Economics of Inter-Cropping: A Case Study of Onion and Tomato at District Muzaffargarh, Punjab-Pakistan

: The current research is being conducted in Muzaffargarh district of Punjab, Pakistan to investigate the profitability and land equivalent ratio of intercropping onion and tomato. An economic analysis of intercropping in the Muzaffargarh district can inform farmers about the profitability and sustainability of this practice, aiding their decision-making between intercropping and monocropping. The study utilized a simple random sampling technique to select 45 vegetable growers out of 60, from two major vegetable-growing villages; Hajiwah and Beli Janubi. Descriptive analysis, including frequency distribution, mean, and percentages, was used to analyze the data. The results of the study showed that intercropping had a significantly higher yield (17897 kg/acre) than sole cropping of onions (6075 kg/acre) and tomatoes (16050 kg/acre). Intercropping also had a higher benefit-cost ratio of 1.59, compared to onion sole cropping (1.37) and tomato sole cropping (1.48). The land equivalent ratio was 1.31, which indicated that intercropping was more efficient in terms of land use than sole cropping. The study also revealed that intercropping onions and tomatoes provided additional income to farmers and helped maximize land use. However, farmers encountered challenges such as high seed costs, diseases, low output prices, and high transportation costs. In conclusion, the study suggested that intercropping onion and tomato is a viable agronomic strategy in the Muzaffargarh district, as it improves land-use efficiency and maximizes returns. The study showed that intercropping complemented each other and contributed to increasing yield per unit area and improving nutritional properties.


INTRODUCTION
Intercropping is a method of growing two or more crop species in the same field at the same time during the growing season [1] and it is the more efficient use of resources such as soil, water, nutrients, and solar radiation to grow two or more cultivars at the same time on the same land [2].Intercropping is a traditional but important cropping system approach for increasing total productivity and farmer income, particularly in densely populated countries with limited per capita cropland [3].Intercropping is effective in generating a variety of crops and is comparable in yield to sole cropping, while also increasing crop resilience, ecosystem services, and nutrient efficiency [4] and climateresilient intercropping systems have great potential to reduce fossil fuel intensive inputs [5].Farmers need local expertise and technical assistance based on locally-derived data to achieve optimal intercrop production [6].Industrial agriculture can be easily diversified through intercropping, which involves the integration of alternative crops or non-crop plants alongside cash crops.This method is relatively simple and effective in promoting diversity within agricultural systems [7] and by incorporating intercropping methods, crop productivity can be significantly enhanced compared to conventional monoculture methods [8].
A wide range of intercropping has been developed around the world, in places like Indonesia, India, Niger, Mali, Central America, and Western Europe, because it significantly increases land productivity compared to monocultures [9,10].Intercropping can improve soil fertility as different crops have different root depths and can therefore access different soil layers, helping to improve soil structure and nutrient availability [11].To achieve spatial complementarity in intercropping, different plants with varied root patterns should be grown together.For instance, combining deeprooted and shallow-rooted crops can enable access to distinct soil volumes, enhancing resource utilization and reducing competition for resources [12].Intercropping increases P availability in the rhizosphere of intercropped plant species [13], as well as improving soil resource utilization [14].Furthermore, the system increases the land equivalent ratio [15,16], lowering crop failure risk and increasing food security [17].The cultivation of particular varieties in intercropping systems has a number of favorable effects [18] and alters the dominant microbial species and soil microbial communities [19,20].
Higher-income and improved socioeconomic status were the primary drivers of intercropping adoption, and intercropping can be effectively adopted through field training and demonstrations [21].Intercropping improves farm resource management by increasing total productivity per unit of land and per unit of time and can significantly reduce pest issues [22].Transitioning to more bio diverse agricultural systems, such as intercropping and agroforestry, can serve as an adaptive measure against climate change.These systems offer a range of benefits at both the farm and ecosystem levels, including biotic, abiotic, economic, and social advantages [23] and intercropping can decrease surface soil evaporation and secondary salinization by increasing the surface coverage of the soil [24].The practice of intercropping is most prevalent in developing nations [25] and because of its significant yield advantage over sole cropping, it has been recognized as a potentially useful technology to increase crop production [26].Flexibility, profit maximization, risk reduction, soil conservation, soil fertility improvement, and lower production costs, as well as higher profitability, are some of the main motivations for smallholder farmers to intercrop [27].Intercrops have the potential to provide a higher yield than sole crops, greater yield stability, efficient use of nutrients [28], reduced disease infestations, and a decrease in the number of pests and weeds [29].A lot of scientists in the fields of agriculture and ecology are becoming increasingly interested in the intercropping approach to vegetable production as a result of the aforementioned qualities [30].When lettuce is intercropped with onions, it helps to control Agrotis ipsilon, a significant insect pest that affects lettuce [31] and can enhance the natural suppression of pests [32].
Garlic and strawberry intercropping increase both the gross income and the land equivalent ratio, and intercropping systems had no impact on the production of strawberry pseudo fruits or garlic bulbs [33].For the effective production of vegetables enriched in selenium, pakchoi and radish can be intercropped to increase selenium accumulation in the edible parts of the crops [34].The nitrate content of the soil profile decreased because intercropping use soil nutrients more efficiently than sole cropping [35] and intercropping significantly decreased the frequency of forked carrots and increased cauliflower yield [36].
Intercropping maize with legumes has the potential to minimize crop failure risk, increase productivity and income, and increase food security in vulnerable agricultural systems [37] and intercropping also has some issues such as intercropping can lead to competition for resources such as water, light, and nutrients, which can reduce crop yield and quality [38].Intercropping can be more complex to manage than monoculture systems as it requires careful selection of crop combinations, planting densities, and management practices [39] and some crop species may be incompatible with each other, leading to reduced growth and yield [40].Both intercropping and rotation are effective methods for enhancing crop productivity and providing ecological benefits [41].Intercropping can create microclimates that favor the development of certain pests or diseases like increased the incidence of maize stem borers and reduced maize yields compared to monoculture [42] and reduction in the yield of both total and marketable bulbs when onions are intercropped with coriander [43] and a reduction in yields when leeks are intercropped with carrots [44].The intercropping system had a significant impact on the yield attributes of different component crops, such as radish, small onion, and vegetable cowpea, but a single stand of component crops produced higher yield attributes than the intercropping system [45].Muzaffargarh is known for its fertile land and the cultivation of various vegetables, particularly tomatoes.However, the majority of farmers in the region are small landholders with limited resources.Analyzing the cost and returns of intercropping can provide valuable insights into the economic feasibility of this farming practice in the area.The land equivalent ratio (LER) is a useful method for assessing the efficiency of intercropping and determining its effectiveness in optimizing land use and increasing yields.The research conducted in the Muzaffargarh district is a significant effort to understand the farming practices and challenges faced by small-scale farmers in the region, as well as to identify strategies for improving their productivity and economic viability.Overall, this research holds great promise for enhancing the livelihoods of farmers and promoting sustainable agricultural practices in the area.The research was carried out with the following objectives: (i) to examine the socio-economic characteristics and existing agronomic practices of sampled farmers; (ii) to analyze the cost and returns of intercropping for sampled farmers; (iii) to evaluate the land equivalent ratio (LER) to determine the efficiency of intercropping; and (iv) to identify constraints in the production and marketing of sampled farmers in the study area.

Description of Study Area
Muzaffargarh is a district in the Punjab province of Pakistan that spans over an area of 8,249 km 2 .It shares borders with the district Layyah to the north and Bahawalpur and Rahimyar Khan districts to the south, across the Chenab River.As per the 2017 census, the district had a population of 4.32 million people, and the literacy rate was 47 percent.The region is known for its agriculture, with numerous citrus and mango farms in the surrounding areas.The climate in Muzaffargarh is arid, with extremely hot summers and mild winters.The annual rainfall in the district is 127 millimeters, as illustrated in Figure 1.

Description of Study Area
Muzaffargarh is a district in the Punjab province of Pakistan that spans over an area of 8,249 km 2 .It shares borders with the district Layyah to the north and Bahawalpur and Rahimyar Khan districts to the south, across the Chenab River.As per the 2017 census, the district had a population of 4.32 million people, and the literacy rate was 47 percent.The region is known for its agriculture, with numerous citrus and mango farms in the surrounding areas.The climate in Muzaffargarh is arid, with extremely hot summers and mild winters.The annual rainfall in the district is 127 millimeters, as illustrated in Figure 1.

Data Collection
The study was conducted as part of the "Strengthening Vegetable Value Chains in Pakistan" (SVVCP) project, which was funded by the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR).The primary objective of this project was to enhance the value chains of three target vegetable crops in Pakistan (onions, potatoes, and tomatoes) using a community-based approach.
The initiative aimed to improve the livelihoods and household incomes of resource-poor communities sustainably, by enhancing the capabilities of value chain actors such as farming families, traders, and intermediaries.The project focused on two villages, Baily Janobi and Hajiwah, in Muzaffargarh district, known for vegetable cultivation.To gather primary data, the Social Sciences Research Institute (SSRI) at NARC conducted a baseline survey, interviewing 45 vegetable growers who were randomly selected from 60 farmers involved in intercropping (onions and tomatoes) and sole cultivation of tomatoes.
Of the 45 farmers surveyed, 24 were engaged in sole onion cropping as well.The selected farmers were interviewed using a structured questionnaire that covered topics such as nursery management, intercropping, farm management practices, and production and marketing constraints.

Data Analysis
To achieve the objectives of the study, a descriptive statistic was used to analyze the percentages, frequency, and mean.The profitability of intercropping was examined on the basis of gross margin, the net return, benefit-cost analysis, and land equivalent ratio.
• To estimate the cost of onion production, the following equations were used: • To find out the economics of the individual intercropping system, the following equation was used:

Land Equivalent Ratio (LER)
LER indicates the proportion or amount of land area that is needed for sole cropping to produce the same yield as intercropping [Mead and Willey, 1980].The LER was calculated using the following formula to determine the economics of the individual intercropping system.
there is no profit or loss from intercropping.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The study consisted of three sections.The first section examined the socioeconomic characteristics of the sampled farmers.The second section focused on farm characteristics, while the third section discussed the farming practices of the farmers.

Age Group of Sampled Farmers
The respondents' agricultural experience increased with age, implying that older farmers had more risk-related interactions than younger farmers.According to the data, farmers between the ages of 41 and 50 (33 %) scored the highest, while those beyond 50 (16 %) scored the lowest (Figure 2).The sampled farmers' average age was 40.3 years, indicating that the majority of them were of working age and could increase agricultural production in the field with support and a supportive environment.
Overall, the data implies that there is a correlation between age and agricultural experience, with older farmers having encountered and navigated through more risk-related situations.This suggests that elder farmers possess valuable insights and skills from their extensive exposure to diverse agricultural challenges.

Educational Level of Sampled Farmers
Based on the study findings, 38 percent of the sampled farmers were illiterate, 22 percent had only primary education, 27 percent had high school education, and 13 percent had graduate degrees (Figure 3).The average formal education of the sampled farmers was 5.1 years, which suggests that the majority of the sampled farmers in the research area had little formal education.The results illustrate that most farmers have limited formal education, impacting their ability to embrace new agricultural practices and adapt to changes.This underscores the need for focused educational efforts to narrow the knowledge gap and enhance their engagement with innovations.

Educational Level of Sampled Farmers
Based on the study findings, 38 percent of the sampled farmers were illiterate, 22 percent had only primary education, 27 percent had high school education, and 13 percent had graduate degrees (Figure 3).The

Educational Level of Sampled Farmers
Based on the study findings, 38 percent of the sampled farmers were illiterate, 22 percent had only primary education, 27 percent had high school education, and 13 percent had graduate degrees (Figure 3).The average formal education of the sampled farmers was 5.1 years, which suggests that the majority of the sampled farmers in the research area had little formal education.The results illustrate that most farmers have limited formal education, impacting their ability to embrace new agricultural practices and adapt to changes.This underscores the need for focused educational efforts to narrow the knowledge gap and enhance their engagement with innovations.

Farming Experience of Sampled Farmers
The amount of risk exposure and the implementation of a risk management approach are both influenced by a farmer's level of farming experience.A farmer with numerous years of farming experience has greater knowledge than a farmer with little farming experience.According to Figure 4, the majority (44 %) of the farmers in the research region had a respectable amount of agricultural experience, which varied from 11 to 20 years, whereas (38 %) had less than 10 years of experience.Only 9 % of the farmers chosen had been farming for more than 30 years, while 9 % had been farming for between 21 and 30 years.The sampled farmers had an average of 15.9 years of farming experience.The diversity of farming expertise within the research area influences how individuals are exposed to risks and how they navigate uncertainties.Farmers with greater experience tend to be more skilled at managing agricultural uncertainties by leveraging their accumulated knowledge and making wellinformed decisions.

Household Size of Sampled Farmers
Figure 5 findings regarding household size reveal that more than half (55 %) of the sampled farmers had 6-10 family members, followed by 27 percent who had less than 5 family members.The sampled

Farming Experience of Sampled Farmers
The amount of risk exposure and the implementation of a risk management approach are both influenced by a farmer's level of farming experience.A farmer with numerous years of farming experience has greater knowledge than a farmer with little farming experience.According to Figure 4, the majority (44%) of the farmers in the research region had a respectable amount of agricultural experience, which varied from 11 to 20 years, whereas (38%) had less than 10 years of experience.Only 9% of the farmers chosen had been farming for more than 30 years, while 9% had been farming for between 21 and 30 years.The sampled farmers had an average of 15.9 years of farming experience.The diversity of farming expertise within the research area influences how individuals are exposed to risks and how they navigate uncertainties.Farmers with greater experience tend to be more skilled at managing agricultural uncertainties by leveraging their accumulated knowledge and making well-informed decisions.This boosts productivity but also raises the reliance ratio, making the household more sensitive to economic changes.To address this, it's crucial to manage labor, diversify income, and enhance efficiency to safeguard the welfare of these farming families.Family members of farmers make significant labor contributions to the family labor pool, but this also increases the farmers' reliance ratio.The results show that a substantial number of sampled farmers have larger households, and family members play a vital role in farm work.This boosts productivity but also raises the reliance ratio, making the household more sensitive to economic changes.To address this, it's crucial to manage labor, diversify income, and enhance efficiency to safeguard the welfare of these farming families.

Family Type of Sampled Farmers
Families are progressively dissolving, and more people are choosing to live separately in order to enhance their standard of living.The majority of the sampled farmers (62 %) were part of nuclear families, whereas (38 %) were part of joint families.Figure 6 demonstrates a rising trend towards nuclear families (62 %), reflecting a preference for independent living, likely motivated by a desire to improve living standards.Concurrently, joint families (38 %) continue to emphasize the lasting importance of strong family bonds and communal living practices in the region.

Sampled Farmers' Involvement in Farming
Figure 7 depicts the sampled farmers' part-time and full-time participation in farming activities.More than half (51 %) were actively involved in farming, while the remaining 49 percent were only partially involved.The results show a significant number of farmers fully committed to farming, while others engage only part-time.This highlights varying reliance on agriculture for livelihoods, offering insights into rural economies and livelihood approaches in the study area.

Occupational Distribution of Sampled Farmers
Farming is the primary occupation in rural areas because it provides the majority of the income for those who live there.Figure 8 shows the job descriptions of the sampled farmers.The sampled farmers who rely solely on farming represented 76 percent, while 24 percent also held other employment in addition to farming.The findings indicate that farming is really important in rural areas because it helps people earn a lot of money.
The information in Figure 8 also shows that most people mainly depend on farming for their income, while some others have different ways of making money.

Farm Area Owned by Sampled Farmers
Figure 9 reveals that 27 % of the sampled farmers were tenants and did not have their own land, while the majority (47 %) had less than one acre, followed by 20 % had 1-3 acres, and 6 % had more than 3 acres, while an average farm size was 0.98 acre.The findings illustrate that the sampled farmers were primarily smallholders, often tenants cultivating small plots of land.This inference is strengthened by the average farm size, which was less than one acre, indicating a scarcity of largescale farming within the sample.

Farm Area Owned by Sampled Farmers
Figure 9 reveals that 27% of the sampled farmers were tenants and did not have their own land, while the majority (47%) had less than one acre, followed by 20% had 1-3 acres, and 6% had more than 3 acres, while an average farm size was 0.98 acre.The findings illustrate that the sampled farmers were primarily smallholders, often tenants cultivating small plots of land.This inference is strengthened by the average farm size, which was less than one acre, indicating a scarcity of large-scale farming within the sample.

Tenancy Status of Sampled Farmers
The tenancy status of the sampled farmers is shown in Figure 10.Only 15% of the sampled farmers were owners; more than half (58%) were owner-cum-tenants, while 27% were tenants.Hence, the majority of the sampled farmers had a mixed tenancy status as owner-cum-tenants.This underlines a close interconnection between land ownership and tenancy in this farming community.This diversity implies a variety of economic and property dynamics in action.Further investigation is warranted to comprehend the drivers behind these trends and their potential implications for the agricultural sector.

Tenancy Status of Sampled Farmers
The tenancy status of the sampled farmers is shown in Figure 10.Only 15 % of the sampled farmers were owners; more than half (58 %) were owner-cum-tenants, while 27 % were tenants.Hence, the majority of the sampled farmers had a mixed tenancy status as owner-cum-tenants.This underlines a close interconnection between land ownership and tenancy in this farming community.This diversity implies a variety of economic and property dynamics in action.Further investigation is warranted to comprehend the drivers behind these trends and their potential implications for the agricultural sector.

Farm Equipment Owned by Sampled Farmers
Table 1 provides information about the farm machinery that the sampled farmers possessed.The study's findings showed that 20 percent of sampled farmers did not possess any agricultural equipment.The majority of sampled farmers (38 %) had their spray pumps; 20 percent had diesel engines; and 16 percent had tube wells.The study revealed a prominent possession of spray pumps and diesel engines among sampled farmers, while essential equipment like tractors, cultivators, and rotavators were less common.Despite limited ownership, the availability of farm equipment for rent in the study area was reported to be sufficient according to farmers.

Sources of Information
Table 2 shows the major sources of information obtained by sampled farmers in the study area.The majority (76 %) of the sampled farmers indicated fellow farmers as their source of information for agricultural and marketing purposes.Similarly, the other important source were seed dealers, middlemen, and agricultural extension workers, representing (13 %), (7 %), and (4 %), respectively.These findings emphasize the strong reliance on informal networks within the farming community for obtaining relevant information.

Sources of Irrigation
Table 3 showed the major irrigation sources of the sampled farmers in the study area.The majority (75.6 %) of the sampled farmers were using tube wells, while 24.4 percent were using both canal and tube wells for irrigation purposes.The study underscores the dominance of tube wells as the primary irrigation source underscores the importance of groundwater for sustaining agricultural productivity.The fact that many farmers are using both canals and tube wells for irrigation shows that they are smart and flexible in dealing with water challenges.

Acquisition of Loan
Farmers used a variety of sources to get agricultural credit to meet their financial needs.The data pertaining to loan acquisition is shown in Table 4.
Only 31 % of sampled farmers obtained credit for their farm operations.The low percentage of farmers accessing formal financial institutions, coupled with significant reliance on self-financing and informal sources, emphasizes the need for targeted policies and interventions to improve farmers' access to affordable and timely credit.Addressing these challenges is crucial for promoting sustainable agricultural growth and rural development.

Sources of Loan
The different loan programs available to farm businesses in the study area are listed in Table 5.More than half (57 %) of the sampled farmers borrowed money from commission agents, who are the most frequent source of debt among them.This is followed by NGOs (22 %), commercial banks (14 %), and relatives (7 %).
The distribution of loan programs and sources of debt among farmers in the study area reflects a complex financial landscape.While commission agents dominate as a source of credit, the presence of NGOs and commercial banks, along with borrowing from relatives, underscores the diversity of options available to farmers.Efforts to enhance financial literacy, improve access to formal credit, and regulate informal sources can contribute to a more sustainable and equitable credit ecosystem for agricultural communities.

Purpose of Loan
Table 6 lists the purpose of borrowed money received by the sampled farmers in the study area.
The majority of the sample's farmers (79 %) had taken out loans for crops, followed by loans for livestock (7 %), and then loans for businesses (14 %).Crop-related loans dominate, reflecting the fundamental role of agriculture in these communities.Livestock and business loans showed farmers' efforts to diversify income sources and improve their overall economic well-being.Access to credit for these purposes can play a significant role in promoting sustainable agricultural practices, livestock management, and rural development.

Loan Size Obtained
Table 7 displays the loan amounts obtained by the sampled farmers in the study area.About half (50 %) of the sampled farmers received loans up to $50,000, 22 % received loans between $50,000 and $1,000,000, and 28 % received loans exceeding $1,000,000 in total.The availability of loans across different amounts states the importance of offering a diverse range of financial products to cater to the unique requirements of farmers at different stages of development.Source: Field survey data, 2019-20

Profitability of Intercropping
The economics of intercropping presented in Table 8 revealed that the total gross revenue was Rs. 289668/acre, whereas the total cost amounted to Rs. 182756/acre.Similarly, the gross margin was found to be Rs.124912 per acre, while the net return over the total cost was found to be Rs.106912 per acre.Hence, the benefit-cost ratio comes to around 1.59.It is evident that the percentage share of the total variable costs is 90.2 percent, and the fixed cost was 9.8 percent of the total cost of production.
The benefit-cost ratio of intercropping was also higher, with a value of 1.59 than sole crops.So intercropping onions with tomatoes was more profitable as compared to sole crops.The findings revealed that the practice of intercropping onions

Economics of Intercropping in District Muzaffargarh
and tomatoes was found to be economically favorable.The benefit-cost ratio, which measures the profitability of the venture, indicated that intercropping yielded positive financial returns.
Additionally, the comparison of intercropping's benefit-cost ratio with that of sole crops further supports the conclusion that intercropping was more profitable.

Profitability of Onions (Sole)
The economics of onion (sole) cultivation presented in Table 9 revealed that the gross revenue was Rs. 118463/acre, whereas the total cost amounted to Rs. 86379/acre.Similarly, the gross margin was found to be Rs.50083 per acre, while the net return over the total cost was found to be Rs.32083 per acre.Hence, the benefit-cost ratio comes in around 1.37.
The percentage shares of variable costs and fixed costs of production were 79.2 percent and 20.8 percent of the total cost of production, respectively.The variable costs include land preparation (13.3 %), seeds (5.9 %), nursery raising and transplanting costs (5.2 %), manures (6.4 %), fertilizers (12.5 %), weeding and hoeing (6.7 %), insecticides and pesticides (1.9 %), irrigation (12.2 %), harvesting and curing (7.8 %), and transportation and marketing costs (6.6 %) of total production costs.Among the different items of cost, the rental value of land, land preparation cost, fertilizer cost, and irrigation cost were the major items of cost of cultivation in onion (sole) production.The data suggests positive economic outcomes for sole onion cultivation, individual farmers should conduct a comprehensive analysis to determine the suitability of this crop within their overall farming strategy.

Profitability of Tomatoes (Sole)
The economics of tomato (sole) cultivation presented in Table 10 revealed that the gross revenue was Rs. 253590 per acre, whereas the total cost amounted to Rs. 170921 per acre.The gross margin was determined to be Rs.100669 per acre, with a net return over the total cost of Rs. 82669 per acre.The benefit-cost ratio comes to around 1.48, which shows that the tomato crop is a remunerative enterprise for the farmers.The percentage shares of variable costs and fixed costs of production were 89.5 percent and 10.5 percent of the total cost of production, respectively.The variable costs include land preparation (7.4 %), seeds (10.5 %), nursery raising and transplanting costs (2.8 %), manures (2.6 %), fertilizers (7.4 %), weeding and hoeing (5.0 %), insecticides and pesticides (3.9 %), irrigation (6.1 %), harvesting and curing (13.7 %), and transportation and marketing costs (28.2 %) of total production costs.Among the various items of cost, transportation and marketing cost, harvesting and curing cost, and seed cost were the major items of cultivation cost in tomato (sole) production.
Based on the presented data, cultivating tomatoes as a sole crop appears to be a profitable endeavor.
Farmers should conduct a thorough analysis of their specific circumstances and consider other relevant factors before making decisions about crop selection and cultivation practices.

Profitability Comparison of Intercropping and Monocropping
Intercropping involves growing two or more crops together on the same piece of land, while monocropping involves cultivating only one crop.According to Additionally, intercropping has been found to reduce the costs of inputs associated with farming.

Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) of Intercropping
The land equivalent ratio is a concept in agriculture that describes the relative land area required under

Economics of Intercropping in District Muzaffargarh
sole cropping (monoculture) to produce the same yield as under intercropping [49].The results showed that the land equivalent ratio (LER) was greater than one, which implies that intercropping was more productive than sole cropping.Specifically, the total LER found was 1.31, indicating that the intercropping system produced 31 % more yield than the same area of land planted in sole crops.This suggests that intercropping is a more efficient way of utilizing land, as it enables higher yields without the need for additional land.Various studies on intercropping have shown that planting tomatoes and onions together can lead to a higher land equivalent ratio (LER).The findings presented here are in line with previous research conducted by [Soniya et al., 2021; Yildirim and Guvenc, 2005; Lamlom and Ahmed, 2021], indicating that intercropping, coupled with appropriate nutrient management, can result in more efficient land utilization and higher crop yields.However, a contrasting study conducted by [Ahmed et al., 2023] discovered that intercropping tomatoes and onions had a negative effect on yield, and the resulting LER was less than one.

Production Constraints
To assess production issues, eight factors are considered, and the two most important production issues mentioned by sampled farmers were seed costs and disease and pest management, which represented 97.8 percent and 93.3 percent, respectively.Similarly, the lowest level was the access to quality water by sampled farmers in the study area (Table 13).The information presented underscores the importance of addressing key production challenges to enhance agricultural productivity and the economic well-being of farmers.Strategies aimed at reducing seed costs, improving disease and pest management practices, and sustaining access to quality water resources could contribute to a more sustainable and prosperous agricultural sector.

Marketing Constraints
Eight major marketing issues for producers have been identified and presented in Table 14.The three major marketing issues identified by the sample farmers were low prices, perishability of the product, and high travel costs representing 93.3 %, 91.1 %, and 77.8 % respectively.Similarly, the unavailability of packing materials was the lowest level for sampled farmers in the study area.
The information provided highlights the need for targeted interventions and support mechanisms to address the identified marketing challenges, thereby improving market access and financial outcomes for agricultural producers.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The study concluded that intercropping onions with tomatoes provides farmers with additional income and helps them meet their household needs.Compared to purchasing crops, intercropping is a more cost-effective option for farmers.It is a traditional farming practice in the study area, with a majority of farmers intercropping onions with tomatoes, especially for domestic use.The economic indicators, including gross margin, net return, benefit-cost ratio, and land equivalent ratio, showed promising results for intercropping over sole cropping.Intercropping had the highest benefit-cost ratio of 1.59, which was higher than the ratios observed in sole cropping of tomatoes (1.48) and onions (1.37), highlighting its costeffectiveness.The LER value was greater than one (1.31),supporting the benefits of intercropping and indicating that farmers can increase their profits by growing onion crops at different densities.However, unpredictable weather conditions, market volatility, rising input costs, and low planting densities for onions are factors that can hinder profitability.To optimize land use and increase crop yields, farmers can benefit from adopting intercropping along with appropriate management techniques.Adopting intercropping practices can help farmers overcome challenges and increase profitability, contributing to a sustainable and resilient agriculture system.
Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations can be made: • To boost intercropping productivity and profitability for onions and tomatoes, farmers should prioritize the use of high-quality seeds.• Increasing onion planting density can improve the total return of onion-tomato intercropping by optimizing resource utilization and enhancing yields.• Governments can alleviate local market instability by intervening with market information systems, price stabilization measures, and support programs.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors express their gratitude to ACIAR and CABI-Pakistan for their assistance in conducting the baseline survey for this study.

DECLARATION
The study findings are exclusive to this publication and have not been published or considered for publication elsewhere.In case of acceptance for publication, the copyright of the article will be transferred to the Pakistan Academy of Sciences.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
There is no conflict of interest among the authors.

Fig. 1 .Fig. 1 .
Fig. 1.Map of the study area (District Muzaffargarh, Punjab-Pakistan)2.2Data CollectionThe study was conducted as part of the "Strengthening Vegetable Value Chains in Pakistan" (SVVCP) cost of production (Rs./acre) TVC = Total Variable costs (Rs./acre) TFC = Total Fixed costs (Rs./acre) Xi = Quantity/Number of inputs per acre Pi = Price of inputs (Rs./acre) • To estimate the profitability of onion production, the following equations were used: Where, return (Rs./acre) NR = Net return (Rs./acre) GM = Gross margin (Rs./acre) Y i = Quantity of output (Kg/acre) P i = Price of onion (Rs./kg)

Fig. 2 .
Fig. 2. Age group of sampled farmers average formal education of the sampled farmers was 5.1 years, which suggests that the majority of the sampled farmers in the research area had little formal education.The results illustrate that most farmers have limited formal education, impacting their ability to embrace new agricultural practices and adapt to changes.This underscores the need for focused educational efforts to narrow the knowledge gap and enhance their engagement with innovations.

Table 1 .
Percentage distribution of farm equipment owned by sampled farmers Source: Field survey data, 2019-20

Table 2 .
Percentage distribution of sampled farmers by sources of information Source: Field survey data, 2019-20

Table 3 .
Irrigation sources of sampled farmers for selected vegetables Source: Field survey data, 2019-20

Table 4 .
Loan obtained by sampled farmers

Table 5 .
Percentage distribution of sampled farmers by sources of loan obtained Source: Field survey data, 2019-20

Table 6 .
Percentage distribution of farmers according to the purpose of the loan

Table 7 .
Size of loan obtained by sampled farmers

Table 13 .
Production constraints faced by farmers

Table 14 .
Onion marketing constraints faced by sampled farmers Source: Field survey data, 2019-20