Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Economics
Volume 15 Issue 6 Version 1.0 Year 2015
Type: Double Blind Peer Reviewed International Research Journal
Publisher: Global Journals Inc. (USA)
Online ISSN: 2249-460x & Print ISSN: 0975-587X
Abstract- Cotton is the important cash crop of Pakistan and a major source of foreign earnings.
However cotton crop is facing many problems, such as disease and pest attacks. One way to
reduce losses caused by disease and pest attack is the use integrated pest management (IPM)
practices. Keeping in view the importance of this technique, the present study analyzed the
adoption of IPM along with estimation of risk involved in the adoption process. To estimate the
cotton yield, two types of production functions (one for adopter and other for non-adopters) were
estimated using the regression analysis. Then estimate of regression models was used further in
risk analysis. The results of non-adopters of IPM showed that cost of urea bags, cost of nitrophosphate bags, cost of herbicide and rainfall were -0.038, 0.00475, 0.301 and 0.164
respectively and all of these significant at 10 percent level.
Keywords: cotton, IPM, herbicide, evaluation, risk, coefficient, hyderabad.
GJHSS-E Classification : FOR Code: 149999
EconomicEvaluationandRiskAnalysisofIntegratedPestManagementIPMinCottonProductioninSindhPakistan
Strictly as per the compliance and regulations of:
2015. Sanaullah Noonari, Ms.Irfana Noor Memon, Ghulam Yasin Kalwar, Maria Pathan, Aamir Ali Marani, Zarmina Memon, Riaz
Hussain Jamali & Amber Pathan. This is a research/review paper, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), permitting all non-commercial
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Introduction
Year
1
I.
2015
Sanaullah Noonari , Ms.Irfana Noor Memon , Ghulam Yasin Kalwar , Maria Pathan , Aamir Ali Marani ,
Zarmina Memon , Riaz Hussain Jamali & Amber Pathan
Year
2015
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
Objectives
of
socio-economic
b) Educational Status
Education considered as one of the most
important factors Which effect the knowledge, attitude
and prestige of an individual to accept the new
technology such as integrated pest management (IPM)
for cotton production. In the present study education
means schooling years that have been spent in school
or college for the acquisition of knowledge. It is
assumed that farmers with higher education adopt new
technology rapidly.
c) Farm Size
Farm size has an important effect on the crop
production. Larger farm size reduces the variable cost of
inputs as well as fixed cost, because of economies of
scale.
d) Farming Experience
Farming experience has
crops production. Experienced
technical knowledge than non
Farming experience is playing
making efficient use of resources.
an importance in the
farmers have more
experienced farmers.
on important role in
Year
h) Returns to scale
Production function employed for IPM and non-IPM
The returns to scale were estimated directly by
farmers as a whole is given below.
getting
the
sum of 'bi' coefficients. The returns will be
Log (Y) = log (a) + b1log (x1) + b2log (x2) + b3log (x3) +
increasing,
constant
or diminishing based on whether
b4log (x4) + b5log (x5) + b6log (x6) + b7log (x7) + ei
value of summation of 'bi' is greater, equal or less than
Where;
unity, respectively.
Y = Gross return in rupees/ha
i) Structural break in production relation
a = Intercept
To identify the structural break, if any, in the
x1= Seed cost/ha
production relations with the adoption of IPM technology
x2 = Organic manure cost/ha
in production, output elasticitys were estimated by
x3 = Human labour cost/ha
ordinary least square method by fitting log linear
regression was run in combination with the IPM and
x4 = Bullock labour cost/ha
non-IPM farmers. The pooled regression was run in
x5 = Chemical fertilizers cost/ha
combination with IPM and non-IPM farmers including
x6 = IPM component/ Plant protection cost/ha
IPM farmers as dummy variables one for IPM and zero
x7 = Machine labour cost/ha
for non-IPM farmers.
The following log linear estimable forms of
ei = Error term
equations were used for examining the structural break
bi = Elasticitys coefficient of respective inputs
in production relation.
and summation of these gives returns to scale
(1)
ln y1 = ln A1+ b1 ln X1 + b2 ln X2+ b3 ln X3+ b4 ln X4+ b5 ln X5+ b6 ln X6+ b7 ln X7+U1
ln y2 = ln A2+ b1 ln X1+ b2 ln X2 + b3 ln X3+ b4 ln X4 + b5 ln X5+ b6 ln X6+ b7 ln X7+Ui
(2)
(3)
ln y3 = ln A3+ b1 ln X1 + b2 ln X2+ b3 ln X3+ b4 ln X4+ b5 ln X5+ b6 ln X6+ b7 ln X7+e3d+U1
Where,
Subscribes 1, 2 and 3 in above equation represent non-adopter, adopter and pooled regression function
with IPM as dummy variables, respectively.
b1, b2, b3, b4, b5, b6, b7 b1, b2, b3, b4, b5, b6, b7, b1, b2, b3, b4, b5, b6, b7
Represent individual output elasticity of
j) Output decomposition model
respective input variable in equation (1), (2) and (3) d
For any production function, the total change in
in equation (3) represent dummy variable. If the
output is affected by the change in the factors of
regression coefficient of dummy variables is significant,
production and in the parameters that define the
then there is structural break in production relations with
function. This total change in per hectare output is
the adoption of IPM technology.
decomposed to reflect on adoption of IPM and the
change in input levels. The output decomposition model
g) Functional analysis
2015
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
Year
2015
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
Analysis of qualitative
Regression Analysis)
variables
Multiple
No. Respondent
Percentage
Non-Adopters
Adopters
Total
30
30
60
50.00
50.00
100.0
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
i. Age
Table 2 : Distributions of respondent according to their age group in the study area
No. Respondent
Percentage
No. Respondent
Percentage
07
11
12
30
23.33
36.66
40.00
100.00
04
18
08
30
13.33
60.00
26.66
100.00
Table-2 depicts that 07 adopters and 04 nonadopters farmers belonged to age group up 35 years,
while about one-third i.e.11 adopters and less than half
i.e. 18 non-adopters farmers belonged to age group 3645 years. About 12 adopters and 08 non-adopters
farmers belonged to age group above 45 years.
ii. Education
Education can be defined as the process of
developing knowledge, wisdom and other desirable
IPM-Adopters
No. Respondent
Percentage
5
15
8
2
30
Illiterate
Primary-middle
Matric
Collage-University
Total
16.66
50.00
26.66
6.66
100.00
4
12
10
4
30
13.33
40.00
33.33
13.33
100.00
Below 5
5-8
Above-8
Total
IPM-Adopters
Non-IPM adopters
No. Respondent
Percentage
No. Respondent
Percentage
13
11
06
30
43.33
36.66
20.00
100.00
06
14
10
30
20.00
46.66
33.33
100.00
Non-IPM adopters
No. Respondent
Percentage
2015
Non-IPM adopters
Year
Up to 35
36 to 45
Above 45
Total
IPM-Adopter
Age Group
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
Year
2015
Marital Status
Single
Married
Divorced
Widow
Total
IPM-Adopters
No. Respondent
Percentage
9
20
0
1
30
30.00
66.66
0.00
3.33
100.00
Non-IPM adopters
No. Respondent
Percentage
10
12
1
2
30
33.33
40.00
3.33
6.66
100.00
IPM-Adopters
Percentage
No. Respondent
14
3
13
30
46.66
10.00
43.33
100.00
Non-IPM adopters
No. Respondent
Percentage
16
2
12
30
53.33
6.66
40.00
100.00
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
Owner
Tenant
Owner cum Tenant
Total
Non-IPM adopters
No. Respondent
Percentage
46.66
30.00
23.33
100.00
16
8
6
30
53.33
26.66
20.00
100.00
IPM-Adopters
Year
No. Respondent
Percentage
No. Respondent
Percentage
05
10
15
30
16.66
33.33
50.00
100.00
04
11
15
30
13.33
36.66
50.00
100.00
Up to 10
11-20
Above 20
Total
Non-IPM adopters
No. Respondent
Percentage
No. Respondent
Percentage
10
8
7
5
30
33.33
26.66
23.33
16.66
100.00
9
7
8
6
30
30.00
23.33
26.66
20.00
100.00
Df
Significance
2.801
.946
level
Chi-square
Less 5 acres
5-8 acres
8-10 acres
Above 10 acres
Total
IPM-Adopters
Farmer status
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
S.E
Wald
Exp(B)
Education
Farm Size
Farm Experience
Constant
.160
-.111
1.177
-5.005
.238
.032
.278
2.414
.453
12.354
17.948
4.299
.852
.895*
3.246*
.007*
Year
2015
Estimated Coefficient of
independent variables
T value
Significance
Constant
Cost of urea Bags
Cost of Nitro-phosphate Bags
Seed Expenditure
Temperature
Rainfall
Humidity
Herbicides Cost
Spray cost
-42.57
-0.00389
0.00475
0.00356
0.02693
0.301
0.164
-0.00093
0.00027
-1.805
*3.313
*3.579
- 0.907
1.628
*2.221
*2.511
-0.308
0.310
- 0.78
0.002
0.001
0.370
0.111
0.032
0.016
0.760
0.758
T value
Significance
Constant
Temperature
Nitre-phosphate Bags Cost
Seed Expenditure
Spray Cost
Herbicide cost
Urea Bags Cost
Humidity
Rainfall
2.359
0.0305
0.000350
0.100
0.00295
-0.000671
-0.00213
-0.000445
0.08946
0.414
* 1.672
0.488
*2.05
*5.322
-0.308
M.844
-0.035
1.882
0.681
0.102
0.628
0.046
0.00
0.759
0.073
0.972
0.067
Independent
Variables
Year
2015
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
Year
2015
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
10
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
Min. Yield
Max. Yield
38.95
39.17
39.38
39.60
39.82
40.03
40.25
40.46
40.68
40.90
41.11
41.33
41.54
41.76
41.98
42.19
42.41
42.62
42.84
43.06
43.27
43.49
43.70
43.92
44.14
44.35
44.57
45.00
45.22
22.23
23.17
18.40
25.81
25.56
22.76
24.57
22.26
20.96
21.93
23.01
23.82
23.28
20.20
17.30
12.04
22.62
16.90
15.07
19.33
15.40
13.94
16.29
19.04
3.105
13.48
14.46
13.25
12.11
46.29
49.80
49.33
49.64
45.92
48.35
48.63
49.50
48.32
51.10
50.78
53.08
51.92
49.87
55.33
52.76
50.36
57.14
59.75
53.58
56.29
52.20
64.16
56.72
57.59
66.43
57.21
64.03
55.30
Table 15 : Stimulated mean cotton yield, Standard deviation and Coefficient of variation of lPM-Adopters
Mean Yield
Standard deviation
Coefficient of Variation
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2029
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
38.95
39.17
39.38
39.60
39.82
40.03
40.25
40.46
40.68
40.90
41.11
41.33
41.54
41.76
41.98
42.19
42.41
42.62
42.84
43.06
4.35
4.88
4.77
4.85
4.35
4.76
5.03
5.50
5.85
5.72
6.18
6.21
6.44
6.04
6.75
7.19
6.36
7.69
7.69
7.30
11.16
12.45
12.10
12.2
10.92
11.88
12.49
13.59
14.37
13.98
15.02
15.02
15.49
14.46
16.07
17.03
14.99
18.03
17.94
16.95
11
Years
Year
Mean Yield
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2039
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2038
2039
Years
2015
Table 14 : Simulated mean cotton yield, min mean yield and max mean yield
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
Year
2015
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
12
43.27
43.49
43.70
43.92
44.14
44.35
44.57
44.78
45.00
45.22
7.66
8.25
8.35
8.36
9.15
8.81
8.81
9.43
9.77
9.59
17.69
18.96
19.10
19.03
20.72
19.86
19.76
21.05
21.70
21.20
Mean Yield
Min. Yield
Max. Yield
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2029
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
28.19
28.44
28.68
28.93
29.17
29.42
29.66
29.91
30.15
30.40
30.64
30.89
31.13
31.37
31.62
31.86
32.11
32.35
32.60
32.84
33.09
33.33
33.58
33.82
34.07
34.31
34.56
34.80
35.05
35.29
12.714
12.575
-15.632
13.804
13.263
8.516
8.558
7.311
9.504
5.574
9.876
7.159
7.599
7.093
4.441
8.761
9.44
3.879
2.783
5.574
1.456
2.858
8.577
4.373
2.453
4.339
6.134
3.697
5.313
3.641
34.984
37.636
37.37
35.437
36.477
41.678
38.821
39.514
42.410
48.566
42.008
46.028
41.555
44.589
44.666
43.395
44.048
45.611
47.708
48.566
46.847
46.145
45.948
50.768
53.297
56.693
53.167
53.579
53.742
61.120
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
Standard deviation
Coefficient of Variation
28.19
28.44
28.68
28.93
29.17
29.42
29.66
29.91
30.15
30.40
30.64
30.89
31.13
31.37
31.62
31.86
32.11
32.35
32.60
32.84
33.09
33.33
33.58
33.82
34.07
3431
34.56
34.80
35.05
35.29
4.931
4.974
4.743
5.143
5.505
6.603
5.754
6.710
6.394
8.909
6.337
6.800
6.870
7.072
8.041
7.448
7.398
8.293
9.155
8.909
9.204
8.794
8.414
10.059
9.963
11.012
10.008
10.638
10.186
11.306
17.48
17.48
16.53
17.77
18.86
22.44
19.39
22.43
21.20
29.30
20.67
22.01
22.06
22.53
25.42
23.37
23.03
25.62
28.07
27.12
27.81
26.37
25.05
29,73
29.24
32.08
28.95
30.56
29.05
32.03
Discussion
13
Year
Mean Yield
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
Years
2015
Table 17 : Stimulate mean cotton yield, Standard deviation and Coefficient of Variation of IPM non-adopters.
Year
2015
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
14
Year
15
2015
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
Year
2015
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
16
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
Year
40.
17
39.
2015
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
Year
2015
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
18
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
92.
93.
94.
19
91.
2015
85.
Year
84.
83.
Year
2015
Economic Evaluation and Risk Analysis of Integrated Pest Management (Ipm) in Cotton Production in
Sindh Pakistan
20