Economic Evaluation of Tomato Sole and Tomato Onion Intercropping Systems of Smallholders in District Muzaffargarh, Pakistan
Economic Evaluation of Tomato Sole vs Tomato Onion Intercropping
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53560/PPASB(58-2)640Keywords:
Smallholders, Tomato, onion, Intercropping, Economic comparison, Benefit-cost ratio, PunjabAbstract
The objective of this research was to conduct an economic evaluation of smallholders’ practices i.e tomatoonion intercropping (toi) and tomato sole cropping (ts). Primary farmer’s field-level data was used in the study. Resource use efficiency and financial profitability indicators were calculated for comparison of two tomato cultivation systems. A financial model based on a modified Policy Analysis Matrix (PAM) approach was used as a method of research. The result indicates that 53 percent respondent adopts the tomato-onion intercropping system and remaining 47 percent respondents follows sole tomato system. Tomato-onion intercropping gave higher private profitability (US$. 1556/acre) with a benefit-cost ratio (BCR) of 2.35 compared to sole tomato with private profitability of US$.913 per acre with BCR 1.88. A higher BCR was found in tomato-onion intercropping than in the sole tomato cropping system. Tomato onion intercropping (toi) has more resource use efficiency with less Private Cost Ratio (PCR) value 0.30 as compared to tomato sole with PCR value 0.38. In conclusion, the tomato-onion intercropping system resulted in higher net income may be a viable option for smallholders to mitigate the economic risk of sole tomato cultivation. The result proved that the sole tomato cropping system is also economically viable however tomato-onion intercropping proved promising practice to minimize the economic risk of sole tomato crop. The findings have implicates that tomato-onion intercropping has the potential to increase the livelihoods of the smallholders in the study area.
References
GoP. Economic Survey of Pakistan 2018-19. Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Finance, Islamabad (2019).
GoP. Crop Area Production District Wise. 2017-18. Government of Pakistan, Ministry of National Food Security & Research, Islamabad (2018).
G. Thapa. Smallholder farming in transforming economies of Asia and the Pacific: Challenges and opportunities. Discussion on Paper prepared for the side event organized during the Thirty third session of IFAD’s Governing Council (2009).
P.B. Hazell., C. Poulton. S. Wiggins, and A. Dorward. The future of small farms for poverty reduction and growth. International Food Policy Research Institute 42: (2007).
S. Mitra, and S. Sharmin. Risk Attitudes and Financial Profitability of Tomato Farmers - A Study in Bangladesh. Journal of Agricultural Sciences – Sri Lanka 207-217 (2019).
D. Kahan. Managing risk in farming. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2008).
C.D Haung, Q.Q, Liu, X. L. Li, and C.C Zhang. Effect of intercropping on maize grain yield and yield components. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 18(8): 1690-1700 (2019).
Y. Hong, N. Heerink, and W. Werf. Farm size and smallholders’ use of intercropping in Northwest China. Land Use Policy 99: (2020).
B. Horwith. A role for intercropping in modern agriculture. Bio Science 35(5): 286-291 (1985).
E. Monke, and S.R. Pearson. The Policy Analysis Matrix for Agricultural Development. Cornell University Press. (1989).
N. Indriyani., S.D. W. Prajanti, and Y.A Maretta. Competitiveness and the Impact of Government Policy on the Clove Farming Business in Getasan Sub-District, Semarang Regency. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research 9(1): 3173-3182 (2020).
K.V. Pilusa. A. Belete, and V.A Baloi. Analysing chicken meat production comparative advantage of South Africa. African Journal of Agricultural Research 16(6): 843-849 (2020).
D.R. Appleyard. Report on comparative advantage. Agricultural Prices Commission Report 61: (1987).
S. Ahmad, and R.P. Martin. Agricultural Policy Analysis in Pakistan: Illustrations in the Use of the Policy Analysis Matrix. Lahore University of Management Sciences. Working Paper 27: (2000).
S. Machado. Does intercropping have a role in modern agriculture?. Journal of soil and water conservation 64(2): 55A-57A(2009).
W. Akhtar, M. Ahmad, N. Akmal, H. Shah, and A. A. Mirani. Resource use efficiency in dates production in Sindh Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Research 32(3): 416-42 (2019).
W. Akhtar, M. Sharif, A. H. Qureshi, K. M. Aujla, M. A.Khan. Competitiveness of tomato production in Punjab, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Research 29(2): (2016).
W. Akhtar, M. Sharif, and N. Akmal. Analysis of Economic Efficiency and Competitiveness of the Rice Production Systems of Pakistan’s Punjab. Lahore Journal of Economics 12(1): 141-153 (2007).
S. A Hussain, N. Ali, A. Rab and M. Shah. Yield and economic dynamics of intercopping in summer vegetables Sarhad Journal of Agriculture 24(1): 31(2008).
T. Sun, C. Zhao, X. Feng, W. Yin, Z. Gou, R. Lal, A. Deng, Q. Chai, Z. Song, W. Zhang. Maize based intercropping systems achieve higher productivity and profitability with lesser environmental footprint in a water scarce region of northwest China. Food and Energy Security 10(1): (2021).
X. Qian, H. Zang, H. Xu, Y. Hu, C. Ren, L. Guo, C. Wang, and Z. Zeng. Relay strip intercropping of oat with maize, sunflower and mung bean in semi- arid regions of Northeast China: yield advantages and economic benefits. Field Crops Research 223: 33-40 (2018).
T. Chapagain, R. Pudasaini, B. Ghimire K. Gurung, K. Choi, L.Rai S. Magar, B.BK, M.N Raizada. Intercropping of maize, millet, mustard, wheat and ginger increased land productivity and potential economic returns for smallholder terrace farmers in Nepal. Field Crops Research 227: 91-101 (2018).
S. Sharmin., S. Mitra, and M. Rashid. Production, yield and area growth of major winter vegetables of Bangladesh. Journal of Bangladesh Agricultural University 16(3): 492-502 (2018).
S. Maitra, T. Shankar, and P. Banerjee. Potential and Advantages of Maize-Legume Intercropping System in Maize-Production and Use. IntechOpen (2020).
K. Bybee-Finley, and M.R Ryan. Advancing intercropping research and practices in industrialized agricultural landscapes.” Agriculture 8( 6):80 (2018).
S. D. A. Hussein, S.R. Salman, A.M.R.A. Mawgoud, and A.A. Ghoname. Productivity, quality and profit of sole or intercropped green bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) crop. Journal of Agronomy 4(2): 151- 155 (2005).
M.K. Kansiime, P.V. Asten, and K. Sneyers. Farm diversity and resource use efficiency: Targeting agricultural policy interventions in East Africa farming systems. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 85: 32-41 (2018).
X.Wu, F. Wu, X. Zhou, X.Fu, Y. Tao, W. Xu, and S. Liu. Effects of intercropping with potato onion on the growth of tomato and rhizosphere alkaline phosphatase genes diversity. Frontiers in Plant Science 7: 846 (2016).
F.Z. Wu, K. Pan, and S.W. Liu. Restoration of soil and the technology of continuous cropping obstacle to overcome. China Vegetables (in Chinese) 13: 39 (2013).
X. Zhou, G. Yu, and F. Wu. Effects of intercropping cucumber with onion or garlic on soil enzyme activities, microbial communities and cucumber yield. European Journal of Soil Biology 47(5): 279- 287 (2011).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY). Allows users to: copy the article and distribute; abstracts, create extracts, and other revised versions, adaptations or derivative works of or from an article (such as a translation); include in a collective work (such as an anthology); and text or data mine the article. These uses are permitted even for commercial purposes, provided the user: includes a link to the license; indicates if changes were made; gives appropriate credit to the author(s) (with a link to the formal publication through the relevant DOI); and does not represent the author(s) as endorsing the adaptation of the article or modify the article in such a way as to damage the authors' honor or reputation.
