bharati H. Rede3
    S
    Sandeep Dongre1
    https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1014-1177
    V
    Vaijanteemala H. Kendre1
    https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8829-1444
    A
    Abhijit Das4
    https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7626-9319
    D
    Dipankar Saikia5
    https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1862-646X
    1Symbiosis Institute of Business Management Nagpur, Symbiosis International (Deemed University), Pune, Nagpur-440 008, Maharashtra, India.
    2Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani-431 402, Maharashtra, India.
    3Dr. Sharadchandra Pawar College of Agriculture, Baramati-413 102, Maharashtra, India.
    4Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, School of Agriculture, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara-144 411, Punjab, India.
    5Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Assam down town University, Guwahati-781 026, Assam, India.

    ABSTRACT

    Background: India is one of the world’s largest producers of fruits and vegetables, yet fluctuations in area, production and productivity continue to create uncertainty in farm incomes, market supply and food security. Understanding the level and pattern of instability across states is therefore essential for balanced horticultural development.

    Methods: The study assesses state-wise instability in the production of fruits and vegetables in India over the period 2001-2021, covering 27 central states. Time-series data on area, production and productivity were compiled from official sources. The Cuddy-Della Valle Index (CDVI) was used to measure instability after adjusting for time trends and instability levels were classified as low, moderate and high to facilitate meaningful comparison across states and periods.

    Result: Results indicate that at the national level, both fruits and vegetables remained within the low instability level across all three dimensions, though fruits showed relatively higher instability in area and productivity, while vegetables showed comparatively higher instability in production. At the state level, several states recorded high instability levels. Maharashtra showed high instability in fruit area (33.85%). Arunachal Pradesh showed high instability in fruit production (54.18%), vegetable area (51.05%) and productivity (75.87%), while Nagaland showed high instability in fruit productivity (64.54%) and vegetable production (46.82%). These findings indicate that instability is concentrated in specific regions, particularly in northeastern and hill states, reflecting structural and agro-climatic constraints. The results highlight the need for state-specific crop planning, promotion of climate-resilient and high-yielding varieties, strengthened extension services and improved market infrastructure.

    INTRODUCTION

    Agriculture remains a cornerstone of India’s economy, supporting a large share of the population and contributing significantly to national income (Baruah and Mandal, 2025; Sidhu, 2025). Within this framework, fruits and vegetables have emerged as dynamic components of the agricultural sector due to their role in income diversification, nutritional security and export expansion (Gupta, 2022). India is the second-largest producer of horticultural crops globally, including fruits, vegetables, spices and plantation crops. As per the National Horticultural Database (2021-22), fruit production reached 102.48 million metric tonnes from 9.6 million hectares, while vegetable production stood at 200.45 million metric tonnes from 10.86 million hectares. These commodities and their processed products account for nearly 55 per cent of India’s agricultural exports, highlighting their economic significance.
           
    The rapid growth of the horticultural sector reflects broader structural shifts in the Indian economy (Bhuyan and Kotoky, 2023; Kaur and Goyal, 2025). Rising incomes, urbanization, dietary diversification and integration with global markets have accelerated demand for high-value agricultural commodities. For farmers, diversification toward fruits and vegetables offers opportunities for higher returns and value addition. However, this growth trajectory is accompanied by spatial and temporal variability in area, production and productivity.
           
    Agricultural production instability carries significant economic consequences. Fluctuations in output generate income uncertainty for producers, contribute to price volatility, influence investment behaviour and affect export reliability. Persistent variability may also signal structural inefficiencies, including inadequate infrastructure, climatic vulnerability and market imperfections. Economic theory suggests that sustainable agricultural development requires not only growth but also stability, as predictable production patterns support investment, technological adoption and food security (Singh and Byerlee, 1990; Weber and Sievers, 1985).
           
    Although prior studies have examined growth performance and export trends in India’s horticultural sector (Bhuyan and Kotoky, 2023), most analyses are confined to national aggregates. Such approaches often mask substantial inter-state disparities arising from differences in agro-climatic conditions, resource endowments, infrastructure and technological adoption. The limited focus on state-level instability restricts the development of region-specific policy interventions to reduce risk and strengthen production systems.
           
    In this context, the present study assesses state-wise instability in area, production and productivity of fruits and vegetables in India by constructing an instability index. It compares the magnitude of variability across central producing states, classifies states by the degree of instability observed and examines the economic implications of this instability for food security and sustainable sectoral growth.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    The study covers 27 Indian states. Goa was excluded due to its negligible contribution to total fruit and vegetable production and the unavailability of consistent time-series data. For states formed after 2001, data were merged with their respective parent states (e.g., Telangana with Andhra Pradesh and Uttarakhand with Uttar Pradesh) for the earlier years to ensure continuity and comparability across the entire study period. This harmonization avoids structural breaks in the time series and maintains analytical consistency.
           
    The states included in the analysis are Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and West Bengal.
           
    The study covers the period from 2001 to 2021 using annual time-series data on area, production and productivity for fruits and vegetables in India. The study period was divided into Period I (2001-2011) and Period II (2011-2021) for comparative analysis.
     
    Data sources and preprocessing
     
    Time-series data were sourced from Agriculture Statistics at a Glance, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India and the Handbook of Statistics on Indian States, Reserve Bank of India (Nayak and Singh, 2018). Data preprocessing included standardizing units, addressing minor missing observations through linear interpolation and examining outliers using trend diagnostics and cross-verification with official publications. Productivity was computed as the ratio of production to area. Statistical computations were performed using SPSS and Excel.
     
    Measurement of instability
     
    Instability is a critical parameter in agricultural economics because production is influenced by climatic uncertainty, price fluctuations and structural constraints (Rede et al., 2026). Measuring variability provides insight into risk exposure and structural resilience of production systems.
           
    To quantify instability in area, production and productivity, the Cuddy-Della Valle Index (CDVI) was employed (Cuddy and Della Valle, 1978; Singh and Byerlee, 1990). The CDVI is a refined version of the coefficient of variation (CV) that adjusts for deterministic trends in time-series data. Since agricultural output often follows an upward or downward trend, the simple CV may overestimate variability. The CDVI addresses this limitation by incorporating the trend equation’s goodness-of-fit.
           
    The Cuddy-Della Valle Index (Ix) was calculated as follows:
     
     
     
    Where,
    CV= Coefficient of variation.
    R2= Adjusted R2 (ESS/TSS, i.e., ratio of explained variation to total variation).
           
    By adjusting for trend effects, the CDVI provides a more accurate measure of pure instability rather than variability arising from systematic growth patterns.
     
    Classification of instability levels
     
    To improve interpretability, instability levels were classified as low (CDVI < 15 per cent), moderate (15-30 per cent) and high (>30 per cent) (Malik and Mohanty, 2023; Khan et al., 2024). This classification facilitates meaningful comparison across states and periods, enabling identification of relatively stable and highly volatile production systems.

    RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

    Considering the goals of the current study, data were gathered from various sources. The state-wise instability index of fruits and vegetables was analysed using appropriate statistical methods, based on area, production and productivity (Kaur and Chauhan, 2024; Sethi et al., 2025). Agricultural production instability affects price stability and consumption patterns of agricultural commodities (Ahmed et al., 2025). Therefore, instability in area, production and productivity of fruits and vegetables was examined at both state and national levels. The Instability Index was computed for Period I (2001-2011), Period II (2011-2021) and the overall period (2001-2021) (Dey et al., 2020). The states formed after 2001 were merged with their parental states for consistency and Goa was excluded due to negligible contribution and lack of data. Thus, 27 states were considered. The Cuddy-Della Valle Index (CDVI) was used to measure instability over time (Jambhulkar et al., 2023). The study assessed both the magnitude and changes in instability across the two decades in fruits and vegetables (Rani et al., 2022).
     
    The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of fruits in the area
     
    The Instability Index (CDVI) of fruits in the area is presented in Table 1. At the national level, fruit area instability was 4.072 per cent in Period I, increased to 5.404 per cent in Period II and reached 9.073 per cent during the overall period. Although the increase between the sub-periods was moderate, the higher overall value indicates cumulative fluctuations over two decades. Compared to production and productivity, area instability was relatively higher, suggesting that changes in land allocation contributed significantly to variability in the fruit sector (Gowri et al., 2017).

    Table 1: Instability index (CDVI) of fruits in area.


           
    At the state level, substantial variation is observed. During Period I, Nagaland recorded the highest instability (45.541%), while Punjab recorded the lowest (2.216%) (Sharma et al., 2022). In Period II, Kerala showed the highest instability (18.267%), whereas Himachal Pradesh recorded the lowest (0.609%). Over the overall period, Maharashtra recorded the highest instability (33.847%), while West Bengal recorded the lowest (2.329%) (Pal et al., 2022). The consistently high instability in northeastern states and Maharashtra reflects climatic vulnerability, uneven horticultural expansion and structural limitations, while Punjab and West Bengal show more stable land-use patterns.
     
    The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of fruits in production
     
    The Instability Index (CDVI) of fruits in production is presented in Table 2. At the national level, production instability was 3.146 per cent in Period I, slightly declined to 3.067 per cent in Period II and stood at 3.673 per cent during the overall period (Soujanya et al., 2023). The marginal decline indicates some stabilization in fruit output. Production instability was lower than area and productivity instability during the overall period (Kumar et al., 2021), suggesting that yield adjustments partly offset area fluctuations.

    Table 2: The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of fruits in production.


           
    In Period I, Nagaland recorded the highest instability (84.249%), followed by Mizoram (45.536%), while West Bengal (4.971%) and Gujarat (5.442%) recorded the lowest (Norboo, 2023). During Period II, Himachal Pradesh (28.430%) and Arunachal Pradesh (24.497%) recorded the highest, while Punjab (1.414%) and Assam (2.749%) showed the lowest instability (Varalakshmi et al., 2023). Overall, Arunachal Pradesh (54.182%) and Nagaland (41.416%) remained most unstable, while Punjab (4.671%) and West Bengal (5.660%) were lowest (Kaur et al., 2021).
           
    Most states experienced a decline in instability from Period I to II, though some, including Arunachal Pradesh, Haryana, Maharashtra, Sikkim, Tripura and West Bengal, showed increases. The persistently high instability in northeastern and hill states highlights vulnerability to climatic fluctuations and structural constraints, particularly for perennial crops (Mohan et al., 2022).
     
    The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of fruits in productivity
     
    The Instability Index (CDVI) of fruits in productivity is presented in Table 3. At the national level, productivity instability was 6.390 per cent in Period I, declined slightly to 6.086 percent in Period II and was 7.196 per cent during the overall period (Vanitha et al., 2021). Productivity instability remained higher than production instability but lower than area instability, indicating that yield variability contributed significantly to overall fruit sector fluctuations.

    Table 3: The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of fruits in productivity.


           
    In Period I, Nagaland recorded the highest instability (99.879%), followed by Mizoram (48.279%), while Karnataka (2.009%) and West Bengal (4.823%) recorded the lowest. During Period II, Himachal Pradesh (28.547%) and Kerala (26.210%) recorded the highest, whereas Punjab (1.271%) and Uttarakhand (1.296%) recorded the lowest (Jambhulkar et al., 2023). Overall, Nagaland (64.544%) and Mizoram (41.836%) remained most unstable, while Karnataka (2.674%) and Assam (4.913%) showed the least instability (Sharma et al., 2022).
           
    Most states experienced a decline in productivity instability from Period I to Period II (Dey et al., 2020). During the overall period, Maharashtra showed the highest instability in area (33.847%), Himachal Pradesh in production (31.172%) and Nagaland in productivity (64.544%), indicating that instability varies by dimension across states.
     
    The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in the area
     
    The Instability Index (CDVI) of vegetable area is presented in Table 4. At the national level, instability declined from 4.930 per cent in Period I to 2.158 per cent in Period II, with an overall value of 3.912 per cent (Shreyana et al., 2022). During Period I, Mizoram (62.393%) and Nagaland (42.953%) recorded the highest instability, while West Bengal (2.550%) and Karnataka (2.718%) recorded the lowest (Sharma et al., 2022; Pal et al., 2022). In Period II, Arunachal Pradesh (56.150%) and Manipur (30.298%) were highest, West Bengal (1.497%) and Punjab (2.261%) lowest (Norboo, 2023). Overall, Arunachal Pradesh showed the highest instability (51.053%), West Bengal the lowest (2.224%) (Pal et al., 2022).

    Table 4: The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in the area.


     
    The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in production
     
    The Instability Index (CDVI) of vegetable production is presented in Table 5. At the national level, instability declined from 7.215 percent in Period I to 1.758 per cent in Period II, with an overall value of 5.009 per cent (Vanitha et al., 2021). Nagaland and Mizoram recorded the highest instability, while Himachal Pradesh and Odisha showed the lowest (Sharma et al., 2022). In Period II, Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim were highest, Punjab and Himachal Pradesh lowest (Norboo, 2023).

    Table 5: The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in production.


     
    The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in productivity
     
    The instability index (CDVI) for vegetable productivity is presented in Table 6. At the national level, instability declined from 5.041 per cent in Period I to 2.305 per cent in Period II, with an overall value of 3.878 percent (Vanitha et al., 2021). Productivity instability remained lower than area and production instability, indicating relatively stable yield performance in vegetables.

    Table 6: The state-wise instability index (CDVI) of vegetables in productivity.


           
    Mizoram and Chhattisgarh recorded the highest instability in Period I, while Odisha and Gujarat recorded the lowest (Sharma et al., 2022). In Period II, Arunachal Pradesh and Kerala recorded the highest instability, whereas Tripura and Chhattisgarh recorded the lowest (Norboo, 2023; Jambhulkar et al., 2023). In the overall period, Arunachal Pradesh recorded the highest instability (75.875%), while Odisha (3.246%) and Himachal Pradesh (4.378%) recorded the lowest instability (Sharma et al., 2022).
           
    Most states showed improvement from Period I to Period II. When comparing fruits and vegetables, fruits generally exhibited higher productivity instability, while vegetables showed relatively greater instability in production during the overall period.

    CONCLUSION

    This study shows that instability in India’s fruit and vegetable sector varies across crops and states. At the national level during 2001-2021, fruits remained within the low instability level in area (9.073%), production (3.673%) and productivity (7.196%), although fluctuations in area and productivity were relatively higher than in production. Vegetables also recorded a low instability level nationally in area (3.912%), production (5.009%) and productivity (3.878%), with production showing comparatively greater variation.
           
    However, state-level results present a different picture. Maharashtra recorded a high instability level in fruit area, Arunachal Pradesh showed a high instability level in fruit production as well as vegetable area and productivity and Nagaland exhibited a high instability level in fruit productivity and vegetable production. These findings confirm that instability is region-specific and more pronounced in certain northeastern and hill states, reflecting structural constraints and agro-climatic uncertainties.
           
    The policy implications of these results are direct and actionable. Higher instability in fruit area and productivity calls for interventions such as promotion of climate-resilient varieties, orchard rejuvenation programmes and assured irrigation support. In vegetables, greater production instability requires improved market intelligence and strengthening of storage and cold chain infrastructure to manage supply fluctuations.
           
    Reducing instability is essential for farmer income security. Expanding crop insurance, region-specific extension services and informed crop planning can lower production risks. Overall, stabilizing fruit and vegetable production can reduce price volatility and enhance national food security.
     
    Disclaimers
     
    The views and conclusions expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of their affiliated institutions. The authors are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the information provided, but do not accept any liability for any direct or indirect losses resulting from the use of this content.

    CONFLICT OF INTEREST

    The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.

    REFERENCES


    1. Ahmed, Z., Kadir, A., Alam, R. and Laskor, M.A.H. (2025). The impact of staple crop price instability and fragmented policy on food security and sustainable development: A case study from Bangladesh. Discover Sustainability. 6(1): 79.

    2. Baruah, S. and Mandal, R.K. (2025). Crucial achievements of Indian agriculture: A critical assessment. Journal of Information Systems Engineering and Management. 10: 487-497.

    3. Bhuyan, D. and Kotoky, A. (2023). Instability in production and productivity of horticultural crops in Assam. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 57(1): 123-127. doi: 10.18805/IJARe.A-5927.

    4. Cuddy, J. and Della Valle, P.A. (1978). Measuring the instability of time series data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics. 40: 79-85.

    5. Dey, A., Dinesh and Rashmi. (2020). Rice and wheat production in India: An over-time study on growth and instability. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 9(2): 158-161. 

    6. Gowri, U.M., Prabhu, R., Anbarassan, A. and Govindraj, M. (2017). Growth and trend analysis of major horticulture crops in Tamil Nadu. Statistical Approaches in Multidisciplinary Research. 29(4): 1-9. 

    7. Gupta, M.D. (2022). Growth trends and potential of horticulture in Northeast India. J. Hortl. Sci. 17(2): 530-542. 

    8. Jambhulkar, N.N., Biswajit, M., Jaiprakash, B., Mishra, S.K. and Pradhan, A.K. (2023). Growth and instability analysis of rice production: A district-level assessment in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand states of India. The Pharma Innovation Journal. 12(2): 813-819. 

    9. Kaur, K., Guleria, A. and Katoch, S. (2021). Assessment of the co- movement of kinnow prices among the domestic markets in Punjab. Journal of Agricultural Development and Policy. 31(1): 39-47. 

    10. Kaur, A. and Goyal, M. (2025). Impact of national horticulture mission on the production and trade scenario of fruits in India. Agricultural Research Journal. 62(2): 149-160.

    11. Kaur, S. and Chauhan, S. (2024). Dynamics of agricultural transformation in Punjab: Crop trends, instability and decomposition analysis. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 196(9): 855.

    12. Khan, M.N., Malik, A.M. and Khan, F. (2024). Performance and instability of oilseed crops in Pakistan. Proceedings of the Pakistan Academy of Sciences: B. Life and Environmental Sciences. 61(1): 77-87.

    13. Kumar, R., Jaulkar, A.M., Srivastava, S.C. and Singh, S. (2021). A study on the growth and instability of Paddy and Wheat crops in Gwalior District (Madhya Pradesh). The Pharma Innovation Journal. 10(5): 745-748. 

    14. Malik, B. and Mohanty, S.S. (2023). Fluctuations in agricultural production: A comparative study across selected countries. Journal of Studies in Dynamics and Change. 10(1): 9-26.

    15. Mohan, M.S., Vidhyavathi, A., Padmarani, S. and Balaji, P. (2022). Performance of Cashew processing units in Tamil Nadu: A case study in Kanyakumari. Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology. 41(23): 10-20. 

    16. Nayak, A.K. and Singh, N. (2018). Growth, instability and export performance of banana in India-An economic analysis. Agricultural Situation in India. 1(1): 25-33. 

    17. Norboo, J. (2023). Trends and patterns of agricultural growth in the North-West Himalaya, India. Journal of Research in Agriculture and Animal Science. 10(3): 1-10. 

    18. Pal, P.P., Nayak, P.P. and Mallick, R.K.  (2022). Revisiting the status of agricultural productivity in Odisha. Malaysian Business Management Journal. 1(1): 40-46. 

    19. Rani, S.U., Kumar, N.P.P., Paul, R.K., Padaria, R.N. and Geetha, M.L. (2022). Instability analysis of agricultural productivity: A district-level assessment in Karnataka State, India. International Journal of Environment and Climate Change. 12(1): 33-43. 

    20. Rede, D.G., Pratyush, R.K., Bharati, R.H., Dongre, S., Vaijanteemala, K.H. (2026). Food spice ginger: An economic analysis of growth trends in India. Asian Journal of Dairy and Food Research. 45(1): 113-118. doi: 10.18805/ajdfr.DR- 2367.

    21. Sethi, D., Shivalika, S., Kumar, V. and Sharma, K. (2025). Spatio- temporal changes in area, production and productivity of vegetables: A review. Agricultural Reviews. 46(5): 757-765.  doi: 10.18805/ag.R-2643.

    22. Sharma, A., Dey, A., Devegowda, S.R., Gautam, Y.  and Kumareswaran, T. (2022). Growth, instability and decomposition in area, production and productivity of horticultural crops in North- East India. Agro Economist-An International Journal. 9(2): 133-137. 

    23. Shreyana, B.C., Singh, M.H.G.L.S. L., Upadhyay, B. and Bairwa, H.L. (2022). Growth performance and instability of major vegetables of Rajasthan. The Pharma Innovation Journal. 11(8): 2133-2136. 

    24. Sidhu, R.S. (2025). Advancing sustainable growth in indian agriculture: Integrating technology, market and policy frameworks. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics. 80(1): 1-37.

    25. Singh, A.J. and Byerlee, D. (1990). Relative variability in wheat yields across countries and over time. Journal of Agricultural Economics. 41(1): 21-32. 

    26. Soujanya, C.K., Venkataramana, M.N. and Babu, B.N.P. (2023). Growth in production and export performance of Indian coffee in the international market. Mysore Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 57(2): 395-402. 

    27. Vanitha, R., S.M.S.S. and Singh, J.N. (2021). Growth trend in vegetable production-A time series analysis. Journal of Applied Horticulture. 23(3): 294-298. 

    28. Varalakshmi, A., Harish Nayak, G.H., Manjunath, M.G. and Vinay, H.T. (2023). Trend and forecasting of area, production and productivity of mango crop in Karnataka, India. Journal of Experimental Agriculture International. 45(5): 16-23. 

    29. Weber, A. and Sievers, M. (1985). Observations on the geography of wheat production instability. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture. 24(3): 201-211. 
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us
      Published In
      Asian Journal of Dairy and Food Research

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)