International Journal of Human Resource

Management and Research (IJHRMR)

ISSN(P): 2249-6874; ISSN(E): 2249-7986
Vol. 6, Issue 5, Oct 2016, 19-24
TJPRC Pvt. Ltd

FARMERS PREFERENCES TOWARDS PRIVATIZATION OF

AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICES IN ANANTAPUR DISTRICT (A.P.)
J. YOGA NARASIMHULU NAIDU1 & DIPAK KUMAR BOSE2
1

Research Scholar, Department of Agricultural Extension and

Rural Sociology, TNAU, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India

Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Extension and Communication,

Shiats University, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh, India

ABSTRACT
India experiences paradigm shift from subsistence agriculture to commercialized agri-business under
liberalization, globalization and privatization era. Choosing best alternative and suitable ways to make extension services
more responsive to farmers is the need of the hour. The study was conducted in Anantapur District of Andhra Pradesh
purposively for exploring the preference of farmers regarding privatization of agricultural extension in terms of services,
crops preferred, clientele group and approach. A total of 120 respondents were selected purposively as a sample for the
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), Household survey by using pre-structured interview schedule, Focus Group
Discussion (FGD) with checklists and finally case studies. The outcome of the study was that most of the farmers prefer
the Privatization of Agricultural Extension Services for commercial crops and progressive farmer clientele group.
Among the approaches the respondents prefer mostly co-operative approach for agricultural extension services. From
the study, it is clear that Privatization of Agricultural Extension Services has various advantages like providing demand
driven services, more cost effective with efficient and quality services, more clientele accountable, complement or

Original Article

present investigation. The data collection was started through Key informant Group Discussion (KGD) including

supplement to the effort of public extension and increased staff professionalism. But, side by side it has some
disadvantages like concentrating more on big farmers, services on cost basis and for commercial crops only hurdles the
privatization of extension services.
KEYWORDS: Privatization, Anantapur, Preferences, Services

Received: Sep 07, 2016; Accepted: Oct 03, 2016; Published: Oct 05, 2016; Paper Id.: IJHRMROCT20164

INTRODUCTION
India witnessed the shift from traditional and subsistence agriculture to a commercial activity during post
half of the20th century. There were attempts made to increase the production, productivity and to diversify the
agricultureby government, private and non-governmental organizations. But, only after independence, the
organized Agricultural extension came into operation. Green revolution of sixties paved the way for entry of
Agri-business companies for selling inputs, rendering agriculture and allied services. At present the increased
agriculture consultants and large number of consultancy firms are catering the needs of hi-tech commercial
agriculture. Some organizations are operating, focusing not only on production but also processing and marketing.
Apart from government, private and non-governmental organizations are serving the farmers in risk prone areas.
Revolution in information technology and powerful media made the farmer access to the information easy and cost
effective. Nowadays the number of players in agriculture is increasing since agriculture is commercializing.
www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

20

J. Yoga Narasimhulu Naidu & Dipak Kumar Bose

Commercial agriculture needs more investment, high technology and various inputs like seeds, machineries etc. Hence, the
dependency of farmer on many players is in surge than ever before. Today, considerable numbers of private extension
service providers are there in the field who can induce the ultimate profit of the farmer. Past investments in extension have
yielded high economic rates of return and are seen as one reason for good global performance in food production
(Alex et al., 2002). But there is an increasing realization that public extension by itself cannot meet the specific needs of
various regions and different classes of farmers and policy environment will promote competitive private and community
extension to operate effectively, in roles that complement, supplement, work in partnership and even substitute for public
extension (DAC, 2000). The foremost reason behind the agricultural extension privatization was found to be the declining
trend in government expenditure for extension over the last decade.
The present study was made to find out the preferences of farmers regarding privatization of agricultural
extension services, crops preferred, clientele group and approach in Anantapur district of Andhra Pradesh.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Sampling Procedure
This section describes the approaches and methods employed for data collection and analysis. The first

sub-section of this chapter presents the description of the study area. Then the details of methodology used to conduct the
overall study were discussed in subsequent sub-sections.
In this study, descriptive research design was followed in order describe demographic characteristics. Andhra
Pradesh state was selected purposively because more public-private sectors are working for upliftment of the
Socio-economic condition of the rural families. The Anantapur District was selected purposively for research investigation
because it is one of the largest districts in the A.P. and there are so many private organizations providing extension services
on little bit payment basis. The District has been divided into three Revenue Divisions consisting of 63 Revenue Mandals
(Anantapur Division 20, Dharmavaram Division 17 and Penukonda Division 26). Out of 20 mandals from Anantapur
Division two mandals were selected purposively because there are two Agricultural Research Stations
(Rekulakunta, Reddipalle) were located through which few private organizations were working collectively to uplift the
status of the small and marginal farmers. The list of villages under the selected Revenue Mandals was collected with help
of Mandal Development officer. Five villages were selected purposively since the time period is limited. The list of farmers
in selected villages who have benefitted from PESP was procured from the Agricultural officer. It was found that total 748
farmers have benefitted from PESP who are distributed in the villages Narpala, Bathalapalli, D. cherlopalli, Venkatampalli
and Chamaluru. 77 farmers from the list were selected by following proportionate random sampling method. In order to
compare with PESP beneficiary farmers 43 non-beneficiary farmers from the same villages were selected. Following is the
details of sample selected for the study.
Table 1: Selection of Villages and Respondents
Sl. No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.4528

Selected Villages
Narpala
Bathalapalli
D. Cherlopalli
Venkatampalli
Chamaluru
Total
Grand Total

Beneficiaries
16
15
16
14
16
77

Non-Beneficiaries
9
8
9
8
9
43
120

NAAS Rating: 3.25

Farmers Preferences towards Privatization of Agricultural

Extension Services in Anantapur District (A.P.)

21

Data Sources and Data Types

The study utilized both primary and secondary data. The primary qualitative data were gathered from focused

group discussion, key informants interviews, and informal discussions with individuals and personal observations.
The primary quantitative data were also generated through interview with the sample householders. In addition, relevant
secondary data were collected from available reports from Agricultural officers and NGOs; records from providers,
government policies and strategies documents from Anantapur district Govt. Site survey, and internet websites. More
emphasis was given to the qualitative data to capture all relevant information required and to have an in-depth insight of
the problem under analysis and have the potential to cover wide aspects of service delivery and are easy to use in schedules
for research work.

Instrument used for Data Collection

The information was elicited from the respondents with the help of pre-structured interview schedule.

The tentatively prepared schedule was advocated in a non-sample area to test the relevancy and practicability. Based on the
experience gained the schedule was modified wherever needed and finalized.

Method of Data Collection

The primary data were collected through personal interview technique with the help of pre-tested structured

interview schedule besides interaction with the key informants and group discussion. The secondary data were also
obtained from State Department of Agriculture and relevant published materials. The investigator personally met the
respondents and explained the purpose. The required data were recorded in the schedule.

Methods of Data Analysis

Quantitative data collected from the Household survey were analyzed using descriptive statistical methods.

The responses to the raw quantitative data were coded and stored using Microsoft Excel spreadsheet in order to avoid
respondent anonymity. They were summarized while qualitative responses were tallied and finally prioritized in order to
determine trends and patterns in the data and draw conclusions. It were also described, analyzed and interpreted on the spot
during data collection to avoid missing of relevant information.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Preference of Farmers Towards Privatization of Agricultural Extension Services

Preference of Respondents towards Privatization of Agricultural Extension Services (PAES) was measured in

which respondents felt that the extension services can be obtained by paying something, clientele groups who can afford
cost sharing concept and approaches of privatization of extension services.
(A) Services: Among the services namely Land development, Cultivation practices of food crops, vegetable
crops, fruit crops, flower crops, seed production, irrigation technology, postharvest technology, dairy, poultry,
vermicomposting, market services and credit services, based on the score obtained by the respondents the frequency and
percentage are presented in the following table

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

22

J. Yoga Narasimhulu Naidu & Dipak Kumar Bose

Table 2: Respondents Preferences and Opinion Regarding

Payment for Technical Services from PESP
N = 120
Sl. No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

Respondents
Preferences for PESP

Items
Land development
Cultivation practices of food crops
Cultivation practices of vegetable crops
Cultivation practices of fruit crops
Cultivation practices of flowers
Seed production
Irrigation technology
Post-harvest technology
Dairy
Poultry
Vermicomposting
Marketing services
Credit service

Frequency(Percentage)
18 (15.00)
34 (28.33)
102 (85.00)
104 (86.66)
101 (84.17)
112 (93.33)
100 (83.33)
108 (90.00)
104 (86.67)
106 (88.33)
111 (92.50)
94 (78.33)
24 (20.00)

Opinion Regarding
Payment for Technical
Service
Frequency(Percentage)
8 (6.67)
19 (15.83)
106 (88.33)
99 (82.50)
96 (80.00)
103 (85.83)
106 (88.33)
104 (86.67)
102 (85.00)
102 (85.00)
106 (88.33)
110 (91.67)
11(9.17)

From the table 2 it is evident that majority of the respondents (93.33%) preferred for advice in seed production
services, 92.50 per cent respondents preferred services for vermicomposting, 90.00 per cent respondents preferred
post-harvest technology services, for poultry services 88.33 percentage, for dairy and fruit crops 86.67 percentage, for
irrigation technology 83.33 percentage, for marketing services 78.33 percentage, for credit services 20.00 percentage and
only 15.00 per cent for land development. Regarding Cultivation practices majority of respondents (85.00%) preferred
services for vegetable crops, 84.17 per cent for flower crops and only 28.33 per cent for food crops.

Crop Preferences
Table 3: Respondents Preference Regarding Crops. N = 120
Sl. No.

Preferences (Crops)

1.
2.
3.

All the field crops

Only for commercial crops
Only for horticultural crops

Response
Frequency(Percentage)
98 (81.67)
116 (96.67)
110 (91.67)

From the table 3 it is evident that the majority of the respondents (96.67%) preferred PESP for commercial crops
91.67 per cent for horticultural crops and only 81.67 percent preferred for the field crops. A similar result was reported by
Venkatakumar et al. (2000).

Clientele Groups
Table 4: Respondents Preferences of Clientele Groups. N = 120
Sl. No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.4528

Preferences
(Clientele Groups)
Only to large farmers
Horticultural farmers
Commercial crop growing farmers
Categorizing on socio-economic status
Resource rich category
Large farm size holder category
Progressive farmers

Response
F (P)
12 (10.00)
22 (18.33)
28 (23.33)
19 (15.83)
16 (13.33)
12 (10.00)
108 (90.00)
NAAS Rating: 3.25

Farmers Preferences towards Privatization of Agricultural

Extension Services in Anantapur District (A.P.)

23

Table 4 depicts that majority of respondents (90.00%) preference was Progressive farmers group as they accept
privatized extension services since they want new quality information which interns should yield expected results and they
also have high risk bearing ability and they take up task on challenging basis. Next in the order were commercial farmers
group with percentage of 23.33 as they are ready to accept a privatized extension service shows the encouraging scope of
private extension services in peri-urban areas. 18.33 per cent Horticultural farmers group were preferred, obviously they
need specific information at right time. 10.00 per cent of Large farmers groups were preferred by the respondents, because
of large farm size and their resource richness ready to pay for private extension services, The approach of privatized
extension services shows the pathway to the farmers, how to contribute for getting quality information. It is the method of
sharing the cost, which is largely taken care of by public agencies till now. Privatization is more suitable for progressive
because they are innovative and can bear the expanses of privatization followed by commercial crop growing farmer
groups then horticultural farmer groups and large farmers group. This may due to fact that changing of the agriculture
sector from subsistence to profit oriented.

Approaches
Table 5: Respondents Preference over Various Approaches
N = 120
Sl. No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Preferences
(Approaches)
Complete privatization
Decentralization of Government service
Privatization + Government subsidy
Joint funding
Through co-operatives

Response
F (P)
6 (5.00)
38(31.67)
102 (85.00)
108 (90.00)
111 (92.50)

It is obvious from the Table 5 that, majority of the respondents (92.50%) prefers Cooperative farming as it is
promising approach for ensuring income to farmers, where in the group of farmers sharing the operational expenses and
has control over the cost of cultivation. 90.00 per cent farmers preferred the joint funding approach followed after
co-operative farming. These approaches can give an opportunity to farmers work in groups. Still the farmers were under
the impression that, public extension system should share that cost and give with benefit, but looking into the present
system they (85.00%) are arguing private partnership along with public system efforts. In the ultimate analysis it can be
said that farming community is shifting the paradigm slowly. Next approach in the order was decentralization of
government with 31.67 percentage so as to provide extension services at grass root levels. Due to privatization the farmers
are facing problems in selling their produce. The biggest drawback in Indian agricultural system is lack of market
infrastructure for farmers and buyers determine price of produce rather than producers. Farmers are not assured of what
price they are going to get for their produce in advance and they cant concentrate on their farm operations. Complete
privatization approach is preferred only by 5.00 per cent of the respondents. Similar findings were found in the study of
Ram Jiyawan(2009).

CONCLUSIONS
The role of agricultural extension in the next decade should be quite different from what it was 10 years ago or
even now. The public sector extension would still continue to be the major extension provider in most parts of the country
as the private sector alone would not be able to meet even partially the varied needs of farmers. Extension services cannot
be totally privatized, there should be room for both public and private extension. Privatization of agricultural extension
www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

24

J. Yoga Narasimhulu Naidu & Dipak Kumar Bose

system should not be seen as an alternative to public extension system. It can get a greater success in the areas of hi-tech
and commercial aspects. The infrastructure and the extension already available should be strategically deployed to improve
the efficiency of the public extension system. Private extension systems should play a complementary role so that all
farmers get required support at right time in the right form. Due attention needs to be given to the challenges that have
been mentioned for reaping the results of privatization of agricultural extension. Privatization should not be recommended
for all the extension services and practices.
REFERENCES
1.

Alex, G., Zijp, W. and Byerlee, D. (2002). Rural extension and advisory services: New directions. Rural Strategy Background
Paper, No. 9.Washington, D.C. AKIS Thematic Team, World Bank.

2.

DAC (2000).Policy framework for agricultural extension (draft). New Delhi: Extension Division, Department of Agriculture
and Co-operation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.

3.

Venkata Kumar et al. (2000) Privatization of agricultural extension system in India. presented at National seminar on private
extension, July 28-29, 2000, MANAGE, Hyderabad (AP.).

4.

Ram Jiyawan (2009)Farmers View on Privatization of Agricultural Extension Services.

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.4528

NAAS Rating: 3.25