A STUDY ON IMPACT OF AGMARK STATUS IN CONSUMPTION PATTERN

WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO TIRUNELVELI CITY

Dr. D. Janis Bibiyana1 and S.Sarala lakshmi2

Abstract:
Agmark is the quality mark of Government of India, which is given to agricultural
commodities. The agricultural produce act is permissive and the grading under the same
has come to be known as AGMARK Grading. The grade standards are based on both
physical characteristics and internal attributes such as weight, size, shape, colour and
material. This study aims to study the public awareness about AGMARK and to study
the impact of AGMARK status in consumption.
Well framed questionnaire was used to collect data from the customers. 150
sample respondents were selected from Tirunelveli city by convenient sampling
technique. Hypotheses was framed and tested with chi-square test. 5 point Likerts
scaling technique and Percentage analysis also made to draw the meaningful inferences
from the study. An analysis of the socio-economic distribution of the customers and
Agmark item reveals that age, education, family size, income level of the respondents
were not found to influence the level of satisfaction on the Agmark products. 63
respondents highly agreed with Agmark articles are course better than others and Agmark
articles only sold at every shop.
Key words: Consumer behavior, customer satisfaction, Quality control

Assistant Professor in Commerce, St. Johns College, Palayamkottai.

Assistant professor in Department of BBA ST.XAVIERS college, Palayamkottai

Introduction
The word Agmark denotes Agricultural marketing. Agmark is the quality mark of
Government of India, which is given to agricultural commodities. This scheme was
established by passing The Agricultural produce Grading and Marketing Act 1937. This
act defines standards of quality, fixing grade designations to indicate quality and
prescribing grade designation marks with regard to scheduled agricultural products. The
act gave statutory powers to the government of India to prescribe grade standards for
various agricultural commodities. The agricultural produce act is permissive and the
grading under the same has come to be known as AGMARK Grading. The grade
standards are based on both physical characteristics and internal attributes such as weight,
size, shape, colour and material.
Objectives
This study aims to study the public awareness about AGMARK and to study the
impact of AGMARK status in consumption.
Methodology
To attain the objectives of the study data were collected from both primary and
secondary source. Well framed questionnaire was used to collect data from the customers.
150 sample respondents were selected from Tirunelveli city by convenient sampling
technique. Hypotheses was framed and tested with chi-square test. 5 point Likerts
scaling technique and Percentage analysis also made to draw the meaningful inferences
from the study.
Hypotheses
Ho: Socio-economic status of the sample respondents does not influence the level of
satisfaction towards the Agmark products.

Data analysis and Interpretation

Consumers quality preference towards the use of agricultural commodities may
differ from person to person. The socio-economic status of the sample respondents may
affect the usage of agricultural commodities and their quality preference. Hence, socioeconomic status like age, educational qualification, size of the family, and monthly
income were analyzed.

Table 1
Socio-economic status of the sample respondents
Particulars

No

Age
Below 30 years

33

30 40 years

particulars

No

22

Family size (members)

1-2
11

45

30

3-4

79

53

40 50 years

42

28

5-6

48

32

Above 50 years
Income (monthly)

30

20

7-8
Education

12

Below 20000

69

46

School level

45

30

20000-30000

39

16

Under Graduates

42

28

30000-40000

25

17

Post Graduate

52

34

Above 40000

17

11

professional

12

Source: primary data

Table 1 shows that a significant proportion of the respondents (30%) were of the
age group 40-50years. Maximum respondents (46%) were earning below Rs.20000 per
month. 53% respondents family size is 3-4. Most of the respondents were having
education only up to school level.

Table 2
Qualitative response about Agmark products
Sl.
No

Particulars

1.

Consumers are adviced to buy

Agmark articles only
Much importance should be given to
Agmark products
Awareness should be created to
consume Agmark articles.
Agmark articles only sold at every
shop.
Agmark articles are always high in
demand.
Agmark articles are course better than
others.
Many articles are being marketed
without Agmark label.
No qualitative difference exists
between Agmark and non- Agmark
products.
No price difference is observed.

27

57

24

27

15

150

87

39

150

75

45

12

150

63

39

15

21

12

150

48

69

15

150

63

51

12

15

150

36

36

21

12

45

150

48

63

12

18

150

15

12

36

78

150

Quality grading of articles not at all

necessary.
Quality grading increases the cost of
the product.
Quality of the product should be
certified genuine.
Agmark grading should be insisted to
all products.
Govt. has to direct sale of quality
products.
Standard quality measure is needed.

21

60

15

12

42

150

12

18

12

102

150

105

24

150

18

21

15

36

60

150

39

69

15

18

150

51

60

15

15

150

709
(32)

651
(29)

204
(9)

234
(11)

453
(20)

2,
3
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.

Level of Qualitative Statement

Highly
Agreed

Total

Agreed

No
idea

Less
Agreed

Highly
Less
Agreed

Source: Primary data.

Table 2 reveals that majority of the customers know about Agmark products and
using these articles. The figures in the parenthesis show the percentage to the total.

Total

2250
(100)

Particulars
Age
Education
Income
Family size

Table 3
Computed Chi-Square Values
Chi-Square Values
Calculated value

Table value

1.23
1.25
1.23
1.7

12.6
12.6
12.6
12.6

Result at 0.05 level

Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted

Table 3 shows that calculated chi-square values are less than the table value 12.6
and hence, the Null hypothesis, Socio-economic status of the sample respondents do not
influence the level of satisfaction towards the Agmark products is accepted at 5% level of
significance. It implies that all the people like Agmark products irrespective of their socio
economic background.
Table 4
Customers Expectations
Expectations
Reduce Agmark products price.
Punish the adulterators.
More advertisement is necessary
Customer awareness program is
necessary.
Government must take efforts to grade
the product by accreditation.

No. of Respondents
113
98
78
90
119

Percentage
75
65
53
64
79

Rank
2
3
5
4
1

Source: Primary data

Table 4 explains that mostly 119 out of 150 respondents expect that Government
must take efforts to grade the product by accreditation as it ranked first. 113 out of 150
respondents expect to Reduce Agmark products price as it ranked second. 65% of the
respondents viewed that Punish the adulterators and was ranked third. 90 respondents
being 64% felt that Customer awareness program is necessary.
Therefore Agmark products are called upon to adhere to the various suggestions
brought forth by the esteemed respondents who alone will justify the Agmark products.

Findings
An analysis of the socio-economic distribution of the customers and Agmark item
reveals the following fact: a higher percentage of the respondents belong to the age group
of 30-40. Majority of the respondents (34%) are postgraduates. A large number of
respondents (53%) have monthly income of below 20000. Majority of the respondents
(46%) belong to the family size 2-4. However, age, education,, family size, income level
of the respondents were not found to influence the level of satisfaction on the Agmark
products. 105 respondents out of 150 highly agreed with Quality of the product should be
certified genuine and 87 respondents highly agreed with much importance should be
given to Agmark products. 63 respondents highly agreed with Agmark articles are course
better than others and Agmark articles only sold at every shop.
Suggestions
1. Publicity campaign may be arranged by the Agmark authorities to know about Agmark
status for agricultural products.
2. Meeting of the farmers must be periodically arranged to demonstrate the latest
technology.
3. It is suggested that producers and sellers may sell the Agmark products at reasonable
price to suit the needs of the middle income groups.
4. Advertisement should be attractive and influencing. In addition, they should be more
informative to the buyers.
5. Government should take efforts for Agmark products to be graded by accreditation.
6. More number of Agmark laboratories are to be introduced in Tirunelveli district.
Conclusion
All respondents at Tirunelveli district are aware of Agmark products.

The

Agmark certification can be extended to more number of products without much taxation.
The Agmark may include accreditation. Though market economy minimized adulteration
to some extent, Agmark certification is essential for all the agricultural products.

References
Acharya,S.S., & N.L.Agarwal., Agricultural Marketting in India, Calcutta: Oxford & IBH
Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 1996.
Murugarathinam, A., & T. Aranganathan., Agricultural MarketingInfrastructure in
Tamilnadu, Kissan World, 33 (10):2006.
Raravikar.Y.G., Role of Agmark Products in our daily life, Agricultural Marketing
Golden Jubilee Supplement, Government of India, 28 (4): 1986.
Tonapi. A.T., Agmark as an aid to Internal and Export trade, Agricultural Marketing
Golden Jubilee Suppliment, Government of India.