CHAPTER-5

ECONOMICS OF POMEGRANATE CULTIVATION

5. 1 INTRODUCTION:

Nashik is the leading district in grape and pomegranate fruit production in

Maharashtra. Both crops are considered as the backbone of the rural economy in the
district. It is a well known fact that good established and maintained fruit orchard can
offer better income as compared to other cereal crops. So the major cause behind the
expansion of pomegranate orchards was the higher profits gained from its cultivation.

Recently the pomegranate crop has obtained great economic significance in

raising the income of even marginal farmers too. That also indicated its sustainability
for small holdings for replacing subsistence farming as well as its significance in
alleviating poverty levels of rural areas. Now growers of study region are taking
pomegranate crop as livelihood and a good source of earning. The net return from
orchards up to ` 5 lakh ha-1 annum-1 have been demonstrated by some growers.

Overall, this crop has contributed in increasing rural economy and provided a
good earning source especially for unemployed rural youths. As well as it
revolutionized agricultural economy to a large extent in drier tracts of the district.
This undoubtedly makes it necessary to go into the details of the economical aspects
of pomegranate crop grown in the study area. The study of the economics of
pomegranate is indispensable since there is no proper farm business data on its cost of
production and marketing (Khunt and et. al. 2003).

Against this backdrop, present chapter seeks to examine the cost and return
structure of the pomegranate crop on the basis of primary data collected during field
survey. The technique of tabular analysis was employed for financial calculations and
average figures of financial inputs made by respondents are considered for
interpretation of results. The profitability from pomegranate cultivation was measured
by computing the cost benefit ratio for small, medium and large category of
respondents in general. And the impact of biotic and abiotic factors viz. i) soil types
ii) altitude of orchard iii) cropping seasons iv) varieties and v) ages of orchards on
yield and profits from pomegranate crop was assessed in particular.

127
5.2 COST AND RETURN CONCEPTS:

While understanding the economic feasibility of pomegranate crop, the cost

structure is studied under three heads of expenses viz. establishment cost, operational
cost, and marketing cost. Whereas, the profitability was measured by computing the
the gross return, net profit and cost benefit ratio. Those financial concepts frequently
used in the present study are explained in detail below.

5.2.1 Establishment Cost:

Initial investment made for creating the basic structure and set up a
pomegranate orchard is known as ‘establishment cost’. It is also referred as ‘fixed
cost’. It constitutes expenses for plantation and maintaining the orchard during first
two years. The cash outflows during this non bearing or unproductive stage of
orchards. Hence this cost needs to be spread over the returns obtained in the
productive life of orchard.

Extensive discussions with respondents and experts in the field of

pomegranate cleared that the average economic or productive life span of
pomegranate in the study area is around 10 years. Thus, total establishment cost was
apportioned over 10 years and annual establishment cost was obtained as below

  
 ! "

Annual establishment cost =

  #$ % 
 % !



5.2.2 Operational cost:

It involves the time to time expenditure made on purchase of materials and

labour inputs during cropping season (Bahar period) and the rest period of the
orchard. Additionally, other annual expenses like electricity bills, revenue of land,
rental value of land, depreciation of machinery, interest on fix and working capital
and miscellaneous expenditure needed for operating the pomegranate holdings were
also taken under head of operational cost.

(Operational cost = Material cost + Labour cost + Machinary cost + Other costs)

128
5.2.3 Marketing cost:

It includes expenses on labour for completing certain marketing operations

such as harvesting, sorting and packing of fruits at the field level. And also the
charges deducted at the market place for loading, unloading, weighing, commission of
fruit agents and market fees were computed under head of marketing cost.

(Marketing cost = Labour cost+Packing Material+Transport+Market charges)

5.2.4 Gross Cost :

The sum of annual establishment cost, operational cost and marketing cost
formed the gross cost of pomegranate cultivation.

(Gross Cost=Annual establishment cost +Operational cost + Marketing cost)

5.2.5 Gross Returns:

It was obtained by multiplying the yield with market price of fruits.

(Gross Returns = Yield x Price)

5.2.6 Net Returns:

The Net return is the earning power of money invested in pomegranate during
its life span that was worked out by deducting gross cost from gross returns.

(Net Returns = Gross return – Gross Cost )

5.2.7 Cost Benefit Ratio:

The cost benefit ratio (hereafter called as CBR ) indicates the returns received
for each rupee invested in pomegranate enterprise. This ratio was simply obtained by
dividing gross returns to gross cost.

(Cost Benefit Ratio (CBR) = Gross returns ÷ Gross cost)

5.3 ESTABLISHMENT COST:

Creation of basic infrastructure is the most fundamental aspect in pomegranate

cultivation. It not only includes expenses incurred in the zero years i.e. for plantation
but also the nourishment of trees for next two years till it starts bearing the fruits.
Hence the expenses made at different points of time makes it necessary to divide the
establishment cost into 2 subparts viz. i) Plantation cost ii) Gestation period cost.

129
5.3.1 Cost of Pomegranate Plantation:

Table No. 5.1 indicates an expenditure on various items that a grower had to
do before and at the time of pomegranate plantation.

Table No. 5.1 Cost of Pomegranate Orchard Plantation (Value in ` Ha -1)

Sr. Item of Cost Category of Respondents Average Average

No. Cost Cost in
Small Medium Large %

i Land preparation cost 3068.9 2723.8 2558.6 2783.8 3.41

ii Plantation layout 78.6 86.0 150.9 105.2 0.13

iii Digging of pits 1978.1 1960.9 1950.9 1963.3 2.41

iv Sapling 7614.1 6871.0 5026.1 6503.7 7.97

v BHC/ Thymate powder 945.8 755.9 799.2 833.6 1.02

vi Organic fertilizers 8295.9 8123.9 8108.8 8176.2 10.02

vii Chemical fertilizers 1896.3 1829.4 1832.4 1852.7 2.27

viii Drip irrigation kit 30010.3 29018.9 28988.7 29339.3 35.94

ix Orchard equipments 30981.0 28147.6 25025.8 28051.8 34.37

x Orchard implements 2010.0 2107.8 1928.0 2015.3 2.47

Total 86879.0 81625.2 76369.4 81624.9 100.00

(Compiled by researcher)

The proportionate costs (table No. 5.1) of pomegranate plantation show that

i) The drip irrigation kit, as a basic input in water scarcity areas had emerged the
main cash component occupied 35.94% in total cost. The drip systems
manufactured by Jain Irrigation Company Ltd, Jalgaon (M. S.) were mostly
preferred by the respondents.

130
ii) It is followed by 34.37% cost for the special kind of orchard equipments like
piston pump used for spraying and the small power generators for spraying,
diesel engines for irrigation were also utilized by respondents in absence of
electric power. The orchard also requires usual farm implements or hand tools
like a sickle, hoes and spade for soil tillage, scissors or secateurs for pruning,
plastic crates for harvesting etc. The cost of all such utensils was only 2.46%.

iii) Generally, 2½ tractor trolleys of compost manure were applied for a hectare
pomegranate plantation. The cost of farmyard manure (FYM) produced on the
own farm was also evaluated on the basis of rates ` 4000 per trolley prevailed
in the village. The expenditure on FYM and other organic fertilizers such as
neem-cake, vermicompost, trichoderma was 10.02% in total plantation cost.

iv) The pomegranate plant (saplings) was fourth major item of cost 7.97%. The
rate of saplings propagated by “Gooti Kalam” available local nurseries was `
10 per sapling. Comparatively, tissue culture saplings having well plant
growth, vigor and free from diseases were costlier ` 25 per saplings excluding
transportation and loading charges.

v) The land preparation of the orchard site shared only 3.41%. And expenditure
on the human labour employed for plantation layout, digging and filling pits
occupied lowest proportion about 2.41%. All others like chemical fertilizers
(2.27%) and disinfectant powders (BHC, thymate and folidol) were minor
items of cost (1.02%).

Table No. 5.1 also indicates that average per hectare plantation cost declined
with increase in size of holding. It was mainly due to differences in the number of
plants ha-1 that also decreased with increase in size of holding viz. 849, 802 and 779
for small, medium and large holdings respectively. Generally growers with small
holdings has tendency of setting maximum plants per unit of land to obtain higher
yields. It leads to increase expenses on planting material for small holdings. Besides,
the cost of equipments and implements to a more or less extent also remains same for
all holdings; it also minimizes average plantation costs for medium and large holding.

5.3.2 Expenditure During Gestation Period:

The financial inputs required for growing up trees and maintaining the orchard
during the initial two years waiting period or gestation period are given in table 6.2. It

131
shows that the organic (farm yard manure) and inorganic (N: P: K) fertilizers (29.9%)
and pesticides (22.6%) as vital material inputs together shared nearly half of
expenditure during the gestation period. After that labour wages occupied more than
one-fourth proportion (26.8 %) in total cost. It is followed by expenses on irrigation
(10.5%) and soil tillage practices (7.5%). Whereas, expense on plantation gap fillings
was low only 2.64%.

Table No. 5.2 Expenditure in Gestation Period of Pomegranate (Value in ` Ha-1)

Sr. Items of cost Category of Respondents Average Ave.

No. Cost Cost
in %
Small Medium Large

A Material cost

i Filling of plantation gap 972.4 864.7 979.4 938.8 2.6

ii Fertilizers 11159.5 10682.4 10061.8 10634.5 29.9

iii Plant protection chemicals 7634.9 8029.9 8478.8 8047.9 22.6

iv Water application 3376.9 3851.5 4022.7 3750.3 10.5

B Labour cost

i Preparation of ridges/bunds 2118.3 2441.7 2643.2 2401.0 6.7

ii Shaping and training of trees 2996.0 3208.0 3116.0 3106.7 8.7

iii Other operations 3052.6 4289.4 4823.7 4055.2 11.4

C Soil tillage practices 2103.6 2811.6 3126.4 2680.5 7.5

Total 33414.1 36179.1 37252.0 35614.9 100.0

(Source: Compiled by researcher)

5.3.3 Annual Cost of Orchard Establishment:

The expenditure made at the time of plantation (table No. 5.1) and during the
gestation period (table No. 5.2) formed the cost of orchard establishment.

132
 Table No. 5.3 Gross Cost of Orchard Establishment (Value in ` Ha-1)

Sr. Heads of Size of Pomegranate Holding Average Average

No. Expenditure Cost Cost in
Small Medium Large %

i Plantation cost 86880.1 81625.2 76369.3 81624.8 69.62 %

ii Gestation period cost 33414.1 36179.2 37252.0 35614.9 30.38 %

Gross Establishment cost 120294.2 117804.4 113621.3 117239.7 100.0 %

As stated earlier, above total establishment cost was apportioned over the 10
years and annual cost was obtained as below.

  
 ! "

Annual establishment cost =
 #$ % 
 %  $
 &' (


` 117239.7
Annual establishment cost = = ` 11724.0
10

Thus, the average annual establishment cost for all sampled orchards was `
11724.0 ha-1. It contributed lowest share (5.75%) in the gross cost of pomegranate
cultivation.

Moreover, it is noteworthy that the establishment cost was lower than above
said amount for the respondents, who were granted for the pomegranate plantation
subsidy scheme ` 45000.0 ha-1 by Agriculture Department, Government of
Maharashtra (GoM).

5.4 OPERATIONAL COST:

Depending on variety, cropping season of pomegranate takes 4 - 7 month

period from flowering to fruit harvesting known as “Bahar of pomegranate”. And
phase (4 - 6 months) between two cropping seasons is known as “rest period” of
pomegranate orchard. Hence the grower has to invest the capital to operate the
pomegranate holding throughout the year. Those annual expenses incurred by grower
were included under the head of operational cost and details of expenses were
grouped under i) material, ii) labour, iii) machinery and iv) other costs.

133
5.4.1 Material Cost:

The growing of pomegranate is a form of permanent gardening, which

requires variety of material inputs to harvest good quality and quantity of fruits.

Table No. 5.4: Material Cost For Pomegranate Orchard (Value in ` Ha-1)

Sr. Material Cost Category of Respondents Average Average

No. Cost Cost in
%
Small Medium Large

A Nutrients

i Organic Fertilizers 14494.4 15839.9 17673.3 16002.5 19.2

Chemical
ii fertilizers 15085.7 17920.9 20292.3 17766.3 21.3

iii Liquid fertilizers 5815.7 7998.6 7427.8 7080.7 8.5

iv Biofertilzers 3171.7 4291.8 4829.2 4097.6 4.9

v Growth hormones 1249.2 1559.4 2291.6 1700.1 2.0

vi Micronutrients 2889.7 2748.5 3091.3 2909.8 3.5

B Plant protection Chemicals

i Pesticides 14920.6 15174.9 12914.3 14336.6 17.2

ii Fungicides 15127.9 12398.9 14284.7 13937.2 16.7

iii Weedicides 4399.2 6187.8 5820.7 5469.3 6.6

Total 77154.1 84120.7 90625.1 83300.1 100.00

( Source : Compiled by researcher)

The application of fertilizers during Bahar of pomegranate refers to integrated

nutrient management by the balanced supply of organic, inorganic fertilizers, growth
hormones and micronutrients. Among them, the chemical fertilizers occupied highest
share 21.3% followed by 19.2% for organic fertilizers (farm yard manure, poultry
manure, neem seed kernel, vermin-compost etc.). But the bio-fertilizers namely
tricho-derma and azato-bactor were limited in use. Table No. 5.4 indicates that more

134
than half of (59.5%) of total material expenses were on nutrient supply to
pomegranate orchards.

From economic point of view, the prices of pesticides, fungicides and

weedicides are mainly based on power of chemicals. For instance, the cost of low
powered chemical was ` 300 kg-1 or a liter that rises up to ` 1000 kg-1 or a liter for
high power chemical. Consequently, the cost of single spray varied from ` 500 ha-1
for low power to ` 2000 ha-1 for high power chemical spray. The pomegranate
orchards were aimed at higher yields and returns, the inputs made for plant protection
activity were higher per unit area. Hence, during Bahar period 40.5% of total material
expenses of were dedicated to plant protection chemicals.

5.4.2 Labour Cost:

Pomegranate cultivation requires labour throughout the year but more

intensively for 6 months during cropping and harvesting season. In study area, the
cost and wage rate for particular labour operation was more or less same across the
sampled villages. As far as pomegranate farming is concerned there was co-existence
of four methods of labour cost viz.

i) Daily wages (weeding, spraying)

ii) Contractual methods (soil tillage, watch and ward)

iii) Per tree basis (pruning, fertilization, bordo-pasting)

iv) Per ton basis (fruit harvesting and grading).

Therefore, in the present study the labour cost was computed by taking the
actual wages paid by the respondents during the survey year (2009-2010).

Table No. 5.5 shows that pruning was major item (23.8%) in labour cost. It
requires skilled labour force and the rates of pruning were basically decided on age
and vigour of tree, which ranged from ` 6 for 3- 4 year old tree to ` 12 for 8 - 9 year
old tree. Moreover, the manual weeding of orchard floor was second item (20.9%) in
labour cost. The female labours were usually employed for destructing of weeds by
cutting with a sickle and turning into the soil. The prevailing wages for weeding
ranged from ` 100 to 150 day -1 and the expenses of single time weeding were ` 3000
ha-1. The spraying, soil tillage and fertilization were other significant items of cost.

135
 Table No. 5.5 Labour Cost for Pomegranate Orchard (Value in ` Ha-1)

Sr. Category of Respondents

Average Average
Item of Cost
No. Cost Cost in %
Small Medium Large

i Weeding 4598.2 7197.5 7788.2 6528.0 20.9

ii Pruning 7626.8 7548.9 7131.1 7435.6 23.8

iii Thinning 370.4 740.2 763.9 624.8 2.0

iv Fertilization 2044.6 2271.2 2296.1 2204.2 7.1

v Spraying 2695.7 4598.2 5762.5 4274.2 13.7

vi Drip maintenance 580.7 629.7 857.1 689.2 2.2

vii Bordo-pasting 1633.9 2268.1 1555.1 1819.0 5.8

viii Tree Supporting 3135.7 2695.7 4317.9 3383.1 10.8

ix Soil Tillage 4070.7 4125.5 4612.7 4269.6 13.7

Total 26756.7 32075.0 35084.5 31227.6 100.00

(Source: Compiled by researcher)

Table No. 5.5 shows that labour cost had positive correlation with size of
holding. Most of cultural practices in marginal and small pomegranate farms were
carried out by cultivators own family members. Therefore, labour cost for small
holdings was lower. In contrast, medium and large pomegranate growers were fully
dependants on hired labour force. They have permanent labour either employed on a
monthly or on annual contract basis. Additionally, they also engaged a large number
of casual labour for time bound operations like harvesting.

5.4.3 Machinery Cost (Tractor expenses):

Generally in the pomegranate farming use of large tractor has a lower annual
utilization limited to primary soil mending operations. But recently, the demand has
picked up for light weight power tiller tractors with matching equipments; which are

136
specifically designed for fruit orchards. This small tractor can make easy movement
in between lines and rows of orchard trees so they were also utilized for spraying
(blowers) and application of biogas slurry (organic manure). The growers with small
holdings were unable to purchase tractors were completed intercultural operations by
hiring or contractual field operations.

Table No. 5.6 Machinery Use Cost for Pomegranate Orchard (Value in ` Ha 1)

Sr. Item of Cost Category of Respondents Average Average

No. Cost Cost in %
Small Medium Large

i Rotavator 4818.6 2697.5 1630.7 3048.9 21.5

ii Tiller 1955.4 944.9 787.5 1229.3 8.7

iii Harrower 1014.3 964.8 948.2 975.8 6.9

iv Sprayer or blower 2895.7 2167.7 1509.3 2190.9 15.4

v Water tankers 8550.4 6623.9 5042.9 6739.1 47.5

Total 15498.6 12508.6 10866.1 14183.9 100.00

(Source: Compiled by researcher)

The tractors were widely used for transport of the water tankers especially
during summer season. The average cost of hiring a tanker (5000 liters water
capacity) was ` 500 per trip depending on a distance between the orchard and place of
water availability.

Analysis of primary data revealed that with advancements in age of the

orchard, the branches of pomegranate tree growing in all directions does not allow
free movement of tractors for intercultural operations. Therefore, cost of human
labour increased moderately with age of orchard while tractor charges shown
decreasing trend with age of the orchard. This fact is well reflected by annual
expenses incurred on both of these items.

5.4.4 Other Costs:

Apart from above expenditure on material and labour inputs, the grower has to
pay land revenues and electricity bills in cash (table No. 5.7). As well it is

137
indispensable to think about rental value of land, depreciation value of orchard
equipments. Therefore, the annual operational cost of pomegranate holding also
includes such other costs.

Table No. 5.7 Other Costs for Pomegranate Holding (Value in ` Ha 1)

Sr. Item of Cost Category of Respondents Average Average

No. cost cost in
Small Medium Large %

I Rental value of land 13453.7 15271.2 15820.8 14848.6 35.0

ii Revenue of land 146.3 175.3 265.6 195.7 0.5

iii Education cess 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 0.4

iv Employment cess 25.0 55.0 100.0 60.0 0.1

v Depreciation 4125.9 5793.6 7952.4 5957.3 14.0

vi Electricity charges 2195.5 3485.3 4792.9 3491.2 8.2

vii Interest on fix capital 8688.1 8162.3 7636.9 8162.4 19.2

viii Interest on working

7296.3 7931.4 8362.2 7932.2 18.7
capital

ix Miscellaneous
818.8 1985.8 2117.4 1640.7 3.9
expenses

Subtotal 36939.6 43049.7 47238.1 42478.1 100.0

(Source: Compiled by researcher)

Although respondents were cultivating own or ancestral land but per hectare
value of land was ascertained from discussion with respondents. And evaluated rental
value has been allocated on basis of area occupied by the pomegranate crop. The
prices of agricultural land within the study region were so variable that ranged from `
1- 3 lakh per acre in different localities. The type of soil, distance from the village or
urban places, farm roads and most significant sources of irrigation water were a major
factor in determining price of agricultural land.

138
 During field survey it was observed that due to suitability of pomegranates,
the orchards are commonly planted in agricultural lands having light soils with poor
irrigation facilities even the barren surfaces and waste slopes were brought under this
crop. So due to poor productivity status of pomegranate holdings, its prices were low
as compared to other fertile lands.

Ordinarily, the amount of land revenues paid by respondents was more than
`150 but it does not exceeds ` 500. Besides, the government of Maharashtra also
levied ‘State Education Cess’ (SEC) on agricultural lands for promoting education in
the state. The authorized rates levied on the pomegranate crop for ‘Education Cess’ is
` 190 ha-1. In addition, the special tax ‘Employment Guarantee Cess’ was levied by
ignoring 0.4 ha of land in any holding on which irrigated crops are raised and on
remaining area ` 25 ha-1 is collected.

The annual depreciation value of capital investment made by the respondents

was computed for equipments used in pomegranate farming i.e. drip system, spray
equipments, electricity generators and other farm implements. The annual
depreciation cost ` 5957.3 were obtained by spreading the purchase value of
equipments evenly over their expected useful life.

The respondents were paying flat tariff payments to the Maharashtra State
Electricity Board (MSEB) at the rate of ` 206 to 235 hp-1 month-1 for operating
electric water pumps installed on the lift, dug or bore wells. In addition, ` 180 hp-1
month-1 was also applicable for piston pump used for spraying.

The interest on fixed capital invested in pomegranate farming was calculated

at the rate of 10 % per annum, so as fixed deposits in commercial banks would fetch
this rate of interest. The items those included under the head of plantation cost e.g.
plantation material, drip irrigation kit, spray equipments, orchard implements etc. are
considered under fixed capital. Interest was considered on value of these assets after
deducting the depreciation for the year.

The interest rate of 6% per annum applicable for “pomegranate crop loan” was
considered for calculating interest on working capital. The material and labour cost,
tractor hiring charges and electricity bills were considered as working capital.
Transportation of materials, repairs of machinery and any other unusual or odd
expenses are included in miscellaneous expenditure.

139
5.5 MARKETING COST:

Table No. 5.8 show the value of four major items in marketing cost for
average yield 8.65 ton ha-1 of pomegranate. In the study region, the major volume of
produce is sold to pre harvest contractors and remaining in district or tehsil markets.
So that put aside expenses on packing of fruits as well as long distance transport
charge. Therefore, the marketing of pomegranate in study area does not require heavy
cost.

Table No. 5.8 Marketing cost of Pomegranate Fruits

Sr. Items of Cost Category of Respondents Average Average

No. Cost Cost in %
Small Medium Large

i Harvesting 4297.3 4685.5 4485.7 4489.5 21.7

ii Packing material 174.2 242.6 503.1 306.6 1.5

iii Transport 3468.6 3336.4 2949.2 3251.4 15.7

iv Market charges 12471.5 14164.8 11291.5 12642.6 61.1

Total 20411.6 22429.3 19229.5 20690.1 100.0

(Source: Compiled by researcher)

5.6 AVERAGE COST BENEFIT RATIO:

The pomegranate fruit crop requires modern agro-equipments, skills and

timely material and labour inputs. Therefore, the cost of pomegranate production was
very high. The establishment (5.77%), operational (84.04%) and marketing (10.19%)
costs together constituted the gross annual cost ` 2.03 lakh ha-1 of pomegranate
cultivation for the study region as a whole (table No. 5.9).

On the other side, net profit earned by the grower is the composite result of
production cost, yield of pomegranate and prices for fruits in the market. In the
existing edapho-climatic conditions of the study area, the pomegranate crop gave a
good response to higher inputs applied by growers. It resulted in average yield 8.65
tons ha-1. Moreover, good demand for pomegranate fruits in market leads to fetch the
remunerative price ` 50.79 kg-1. Consequently, attractive net returns net return ` 2.36

140
lakh ha-1 annum-1 earned by respondents proves good economic profitability of
pomegranate farming. Finally, the cost benefit ratio 1: 2.16 amply clears that why
farmers lead to adopt this fruit crop on a large scale.

Table No. 5.9 Per Hectare Cost Benefit Ratio of Pomegranate Crop (Value in `)

Sr. Head Subheads of Small Medium Large Average Cost

No. Expenditure in %

1 Establishment Plantation 8688.0 8162.5 7636.9 8162.5 4.0

cost
Gestation 3341.4 3617.9 3725.2 3561.5 1.8
period

Subtotal 12029.4 11780.4 11362.1 11724.0 5.8

2 Operational Material cost 77154.1 84120.7 90625.1 83300.1 41.0

cost
Labour 26756.7 32075.0 35084.5 31227.6 15.4

Machinery 15498.6 12508.6 10866.1 14183.9 7.0

Other costs 36939.6 43049.7 47238.1 42478.1 20.9

Subtotal 156349.3 171754.2 183813.7 170639.1 84.0

3 Marketing Harvesting 4297.3 4685.5 4485.7 4489.5 2.2

cost
Packing 174.2 242.6 503.1 306.6 0.2
material

Transport 3468.6 3336.4 2949.2 3251.4 1.6

Market 12471.5 14164.8 11291.5 12642.6 6.2

charges

Subtotal 20411.6 22429.3 19229.5 20690.1 10.2

4 Gross cost [Row1+2+3] 188790.3 205964.0 214405.3 203053.2 100.0

5 Yield Ton 8.24 8.92 8.79 8.65 -

6 Price ` kg -1 47.20 53.50 51.66 50.79

7 Gross return [ Row 5 x 6 ] 388928.0 477220.0 454091.0 439304.7 -

8 Net Profit [ Row 7 - 4] 200137.7 271256.04 239686.1 236251.4 -

9 Cost Benefit [Row 7 ÷ 4] 1: 2.06 1: 2.32 1: 2.12 1: 2.16 -

Ratio

(Compiled by researcher)

141
 6.0
Gross Cost
Gross Return
5.0

4.0
Value in ` Lakhs Ha-1
3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
Small Farmers Medium Farmers Large Farmers Regional average
(CBR 1: 2.06) (CBR 1: 2.32) (CBR 1: 2.12) (CBR 1: 2.16)

Fig. No. 5.1 Cost Benefit Ratio (CBR) According to Size of Pomegranate Holding

5.7 INTER-FARM COMPARISON OF COST BENEFIT RATIO:

Fruit farming enterprise is sensitive, higher skill requiring, a new approach

and technology based. So the socioeconomic status of farmers with respect to farm
size has prime consideration (Phule 2002). In this context, table No. 5.9 and fig. No.
5.1 illustrates that the pomegranate production cost and net returns considerably
varied according to size of holdings.

i) Large Farms:

Large growers having good financial potentials adopted new technology,

provided costlier inputs like liquid fertilizers, branded pesticides, growth hormones
and micronutrients etc. Thus, they ranked first in gross cost (` 2.14 lakh ha-1) for
pomegranate cultivation. Despite of that they remained at second place in yield 8.79
tons ha-1 so also in net profit (` 2.39 lakh ha-1) and cost benefit ratio 1: 2.12.

In this regard interviews with large growers clarified that it was difficult to
take individual care because of the big number of trees. Moreover, they also faced
problems in supervising the labour and managing the cultural practices in a timely
manner. Thus, large size of farm limits the quality and quantity of pomegranate
production when compared to medium farms.

142
ii) Medium Farms:

The medium sized pomegranate orchards were well supervised and supplied
with optimal material and labour inputs. Intensive cultivation practices, supervision
and attempts for quality production have been made by medium farmers. Thus, best
possible quantities 8.92 tons ha-1 along with good quality of fruits had been produced.
As a result, medium category of growers earned highest net profits (` 2.71 lakh ha-1)
and obtained top position in cost benefit ratio 1: 2.32.

iii) Small Farms:

Due to financial problems small farmers applied low material inputs and also
engaged family members for cultural operations. So, the gross cost of pomegranate
cultivation (` 1.89 lakh ha-1) was lowest for small holdings. In other words, they were
unable to provide required material inputs. It is a feature of inadequacy that effects on
production. So the gross yields 8.24 tons ha-1 and quality of fruits declined. So the net
profit ` 2 lakh ha-1 and cost benefit ratio 1: 2.06 was lowest for small holding.

5.8 YIELD AND PROFIT OF POMEGRANATE:

Provided that when all factors are favourable; the average productivity of
pomegranate lands in study region is 20 tons ha-1 i.e. doubles of state average 10 tons
ha-1. Interestingly enough, well managed orchards and free from diseases, yielded as
much as 25 tons ha-1. The pomegranate orchards are intensively cultivated and the
respondents were found to insist on higher yields. However, recently due to the
epidemic spread of two deadly diseases namely wilt and bacterial blight on
pomegranate, the yield has been considerably declined to less than 10 tons ha-1. And
there were no yields, when the severity of attacks was 100%.

Besides the attacks of diseases, yield of pomegranate crop were also found to
be controlled by other biotic and abiotic factors. Among them 5 crucial factors were

i) Soil type of orchard

ii) Altitude of locality
iii) Bahar adopted by grower
iv) Variety of pomegranate
v) Age of the orchard.

143
 The productivity or yield per hectare of pomegranate land is a vital aspect in
assessing the profitability of this crop. Therefore, the impact of the above said factors
on yield as well as on cost benefit ratio of pomegranate crop was examined in section
below.

5.8.1 Soil Type:

The pomegranate fruit crop is not particular about its soil requirement. It can
be grown in diverse soil types such as coarse, medium and deep soils with widely
ranging characteristics. It thrives on comparatively shallow or even murmy soils,
where other fruits fail to flourish (Patil and et. al. 2002). But the pomegranate is a
perennial fruit crop, orchard trees stand in a field for 10-12 years. Therefore, it
demands proper soil conditions for best economic explorations (Phule 2002).

The texture and depth were two major physical characteristics of soil that
determines the yield of pomegranate and quality of fruit. According to the depth of
orchard soils as stated by respondents at the time of interview, the sampled
pomegranate farms were classified into four micro groups (table No. 5.10).

Table No. 5.10 Distribution of Sample Growers According to Soil Types

Sr. Soil Type Soil Depth No. of Orchards in Soil Group Percent of
No. (cm) Orchards
Small Medium Large Total

i Very Shallow 0 to 7.5 20 05 07 32 9.12 %

ii Shallow 7.5 to 25 52 54 35 121 34.47 %

iii Medium 25 to 50 45 37 27 109 31.05 %

iv Deep > 50 44 27 18 89 25.36 %

Total 161 103 87 351 100.00 %

(Source: Compiled by researcher)

The field survey data in table No. 5.10 indicates the practical feasibility of
coarse textured soil type for pomegranate crop. Since, 34.47% and 31.05% orchards
were planted in shallow and medium soil types respectively. And the significant

144
proportion of orchards 9.12% was also planted even in ‘murumy’ or very shallow
type. Though deep soils are fertile but only one-fourth orchards were planted in this
soil type. In context to this, comparative economic appraisal of above soil types of
pomegranate orchard was attempted (Appendix-VII (1)) and cost benefit ratio was
computed separately.

6.0
Gross cost
Gross return
5.0
Value in ` Lakhs Ha-1

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
Very Shallow Shallow Medium Deep
(CBR 1: 1.77) (CBR 1: 2.15) (CBR 1: 2.72) (CBR 1: 2.07)

Fig No. 5.2: Cost Benefit Ratio (CBR) of Pomegranate According Soil Type

Appendix-VII (1) indicates that average productivity of all sampled orchards

was 8.65 tons ha-1 and cost benefit ratio for pomegranate crop was 1: 2.16. However,
fig No.5.2 shows that both significantly varied according to the soil type.

i) Very Shallow Soil (Depth 0 to 7.5 cm):

They are very coarse textured known as ‘murumy’ soils, the thickness of soil
restricted to 7.5cm only. The soil horizons were not fully developed. It contains
excessively coarser material such as number of rock fragments and more sand
particles so attributed too much water porosity. Even if, these soils was irrigated and
fertilized more frequently but satisfactory yields were not obtained. Basically a very
shallow soils are lowly fertile in nature therefore pomegranate yields were lowest 7.93
tons ha-1 compared to other soil types.

145
 The pomegranate orchards from very shallow soil revealed highest gross cost
` 2.10 lakh ha-1. In this regard, it is worth mentioning that formerly this type of soil
was either in the form of barren lands or grazing grounds. At few places, it was
cultivated under uneconomical food grain crops such as bajara, jowar, and fodder. But
from last two decades very shallow soils had been brought under drought hardy
pomegranate crop. Therefore, this soil required more expenses for improvement and
preparation of orchard land such as leveling, digging and filling of pits etc. Hence,
very shallow soil type recorded high orchard establishment cost ` 12173.5 ha-1.

Moreover, these unproductive soils were fertilized and irrigated more

frequently. Additionally, very shallow soils are prone to harmful bacterial blight (oily
spot) disease on pomegranate that increases cost of pesticides. Overall, the operational
cost ` 1.80 lakh ha-1 was also high.

The hard rock beneath or large boulders underlying the thin soil layer does not
allow to penetrate down roots of pomegranate trees. Eventually the tree develops on
very shallow root systems due to which overall growth of trees, flowers and fruits is
hampered. Ultimately, inferior productivity status in this soil type brought down gross
yield 7.93 tons ha-1. Subsequently, it realized lowest net profit ` 1.63 lakh ha-1 for
growers and demonstrated lowest cost benefit ratio 1: 1.77.

ii) Shallow Soil (Depth 7.5 to 25 cm):

The thickness of shallow soil is restricted to 25 cm. These soils are light, and
friable. They are coarse textured contains more sand particles than fines (silt and
clay). All free water is drained easily due to domination of coarser grain size. This
free water draining characteristic of shallow soils is in favour of pomegranate crop.
Because pomegranate tree do not tolerate stagnant soil water for long times that leads
to decaying of roots.

In other words, limited moisture storage in soil particles favours development

of the proper root system (white roots) and productive growth (flowers and fruits) in
pomegranate trees. Therefore, gross yield 8.93 tons ha-1 from shallow soil was higher
compared to very shallow and deep soil. Nevertheless, it not only requires frequent
irrigation but also more fertilizers. The gross cost ` 2.06 lakhs ha-1 of pomegranate
cultivation of this soil type was more as compared to medium soils. As a result,

146
second highest net profits ` 2.38 lakhs ha-1 as well as cost benefit ratio 1: 2.15 was
realized by respondents in shallow soil groups (Appendix-VII (1)).

iii) Medium Soil (Depth 25 to 50 cm):

The texture of these soils varies from sandy loam to loamy sands so that
contains low amounts of silt but more amounts of clay and sand. In other words, more
number of coarse particles than fines. This type of soil texture not only facilitates vital
properties of soil such as good water drainage but also soil aeration, and easy root
penetration of pomegranate tree.

The medium soils are highly favourable for pomegranate farming because of
two reasons. Firstly, due to good fertility condition, the expense on fertilizers was low
and secondly it required small amount of irrigation water compared to shallow soils.
In this context, Appendix-VII (1) indicates lowest cost of cultivation ` 2.01 lakh ha-1
was incurred by respondents belonging to this soil group.

On the other side, good fetility status of this soil type encourages prolific
growth of flowers and fruits of pomegranate trees. Consequently, utmost yields 9.62
tons ha-1 was harvested from medium soils. Those yields also contained superior
quality of fruits and net profit ` 3.45 lakh ha-1 was gained by respondents. Overall,
pomegranate orchards developed in medium soils proved most cost-effective, which
demonstrated uppermost cost benefit ratio 1: 2.72. This provides evidence of the good
potential of medium soils for pomegranate production in the study area.

iv) Deep Soil (Depth above 50 cm):

First group of deep soils are popularly known as ‘Black cotton soils’. As this
soil is derived from basalt rock, it retains the color of parent material containing
ferrous or iron hence they are reddish brown, dark brown to grayish brown in color
and 50 to 100 cm in depth. Second group differs from the above soil in the thickness
of profile i.e. much deeper (100 cm to 150 cm) and color which is much darker. In
fact, these are alluvial soils which occupy the valleys, terraces and flood plains. Due
to a sudden decrease in the slope of the valleys of Godavari and Girna river as well as
their tributaries had deposited their alluvium at the lower parts of basins. These river
plains are quite deep and fertile.

147
 Although deep and very deep soils are fertile in nature but it was not suitable
for pomegranate cultivation.

• Due to more proportion of clay, these soils are compact and impervious and
moisture retentive in nature. And pomegranate cannot tolerate water beyond
60% of soil moisture capacity (Anonymous, 2006). Excess amount of moisture
causes decay or rotting of roots. Ultimately, it leads to dying of plants known
as ‘wilting of pomegranate’. It not only effects on yields by reducing the
number of trees per hectare but also increases the expenses of grower to
control this disease.

• The compact nature of soils leads to develop wide cracks in soils during
summer season. Such soil cracks may cause physical damage to the shallow
roots of pomegranate tree that develops in shallow root system.

• Highly fertile deep soils favour more vegetative growth (green foliage like
leaves and branches) than productive growth (flowers and fruits) in
pomegranate trees. It is one of characteristic of deep soil with respect to
pomegranate crop. Therefore, the yield of pomegranate crop was not
satisfactory from deep soil.

Moreover, maximum green foliage attracts more sucking pest and fungal
diseases that affect on yield and quality of fruits. Therefore, the yield 8.12 tons ha-1
obtained from deep soils is lower than regional average 8.65 tons ha-1 (Appendix-VII
(1)). But deep soils have good natural fertility so that minimized the cost of fertilizers
and irrigation too. Hence, lowest gross cost ` 1.94 ha-1 of pomegranate cultivation
was calculated for deep soils. Despite of that, lower yields brought down the net profit
` 2.09 lakh ha-1. By and large, orchards planted in deep soils revealed poor response
to pomegranate, which stood in third place in cost benefit ratio 1: 2.07.

In brief, cost benefit ratio of pomegranate varied with soil types, in descending
order medium (1: 2.72), shallow (1: 2.15), deep (1: 2.07) and very shallow soil (1:
1.77). It proves that well drained medium and shallow soils are most profitable natural
sites for pomegranate cultivation. Because the pomegranate tree develops on a
shallow root system, which do not requires a thick soil profile. In contrast, moisture

148
retentive deep black cotton soils and alluvial river plains were lowly profitable.
Besides, extremely porous very shallow soils were found too expensive to cultivate
pomegranates in existing water resource in the study area.

Appendix-VI shows that together, the shallow and medium soils occupy
67.19% of cultivable area so that indicates the abundant availability of area for
growing pomegranates in the study region. This soil type is mostly found in scarcity
zone particularly in Sinnar, Chandwad and Malegaon tehsils. If provided with better
irrigation facilities like drip irrigation systems then it can be best utilized for dry land
horticulture development. In addition to pomegranate, other sturdy and drought
tolerant fruit crops like ber, aonla and custard apple; those posses ability to bear the
moisture stress for several days can also be adopted for cultivation.

5.8.2 Altitude:

The investigation made by Samadi Ghulam (2009) revealed that commercially

pomegranates can be grown at higher altitudes. Most of pomegranate growing areas in
Afghanistan are situated between 700 m to 1500 m ASL. However, in his study
injuries to pomegranate due to low temperatures at higher altitudes (> 1000 m) were
reported from Balkh province. It was one of the physical factors in governing the
yield of pomegranates.

Although altitude is also not the restriction for pomegranate production in

study area but per hectare yield and quality of pomegranate crop was altered
according to orchard land elevations. Against this background, the impact of attitude
on gross yields and cost benefit ratio was evaluated.

During field survey the altitude of every sampled orchard was measured with
the help of GPS instrument (with accuracy up to 7 m). The lowest altitude of sampled
orchard was 330 m in village Amode (Nandgaon tehsil) while highest altitude 735 m
was recorded at village Rahud (Chandwad tehsil). Accordingly, the sampled orchards
were classified in six micro groups at an interval of 50 m (table No. 5.11). Then per
hectare yield CBR (Appendix-VII(2)) was calculated for economic assessment of
pomegranate growing altitude zones.

149
 Table No. 5.11 Altitude wise Classification of Sampled Orchards

No. of Sampled Orchards

Percent of
Altitude Zones
Orchards
Small Medium Large Total

i) A zone (330 to 450 m) 16 06 02 24 6.84 %

Low
Altitudes
ii) B zone (451 to 500 m) 24 16 10 50 14.25 %

iii) C zone (501 to 550 m) 49 26 19 94 26.78 %

Middle
Altitudes
iv) D zone (551 to 600 m) 32 23 21 76 21.65 %

v) E zone (601 to 650 m) 30 21 28 79 22.51 %

High
Altitudes
vi) F zone (651 to 735 m) 11 11 6 28 7.98 %

Total 162 103 86 351 100.00 %

(Source: Compiled by researcher)

6.0
Gross Cost
Gross Returns
5.0
value in ` Lakhs Ha-1

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
A Zone B Zone C Zone D Zone E Zone F Zone
(CBR 1: 1.79) (CBR 1: 1.95) (CBR 1: 2.14) (CBR 1: 2.32) (CBR 1: 2.44) (CBR 1: 2.39)

Fig No. 5.3: Cost Benefit Ratio (CBR) based on Altitude of Pomegranate
Orchard

150
 The micro level economic analysis of altitude parameter fig No. 5.3 amply
clears that yield and CBR of pomegranate crop is positively correlated with altitude of
orchard land.

i) Low altitude: (A zone 330 to 450 m) and (B zone 451 to 500 m)

Appendix-VII (2) shows that in low altitude A zone and B zone, the yields of
pomegranate were low 7.94 tons ha-1 and 8.31 tons ha-1 respectively as compared to
the regional average 8.65 tons ha-1. The causes of such inefficient yields may be
attributed to edapho-climatic conditions prevailed at particular localities.

At lower altitudes comparatively moist weather conditions and unsuitable

deep soils in valley locations are some of abiotic constraints limiting the gross yield
and quality of the fruits. Besides moist weather conditions prevailing throughout year
in low altitude regions not only attract more disease, pest and weed pressures but also
hamper quality of fruits. As stated earlier, the tree can’t produce sweet fruits unless
the temperature is high enough for a sufficiently long period. The quality of fruit is
adversely affected in humid climates (Patil and et. al. 2002).

The pomegranate cultivation in low altitude A and B zones was also found
more expensive compared to all other zones. The respondents located in B zone
incurred maximum gross cost ` 2.06 lakhs ha-1 followed by A zone ` 2.07 lakhs ha-1.
These higher expenses were on account of spraying of more pesticides due to more
insect, pest and disease incidences and applying of nutrients other than N P K to cover
unsuitable pedological factors like deep soils.

Despite of incurring higher operational cost of material and labour inputs, the
gross yields were inadequate along with a shortage of quality fruits. It adversely
affected returns from orchards since the cost benefit ratio of A zone 1: 1.79 and B
zone 1: 1.95 were found lowest in all pomegranate growing altitude zones.

ii) Middle Altitude: (C zone 501 to 550 m) and (D zone 551 to 600 m)

Appendix-VII (2) show that yield in C zone were equal to regional average
8.65 tons ha-1 but it was highest 9.28 tons ha-1 in D zone. It provides adequate
evidence of improvement in yields with rise in altitude. Similarly, moderate weather

151
conditions with rising altitudes also leads to reduce the gross cost of pomegranate
cultivation. Ultimately, the middle altitudes ranked second in the cost benefit ratio
1: 2.14, 1: 2.32 for C and D zone respectively.

iii) High Altitudes: (E zone 601 to 650 m) and (F zone 651 to 735 m)

Considerable progress in gross yield 8.93 tons ha-1 at E zone and 8.80 tons ha-1
at F zone was observed. The yields were also coupled with good quality of fruit. It is
largely due to the favourable weather conditions at upper altitudes. The dry weather
conditions such as clear skies, bright sunshine, low humidity, in addition to, well
drained soils enriched with ferrous, calcium and magnesium nutrients situated
accordingly at upper altitudes are more suitable for production of pomegranate crop
(Phule 2002).

As a result, lower production cost ` 1.99 lakhs ha-1 and higher yields, the
pomegranate orchards located at higher elevations were proved highly cost-effective
(Appendix-VII (2)). In other words, high altitude zones ranked at top position in cost
benefit ratio 1: 2.44 for E zone and 1: 2.39 for F zone.

In short, the discussion above reveals the noticeable influence of ‘orchard land
elevation’ in growing of pomegranates. The size and quality of fruit and yield of
pomegranate improved with growing altitude on the other hand gross cost of
production decreased. Overall this micro level analysis proves a significant positive
correlation between altitude and yield of pomegranate fruit crop.

The influence of altitude as ‘abiotic factor’ may be attributed to variations in

micro climate and nutrient status of the orchard soils at different altitude zones. There
are distinct micro climates within each altitude zone that have unique rainfall, wind or
sunlight patterns that impact on flowering and fruiting. Therefore, the micro level
study of ‘altitude effects’ on the plant growth, physiology of flowering and fruiting,
gross yield and quality parameters of pomegranate fruits requires further research
work with specific objectives.

152
5.8.3 Bahars or Cropping Seasons:

In agro-climatic conditions of the Deccan plateau of Maharashtra (tropical

climate), the pomegranate tree flowers in three distinct phases according to seasonal
changes; those are known as ‘Bahar of pomegranate’ (Patil and et. al. 2002). They can
be precisely classified as below.

i) Mrig Bahar (June - July):

It coincides with the onset of monsoon and named on behalf of ‘mrig

nakshtra’ of Marathi calendar.

ii) Hasta Bahar (Oct - Nov):

It begins with retreat of monsoon and named on behalf of ‘Hasta nakshtra’ of

Marathi calendar.

iii) Aambe Bahar (Feb - Mar):

It is parallel to flowering and fruiting season of mango hence named as

‘Aambe’ (in Marathi) Bahar of pomegranate.

153
 Table No. 5.12: Characteristics of Bahars or Cropping Seasons of Pomegranate

Bahar Withholding Flowering Harvest Advantage (s) Disadvantage (s)

Irrigation Period Period

i Mrig Bahar April, May June, July Octomber Sufficient soil moisture a) High incidence of pest and disease
(Rainy season) November and irrigation water is attack, which increases production
available during rainy cost.
season. b) Fruits are of inferior quality due to
humid weather conditions.

ii Hasta Bahar August, October, February, Availability of fruits in The artificial water stress means making
(Winter season) September November March this period is limited trees dormant in Aug, Sep (2 months
hence produce get good prior) to regulate flowering in Oct, Nov
prices in the market. are difficult due to rains.

iii Aambe Bahar November, February, July, a) Artificial water stress a) It is practiced only when assured
(Summer season) December March August can be easily given. irrigation water is available.
b) Low incidence of b) Harvesting period falls in rainy
disease and paste. season may affect quality of fruits.
c) Good quality fruits c) The mature fruits are prone to
can be produced. cracking and sunburn disease.

(Source: compiled by researcher)

154
 Table No. 5.12 clear that the pomegranate is a perennial fruit bearing crop that
continues to bear flowers and fruits throughout the year. But this is not desired in a
commercial cultivation of pomegranates, ordinarily only one Bahar is taken from a
pomegranate tree in a year. The choice of Bahar is on behalf of grower decision,
which mainly depends on water availability, pest disease incidences in a particular
season and market demand for fruits. Because each Bahar has its own advantages and
disadvantages.

Therefore, it had been a difficult task for the respondents to choose the
suitable Bahar, so that proper decision would give him better returns. There by
assuming all future environmental conditions like favourable weather, incidences of
pest and diseases, availability of irrigation water, market prices etc. As a consequence,
not only the gross yield of pomegranate varies but also the cost and return structure of
cultivation changes according to Bahar of pomegranate.

In context to this, present micro analysis was intended to examine the impact
of Bahar on yield and profitability of pomegranate crop. With this objective of the
study, the sampled orchards were firstly micro grouped according to pomegranate
Bahar harvested by the respondents (table No. 5.13). Then primary data was
processed to assess cost and return structure according to bahar (cropping seasons) of
pomegranate (Appendix-VII (3)).

Table No. 5.13 Bahar wise Classification of Sampled Pomegranate Orchards

Sr. Bahar Name Period No. of Sampled Orchards Percent of

No. Orchards
Small Medium Large Total

i Aambe Bahar Feb-July 81 48 35 164 46.72 %

ii Hast Bahar Oct-March 40 28 34 102 29.05 %

iii Mrig Bahar Jun-Nov 40 26 19 85 24.22 %

Total 161 102 88 351 100.00 %

(Source: Compiled by researcher)

155
 5.0
Gross cost
Gross return
4.0

Value in ` Lakhs Ha -1 3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
Aambe Bahar Hast Bahar Mrig Bahar
(CBR 1: 2.36) (CBR 1: 2.29) (CBR 1: 1.84)

Fig No. 5.4: Cost Benefit Ratio (CBR) According to Bahar of Pomegranate

Fig. No. 5.4 indicates the visible effects of weather conditions prevailing in
three seasons of the year on yield and cost benefit ratio of pomegranate crop.

i) Aambe Bahar:

The pomegranate is a crop of dry climate. Hence favourable weather

conditions of summer season coupled with drip irrigation facilities resulted into
highest production 9.63 tons ha-1 in Aambe Bahar. Bright sunshine, high
temperatures, clear skies of summer season and throughout the flowering and fruit
growing period produced better quality and quantity of fruits. It also minimized the
operational cost especially on pesticides due to least incidences of disease and pest
attacks. So the respondents, who practiced this Bahar also incurred lowest gross costs
` 1.99 lakh ha-1 (Appendix-VII (3)). Consequently, Aambe Bahar ranked first in cost
benefit ratio 1: 2.36 of pomegranate cultivation.

The monetary returns of Aambe Bahar would be higher than above; but the
fruits fetched moderate prices in the market. Because pomegranates harvested in
Aambe Bahar coincides with the season of mango fruit in the market. Subsequently,
the prices of pomegranate are slashed with the arrival of mango fruits in the market.
The Aambe Bahar fruits are available for harvesting from the end of May until
August. The matured fruits of this Bahar may suffer from water shortages in April,
May that lead to develop undersize fruits or the problem of fruit cracking.

156
ii) Hast Bahar:

Although, winters are characterized by low average temperatures but moderate

daytime temperatures and ample sunshine in Jan, Feb and Mar i. e. during the fruit
development and the maturity period in the Hast Bahar resulted in medium yields 8.28
tons ha-1. The fruits of Hasta Bahar are available from March to May, when there are
less pomegranate fruits available in the market.

This lower availability of pomegranates in Hast Bahar owes to unsuitability of

soil water drainage conditions. In other words, naturally the moisture is made
available to the soil through the rainfall in August and September. Hence artificial
water stress cannot be given two months prior to regulate Hast Bahar flowering (Oct,
Nov). So this Bahar is not possible to practice in highly moisture retentive deep soil.

As a consequence, production of pomegranate is low hence Hast Bahar is

popular for giving attractive income to the growers. Appendix-VII (3) shows that
-1
Highest price ` 55.98 kg was realized for Hast Bahar pomegranate fruits. The cost
benefit ratio 1: 2.29 of Hast Bahar was slightly lower in comparison to topmost
Aambe Bahar 1: 2.36.

iii) Mrig Bahar:

The adverse weather conditions during rainy season like high humidity, low
insolation, high cloud cover, untimely rains have an effect on the growth of fruits and
at last on yield of pomegranates. Hence the lowest yields 8.03 tons ha-1 was harvested
in Mrig Bahar. The orchards are more prone to infestation of insect, pest and
especially fungal diseases due to humid weather conditions in rainy season.
Therefore, cost of pesticide input was more in Mrig Bahar. It leads to incur highest
production cost ` 2.07 lakh ha-1 (Appendix-VII (3)). Whereas, the highest fruit losses
due to diseased or or blemished and rotten fruits were commonest problem in Mrig
Bahar. As such produce fetched low prices in the market. Eventually, Mrig Bahar of
pomegranate indicated lowest cost benefit ratio 1: 1.84.

In brief, Aambe Bahar coinciding with summer season having hot weather
conditions proved highly profitable cropping season of pomegranate. And the Hast
Bahar in winter season was moderately cost effective. But, Mrig Bahar falling in rainy
season increased operational cost and affected quality of fruits and gross yields.

157
5.8.4 Variety:

Late Dr. G. S. Cheema developed pomegranate variety “Ganesh” at

Ganeshkhind, Pune (M.S.) in 1971. It revolutionized pomegranate cultivation all over
India. This further got a boost by varietal improvement programs carried out at
MPKV, Rahuri (M.S.). It resulted in developing promising selections of three new
improved varieties of pomegranate viz. Aarakta, Mrudula as well internationally
demanded ‘Bhagawa’. These four varieties are recommended for growing in agro-
climatic conditions of Maharashtra.

Recently in the study area, the pomegranate farms have come up with
plantation of above improved varieties. Although the selection of a particular variety
is a vital decision of grower but commercialization of pomegranate crop also depends
upon the fruit characteristics that would fetch better prices in the market. the
combination of desired features such as higher yields, good size of fruits, sweet in
taste, bright red aril and skin color are necessary to get higher consumer preference.

Table No. 5.14 Characteristics of Commercial Pomegranate Varieties.

Name of Variety Characteristics of variety

‘The number one variety in India’, medium size fruits, yellowish

i) Ganesh
red in colour, soft seeds, sweet juice, good yields.

A hybrid of Ganesh x Gul-E-Shah red (Russian variety), fruits

ii) Mrudula yellow with red tinge, soft seeds of blood red in colour, sweet
taste, early mature in 150 days.

Hybrid of Ganesh x Russian variety, attractive red colour fruits,

iii) Aarkata
dark red soft seeds, early maturity (120-135 days), sweet in taste.

‘Most popular variety in the state’, sweet in taste, soft seeded,

iv) Bhagawa fruits are attractive saffron in colour, late maturing in 180 days
but high yielding, thick skin hence suitable for export.

[Compiled by a researcher from reference books viz. i) Sheikh M. K. (2008) ii) Patil
A.V., and et. al. (2002) iii) Vishal Nath and et. al. (2008)].

158
 Table No. 5.14 show that pomegranate varieties differ in the reproductive
capabilities and fruit characteristics. So also the gross yield and fruit quality changes
from one variety to another. Therefore, the efforts were made to examine economical
aspects of four pomegranate varieties commonly grown in the study region. With this
aim of the study, the sampled orchards were micro grouped according variety of
pomegranate (table No. 5.15). After that the economic feasibility of varieties grown in
study region was tested in terms of cost benefit ratio (Appendix-VII (4)).

Table No. 5.15: Distribution of Orchards According to Pomegranate Variety

Sr. Pomegranate No. of Sampled Orchards Percent of

No. Variety Orchards
Small Medium Large Total

i Bhagawa 125 76 72 273 77.78 %

ii Aarakta 29 22 09 60 17.09 %

iii Ganesh 02 02 05 09 02.56 %

iv Mrudula 04 03 02 09 02.56 %

Total 160 103 88 351 100.00 %

(Source: compiled by a researcher from field survey)

7.0
Gross cost
Gross return
6.0

5.0
Value in ` Lakhs Ha -1

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
Bhagawa Aarkta Ganesh Mrudula
(CBR 1: 2.66) (CBR 1: 2.24) (CBR 1: 1.94) (CBR 1: 1.79)

Fig. No. 5.5: Cost Benefit Ratio (CBR) According to Variety of Pomegranate

159
 An examination of fig. No. 5.5 reveal that pomegranate variety adopted by
grower plays very crucial role in governing cost and return structure per unit of
pomegranate land discussed in detail below.

i) Bhagawa:

It is worth noting that Bhagawa is only Indian pomegranate variety, which has
an ability to compete with ‘Wonderful’ variety of U.S.A in international markets. Its
demand is increasing in export markets particularly in United Kingdom, Holland,
European and Gulf countries (Nichit 2007).

The ‘Bhagawa’ variety presently under commercial cultivation is known by

different names ‘Shendari’, ‘Ashtagandha’, ‘Mastani’, ‘Jai Maharashtra’, and ‘Red
Daina’ in various parts of Maharashtra. Because of the high yielding characteristic, it
was found planted by 77.78 % respondents obviously covered maximum area of the
sampled orchards. Appendix-VII (4) shows that highest average yields 8.91 tons ha-1
was obtained from this variety. The fruits of Bhagawa variety are popular for big size
and also superior with respect quality attributes.

Although Bhagawa variety is a heavy yielder but the main disadvantage is that
it takes a maximum period for maturity 6-7 months whereas Ganesh, Mrudula and
Aarakta mature within 4 - 5 months. In other words, it is late for harvesting which
increases the number of pesticide sprays and fertilizers cost. Hence, gross cost
incurred on production of this variety was highest ` 2.20 lakh ha -1.

In spite of that respondents were found highly beneficial. The peculiarities of

this variety stated in table No. 5.14 makes it suitable for both table and processing
purposes. The glossy attractive saffron colored thick skin not only improves market
appearance of fruits but also fit for long distance transport.

Considering such uniqueness of Bhagawa variety, the fruits realized highest

prices ` 65.86 kg-1 in the market. Consequently, this variety proved very much cost-
effective for the cultivators, which brought topmost net profit ` 3.66 lakh ha-1 and
utmost CBR (1: 2.66). It amply clears that why Bhagawa variety is commercially
grown on a large scale by the growers in Maharashtra including study region.

160
ii) Aarkata:

The Aarkata is an early maturing soft seeded variety pre-released in the year
1989 by MPKV, Rahuri (M. S.) in the name of ‘Phule Aarakta’. This variety of
pomegranate is extremely drought tolerant and ready to harvest in 1½ years from
plantation. The Aarkata variety sets heavy crop load, hence the average productivity
was good (8.82 tons ha-1). Therefore, 17.09% respondents were found to adopt it.

As stated earlier, it is an early maturing variety and fruits can be harvested in 4

months, which minimizes the expenses on pesticide spray and irrigation. Moreover,
the low vegetative growth in Aarkata variety trees also lower down labour cost on
pruning. Hence, gross cost was low ` 1.69 lakh ha-1 (Appendix-VII(4)).

The fruit characteristics such as bright ruby or dark red skin, high juice
content, small sized soft seeds and high sugar content makes this variety popular for
processing especially for making pomegranate juice. So the fruits fetched good prices
` 51.48 kg-1 in the market. However, it is delicate variety of pomegranate. The skin of
the fruit is thin so standing crops are more susceptible to insect, pest and disease
attack especially fungal diseases (fruit spots) and insect like thrips and mites. The
respondents were found suffering from yield losses to the extent of 10 - 15% of total
production. As a result, Aarkata variety ranked second in the cost benefit ratio 1: 2.24.

iii) Ganesh:

Now, Ganesh became old variety in the study area and replaced by new
improved Bhagawa and Aarkata varieties. Since, later varieties are found more
profitable by cultivators than former. Only 9 orchards (2.56%) of this variety were
found during field survey and they were more than 15 years old. But those old trees
were fully developed and possessed good resistance capacity against biotic and
abiotic stresses as compared to younger ones. Therefore, second highest average yield
8.65 tons ha-1 was harvested from sampled orchards of Ganesh variety.

As stated above sample orchards were more than 15 years old in age, the
saplings, organic manures, drip irrigation kits and other orchard equipments were
purchased at cheap rates. Hence this variety recorded lowest establishment cost `
10780.7 ha-1 (Appendix-VII (4)).

161
 Moreover the plant vigor, branches and stems of old trees were fully
developed which hold good resistance capacity against insect, pest and disease
attacks. Thus, the minimum expense on pesticides and fertilizers lowers down the
gross cost (` 1.90 lakh ha-1) for Ganesh variety.

However this variety has low demand in the market compared to new
improved Bhagawa and Aarkata varieties. Therefore, it fetched minimal prices `
43.16 kg-1 in the market. The Ganesh variety, nowadays, not planted by the grower
that is evident from its low cost benefit ratio 1: 1.94.

iv) Mridula:

This variety in released by MPKV, Rahuri in the year 1994 and it has all the
characters of Ganesh variety except the seeds are dark red in colour. Although it is
known as new improved variety but it was not found successful in giving the yields.
Only nine or 2.56 % sampled growers were found to cultivate it on smaller plots.
Appendix-VII (4) show that lowest yield 8.30 tons ha -1 with poor quality of fruits was
harvested.

It is early maturing variety in 120 to 150 days. It remained in third place in

gross cost (` 1.98 lakh ha-1) of cultivation. The fruits of Mridula variety are medium
sized, smooth skin, dark red in color, blood red arils with very soft seeds, juicy and
sweet in taste. But usually demand for fruits of this variety is limited so they were
sold at lower value ` 42.65 kg-1 in the market. As a result, the Mridula variety proved
least cost effective that recorded the lowest cost benefit ratio 1: 1.79 in all
pomegranate varieties cultivated in the study area. That’s why presently; this variety
is not preferred by the growers.

In brief, above micro level analysis proves that new improved or high yielding
varieties namely Bhagawa and Aarkata having a larger consumer preference fetched
good prices in the market. So also they brought better net returns to growers. In
contrast, less demand for the fruits of Ganesh and Mridula variety has resulted in
lowering down net profits of growers. Even though Mridula is a new variety of
pomegranate but cultivators didn’t found it improved regarding yields and fruit
quality.

162
5.8.5 Age of Orchard:

The monetary return on investments made by grower starts only after 2 ½ year
from the plantation. But the yield increases slowly with the advancement in age of
pomegranate orchard (table No. 5.16) and maximized from 5th year onwards.

Table No. 5.16: Age - Yield Pattern of Pomegranate Tree

Sr. Age of Height Diameter Radius Number Yield Weight of

No. Tree of of of Stem of Fruit per Tree Fruit
Tree Canopy (cm) (kg) (gm)
i 2nd Year 3 ft 3 ft 10 - 15 25 - 30 10- 15 250 -350
ii 3rd Year 4 ft 4 ft 15 - 20 45 - 50 15 - 25 250- 450
iii 4th Year 5 - 6 ft 5 - 6 ft 20 - 30 60 - 70 25 - 30 300 -500
iv 5th & 6 -7 ft 6 - 7 ft 30 – 35 80 - 100 30 - 35 400 -600
above

(Source: Sonawane Sudhir 2007)

Even though all other cultural practices and environmental factors remained
same but the gross yield harvested in sample orchards belonging to different age
group revealed considerable variation. Accordingly the cost and return structure of
pomegranate orchard was expected to be altered. Keeping this fact in mind, the
attempt was made to assess the impact of this biotic factor (age of orchard) in
determining the yield and profits of pomegranate. The life span of pomegranate
orchard can be broadly divided into four production stages (table No. 5.17)
accordingly sampled orchards were micro-grouped for economic analysis.

Table No. 5.17 Distribution of Sample Orchards According to Age Group

Sr. Production Stage Age of Orchard No. of sample Percent

No. Orchards in Total
i Non-bearing stage Below 2.0 year 103 22.69 %

ii Inclining Production Stage 2.1 to 6.0 year 126 27.75 %

iii Constant Production Stage 6.1 to 10.0 year 167 36.78 %

iv Declining Production Stage Above 10.0 year 58 12.77 %

Total 454 100 %

(Source: Compiled by researcher)

163
 Table No. 5.17 indicates that 22.69% orchards were under 2 years of age lying
in non fruit bearing or unproductive stage so they are not considered in cost benefit
analysis. The yield of pomegranate gradually increases from 2nd year onwards to 6
years, therefore, it is known as ‘Inclining Production Stage’, about 27.75% sampled
orchards were in this youth stage. The yield remains stable during 6 to 10 years, so
called as ‘Constant Production Stage’. Due to declining reproductive capability of
pomegranate after 10 years, the yields were low; about 12.77% sampled orchards
were in old ages. Therefore, costs and returns were analyzed to test the worthiness of
an investment made over the economic life span of pomegranate enterprise.

6.0
Gross Cost
Gross Returns
5.0
Value in ` Lakhs Ha -1

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
Inclining stage Constant stage Declining stage
(CBR 1: 1.95) (CBR 1: 2.35) (CBR 1: 2.18)

Fig No. 5.6: Cost Benefit Ratio According to Age of Pomegranate Orchard.

Fig. No. 5.6 indicates that the cost and return structure of pomegranate
cultivation significantly varies with the age of orchard.

i) Inclining Production Stage (Youth Age 2 to 6 year):

One year after planting pomegranate tree can bear flowers and may develop a
couple of small fruits. However it is not commercially desirable. It is at this point the
pomegranate trees will experience more vertical growth rather than horizontal. After 2
years it develops as a small bush. And shortly after the time, the tree comes into
bearing stage when the full framework is established. Therefore, harvesting of first
Bahar usually takes the period of 2 ½ years after planting. With the advancement of

164
age in youth stage the pomegranate develops more tree vigor and productive growth
especially fruit bearing branches in tree canopy (table No. 5.16).

Due to the small diameter of its trunk, the abundant quantities of fruit on a
single branch can prove to be too heavy and may cause the branch to bend and break
in early bearing ages. Therefore, it was necessary to maintain a certain number of
fruits on each branch. In this context, Table No. 5.16 amply clears that usually in the
first Bahar (2nd year) 25 - 30 fruit per tree are allowed to mature that yield to 10 - 15
kg per tree. During the 3rd year about 15 to 25 kg fruits per tree were harvested.
During the 4th year, the number of fruit increased to 60 to 70 per tree (25 to 30 kg).
As stated by the respondents that from 5th year onwards when pomegranate trees are
fully grown, they were peaking between 30 to 35 kg from well managed pomegranate
orchard. It means that total yield gradually increases during this youth stage (2 to 6
year) hence it is known as ‘Inclining Production Stage’.

Throughout the productive life span of pomegranate the average gross yield
remained at low 7.59 tons ha-1 in youth stage (Appendix-VII (5)). Moreover, these
orchards were recently planted, therefore, cost on orchard establishment was highest
` 12762.3 ha-1 due to the recent hike in prices of plantation material such as drip kits,
saplings, labour wage rates etc. The younger shrubs with smaller nutritional needs and
labour inputs minimized the gross cost of cultivation (` 2.01 lakh ha-1). But lower
yields 7.59 tons ha-1 lowest cost benefit ratio 1:1.95. Therefore, sampled orchards
lying on the youth stage were found lowly profitable.

ii) Constant Production Stage (Adult Age 6 to 10 year):

The tree reaches in adulthood stage after the 6th year onwards. It is at this point
the tree experiences most vigorous growth vertically as well as horizontally. It reaches
to about 3 to 4 meter in height and diameter. The mature large bushes or small trees
of pomegranate are developed with full size, plant vigour, and thick stem lead to the
higher fruit bearing positions in the tree canopy.

In short, the high-vigor trees lead to higher yields than low-vigor ones. That's
why, highest average gross yield 9.52 tons ha-1 were harvested from sampled orchards
in adult age. This prime fruit bearing period lasts until the tree turns the age of 10
year. The yield remains more or less steady up to 10 year; hence these ages (6.1 to
10.0 year) are classified as constant production stage.

165
 However, due to vigorous growth of tree the requirements of water and
nutrients increase during adult ages. Hence there were more expenses on irrigation
and fertilizers. Subsequently the gross cost of pomegranate production was highest `
2.09 lakh ha-1 (Appendix-VII (5)). Nevertheless, the fruits produced in the adult stage
exhibit good characteristics with respect to size, weight, taste and external
appearance. Thus, good quality fruits coupled with better yields during the adult age
of pomegranate orchards earned highest net returns ` 2.84 lakh ha-1. As a result, the
topmost cost benefit ratio 1: 2.35 was realized for the adult aged orchards.

iii) Declining Production Stage (Old Ages > 10 year):

Although the pomegranate tree can live for a long period of time but their
vigor will decline after about 10 years. As the plant grows older, naturally,
reproductive capacity of the tree begins to decline that continues throughout old ages.
Hence, it is known as ‘declining production stage’. As compared to adult stage the
yield obtained at older ages was low 8.84 tons ha-1. Moreover, the attainment of old
age also depends on the type of maintenance of orchards such as the replacement of
dead trees, which was rarely carried out by the growers. Likewise poor management,
inefficient cultural practices and low inputs are also attributed to the lower yield.

However, the older trees are fairly hard to insect pests and disease attacks. In
other words, they posses good resistivity against insect, pest and fungal diseases;
especially bacterial blight and pomegranate wilt diseases. So it reduced the
operational cost (` 1.67 lakh ha-1) for old orchards. It was also noted during field
survey that most of old age orchards were belonging to Ganesh variety, which has a
small consumer preference. Hence, produce realized low prices ` 49 kg-1 in the
market. But minimum operational cost lead to realize second highest cost benefit ratio
1: 2.18 (Appendix-VII (5)) for old orchards.

In a nutshell, the cost effectiveness of pomegranate cultivation also follows the

age - yield pattern of trees. High - vigor trees results in higher yield than low - vigor
ones. Being a small bush in youth stage, the orchards were found lowly profitable.
But when they were developed in small trees the orchard proved highly cost effective.
And after reaching in old ages the reproductive capabilities were found deteriorated
that lead to reduce the magnitude of production.

166
 Finally, it could be concluded that investment in pomegranate orchard was
economically feasible or financially viable in the study region. The cost benefit
analysis revealed that the net return was nearly double the gross cost of capital
invested in pomegranate enterprise. Therefore, investment on pomegranate orchard is
a financially sound, profitable and in attractive propositions.

Based on overall economic analysis the second and third declarative

hypothesis put for the present study is accepted that high monetary returns from
pomegranate crop had attracted farmers towards its cultivation, apart from high
establishment and production costs of this fruit orchard. But the profitability of this
crop varies according to abiotic factors viz. Soil type of orchard, altitude of locality
and abiotic factors viz. age of orchards, varieties and cropping seasons adopted by the
grower.

167