Fisheries and Aquaculture Journal
Open Access

An Economic Analysis of Fish Production of SHG's and Fishermen cooperative groups in Mungeli District of Chhattisgarh

Rohit Kumar Sahu^*, Ajay Tegar and Mukesh Kumar Anant ^*Correspondence: Rohit Kumar Sahu, Department of Agricultural Economics, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Chhattisgarh, India, Email:

Author info »

Introduction

Fisheries sector plays as an important role in the Indian economy. Exports, food and nutritional security, national income, and job creation are all boosted by it. More than 2.8 cores primary-level fishers and fish farmers depend on the fisheries sector for their livelihood, and many more people further down the fisheries value chain. For a sizable portion of the economically underprivileged population of the country, particularly in the coastal districts, this sector also serves as a significant source of income [1,2].

Between 1997 and 2017, the live-weight volume of the world's aquaculture production more than tripled, from 34 MT to 112 MT. In 2017, the top seventy-five percent of aquaculture production was primarily made up of seaweed, carps, tilapia, and catfish species groups. Today, there are 40% more fish, shellfish, aquatic plant, and algal species being cultivated worldwide in a variety of marine, brackish, and freshwater systems; it has increases the diversity of aquaculture [3].

India, a maritime nation, has extensive water resources located in both the inland and marine sectors that are used for fisheries capture and culture. Aquaculture has experienced an average annual growth rate of more than 10%, contributing to the sector's overall strong growth of about 8%. The sector's overall gross value added has been increasing steadily, making up about 7.8% of agriculture's GDP. During 2019–20, the export of maritime goods totaled 12.9 lakh metric tons and was worth Rs 46662.85 cores. Fish and fish products make up about 17 percent of the agriculture exports of our nation [2].

By fostering self-employment among rural women fishermen through SHGs, the Chhattisgarh State is also playing a significant role in improving the lives of these people. The state has abundant water resources, including 1649 irrigation reservoirs and 59175 rural pond areas totaling 0.772 million square meters. These water bodies may be used to develop fisheries through SHGs [4].

The State is actively contributing by fostering rural selfemployment in the fishing industry, which in turn enables rural residents to access wholesome food. Fisheries sector has employed for about 2.20 Lakh persons and majority of them belong to under privileged section of the society. A total of 1.920 lakh ha of water area in the state, including 91,928 rural ponds covering 1.094 lakh ha and 1770 irrigation reservoirs covering 0.826 lakh ha, is available for the development of fisheries up to 2020-21. In 2018-19 the total fish production of Chhattisgarh was 4, 88,618.98 Metric ton and in the year 2019-20 it was 537,889.57 Metric ton, which is 10.08% more than previous year. At present, the production of fish is near about 2, 82,790.29 Metric ton till September 2020-21 [5].

Materials and Methods

Sampling framework

Chhattisgarh comprises 32 districts out of that Mungeli district was selected purposively. Mungeli district consists three blocks out of those two blocks i.e., Mungeli and Pathariya was selected based on the availability of data. In Mungeli district there are 44 SHG’s and 18 Fishermen cooperative groups are registered under fish production practices, where in Mungeli and Pathariya blocks the number of SHG’s and Fishermen cooperative groups constitutes 33 and 8 respectively, out of which 4 SHG’s and 4 Fishermen cooperative groups were selected based on the performance. From the selected SHG’s and Fishermen cooperative groups total of 40 and 112 members respectively selected for the study purpose.10 wholesalers and 12 retailers were identified in the study area out of that 5 wholesalers and 6 retailers were selected based on the nature of respond.

Collection of data

Primary data were collected from members of sample SHG’s and Fishermen cooperative group through personal interview using pre-tested interview schedule. The secondary data were collected from the Directorate of Fisheries, Mungeli and also collected from official website of government.

Analytical tools

The data collected from the SHG’s and Fishermen cooperative group are used for estimating cost and returns structure by using fixed and variable cost. The formula used to find cost and returns are as follows:

a. Total cost=Total fixed cost+Total variable cost

b. Gross income (Rs)=Total Yield (kg) x Market Price of the fish (Rs/kg)

c. Net income (Rs)=Gross income–Total cost

d. Benefit-Cost Ratio=Net return/Total Cost

Results and Discussion

Cost and return of fish production

Cost of fish production by SHG’s and fishermen cooperative groups: Economics of cost of fish production carried out separately for SHG’s and Fishermen cooperative groups is presented in the Table 1. The total cost of fish production were categorized into variable cost and fixed cost per hectare. For SHG’s per hectare cost of fish production was found to be Rs 47658.73 perusal of this table reveals that fish production requires labour in varying magnitude. Though, the labour present in the group is the major part of total human labour requirements, however some hired labour for catching is also required to complete or finish the operations in stipulated time. The average human labour cost for the production was found to be Rs 1949.87 per hectare. The major cost item in fish production were watching cost Rs 18000.00 per hectare, followed by the catching cost Rs 10143.75 per hectare, seed fingerlings Rs 3962.50 per hectare, liming cost Rs 2625.00 per hectare, oilcake cost Rs 1945.00 per hectare, and medicine cost Rs 1712.50 per hectare and Rs 237.50 per hectare for miscellaneous items. The cost incurred on fixed capital is cost on lease rent Rs 2750.00 per hectare. For Fishermen cooperative groups per hectare cost of fish production was found to be Rs 60354.00 perusal of this table reveals that fish production requires labour in varying magnitude. The average human labour cost for fish production was Rs 2005.02 per hectare, the major cost items in fish production were watching cost Rs 20550.00 per hectare, followed by catching Rs 10250.00 per hectare, seed fingerlings cost Rs 6377.50 per hectare, liming cost Rs 4625.00 per hectare, oilcake cost Rs 3362.50 per hectare, medicine cost Rs 2126.25 per hectare, fertilizer cost Rs 1962.50 per hectare and miscellaneous expenses was Rs 482.50 per hectare. Per hectare cost of production of fish by SHG’s and Fishermen cooperative groups was found Rs 47658.73 and Rs 60354.00 respectively.

Table 1: The cost of fish production by SHG’s and Fishermen cooperative groups.

Gross return, net return and B:C ratio of fish production by SHG’s and Fishermen cooperative group: Gross return, total cost, net return, B:C ratio and cost of production were shown in the Table 2. For SHG’s per hectare total cost of fish production was calculated at Rs 47658.73 per hectare, gross return was Rs 199650.00 per hectare, net return Rs 151991.27 per hectare and B:C ratio was calculated 1:3.18. Similarly for Fishermen cooperative groups, per hectare total cost of fish production was calculated at Rs 60354.00 per hectare, gross return was Rs 320850.00 per hectare, net return was at Rs 260496.00 per hectare and B:C ratio was found 1:4.31. Maximum gross and net return was obtained by Fishermen cooperative groups which indicates that the overall management practices in fish production is better as compared to SHG’s [6-13].

Table 2: Gross return, net return and B:C ratio of fish production.

Conclusion

A study was conducted in the Mungeli district of Chhattisgarh. Mainly two district Mungeli and Pathariya blocks were selected for the study on the basis of availability of data. It was found that the total cost incurred in the production of fish by SHG’s and Fishermen cooperative groups was Rs 47658.73 and Rs 60354.00 quintal respectively. Gross return was found to be Rs 199650.00 and Rs 320850.00 per hectare, net return was found to be Rs 151991.27 and Rs 260496.00 per hectare and B:C ratio was found to be 1:3.18 and 1:4.31 in SHG’s and Fishermen cooperative groups respectively. From the B:C ratio it was concluded that the practicing of fish production in the selected blocks was found profitable.

References

1. Abdurrahman ZH, Asif M, Ramola S. A survey on fish marketing system in Dehradun, India. Arch Life Sci Env. 2017;1(2):1-6.

   [Google Scholar]

2. Anonymous, (2020). Handbook on fisheries statistics 2020, Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India, New Delhi.
3. Bhattacharjee I, Roy PS, Pal P, Das B, Banerjee A, Ghosh S. Economics of Fish Production at Kalna and Its Adjacent Areas, Burdwan District, West Bengal, India. Indian J Exp Biol. 2017;4(1).

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

4. Devi BN, Choudhary KK, Singh B, Banjare LK, Verma D. Status and Prospects of Fisheries Self Help Group in Kabirdham District, Chhattisgarh, India. Asian j agric ext economics sociol. 2019;36(4):1-4.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

5. Edet EO, Udoe PO, Uwah ED. Costs and return analysis of fish farming in Calabar metropolis, Cross River State Nigeria. Glob J Agric Sci. 2018;17(1):23-31.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

6. Gawa S, Kumar NR, Prakash S, Sharma R, Panday SK, Dube K. Economics of Fish Feed Production for Cage Culture in Reservoirs of Jharkhand, India. J Exp Zool India. 2021;24(1):927-31.

   [Google Scholar]

7. Hassan F, Prathap SK, Jeeva JC, Mathew S, Babu MR. Economic feasibility analysis of fisherwomen based microenterprises. ICAR. 2013;60(1):125-130.

   [Google Scholar]

8. Hossain MA, Asif AA, Zafar MA, Hossain MT, Alam MS, Islam MA. Marketing of fish and fishery products in Dinajpur and livelihoods of the fish retailers. Int J Fish Aquat Sci. 2015;3(1):86-92.

   [Google Scholar]

9. Islam MS, Rahman MS, Akter F, Moniruzzaman M. Cost benefits analysis of aquaculture in northern part of Bangladesh. Int J Appl Sci. 2017;3(2):105-7.

   [Google Scholar]

10. Jayaraman R. Production and marketing constraints of fisherwomen self-help groups in Thoothukudi District, Tamil Nadu. Indian J Fish. 2017;64(1):106-10.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

11. Jadhav G, Borgave S. Marine Fish Marketing System and Distribution Channels in India: A Literature Review. Int J Res Anal Rev. 2019;6(2):998-1003.

    [Google Scholar]

12. Upadhyay AD, Roy PD. Structural performance of fish market and socio-economic status of market functionaries of Naveen Machhali Mandi Mahanva of Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh. Econ Aff. 2016;61(3):511.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

13. Upadhyay SK, Mishra J, Verma DK. Studies on investment and return in fish farming in different types of pond ownership in Basti district, Uttar Pradesh. J Kalash Sci. 2015;3(3):39-43.

    [Google Scholar]