1Department of Agricultural Economics, NDUAT, Kumarganj, Ayodhya-224229, Uttar Pradesh
2Department of Agricultural Extension, CSAUA&T, Kanpur-208002, Uttar Pradesh
3Department of Horticulture, SHUATS, Allahabad-211007, Uttar Pradesh
*Corresponding author: dr.sp9456@gmail.com
Online published on 22 February, 2021.
The study was undertaken in Auraiya district of Uttar Pradesh to examine the marketed surplus, disposal pattern, consumer price shared and price spread by the paddy growers. A sample of 100 farmers of Auraiya district (Uttar Pradesh) was selected from 10 villages of two blocks for the year 2013-14. The major volume of paddy was sold in Bidhuna, market of Auraiya. For the study of marketing aspects, 25village agents were randomly selected from the market. Three marketing channels were prevalent for disposal of maize in the study area viz; (1) Producer Consumer, (2) Producer - Village trader - Consumer and (3) Producer - Village trader - Wholesaler - Retailer - Consumer.Net price received by producer was observed higher in channel-I, followed by channel-II and channel-III which revealed inverse relationship between net price received by producer’s and number of intermediaries. The channel-I producers net share in consumer price is a 95.66%, marketing cost of producer 4.34%. Producers net share in consumer price is a 90.34%, marketing cost of producer 1.93% and village trader 3.48% in channel-II, respectively. The margin of village trader in channel -II was 4.24%. In channel -III producer net price share in consumer rupee is 74.86%, marketing cost of producer 2.14%, village trader 3.16%, wholesaler 6.86%, and retailer was 2.99%; and margin was 3.67% for village trader, 3.56% for wholesaler and 2.76% for retailer. The marketing efficiency of paddy under Channel-I was found more efficient as compared to Channel-II and Channel III. It was happened due to negligible number of middleman in Channel-I. Paddy crops are profitable enterprise or farming for the farmer’s in the study area and can help the farmers in the way of doubling their income and higher profits when they sold their paddy produce through governments’ direct procurement centers.