MILK PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION

Module 12. Estimation of milk production and marketed surplus

Lesson 28

ESTIMATION OF MARKETED SURPLUS AND SETTING UP OF MILK PLANT

28.1 Introduction

Development of milk production activities in a region are guided by the marketing facilities available, as milk is highly perishable commodity and as such requires quick disposal or conversion into milk products. Hence, it is of vital importance to examine the production, consumption and disposal pattern of milk across different categories of sample households. The analysis regarding these parameters is valuable to commercial liquid milk procurement cells in planning the milk procurement strategy to procure more milk at minimum cost from the milk-shed area. Thus, the present Lecture provides information as a part of empirical study conducted in Shimoga district of Karnataka regarding marketed surplus of milk.

28.2 Daily Average Milk Production and Marketed Surplus of Milk

Daily average milk production and marketed surplus of milk worked out for different category of households, which is enumerated in Table- 28.1.

It can be seen from the table that, on an average, taking all the categories together, the daily milk production per household was worked out to be 11.68 litres, out of which 9.70 litres was sold, representing marketed surplus of 83.05 per cent in the study area. The inter-category analysis revealed that, the average milk production per day was observed to be the highest in case of medium farmers (13.44 litres), out of which 11.10 litres was sold, representing marked surplus of 82.59 per cent. In case of landless farmers, whose average production was the lowest (7.22 per cent), the marketed surplus was 84.63 per cent. The table further indicate that the proportion of marketed surplus to production was highest in case of marginal farmers (85.35 per cent), followed by landless farmers (84.63 per cent), small farmers (84.12 per cent) and large farmers (67.61 per cent). In case of large farmers, the proportion of marketed surplus to the production was lowest because they are well off and sell less milk.

Table 28.1 Daily Milk Production, Consumption and Marketed Surplus of Milk

(Litre/day/household)

Category of Household/farmers	Production	Consumption	Marketed surplus	Percentage of marketed surplus to Production
Land less (No land)	7.22	1.11	6.11	84.63
Marginal (Up to l ha.)	10.10	1.48	8.62	85.35
Small (1-2 ha.)	13.35	2.12	11.23	84.12
Medium
Medium and Semi-Medium
[, combined (2-10 ha.)	13.44	2.34	11.10	82.59
Large (Above 10 ha.)	12.75	. 4.13	8.62	67.61
Overall	11.68	1.98	9.70	83.05

28.3 Disposal Pattern of Milk

Both the organized and unorganized sectors of milk marketing were reported to be operating in the study area. There were two co-operative societies in the organized sector and unorganized sector consists of vendors, vendor processors and tea shops as the main marketing agencies. The information with respect to disposal pattern of milk is exhibited in table 28.2.

Table 28.2 Disposal of milk to different milk marketing agencies (in per cent)

Category of Household	Organized sector Cooperative societies	Unorganized sector
Category of Household	Organized sector Cooperative societies	Vendor	Vendor Processor	Village Consumer	Tea shops	Total
Land less	56.36	35.45	8.19	--	--	100
Marginal	29.10	43.37	21.24	3.87	2.42	100
Small	32.98	30.37	24.87	7.59	4.19	100
Medium	70.04	14.03	4.16	10.04	1.73	100
Large	8.67	44.94	--	40.59	5.80	100
overall	46.31	28.05	14.62	8.44	2.58	100

As evident from Table 28.2 that overall, 53.69 per cent of the total marketed surplus was disposed through the unorganized sector, whereas 46.31 per cent of the total marketed surplus was marketed through the organized sector. This shows that still the sample households are mostly dependent on unorganized sector for disposal of their milk.

Out of the total marketed surplus, 28.05 per cent was marketed through vendors, 14.62 per cent was marketed through vendor processors, 8.44 per cent was marketed to direct consumers and only 2.58 per cent was delivered to tea shops. Among the different categories of sample households, medium farmers marketed as high as their 70 per cent of the marketed surplus through the co-operative sectors, while only 8.67 per cent of the marketed surplus of large farmers was marketed through the cooperative societies.

28.4 Out Come of the Study

It was observed that about 54 percent of marketed surplus was still marketed to the unorganized sector. Therefore, the study suggests the necessity of establishment of cooperative societies and strengthening of the organized sector, so that producer can get remunerative price for his produce.

28.5 Estimation of Marketed Surplus and Setting Up of Milk Plant

The marketed surplus is estimated by conducting a survey in the milk shed area for which the estimate is required as given below and also shown through a empirical study above. The study showed that the milk marketed surplus is overall higher, i.e., 83.05 percent of the total marketed surplus as overall of different category of farmers (Table.28.1). Further the milk production potential is required to estimate in the milk shed area earmarked. This can be estimated by the number of milch animals like local cows, crossbred cows and buffaloes multiplied with the milk yield of respective animals. By adding the milk production of all the species , this will give us the figure of total milk production potential of that area. Suppose 1 lakh litre per day is the milk production potential of that area , its 83.05 percent will be available for sale as confirmed by the empirical study. It means roughly 80 000 litre milk per day is the marketed surplus of milk. As per the procurement ability of the agencies involved with the plant, the installed capacity of the plant can be decided.

Survey Schedule for Estimation of Milk Marketed Surplus

GENERAL INFORMATION OF THE VILLAGE

1. Name of the village: ________ District _________ State ________ Zone _________

2. Distance of the village from district Headquarter :__________ Kms.

3. Demographic features (last census) :

Human Population Male ___________ Female __________ Total ___________

4. No. of Operational Holdings (Census figures) in hectares:

Size group of holding	No. of Holding
Up to 1.00
1.01 - 2.00
2.01 - 4.00
4.01 - 10.00
> 10.00

GENERAL PROFILE OF SAMPLE HOUSEHOLD

District ……………………….. Block……………………….

Name of Respondent…………………………. S/o………………………….

Farmers Category: Small / Medium /Large………………

Family Size……… Adult: M……. / F …... Children (<18 Yr.): M…. / F ….

LAND HOLDING (Ha.)

Particulars	Irrigated	Un-irrigated	Total
Owned
Leased in
Leased out
Operational land holding
Area under fodder crop

CROPPING PATTERN (Agricultural Year June -July)

Season / Crop	Area (Ha)	Quantity produced	Value (Rs.)	By-product	Value (Rs.)
Kharif/ Rainy 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Rabi / Winter 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Summer 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

MILK PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION (In litres)

Species

Months

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

April

May

June

Buffalo

Potential:

Drawn in Pail: (after suckling of calf)

Total

Species

Months

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

April

May

June

CB Cow

Potential:

Drawn in Pail:

Total

Local Cow

Potential:

Drawn in Pail:

Total

MILK CONSUMPTION AND SALE

(In litres/kg)

Particulars

Months

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

April

May

June

Milk Retained in Household:

Cow milk

Buffalo milk

Milk Converted as Products:

Cow milk

Buffalo milk

Products Prepared :

Milk Sold :

Cow milk

Buffalo milk

Sale Price (Rs./lit) :

Cow milk

Buffalo milk

To whom sold*

Sale Price of Product :

To whom sold*

· Milk vendor (1), Coop. Soc. (2), Org. Plant (3), Tea Shop (4), Consumer (5)

Selected references

Chauhan, A.K and Sharma, A.K. 1992. Production, consumption and marketed surplus of milk in rural areas of district Bareilly (UP). Agricultural Marketing, 34(4): 37-39.

Vedamurthy K.B and Chauhan A.K. 2005. Economic analysis of milk marketing in Shimoga district of Karnataka, Ind. J. Agricultural Marketing, 19(3): 39-51.