findings from the endline survey of the mahila kisan ...mssrf-fs-mksp.org/docs/mssrf-mksp_endline...

A.

Submitted to:

M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation

Prepared By:

Association for Stimulating Know-how (ASK) V-30/3, DLF - III,

Gurgaon-122002, Haryana Tel: 0124-4060353-354

Fax: 0124-4060355 www.askindia.org

Findings from the Endline Survey of the Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana (MKSP) 18 August, 2017

2

Acknowledgement Association for Stimulating Know How (ASK) would like to thank the M .S. Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF) for giving us the opportunity to conduct an Endline Survey of the Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana (MKSP) which was initiated in 2007, with the aim of women empowerment in districts of Wardha and Yavatmal of the state of Maharashtra. We would like to thank the MSSRF team in Wardha who provided support in planning and executing the survey. We are grateful to all the women farmers who whole heartedly participated in the survey. The ASK Research Team was welcomed in all these locations and supported to effectively carry out the data collection. We appreciate the insights shared by the Mahila Kisan Samiti members that have helped us build a better understanding of the project, the challenges they faced and the achievements. The women farmers shared their stories of the change ushered by the various initiatives undertaken under MKSP. We hope the findings from the endline survey fulfill the objective of bringing forth the changes achieved and the progress made under the MKSP over the Project period and are able to guide future initiatives taken by the Foundation. Research and Studies Domain Association for Stimulating Know how (ASK)

3

Table of Contents

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 4

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 4

Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 6

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................ 8

Chapter 1 .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 11

Project Background ............................................................................................................................................................................. 11

Chapter 2 .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 15

MKSP Endline Survey: Objectives and Methodology ............................................................................................................ 15

Chapter 3 .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 18

MKSP Members: Profile and Asset Ownership ....................................................................................................................... 18

Chapter 4 .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 26

Trainings and Awareness on Agriculture Practices .............................................................................................................. 26

Chapter 5 .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 30

Cropping pattern and Adoption of Sustainable/Integrated Agriculture Practices ................................................. 30

Chapter 6 .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 44

Other components of the Project .................................................................................................................................................. 44

Chapter 7 .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 49

Perception of Mahila Kisan Samiti members ........................................................................................................................... 49

Chapter 8 .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 54

Learnings/Key Takeaways ............................................................................................................................................................... 54

Annexures .................................................................................................................................. 58

Annexure I: Village-wise break of no. of respondents ....................................................................... 58

Annexure II: In depth Interview Tool .......................................................................................................................................... 60

Annexure III: MSSRF Endline Survey Tools ..................................................................................... 72

4

List of Tables Table 1: Criteria for selection of Poorest of Poor ................................................................................................................... 13 Table 2: Block-wise villages covered for the Endline Survey ........................................................................................... 15 Table 3: A Break-up of the 220 IDIS to be conducted with Women Farmers ........................................................... 16 Table 4: Stakeholder- Study Tool Matrix ................................................................................................................................... 16 Table 5: Villages covered under the Endline Survey 2017 ................................................................................................ 18 Table 6: Villages not covered in Endline Survey 2017 ........................................................................................................ 18 Table 7: Changes in Household assets ownership ................................................................................................................. 21 Table 8: Amount of land owned by Samiti members ........................................................................................................... 23 Table 9: Area of land ownership among Samiti members ................................................................................................. 23 Table 10: Village-wise distribution of new land bought ..................................................................................................... 24 Table 11: Amount of land owned according to land holding ............................................................................................ 31 Table 12: No. of Respondents reporting Rabi crop cultivation........................................................................................ 32 Table 13: Baseline (2012): Land holding wise distribution of farmers and crop yield ........................................ 39 Table 14: Endline (2017): Land holding wise distribution of farmers and crop yield .......................................... 39 Table 15: Vegetables grown in the Kitchen gardens of MKSP members ..................................................................... 45 Table 16: Seeds stored by MKSP members ............................................................................................................................... 46 Table 17: Benefits of training received through MKSP ....................................................................................................... 49 Table 18: Rating and Ranking Exercise conducted with the Women Farmer Groups .......................................... 50 Table 19: Comparison between key indicators of the Baseline and Endline ............................................................ 54

List of Figures Figure 1: Interview for Endline survey being conducted in Yavatmal ......................................................................... 16 Figure 2: Age distribution of Respondents ............................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 3: Marital status of Respondents .................................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 4: Caste distribution among Respondents.................................................................................................................. 20 Figure 5: Religion distribution among Respondents ............................................................................................................ 20 Figure 6: Education status of Respondents .............................................................................................................................. 20 Figure 7: Primary livelihood of Respondents .......................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 8: Change in the type of House ........................................................................................................................................ 22 Figure 9: Primary source of Water ............................................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 10: Land Ownership ............................................................................................................................................................. 23 Figure 11: Change in ownership of equipment ....................................................................................................................... 24 Figure 12: Change in Livestock Ownership .............................................................................................................................. 25 Figure 13: Livestock ownership .................................................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 14: Seed Treatment Demonstration in Bhidi_2 ........................................................................................................ 26 Figure 15: Seed Treatment Demonstration in Bhidi_1 ........................................................................................................ 26 Figure 16: Trainings undertaken by MKSP members on SAP/IAP ................................................................................ 27 Figure 17: Awareness of INM practices ...................................................................................................................................... 28 Figure 18: Awareness on Integrated Pest Management ..................................................................................................... 28 Figure 19: Sources of Information (n2=168) ........................................................................................................................... 29 Figure 20: Land distribution among survey respondents ................................................................................................. 30 Figure 21: Kharif Season ................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Figure 22: Adoption of Soil and Water Conservation Practices ...................................................................................... 33 Figure 23: Adoption of Seed Treatment Practice ................................................................................................................... 33 Figure 24: Seeds for which Seed Treatment was used ........................................................................................................ 34 Figure 25: Adoption of Integrated Nutrient Management Practices ............................................................................. 35 Figure 26: Adoption of IPM .............................................................................................................................................................. 35 Figure 27: Challenges faced in adoption on INM and IPM (n2=139) ............................................................................ 36 Figure 28: Impact of INM and IPM ................................................................................................................................................ 37 Figure 29: Annual Household Income during Baseline 2012 (in INR) ......................................................................... 38 Figure 30: Annual Household Income during Endline 2017 (in INR) .......................................................................... 38 Figure 31: Ms. Manisha with her noodle making machine ................................................................................................ 40 Figure 32: Ms. Sangita Lokhande .................................................................................................................................................. 41 Figure 33: Ms. Jyoti Ugemuge ......................................................................................................................................................... 42 Figure 34: Kitchen Garden in Dhamangaon Wathoda ......................................................................................................... 44

5

Figure 35: Adoption of Kitchen Garden Practice .................................................................................................................... 44 Figure 36: Benefits of having a Kitchen Garden (n2=136) ................................................................................................ 45 Figure 37: Seed Bank in Paloti (Wardha) .................................................................................................................................. 46 Figure 38: Benefits associated with Seed Bank and seed storage .................................................................................. 47 Figure 39: Ms. Sindhu kakas with her Seed Bank .................................................................................................................. 47 Figure 40: Women accessing Seed Bank .................................................................................................................................... 48 Figure 41: Seed Bank initiated under MKSP ............................................................................................................................ 48 Figure 42: Seed Bank seeds on display ....................................................................................................................................... 51 Figure 43: What key benefits do you think you accrued by being part of MKSP? (n2=168) .............................. 52 Figure 44: Future association with MKSP (n2=168) ............................................................................................................ 52 Figure 45: Access to government schemes ............................................................................................................................... 56 Figure 46: Kitchen Garden in Paloti ............................................................................................................................................. 57

6

Abbreviations

APMC Agriculture Produce Market Committee

ASK Association for Stimulating Know How

BPL Below Poverty Line

CFC Common Facility Centre

CRP Community Resource Persons

FGD Focused Group Discussion

GoI Government of India

INM Integrated Nutrient Management

IPM Integrated Pest Management

MGNREGA Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act

MKSP Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana

MoRD Ministry of Rural Development

MSSRF M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation

MSRLM Maharashtra State Rural Livelihood Mission

NRLM National Rural Livelihood Mission

SAP/IAP Sustainable Agricultural Practices/Integrated Agricultural Practices

WFG Women Farmers Group

8

Executive Summary 1. Introduction M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF) initiated the Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana (MKSP – Programme for the Empowerment of Women Farmers) in 2007. The MKSP Project is being implemented in 60 villages across 4 blocks of two districts namely, Wardha and Yavatmal of Vidarbha region in Maharashtra. The Project currently covers 3265 women farmers through 215 Mahila Kisan Samitis or Women Farmer’s Group, providing them technical and institutional support. The empowerment of women farmers in MKSP is attempted through a range of capacity building measures in three focal areas: (i) grass root institution building (ii) integrated agricultural practices and (iii) household food security.

MSSRF had engaged Association for Stimulating Know How (ASK) to conduct an Endline Survey of the MKSP Project. The endline survey was intended to cover the same set of 220 farmers who were surveyed during the Baseline survey in 56 villages of Wardha and Yavatmal districts undertaken at the start of the Project in 2012. The Endline would measure progress made by project via comparison with the Baseline findings. 2. Methodology adopted for the Endline Survey A mixed methods methodology entailing administering both quantitative and qualitative tools was employed for conducting the endline survey. A total of 168 women farmers were interviewed across 56 villages in the two districts of Wardha and Yavatmal. This sample corresponds to the sample covered during the Baseline survey in 2012-13. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were conducted with Women Farmer’s Groups (WFGs) and case studies were recorded to bring out the qualitative aspects of the project. 3. Key findings of the Endline Survey The key findings of the study have been summarized below: 3.1. Awareness on agriculture practices The project has thus been successful in raising awareness on various SAP/IAP through trainings and demonstrations. The awareness on IPM was found to be significantly high during the endline survey with 92% of the total respondents being aware of application of Neemastra, 82% being aware of Pheromone Traps/Yellow Sticky Traps and 83% being aware of the use of bio-pesticides. Of the respondents interviewed, a majority (77%) stated that MSSRF-MKSP is their key source for the know-how on agricultural practices. 70% also stated that MSSRF-MKSP is the source for information on seeds, manures etc. For 72% the Project has been the locus to know about health and nutrition; while for 64% of the respondents, MSSRF-MKSP is source to know about Government schemes. With increase in awareness, the mobility of women has increased with women farmers accessing various information sources like the Krishi Sahyak Kendra, the market (APMC) apart from MSSRF. 3.2. Adoption of Sustainable Agricultural Practices (SAP)/Integrated Agricultural

Practices (IAP) and their impact Compared to the baseline (2012) there is a perceptible shift from small land ownership to semi-medium ownership. During the baseline (2012), 40% of the total respondents (220) were small land owners. There is a reduction in this category during the endline (2017) and a parallel increase in the medium land-owners category. This indicates towards increase in land-holding size.

9

Significant changes have been observed across all the methods with ‘cultivation across slope’ (60%) and ‘bunding/bund repair’ (52%) registering the maximum change. The endline survey brought forth that of the respondents who have adopted seed treatment practice (132 of 168 respondents), 88% used seed treatment for Tur followed by 60% for storing Soybean and 42% for cotton seeds. The endline survey found that of those who own land and/or have been cultivating on leased land (139 respondents of 168), the method of farm yard manure (76%), crop rotation (76%), and soil testing (74%) are the top 3 adopted methods. IPM practices of Neemastra (74%), pheromone traps (65%) and bio-pesticides (58%) were being widely used by the respondents.

The trainings undertaken and the consequent adoption of various practices has had impact on multiple levels like knowledge and information on methods of practicing agriculture; on agriculture yield; on expenditure incurred on inputs and the income generated from agriculture. Of the surveyed respondents who have adopted any of the SAP/IAP (139 of 168 respondents), a majority of the respondents (90%) stated their total yield had increased. Another 78% respondents stated that they saw an improvement in the soil quality. Additionally at the individual level there is a change in the women farmers themselves with increase in confidence and ability to take decisions. Of the surveyed respondents, 61% stated that they are better prepared to take decisions

Of the total respondents surveyed during the endline 73% (122 women farmers) had space for a kitchen garden. Of these, 98% have cultivated a kitchen garden. The key benefits attributed to the kitchen garden are ‘availability of sufficient food’ (91%); ‘nutritional support to family’ (84%); ‘access to pesticide free food’ (83%). 3.3. Benefits of MKSP Maximum women (76%) identified improved access to knowledge as a benefit of being part of MKSP, closely followed by increase in household income (72%). Better access to nutritious food was also considered a benefit (69%). 62% women also stated that their decision making ability has improved owing the knowledge they have gained through MKSP. With respect to women farmers as individuals in the family and community, 14% stated that their position in the family has improved while 10% stated that they now have better access to the Panchayati Raj Institution (PRI). The major motivation of the women farmers to continue their association with the Samitis is the new information and knowledge which they gain. Additionally the benefits which they have accrued as a result of the project namely, scientific knowledge on agriculture, increase in yield, reduction in input costs, increase in income from agriculture better availability of nutritious food, improved access to government schemes and access to credit through the Federation are some of the reasons cited for continued association.

4. Key Learnings 4.1. Sustainable/Integrated Agriculture Practices have been well received The introduction of Sustainable/Integrated Agriculture Practices (SAP/IAP) in the Project areas has received a positive response. The women farmers have been able to adapt their agricultural practices to include methods of Integrated Nutrient Management (INM) and Integrated Pest Management (IPM) to favourable outcomes. Cultivating across the slope has increased from 5% of the total respondents during the baseline to 60% of the respondents during the endline. Similarly undertaking soil testing has improved from 23% during baseline to 74% during the endline. The application of SAP/IAP like Jeevamrut, vermicomposting and Neemastra, using pheromone traps has also recorded significant increase. The women farmers testified for the increase in yield. This they attributed to better organization of agriculture; using mixed cropping method; application of organic fertilizers; availability of equipment through the CFC and availability of timely credit through the Federations

10

4.2. Kitchen garden as a means to ensure household food security Kitchen garden has been one of the most successful initiatives under the MKSP Project. The change in the adoption of kitchen gardens from the baseline (2012) to the endline (2017) has been significant. The women farmers have keenly invested time and efforts to grow seasonal vegetables. Kitchen garden has also been used by many as a source of additional income with women selling the vegetables, fruits and flowers grown in the kitchen garden. 4.3. Creation of a supportive environment The Mahila Kisan Samitis along with the Federations have created a supportive environment for the women farmers by making accessible information, technical support and credit. Women respondents stated that they started taking more interest in farming after joining the project as members. A conducive environment has thus encouraged women to take proactive interest in farming and contribute to decision making regarding the same.

4.4. Increase in participation in Gram Sabha and access to schemes The members of the Mahila Kisan Samitis now increasingly participate in the Gram Sabha. They raise questions regarding schemes and village development activities. This is a significant change where women are actively engaging with the Panchayati Raj Institution (PRI) members. Not only are they accessing this forum but also making it accountable. Apart from disseminating agriculture related information and practices, the Mahila Kisan Samitis also act as channels for information on various government schemes and entitlements. Participation in the Gram Sabha has improved access to information for the MKSP members. The women have also begun to address social issues within the village 4.5. Mahila Kisan Samitis as agents of change and empowerment The MKSP has been able to empower women to effectively contribute to decision making. Another key transformation is the realization amongst the Samiti members of centrality of women in the agriculture process and thereby asserting themselves by way of decision making, which earlier was seen as the prerogative of the male members of the household. Better understanding about agriculture – a structured knowledge has helped the women farmers in taking decisions. The women stated that they now increasingly contribute to household decisions with respect to agriculture.

11

Chapter 1 Project Background

1.1. M. S. Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF) M. S. Swaminathan Research Foundation is a non-profit trust registered as a non-governmental organization. MSSRF’s vision is to harness science and technology for sustainable and equitable development. The organization believes that this can be achieved through pro poor, pro nature, pro women and pro sustainable livelihood orientation to technological development and dissemination. In all the thematic areas of MSSRF’s work, gender mainstreaming is adopted as a strategy through the project cycle. MSSRF adopts pro women approach as a way to achieve gender equity in development. It addresses gender issues related to livelihoods such as equitable access to technology, skill and knowledge, resources and opportunity which are a pre-requisite to ensure sustainable livelihoods. The Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana implemented by M. S. Swaminathan Research Foundation in the district of Wardha and Yavatmal since 2007 works with women farmers groups on adoption of sustainable/integrated agricultural practices, improved food security and attainment of women’s rights. The work is implemented through Mahila Kisan Samitis amongst 3265 women farmers in Wardha and Yavatmal district. The project is currently towards completion of Phase II and has been funded by the Ministry of Rural Development (Government of India) and the Maharashtra State Rural Livelihood Mission. According to the organization, “Contemporary relevance of MSSRF’s work on anticipatory research for identification of climate savior genes, participatory research involving, scientist-farm-family partnership in conservation of biodiversity, promotion of commercial gene-seed-grain and water security system in promotion of food security, and creation of multiple livelihood opportunities through bio villages have yielded results of immense significance, application of ICT has ensured the last person and last mile connectivity and information empowerment. Through research and development and community empowerment, MSSRF influences policy issues for ensuring sustainable agricultural and rural development”. 1.2. “Towards Empowerment of Women Farmers in Vidarbha” Begun in December 2011, MSSRF implemented the project ‘Towards Empowerment of Women Farmers in Vidarbha’. The project envisaged three focal themes:

1. Institution building 2. Sustainable/Integrated agriculture 3. Food security

Women farmers were provided capacity building on aspects such as:

1. Organizational management to equip them to effectively manage their groups and federation

2. Different dimensions of sustainable/integrated agriculture practices 3. Household food and nutrition security

The first phase of the project duration was from December 2011 to November 2014 and the second Phase during 2014-17. The Project was funded by the Ministry of Rural Development and the Maharashtra State Rural Livelihood Mission (MSRLM).

12

1.3. Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana (MKSP) Post the budget presentation of 2010-11, the program ‘Towards Empowerment of Women Farmers in Vidarbha’ received national recognition and became a national program under the title of Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana. The Government of India (GoI) provided funds for expanding the program on a national scale. It also became a component of the National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) of the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD), Government of India. MKSP is operational in 60 villages in the districts of Wardha and Yavatmal with a membership of 3265 women farmers who have been organized into 215 women farmers groups (Mahila Kisan Samitis). These groups have been federated at the block level. There are three federations at the block level:

a. Wardha Taluka Mahila Shetkari Kashtakari Sanstha b. Deoli Taluka Mahila Shetkari Kashtakari Sanstha c. Ralegaon Taluka Mahila Shetkari Kashtakari Sanstha

The federations have been registered as autonomous institutions under the Government of India laws and functions independently. 1.4. Strategies Adopted The objectives of the program have been met by adopting the following methodology:

1.4.1. Building capacity of women on Grass root Institution Building: This was done by

ensuring strengthening of the documentation and financial systems of the groups and federation. Further, resource mobilization, networking and partnership for effective functioning, strengthening of leadership skills, linkages with government on socio-political issues such as land rights for women were areas of capacity building

1.4.2. Building and enhancing capacity of women farmers on livelihood aspects: To build and enhance capacities by promotion of sustainable/integrated agricultural practices, promotion of non-farm enterprises such as income generating activities and promotion of livestock management.

1.4.3. Building the capacity of women farmers to enhance household food security by creating awareness on nutrition, health and hygiene; promotion of mixed cropping and promotion of kitchen gardens.

1.4.4. Enhancing the social and economic empowerment of women farmers by enhancing their decision making capacity, income earning capacity through technical training on cultivation practices and entrepreneurial skills; enhancing knowledge on women’s rights with respect to land, domestic violence, Panchayati Raj Institutions, etc.

1.5. Key Stakeholders of the Project 1.5.1. Community Resource Persons – Community Resource Persons (CRPs), selected from

within the village community, were trained in the first phase and served as the main agents of change towards empowerment of women. They educate and motivate women farmers and the group to practice sustainable agriculture. Women farmers are motivated to participate in Gram Sabhas. CRPs

1.5.2. Women Farmers – traditionally women have been carrying out farming activities as much as or more than men. But varying forms of marginalization has been faced by them. Hence, the program focuses on the “poorest of the poor”. They are women farmers from the most backward sections in the economic, social, and gender spheres. The criteria for selection of Poorest of the Poor (POP) was as follows:

13

Table 1: Criteria for selection of Poorest of Poor

Pro Poor Criteria Pro Woman Criteria The Poorest of the Poor would be the person who would belong to a subset of all 3 criteria

Economic Social Widow Single woman – Divorced/ Deserted/ Unmarried woman

Marginal Small Landless

ST SC NT VJNT Minority

1.6. Key Activities Carried Out

1.6.1. Mahila Kisan Samitis are the women’s farmers groups through which training on

sustainable/integrated agricultural practices have been carried out. Through the same group, leadership skills have been imparted along with formation of linkages to the government agencies and their schemes therein.

1.6.2. Credit support provision for income generating activities - is provided to women farmers. This has been started in the second phase of the program where need based credit support have been provided to women farmers to adopt recommended practices and for livelihood diversification.

1.6.3. Sustainable/Integrated Agricultural Practices (SAP/IAP) - includes soil and water conservation methods; seed treatment methods, integrated nutrient management (INM), integrated pest management (IPM), and post-harvest seed management.

a. Soil and water conservation methods – awareness and skill training on making of farm bunds, contour bunding, and recharge pits. Opening of ridges and furrows during the last hoeing by tying of rope to hoe for earthing up and situ soil and water conservation.

b. Seed management – awareness and skill training on seed selection, storage, treatment and germination procedures

c. Integrated Nutrient Management (INM)- awareness on need for soil testing, training on soil sample collection and facilitating soil test; awareness and training on identification of nutrient deficiency; awareness on the correct combination of nutrients to be use and knowledge and training on the judicious use of different nutrient sources; awareness and training on proper storage of farmyard manure; promote application of organic matter to the soil; and promotion of bio fertilizers

d. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) – promotion of judicious combination of chemical and organic pesticides; awareness and training on appropriate cultural practices to control pests and diseases; growing of trap crops for pest control and use of pheromone traps for pest control; promotion of bio pesticides and skill training on contour bunding.

e. Post-harvest practices – involving the promotion and training on the correct way of collection and threshing of crops; grading and storage of the grains and seeds thereafter.

1.6.4. Common Facility Centres (CFC) – The CFC is a custom hiring centre for basic agricultural equipment. It facilitates timely availability of agricultural equipment for the use of farmers (all in the village) on a rental basis, in their cultivation process. The Centre is managed by a Steering Committee which is made up of selected Samiti members.

1.6.5. Kitchen Garden – has been introduced to support the idea of consumption of healthy and nutritious food at an affordable cost. The kitchen gardens are made in the small space available in the women’s houses. Vegetables and fruits are encouraged to be grown for the use of the household. Jowar is also promoted in the fields as a locally suitable food crop.

1.6.6. Seed Banks – have been introduced in some villages for preservation of local and traditional variety of seeds of grains and vegetables in that village. Moreover, the

14

members of the Samitis contribute to the collection of the grains and borrow from it too for their kitchen gardens.

1.6.7. Health benefits through Community Hunger Fighters – Community Hunger Fighters (CHFs)/Swasthya Mitra have been introduced in 33 of the villages under the MKSP program to address issues of malnutrition. The CHFs undergo a structured training program covering various aspects related to health, hygiene, malnutrition, government schemes, etc. Routine health camps in convergence with both the government and private health centers have been organized under the program. The CHFs initiative was part of Phase I of the project and not continued in Phase II.

15

Chapter 2 MKSP Endline Survey: Objectives and Methodology

MSSRF engaged Association for Stimulating Know How (ASK) to conduct an Endline Survey of the MKSP Project. The endline survey was intended to cover the same set of 220 women farmers who were surveyed during the Baseline survey in 56 villages of Wardha and Yavatmal districts undertaken at the start of the Project in 2012. The Endline would measure progress made by project via comparison with the Baseline findings. This chapter discusses the following aspects of the survey

Objective and scope of the endline Methodology Challenges and limitations Chapterization of the report

2.1. Objective and Scope of the Endline The broad objectives of the endline survey were:

To deepen MSSRF’s understanding of what progress has been made by the Project in improving the level of awareness, technical capacity in terms of adopting integrated agricultural practices and status of women farmers in the Project areas.

Give voice to project stakeholders –including women farmers and their group – and their perspective on the impact of the Project in their lives.

Produce an Endline report effectively sharing project achievements and lessons learned which can be shared with MSSRF partners, government, farmers, development practitioners and other interested parties.

2.2. Methodology Mixed methods, entailing uses of both qualitative and quantitative tools have been used for data collection and analysis. A mixed methodology overcomes the challenges of a single design. The quantitative data is substantiated by the qualitative data thereby provide a more comprehensive depiction of the situation thereby offsetting the weaknesses inherent to using each approach by itself. 2.2.1. Sampling Procedure and Sample The endline survey intended to cover the same set of 220 farmers who were surveyed during the baseline survey in the 56 villages in the four Talukas of Deoli, Wardha, Ralegaon and Hinganghat. Table 2 given below lists the number of villages covered across the 4 Talukas in the 2 districts of Wardha and Yavatmal. (See Annexure I for the complete list of villages).

Table 2: Block-wise villages covered for the Endline Survey

District Talukas No. of Villages

Wardha Wardha 20

Deoli 17

Yavatmal Ralegaon 18

Hinganghat 1

Total 56

16

Table 3 illustrates the total number of women farmers interviewed across 56 villages in the two districts. A total of 168 IDIs were administered out of the 220 identified women farmers. 52 women farmers were not available for multiple reasons as stated in Table 3.

Table 3: A Break-up of the 220 IDIS to be conducted with Women Farmers

S. No. Respondents No.

1. Respondents interviewed 168

2. Respondents who have migrated 28

3. Respondents not in the village on the day of the survey 20

4. Respondents who have passed away 4

Total No. 220

Figure 1: Interview for Endline survey being conducted in Yavatmal

2.2.2. Stakeholder – Study Tool Matrix The key respondents for the Endline survey were the women farmers’ who are beneficiaries of the MKSP Project. The matrix provided in Table 4 below lists the stakeholders met, the corresponding tools administered and total number of IDIs and FGDs conducted.

Table 4: Stakeholder- Study Tool Matrix

S. No. Stakeholder Study Tool used Total No. 1. 220 women farmers covered during the

Baseline in 2012-13 In Depth Interviews (IDIs) 1681

2. Women Farmer’s Groups Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) 8 3. Individual women farmers Case Studies 13 4. MSSRF Project Staff Semi Structured Interview 1

2.3. Challenges and Limitations

A key limitation of the study was the unavailability of the identified women farmers thereby decreasing the sample size by 52 persons. Of the identified respondents, 28 women were reported to have migrated from their villages; while 20 respondents were not available on the day of the survey due to various reasons. These being - pilgrimage visits, visiting relatives, admitted to the hospital and visiting Wardha for official work.

1 For a village wise break up of IDIs conducted, please refer to Annexure I

17

The endline survey was conducted at the onset of the peak agricultural season and hence women would be found working in the field during the day making them unavailable for the interviews and the FGDs. This was addressed by conducting these interviews in the evening when the women would return from the fields.

2.4. Chapterization of the report

Chapter 1 describes the MKSP project, its objectives and the key activities carried out under the project. Chapter 2 outlines the methodology adopted to conduct the endline survey including objectives sampling, tools applied and stakeholders met.

Chapter 3 builds a socio-economic profile of the survey respondents and describes the status of asset ownership of the respondents. Chapter 4 determines the trainings undertaken by the responders and their awareness about the SAP/IAP taught under the project.

Chapter 5 discusses the cropping pattern and the adoption of SAP/IAP by the members of the Mahila Samitis, and the resultant impact on agriculture and income. Chapter 6 discusses various aspects of household security addressed under MKSP.

Chapter 7 elaborates on the benefits accrued to the survey respondents under the project and describes the perspectives of the Samiti members’ vis-à-vis the project and its activities. Chapter 8 outlines the key learnings of the MKSP project.

18

Chapter 3 MKSP Members: Profile and Asset Ownership

3.1. Profile of the Respondents The endline survey interviewed 168 women farmers covered during the baseline in 2012. This section elaborates on the socio-economic profile of the 168 participants of this survey. It also elaborates on their asset ownership including household assets and land assets and changes therewith. This chapter will provide a profile of the survey respondents based on the following indicators

Target Location Age distribution and Marital status Religion and Caste distribution Primary livelihood of the respondent Samiti membership

Thereafter the chapter briefly discusses the status of the asset ownership and the changes noted compared to the Baseline (2012) based on the following indicators

Household assets: Material ownership and basic facilities Land ownership Ownership of agricultural equipment Ownership of livestock

3.1.1. Target Location The endline survey was conducted in 51 villages in the 2 Talukas of Deoli, Wardha in Wardha district; and 2 Talukas, Ralegaon and Hinganghat in Yavatmal district. (See Table 5)

Table 5: Villages covered under the Endline Survey 2017

District Talukas No. of Villages

Wardha Wardha 17

Deoli 17

Yavatmal Ralegaon 16

Hinganghat 1

Total 51

Of the 56 villages to be covered, the endline survey did not visit 5 villages (See Table 5) as the identified respondents were unavailable due to reasons of death, migration and non-availability on the day of the survey.

Table 6: Villages not covered in Endline Survey 2017

S. No. District Talukas Villages

1 Wardha Deoli

Chikani

2 Waigaon Nipani

3 Yavatmal Ralegaon

Loni

4 Sawner

19

5 Takali

The following sections build the demographic profile of the respondents of the endline survey. 3.1.2. Age distribution and Marital status Of the 168 women farmers interviewed, 31% and 30% belonged to the age group of 31 to 40 years and 41 to 50 years respectively. Of the total respondents, only 1% belonged to the age group of 18 to 25 years while 7% were aged 61 years and above. (See Figure 2)

Of the total respondents, 79% were married, while 21% were widowed. The latter fulfills the project objective of reaching the vulnerable women in the community and capacitating them to take decisions vis-à-vis agriculture and agricultural practices. (See Figure 3) 3.1.3. Religion and Caste Distribution

The project intended to include women from marginalized sections of society. Of the total respondents, 77% comprised Hindus, 22% stated to be practicing Buddhism while 1% followed Islam. (See Figure 5) The women farmers belonged to the different social categories namely, Other Backward Class (OBC), Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Special Backward Class (SBC), De-notified Tribes (VJNT) and Nomadic Tribes (NT). The maximum women farmers belonged to the OBC category with 41%, followed by 25% belonging to SC. ST respondents comprised 23% followed by 8% belonging to the SBC category. (See Figure 4).

79%

21%

Married Widowed

Figure 2: Age distribution of Respondents

Figure 3: Marital status of Respondents

7%

22%

30%

31%

10%

1%

61 years above

51 to 60 years

41 to 50 years

31 to 40 years

26 to 30 years

18-25 years

20

3.1.4. Education status The maximum number of respondents (43%) of the endline survey had studied up to some level in the secondary school. 22% respondents were illiterate and only 1 woman recorded as having completed her graduation. (See Figure 6)

3.1.5. Primary livelihood of the Respondents In line with the project objectives of working with women farmers and agriculture labourers, the majority respondents i.e. 79% recorded agriculture as their primary livelihood, while 15% of the total respondents stated agriculture labour to be their primary means of livelihood. (Figure 7)

77%

22%

1%

Hindu

Buddhist

Muslim

41%

25%

23%

8%

2% 1%

OBC

SC

ST

SBC

VJNT

NT

22%

6%

15%

43%

13%

1%

1%

Illiterate

Functionally literate

Primary school

Secondary school

Higher secondary

Diploma/Technical education

Graduation

Figure 5: Religion distribution among Respondents Figure 4: Caste distribution among Respondents

Figure 6: Education status of Respondents

21

3.1.6. Samiti Membership All the respondents belonged to a Mahila Kisan Samiti in their respective village. The time period of being associated with the Samitis ranged from 2008 to 2015. The different Mahila Kisan Samitis are named as follows:

a. Jagrut Mahila Shetkari Samiti b. Jijai Mahila Shetkari Samiti c. Ramai Mahila Shetkari Samiti d. Savitri Mahila Shetkari Samiti e. Ahilya Mahila Shetkari Samiti

3.2. Status of Asset Ownership This section looks at the status of asset ownership including access to basic facilities, household assets, land and other assets. The findings of the Endline Survey have been placed vis-à-vis the Baseline Survey of 2012 to be able to determine the changes that have occurred at the household level. 3.2.1. Household Assets: Material possessions and Basic Facilities The survey brought forth changes seen in ownership of assets at the household level. Table 7 compares ownership of certain household as recorded in 2012 and the corresponding increase (or decrease) in 2017. The endline survey found that 99% of the surveyed respondents stated as having their own house with 98% of the houses being electrified. Toilet availability and usage are both over 80%.

Table 7: Changes in Household assets ownership

Household assets Households possessing these household assets (in %)

Baseline Survey 2012(n1=220)

Endline Survey 2017 (n2=168)

House 97% 99%

Electrified house 94% 98%

Toilet availability 47% 89%

Toilet usage 44% 86%

TV 67% 86%

Radio 16% 15%

79%

15%

3%

1%

1%

1%

Cultivators

Agricultural labour

Home maker

Anganwadi worker

Manf processing

Livetsock

Figure 7: Primary livelihood of Respondents

22

Bicycle 20% 16%

Motorcycle 14% 17%

Fridge - 11%

Cell Phone 80% 80%

Cell Phone owned by Samiti member 11% 20%

As can be seen from Table 7, with the exception of radio and bicycle, there has been an increase in the percentage of household assets with the biggest change being recorded in availability of toilet and its usage. As seen in Table 7, the baseline survey (2012) recorded 47% of households having access to a toilet while only 44% of the surveyed respondents used it. The Endline survey (2017) recorded 89% of the surveyed respondents having a toilet and 86% using the facility. Of the total respondents in 2012, 67% owned a TV compared to 86% of the total respondents in 2017. Similarly cell phone ownership by the Samiti member herself has also increased to 20% in 2017. The type of house construction has also seen a change from the baseline in 2012 to 2017. As see in Figure 7, the kutcha houses have decreased from 52% to 36% while there is an increased in the percentage of semi-pucca and pucca houses. Of the total respondents surveyed in 2017, 32% own a semi pucca house and another 32% own a pucca house. This is further substantiated by qualitative findings where some women shared that they have been able to build concrete houses over the past 5 years. (See Figure 8)

The endline survey found that piped water supply to houses has increased from 54% of the total households surveyed in 2012 to 65% of the total household surveyed in 2017. (See Figure 9)

Figure 9: Primary source of Water

14%

21%

65%

Well

Hand pump

Piped water supply

52%

21%

25%

36%

32%

32%

Kutcha

Semi pucca

Pucca

Endline Survey 2017 (n2=168) Baseline Survey 2012 (n1=220)

Figure 8: Change in the type of House

23

3.2.2. Land Ownership The land ownership pattern is seen to be constant with 20% of the surveyed respondents being landless and 81% owning land ranging from 1.5 acres to 25 acres. (See Figure 10)

3.2.2.1. Land ownership pattern of Samiti Members The endline survey found that of the total respondents who own land (135), 42% have land registered in the name of the Samiti member. Of the total rainfed land owned (447.25 acres), 168.25 acres is registered on the Samiti members name. Similarly, of the total irrigated land owned (283.5 acres), 73.5 acres land is in the name of the Samiti member.

Table 8: Amount of land owned by Samiti members

Rainfed (in acres) Irrigated (in acres)

Area owned by Samiti members (57) 168.25 73.5

Total Land ownership (135) 447.25 283.5

Table 9 depicts the number of women farmers who have land titles in their name. As can be seen, 35 women farmers have land under rainfed while 22 women farmers own irrigated land in their name.

Table 9: Area of land ownership among Samiti members

Category of landholding No. of Samiti members

with area under rainfed

with area under irrigation

Marginal (0 to 2.47) 2 3

Small (2.48 to 4.94) 18 15

Semi-medium (4.95 to 9.88) 13 3

Medium (9.89 TO 14.99) 1 1

Medium (15.00 TO 24.99) 1

Total 35 22

3.2.2.2. Investment in new land The endline also investigated if the Samiti members (or their households) have bought new land over the past 5 years. 4% of the total respondents answered in the affirmative. The 4% in real numbers translates to 7 respondents have bought land. Table 10 depicts the villages in where new land has been bough along with the amount of land bought.

81%

80%

19%

20%

Baseline Survey 2012 (n1=220)


Landed Landless

Figure 10: Land Ownership

24

Table 10: Village-wise distribution of new land bought

Name Of Village 2 Acres 2.25 Acres 3 Acres 4 Acres 4.5 Acres 8 Acres

Kurzadi Fort 1

Lonsawali 1

Malkapur 1

Nagzari 1

Sakhi 1

Sonegaon Bai 1

Wabgaon 1

Total 2 1 1 1 1 1

Of the 7 households which have bought land, 100% have registered the land in the name of a male members of the household i.e. either the husband of the Samiti member or her son. 3.2.3. Agricultural Equipment The Endline survey also surveyed the ownership of agricultural equipment and whether the women farmers have made investments in any agricultural equipment over the past 5 years. It was found that now 93% of the respondents own at least one agricultural equipment2. This is an increase from the Baseline (2012) where 40% of the total respondents owned at least one equipment. (See Figure 11)

The women farmers have invested in different small and heavy equipment over the past 5 years. Table 11 illustrates the equipment bought by the number of women farmers over the past 5 years. The most acquired agricultural equipment by number of farmers who bought it is the Sickle at 52% followed by the spade at 38%. 14% of the women farmers bough a cart while 2% invested in a tractor over the past 5 years

Table 11: Equipment bought in the past 5 years

Equipment No. of women

farmers (in %) Pumpset 10 Sprayer 13 Speed drill 20 Tractor 2 Cart 14 Plough 18 Thresher 4

2 The Endline survey included 3 new instruments as compared to that in the Baseline (2012). The equipment ownership was surveyed for – Plough, Pumpset, Sprayer, Seed Drill, Tractor, Cart, Thresher, Harrow, Hoe, Sickle, Spade, Pick axes (italicized equipment are new additions)

40%

93%

60%

7%



Have equipment Have no equipment

Figure 11: Change in ownership of equipment

25

Harrow 21 Hoe 24 Sickle 52 Spade 38 Pick Axe 32

3.2.4. Livestock The Endline Survey also looked at asset ownership in terms of livestock. It was found that 67% of the respondents now own livestock compared to 53% of the respondents surveyed during the Baseline in 2012. (Figure 12) Of the 112 respondents who own livestock, 37% own bullocks; 29% own goats; 28% own cows while only 1% recorded owing buffaloes. (Figure 13) Ownership of cattle also determines access to cow dung and urine – both essential components of organic nutrient management practices.

The endline (2017) thus recorded an improvement in asset status including household assets, agricultural equipment and livestock as compared to the baseline (2012). Land ownership too has marginally increased compared to the baseline (2012).

53%

67%

47%

33%



Own livestiock Don't own livestock

Figure 12: Change in Livestock Ownership

37%

29%

28%

21%

1%

Bullock

Goat

Cow

Poultry

Buffalo

Figure 13: Livestock ownership

26

Chapter 4 Trainings and Awareness on Agriculture Practices

One of the key objectives of MKSP was building the capacities of women farmers by imparting scientific and structured knowledge on Sustainable/Integrated Agriculture Practices (SAP/IAP). This section looks at the trainings received by the members of the Mahila Kisan Samiti and the consequent awareness levels of the women farmers. The survey also investigated the sources of information accessed by the women farmers on agriculture and related issues. This chapter would discuss the following survey findings

Training undertaken by MKSP members Awareness on Sustainable/Integrated Agriculture Practices (SAP/IAP) Sources of Information

4.6. Trainings undertaken by MKSP members The trainings on SAP/IAP comprised 4 key components:

a. Seed Management b. Soil and Water Conservation c. Integrated Nutrient Management (INM) d. Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

In addition to the above, trainings were also conducted on building a Kitchen Garden and a Seed Bank at the village level. Exposure visits (in addition to training sessions) to individual farmers practicing organic farming, sustainable/ integrated agriculture practices and cultivating a kitchen garden were held to encourage and educate the members. While the kitchen garden has always been an integral part of families practicing agriculture, a

more scientific and systematic approach was disseminated to the Samiti members through the project. Additionally the technique of growing a vegetables and fruits in a kitchen garden in a small space was a new learning for the women farmers. With the objective of ensuring household food security, trainings on nutrition and health was also an important activity undertaken in the Samitis. Further, the Federation members, who are also members of the Mahila Samitis, were trained on managing credit, loaning activities, book keeping and accounting. The Federation members aid the Mahila Samiti

Figure 15: Seed Treatment Demonstration in Bhidi_1

Figure 14: Seed Treatment Demonstration in Bhidi_2

27

members in accessing credit from the Federation. Trainings on accessing various government schemes were also undertaken with the Samiti members.

Figure 16 depicts the number of women who stated to have participated in the various trainings. Of the total respondents, 92% recall having received training on cultivating a Kitchen Garden followed by 86% stating they have received inputs on health and nutritional issues. Of the total respondents who have participated in trainings, 85% recollected have participated in trainings on cultivation practices and nutrient management followed by 81% having received training on Integrated Pest Management (IPM). 4.7. Awareness of agricultural practices The endline survey assessed the awareness of the Samiti members on INM and IPM practices. This was compared with the awareness of these practices at the time of the baseline conducted in 2012. The endline survey brought forth that the awareness on INM practices on an average is above 80%. This corresponds with the data on trainings as seen in Figure 14 where on an average 80% have received various inputs on SAP/IAP.

The awareness on composting, vermicomposting, bio-fertilizers/Jeevamrut, soil testing recorded an increase. (See figure 17). The survey also brought forth that women farmers are acquainted with application of nutrients based on the soil test results (75%), mixed cropping method in farming (79%) and the practice of crop rotation (81%).

Agricultural Practices

•85% have received training on cultivation

practices •85% have received training on Nutrient

Management Practices •81% have received training on Integrated Pest

Management •79% have received training on methods of

land improvement •76% have received training on seed treatment

Food Security

•92% have received trainng on Kitchen Garden •86% have received training on health and

nutritional issues •74% have received inputs with respcet to

credit and accessing credit •67% have received training on accessing Govt.

schemes

Figure 16: Trainings undertaken by MKSP members on SAP/IAP

28

Figure 17: Awareness of INM practices

The awareness on IPM was found to be significantly high during the Endline survey with 92% of the total respondents being aware of application of Neemastra, 82% being aware of Pheromone Traps/Yellow Sticky Traps and 83% being aware of the use of bio-pesticides. (See Figure 18).

4.8. Sources of Information The endline sought to determine the various sources of information on agriculture and related issues. Findings bring forth that MSSRF and MKSP were seen as a key source on various issues related to agriculture. Of the respondents interviewed, a majority (77%) stated that MSSRF-MKSP is their key source for the know-how on agricultural practices. 70% also stated that MSSRF-MKSP is the source for information on seeds, manures etc. For 72% the Project has been the locus to know about health and nutrition; while for 64% of the respondents, MSSRF-MKSP is source to know about Government schemes The other significant sources of information on agriculture and related issues are the media for updated information on rain and climate conditions (40%) and the Krishi Sahyak Kendra for

93%

80%

85%

73%

83%

72%

85%

92%

71%

58%

82%

91%

82%

92%

75%

79%

81%

Farm Yard Manure

Sheep penning

Biomass/Green Manure

Composting/organic manure

Vermicomposting

Biofertilisers/Jeevamrut

Soil testing

Soil test based nutrient management

Mixed Cropping

Crop Rotation


82%

60%

70%

92%

82%

83%

Botanical Extracts /neemastra

Pheromone Traps/Yellow Sticky Traps

Bio pesticides


Figure 18: Awareness on Integrated Pest Management

29

information on credit facilities (38%) and prices of produce (24%). The activities under the MKSP have encouraged the members to access government entities (like the Krishi Sahyak Kendra) for information. Other farmers and the entities within the market (like the APMC for produce prices) were also sources of information in various measures. (See Figure 19)

Figure 19: Sources of Information (n2=168)

The project has thus been successful in raising awareness on various SAP/IAP through trainings and demonstrations. With increase in awareness, the mobility of women has increased with women farmers accessing various information sources apart from MSSRF as seen in Figure 16.

40%

3% 4% 9% 2% 5% 4%

30%

70% 77%

35%

28%

64% 72%

5% 4%

4%

24%

38%

16%

17% 11%

15% 12%

12% 16% 2% 5%

17% 1%

On rain andclimate

conditions

On latest varietyof

seeds/manureetc.

On agriculturalpractices

On prices ofproduce

On creditfacilities

On GovtSchemes

On health andnutrition issues

Media MSSRF- MKSP Govt Other Farmers/Family Market/Pvt Co./Bank

30

Chapter 5 Cropping pattern and Adoption of Sustainable/Integrated Agriculture Practices

Chapter 5 describes the cropping patterns based on the available land resources, and how the situation may have changed since the baseline study. This chapter shall also present information on adoption of the SAP/IAP, the challenges they faced in doing so and the resultant impact on the livelihood of the respondents. This chapter will discuss the survey findings based on the following indicators

Land resources Cropping pattern: Kharif and Rabi seasons Agriculture yield Adoption of Sustainable/Integrated Agriculture Practices (SAP/IAP) Challenges faced in adopting SAP/IAP Impact of SAP/IAP

5.1. Land Resources

The MKSP Project initiated the work with women farmers who own land (including small and marginal land). After initiating the work of forming Samitis, the MKSP project enlarged the scope to include landless agriculture women labourers as well. The objective was to be inclusive and reach to the most marginalized and build their capacities.

Figure 20 below depicts the distribution of land among the Samiti members (including those who are landless). Of the survey respondents, 31% are small land owners (2.49 – 4.94 acres acres) followed by 30% owing semi medium land (4.95-9.88 acres).

Figure 20: Land distribution among survey respondents

Compared to the baseline (2012) there is a perceptible shift from small land ownership to semi-medium ownership. During the baseline (2012), 40% of the total respondents (220) were small land owners. There is a reduction in this category during the endline (2017) and a parallel increase in the medium land-owners category. This indicates towards increase in land-holding size.

The total amount of land owned by survey respondents is 730.75 acres. Table 11 below depicts the total amount of land owned as per land holding. It also depicts distribution of the number of women farmers as per land holding.

19%

8%

40%

22%

8%

3%

20%

10%

31% 30%

7%

2% 1%

Landless Marginal (0 to2.47)

Small (2.48 to4.94)

Semi-medium(4.95 to 9.88)

Medium (9.89TO 14.99)

Medium (15.00TO 24.99)

Large (25 andabove)

2012 (n1=220) 2017 (n2=168)

31

Table 11: Amount of land owned according to land holding

Land Holding Total amount of land (in acres) No. of Women Farmers

Marginal (0 to 2.47) 31.5 16

Small (2.48 to 4.94) 164.75 52

Semi-medium (4.95 to 9.88) 288 50

Medium (9.89 TO 14.99) 123.5 11

Medium (15.00 TO 24.99) 66 4

Large (25 and above) 57 2

Total 730.75 135

5.2. Cropping Patterns: Kharif and Rabi Seasons

The endline survey looked at the annual cropping cycle and included both Kharif and Rabi crops for type of crops cultivated, area covered under cultivation and the yield. The baseline has information pertaining to the Kharif season only. Thus a comparative analysis between the baseline and Endline was possible for the Kharif season.

Of the total respondents, 82% (139 respondents of 168) had cultivated in the preceding season either on owned land or leased land. This section looks at the crops cultivated in both seasons, Kharif and Rabi.

5.2.1. Kharif

The endline survey brought forth that there is a marginal increase in the number of respondents cultivating cotton and soybean on irrigated land. However, the cropping pattern of cotton/soyabean intercropped with tur remains the same.

5.2.2. Rabi

The endline survey found that of the total respondents, only 24% of them took up cultivation during the Rabi season. The main crops cultivated at the time were Groundnut, Wheat and seasonal vegetables like Spinach, Fenugreek, Ladies Finger and Chick-pea. Table 12 below shows the number of households cultivating a Rabi crop per the total land area.

Of those cultivating Rabi crops, 52% stated to be cultivating wheat on 48 acres of land. This was followed by Groundnut (37%) on 39 acres of land. Of the respondents, 10% stated to be cultivating seasonal vegetables like spinach, fenugreek on 6.5 acres of land.

93%

85%

46%

2%

2%

1%

1%

Cotton

Tur

Soybean

Moog

Jowar

Pomegranate

Vegetables

Figure 21: Kharif Season

32

Table 12: No. of Respondents reporting Rabi crop cultivation

No. of respondents reporting Rabi crop

cultivation (n2 = 41)

Area (in acres)

Wheat 52% 48

Groundnut 37% 39

Other (Spinach, Fenugreek, Ladies Finger and Chick-pea)

10% 6.5

5.2.3. Comparing the two agricultural seasons The Kharif season is the mainstay of the agriculture in the project villages of the two districts of Wardha and Yavatmal. This is owing to the fact that agriculture is largely rainfed and the amount of irrigated land to cultivate the Rabi crop is limited in quantity. Thus, more land (in acres) is brought under cultivation during the Kharif season and more crops (cotton, tur, soybean, moog, jowar etc.) are cultivated compared to the Rabi season, which witnesses cultivation of maximum 2 crops (wheat and groundnut). As more land is brought under cultivation for the Kharif crops, the yield generated is also higher vis-à-vis the yield of the Rabi crops. 5.3. Adoption of Sustainable/ Integrated Agriculture Practices

The MKSP program aimed at building capacities of the women farmers by training them on a variety of practices that will make their cultivation methods more sustainable in nature. These are named “Sustainable/Integrated Agricultural Practices (SAP/IAP)” by MSSRF. The practices under SAP/IAP are cost effective, environment friendly and involve balanced use of organic and biological based inputs to the extent possible. SAP/IAP helps reduce the high cost and risk involved in cultivation compared to purely chemical based agriculture. Looking at the climatic conditions in the area, the dissemination of these practices has been both an effective strategy and has been mentioned earlier, quite relevant too.

The sustainable/integrated agricultural practices that have been taken up under the MKSP project fall under the following 5 categories: Soil and Water Conservation Methods; Seed Management; Integrated Nutrition Management (INM); Integrated Pest Management (IPM); Post Harvest Management.

5.4.1. Adoption of Soil and Water Conservation Methods

Practices taken up under soil and water conservation methods refer to making of bunds, planting crops on bunds, sowing across slopes, conducting soil tests and usage of appropriate soil based nutrients and opening of ridges and furrows. The adoption of various SAP/IAP including soil and water management has been accounted for those who own land and/or have been cultivating on leased land. A comparative analysis of the Baseline data and Endline has been depicted in Figure 22. Significant changes have been observed across all the methods with ‘cultivation across slope’ and ‘bunding/bund repair’ registering the maximum change. Discussions with the Project staff, on soil and conservation practices brought forth that the method of cultivation across the slope has been widely adopted by the women farmers. This is reinforced by the findings of the Endline survey.

33

During the baseline (2012) of those who owned land and/or cultivated (177 respondents of 220) 15% had undertaken bunding work/bunding repair. As opposed to this, the Endline survey found that of those who own land and/or have been cultivating on leased land (139 respondents of 168), 52% had undertaken bunding work/bunding repair. Similarly with respect to the method of cultivating across slope, 5% of the respondents were noted to have practiced it during the baseline, compared to 60% of the respondents during the endline (2017).

5.4.2. Adoption of Seed Treatment Practices

The MKSP Project had introduced the method of seed treatment in the Project area. Application of bio fertilisers – Rhizobium or Trichoderma Virideae or a mixture of cow dung, jaggery and cow urine had been suggested. The adoption of this practice is seen amongst 79% of the respondents during the Endline survey (2017) compared to 78% of the total respondents during the Baseline (2012). (See Figure 23)

At the time of the baseline 78% of the respondents (172 of 220 respondents) stated to be practicing seed treatment on at least one seed including Cotton, Soybean, Tur, Wheat, Jowar and Bnegalgram. The Endline survey brought forth that of the respondents who have adopted seed treatment practice (132 of 168 respondents), 88% used seed treatment for Tur followed by 60% for storing Soybean and 42% for cotton seeds. Figure 24 below depicts the crops for which seed treatment was being practiced during the baseline (2012) and the endline (2017).

As can be seen, the type of seeds for which seed treatment is practiced has increased at the time of the endline survey. Seed treatment for Tur registered the maximum increase amongst all. Seed treatment for cotton recorded a decline compared to the baseline. In FGDs across both districts, women farmers stated that since they use Bt cotton seeds, they have to buy the

78%

79%

22%

21%

Baseline 2012 (n1=220)

Endline 2017 (n2=168)

Yes No

Figure 22: Adoption of Soil and Water Conservation Practices

Figure 23: Adoption of Seed Treatment Practice

14%

1%

5%

6%

52%

11%

34%

60%

19%

Bunding/Bund Repair

Farm ponds

Ridge and furrow planting

Cultivation across slope

Gravel removal


34

company seeds every year. Therefore they do not use seed treatment for cotton seeds as it is not required.

Figure 24: Seeds for which Seed Treatment was used

5.4.3. Adoption of Integrated Nutrient Management and Integrated Pest Management

Under practices adopted for INM the MKSP program has taken up awareness on need for soil testing, training on soil sample collection and facilitating soil test; awareness and training on identification of nutrient deficiency; awareness on the correct combination of nutrients to be use and knowledge and training on the judicious use of different nutrient sources; awareness and training on proper storage of farmyard manure; promote application of organic matter to the soil; and promotion of bio fertilizers. The adoption of the INM methods brought forth from the endline survey has been posited against the findings from the Baseline (2012) showing that a notable change in the adoption of INM practices has taken place. In the Baseline (2012), of those who owned land and/or cultivated (177 respondents of 220), use of farm yard manure (53%), soil testing (23%) and biomass (14%) were the top 3 adopted methods. The endline survey found that of those who own land and/or have been cultivating on leased land (139 respondents of 168), the method of farm yard manure (76%), crop rotation (76%), and soil testing (74%) are the top 3 adopted methods. Practice of composting, vermicomposting and use of bio-fertilizers/Jeevamrut was seen to be negligible during the Baseline (2012). The endline however shows a substantial change in the adoption of these methods with over 50% of the respondents applying these practices. (See Figure 25)

Tur

Baseline: 73% Endline: 88%

Soybean


Cotton

Baseline: 85%

Endline: 42%

Wheat


Greengram 6% Blackgram 5%

Jowar


Bengalgram Baseline: 1% Endline: 2%

35

According to survey respondents Neemastra was the easiest practice to adopt. Vermicomposting on the other hand was considered difficult by the MKSP members as it requires space, attention and more efforts as well as monitoring.

The adoption of IPM has also seen a significant change compared to the Baseline. Neemastra (74%), pheromone traps (65%) and bio-pesticides (58%) saw being widely used by the respondents. (See Figure 26)

Similarly, the Pheromone Traps/yellow sticky traps were universally approved by those who had used them. They were said to be more effective and last longer, thereby ensuring protecting from pests as well as reduction expenses.

Testimonial: Sangita Lokhande is a resident of Ajgaon (Wardha). Sangita cultivates cotton, soybean and tur applies most practices of SAP/IAP, INM and IPM and states the benefits she has observed. “Soil fertility has increased; the costs on fertilizers and pesticides have gone down; the quality and the quantity of produce have increased. Since adoption of these practices the soybean yield lost to insect attacks has reduced.”

8%

1%

27%

74%

65%

58%

Botanical Extracts /neemastra

Pheromone Traps/Yellow Sticky Traps

Bio pesticides


53%

5%

14%

1%

0%

1%

23%

78%

49%

35%

60%

53%

55%

74%

62%

71%

76%

Farm Yard Manure

Sheep penning

Biomass/Green Manure

Composting/organic manure

Vermicomposting

Biofertilisers/Jeevamrut

Soil testing

Soil test based nutrient management

Mixed Cropping

Crop Rotation


Figure 25: Adoption of Integrated Nutrient Management Practices

Figure 26: Adoption of IPM

36

5.5. Challenges in adopting SAP/IAP

While the adoption of SAP/IAP has been positive amongst the project areas, the survey also investigated the challenges faced by the women farmers in adopting these practices. This section also looks at the impact of adopting SAP/IAP, as perceived by the women farmers.

The primary challenge faced by most of the respondents is the lack of availability of cow dung and urine as stated by 30% respondents. Not all women farmers in the project areas possess cattle and thus access to cow dung/urine is limited. Since for SAP/IAP like Jeeavmrut, organic manure and seed treatment, the inputs of cow dung/urine are required, lack of availability is directly proportional to its adoption. Other challenges faced by the women farmers include ‘time consuming and extra efforts’ (23%), ‘unable to apply methods on leased land’ (17%) etc. (See Figure 27)

5.6. Impact of adopting SAP/IAP The endline survey also sought to understand the impact of the SAP/IAP on agriculture. Both positive and negative outcomes were recorded. Of the surveyed respondents who have adopted any of the SAP/IAP (139 of 168 respondents), a majority of the respondents (90%) stated their total yield had increased. Another 78% respondents stated that they saw an improvement in the soil quality. The primary negative impact quoted was that the practices were time consuming (23%). A mixed response was seen with respect to expenses undertaken and the yield of the produce. Figure 28 illustrates the details of the impacts cited by the respondents.

Figure 27: Challenges faced in adoption on INM and IPM (n2=139)

Difficulty to collect/get cow dung and cow urine 30%

23% Time consuming and extra efforts

Do not own land so cannot practice (even

on leased land) 17%

8% Other reasons like

expensive, forgot, do not get raw material like

neem leaves etc.

37

Figure 28: Impact of INM and IPM

A significant impact of the various trainings and adoption of these practices has been on the individuals as woman farmers and decision makers at home and in the community. Being armed with scientific knowledge and information of agriculture, agricultural practices and government schemes, there is rise in the confidence of the women farmers. This translates into decision making within the household and increase in mobility within the community. Manisha, a Samiti member from Dhamangaon Wathoda (Wardha) summarizes the change, “Now I teach my husband everything. I am free to decide whatever is to be done!”

Nanda Junghare, 42, is Mahila Shetkari Samiti member from Dahegaon Miskin (Wardha). Nanda is an enterprising woman farmer and has adopted many techniques taught under MKSP to positive outcomes. Nanda practices/uses bird trap, pheromone traps, Jeevamrut, Neemastra, Ambuastra, soil testing and organic fertilizers. Nanda has bought a noodle maker and photocopy machine from the loans availed from a village SHG and MSRLM. She has also received training in SHG formation and account keeping under MSRLM. Thus, through MKSP, there has been a change in the way Nanda practices agriculture and has been able to diversify her livelihood sources. 5.6.1. Impact on Income Agriculture and agricultural labour is the main source of income in the Project villages of Wardha and Yavatmal. Both the Baseline (2012) and Endline (2017) surveys collected data in

90% stated Increase in yield

78% stated improvement in soil quality

62% stated reduction in expenses

61% stated that they are better prepared to take decisions

23% stated the practices are time consuming

5% stated increase in expenses

3% stated reduction in yield

“Juna te Sona!” (Old is Gold) “These practices of using cow dung and cow urine are age old. Earlier generations would use these resources – however over the years with influx of chemical based manures and pesticides, and the need to increase yield, we adopted these inputs. MSSRF is re-introducing these practices.”

“Chemicals are not good for the soil and for our health. However with years of using these market manures and pesticides, the land has also adapted to it. Changing from this to organic based inputs will take time. The land too will take time to adapt itself.”

38

income sources and annual income of the survey respondents. Figures 26 and 27 depict the income ranges of the respondents from the Baseline (2012) and Endline (2017) respectively. In 2012, the Below Poverty Line (BPL) was pegged at INR 273 per day per capita in rural areas which amount to an annual income of 9792 INR. Of the baseline survey respondents who had stated their annual household income (217), 13% fall in the BPL category. The maximum respondents fall in the 9793 – 25,000 INR range (44%), followed by 35% respondents belonging to the 25,000 – 75,000 INR category. (See figure 29) The BPL in 2017 is kept at 32 INR4 per day per capita in rural areas which amount to an annual income of 11,520 INR. The Endline found no respondents falling in the BPL category. There is a marked shift in the annual incomes of the survey respondents from 2012 to 2017. Of all the respondents who stated their annual household income (157), 32% fall in the income range of 75,000 - 1, 50,000 INR. 25% fall in the income range of 25,000-75,000 INR followed by 22% falling in the income range of 1, 50,001- 3, 00,000 INR. (See Figure 30)

3 http://www.hindustantimes.com/business/demystifying-india-s-poverty-line-here-s-everything-you-need-to-know/story-

43vy1sQ7LrCZuezTakDnkM.html 4 Ibid

Figure 29: Annual Household Income during Baseline 2012 (in INR)

13%

44%

35%

6%

1%

Below 9792

9793 - 25,000

25,001 - 75,000

75,001 - 1,50,000

1,50,001-3,00,000

Baseline 2012 (n1=217)

4%

25%

32%

22%

12%

4%

Below 11520

11,521 - 25,000

25,001 - 75,000

75,001 - 1,50,000

1,50,001- 3,00,000

3,00,001 - 6,00,000

Above 6,00,001

Endline 2017 (n2=157)

Figure 30: Annual Household Income during Endline 2017 (in INR)

http://www.hindustantimes.com/business/demystifying-india-s-poverty-line-here-s-everything-you-need-to-know/story-43vy1sQ7LrCZuezTakDnkM.html

http://www.hindustantimes.com/business/demystifying-india-s-poverty-line-here-s-everything-you-need-to-know/story-43vy1sQ7LrCZuezTakDnkM.html

39

The trainings undertaken and the consequent adoption of various practices has had impact on multiple levels like knowledge and information on methods of practicing agriculture; on agriculture yield; on expenditure incurred on inputs and the income generated from agriculture. Additionally at the individual level there is a change in the women farmers themselves with increase in confidence, they are claiming spaces within the family and community be way of participation and contribution to decision making.

5.6.2. Impact on Yield

The agriculture yield during the baseline (2012) and endline (2017) for Cotton and Soybean has been presented in Table 13 and Table 14 respectively. Through the endline survey information on crop cultivated and yield gained for the last agricultural cycle. As can be compared from both the tables, the total cotton yield has shown a significant increase from 2773 quintals harvested by 220 farmers to 3534 quintals harvested by 132 farmers. The difference in the yield of soybean is owed to the fewer number of farmers having cultivated soybean. The Tur yield is available for the duration of the endline only.

Table 13: Baseline (2012): Land holding wise distribution of farmers and crop yield

Land holding Cotton Soybean

Yield (in quintals)

No. of Farmers

Yield (in quintals)

No. of Farmers

0 to 2.47 161 17 96 17

2.48 to 4.94 887 88 369 88

4.95 to 9.88 726 49 477 49

9.89 to 14.99 591 17 322 17

15.00 to 24.99 288 7 121 7

Leased lands 120 42 104 42

2773 220 1489 220

Table 14: Endline (2017): Land holding wise distribution of farmers and crop yield

Land holding Cotton Soybean Tur

Yield (in quintals)

No. of Farmers

Yield (in quintals)

No. of Farmers

Yield (in quintals)

No. of Farmers

0 to 2.47 150 14 11 3 86.5 12

2.48 to 4.94 903 4 108 3 418.5 4

4.95 to 9.88 1351 46 329 13 337.5 45

9.89 TO 14.99 488 2 113 2 75 2

15.00 TO 24.99 223 46 12 40 53.5 43

25 and above 180 11 33 9 32 11

Leased land 239 9 1 1 42 8

Total 3534 132 607 71 1045 125

Testimonials: Shalu Masram is a resident of Jamni village and member of the JagrutMahilaShetkariSamiti. Shalu practices most of the SAP/IAP taught under MKSP like organic manure, composting, vermicomposting, Neemark, and mixed farming. She applies very less chemical fertilizers and thus has been able to reduce expenditure on inputs.

40

Shalu cultivates cotton, tur, udar and til on her 3 acre land. She said that her cotton yield has gone up from 15-20 quintals to 28 quintals. From 2 Kgs of tur, she got a yield of 3 quintals. Shalu and her husband supplement their household income by working as agriculture labour. With their earning from wage labour and increased income from agriculture, Shalu has been able to build a 4 room house and invest in gold worth 30,000 INR

Testimonials: Sumitra Gavade, 60, is resident of Pimpaklhuti (Yavatmal) and member of the Savitri Mahila Shetkari Samiti. Sumitra states the increase in yield of crops cultivated. Earlier an acre of land would produce 7-8 quintals of cotton which has now increased to 12 quintals. This translates into better income. Sumitra has been able to invest in gold from her own savings. She believes that the association with the Samiti has helped her access information; govt. schemes like IAY and appreciates the hand-holding given to apply the SAP/IAP.

Case Study 1: Ms. Manisha (Rashmi) Manisha belongs to village Dhamangao Wathoda in Wardha Taluka. She joined the Mahila Shetkari Gath (Mahila Kisan Samiti) initiated under the MKSP program in 2012 and is part of the Ramai Samiti. Manisha’s family owns 3 acres of rainfed land. The family’s primary occupation is agricultural cultivation. They grow Cotton, Tur (Arhar Dal) and Soybean. She used to cultivate these crops using conventional methods that were heavy on chemical fertilisers and pesticides. Not having the opportunity to travel outside her village at all, Manisha says she was not aware of any other modes of cultivation. In 2012 the MKSP Samitis begun building awareness of the women farmers in the village through the Samitis and she begun to get interested in the methods taught. Over the years Manisha has learnt all the 18 practices that have been taught under the program and even takes lead in demonstrating to the other farmers in the village. She has even started to grow new crops in her field, such as Moong (Green Gram), Urad dal (Split Black Gram) and wheat. She has also come to understand the relevance of growing moong and urad dal on the embankments or in between cotton/soybean as mixed crops. The crop grows well in her field until the pigs destroy it. She has now placed electrical wiring around her fields and this saves the crop from any destruction by animals. Manisha says that cultivation practices as taught by MSSRF have made cultivation more organised and well planned. She states that seed treatment and the use of Jeevamrut and Neemark are the most beneficial practices she has learnt from the program. The availability of cattle at home makes it easier for her to prepare farmyard manure, Jeevamrut and Neemark. Before the project had started, her husband used to take all the decisions regarding the cultivation. But now it is she herself who knows each practice and guides her husband on what is to be done for a particular crop. She states that her husband has also come to see how the yield has increased steadily and costs have reduced and hence, the new practices are indeed useful. Further, despite the fact that her field has no irrigation source, the practices taught can be used. The yield has increased over the years. She states that the occurrence of a good monsoon is, however, the most important factor.

Figure 31: Ms. Manisha with her noodle making machine

41

Three years ago, when a good monsoon had come in the area, she was able to get a yield of over 20 quintals of cotton and 4 quintals of Tur dal in 3 acres of rain fed land. Even wheat (during Rabi) had given a yield of 12 quintals. The confidence of better farming techniques has led the family has taken up additional 5 acres on lease where they plan to use the practices taught by MSSRF. The Samiti and the Community Resource Persons (CRPs) in each village are trained well and guide the women on adopting the practices suggested by MSSRF for more sustainable cultivation. Having space in her house, she has a big kitchen garden and grows lemon, jamb, pomegranate mango, brinjal, amaranth leaves, methi (fenugreek leaves), spinach, coriander, ridged gourd, and beetroot. The family is able to eat more nutritious vegetables that are easily available at home. Moreover, they are grown free of chemical fertilisers and pesticides. An increase in savings and the facility of easy access to credit through the Federation has led Manisha to be able to buy a noodle making machine on a loan of INR 18,000 this year. The months of April, May and June are lean months in agriculture and Manisha has used the time to prepare noodles, vermicelli, etc. She was able to stay gainfully employed at the time and earn INR 12,000 (approximately) in 2 months. The Samiti and the Federation has facilitated her with loans for agriculture earlier too when she took INR 5000. She even states that the Federation has been able to replace the local moneylenders in the village as most women farmers are in the Samiti and don’t have to go to banks for small agricultural loans at high interest rate. The savings in farming inputs facilitates ease of returning the loans. Going ahead, Manisha wants to save as much money as she can for her children’s education and their marriage. She would also like to expand the small business running at home to tide over

difficult times in agricultural seasons.

Case Study 2: Ms. Sangita Raju Lokhande Sangita Lokhande belongs to Ajgaon in Wardha Taluka. The primary occupation of the family is agricultural cultivation and grows Cotton, Tur and Wheat on 5 acres of land. She also cultivates on another 5 acres of land on lease. Sangita states that she has adopted most of the practices taught by the Samiti and those that hav been particularly beneficial are ones such as soil fertility test and putting only the requisite amount of chemical fertilisers as per the test, use of farmyard manure, bio-fertilisers and pesticides, crop rotation and mixed cropping and seed treatment. Sangita states that she and her husband were not aware of any of these practices earlier and most of the times her husband would follow what he would be advised at seed or fertiliser shops. The biggest change that has been seen by adoption of the practices has been that of reduction in the inputs placed for farming. Specifically, the heavy cost of using chemical fertilisers and pesticides is one. She feels that the fertility of the soil has improved with the use of the bio-fertilisers. This in turn impacts the yield received in every cropping cycle in both quantity and quality of the produce. For instance, before the project 1 acre of land would yield cotton below 10 quintals. However, they are now able to get between 12-15 quintals per acre. The yield for Tur has grown from 6-7 quintals to 18 quintals in the latest season. With high amounts of yield she is able to keep some for consumption at home and sale in the market.

Figure 32: Ms. Sangita Lokhande

42

Sangita states that she finds it easier to manage pest attacks, impacts of inclement weather in a better manner now. She is able to use the saved money in cultivating leased land and increase her earnings. Wheat is grown in leased land where irrigation facilities are available. Sangita feels she is more confident as a person and farmer now. Earlier she would just follow her husband’s directions and work as a mere labourer in the field. But now she is in control of the practices to be adopted for an easier cultivation of crops. The encouragement and support provided by the Mahila Kisan Samitis has also built her confidence to go out for trainings and learn more. She is now more aware of the APMC and the rates at which the produce is sold. She is more aware of nutrition, health and hygiene to be maintained at home. The practice of kitchen garden inculcated at home has helped them reduce expenses on vegetables bought from the market. The seeds are stowed away for the next season and contribution is provided to building the seed bank in the village too. This way they have been able to preserve traditional variety of seeds for a number of vegetables and grains. The Samiti has provided information on government schemes related to social welfare, agricultural equipment, irrigation facilities, etc. Linkages have been facilitated to Sewagram for provision of health facilities. Sangita states that women in the Samiti are better informed on a number of matters and this makes them more proactive and confident. Decisions taken on every matter at home are now done in full consultation with the women and never by just the male members alone. Case Study 3: Ms. Jyoti D. Ugemuge Jyoti is from Chana Takli village in Deoli Block and is part of the Jagrut Samiti since the inception of the project in the area. A family of 4 persons, the primary occupation is that of agriculture. They grow Cotton, Tur and Soybean in 5 acres of land. Jyoti states that the steady use of the practice has reduced their expenses on inputs required and the savings and confidence gained have been used to expand to cultivating leased land of up to 30 acres since 3 years. Jyoti has adopted the SAP/IAP like mixed cropping and crop rotation; farm yard manure, sheep penning, vermicomposting, soil test based nutrient application and application of neemastra. The key benefit she has gained as a result of applying these practices includes reduction in the costs of inputs (like chemical fertilizers and pesticides) and increase in yield. With better yield she has been able to invest in leasing more land thereby taking her cotton yield from 30 quintal prior to the project period to 90 quintal as of last year. Jyoti has expanded her income sources by way of entrepreneurship. She has investing INR 25,000 in a noodle manufacturing machine through which she aims to earn up to INR 10-12,000 per month. Since 2 years she has set up a clothes shop in her house which fetches her INR 20,000 annually. With the increase in income from agriculture and other sources, Jyoti has been able to invest in gold which she considers her savings for the future and has repaired her house.

Figure 33: Ms. Jyoti Ugemuge

43

Being associated with the project has not aided Jyoti financially but also transformed the dynamics in her household. Jyoti states that now she is able to talk at home more freely and that her husband has readily learnt all the practices from her.

44

Chapter 6 Other components of the Project

The MKSP intended to ensure household food security. The household food security and health component looked at teaching practices that would ensure better food consumption and health status of the women and their families. Practices such as a Kitchen Garden, Seed Bank, safe Drinking Water, Toilets and access to health benefits were included under MKSP with the objective of promoting a healthy life for the women and her household. This chapter will explore the following topics

Kitchen Garden: Adoption and Impact Seed Bank: Usage and Impact

5.3. Kitchen Garden: Adoption and Impact 5.3.1. Adoption The respondents of the survey shared that the kitchen garden was an important input provided under MKSP. Women farmers were encouraged to cultivate a kitchen garden in patches of land outside their homes or in their fields. At the beginning of the intervention, seeds were provided to initiate the cultivation. Thereafter the women farmers have been accessing seeds from the seed bank and other women farmers. The baseline (2012) showed that of the total women farmers, 29% (63 women farmers) had space for a kitchen garden of which 84% (of 63 women farmers) had cultivated a kitchen garden. The endline survey (2017) depicts a significant shift with more women making available space as well as efficiently using the available homestead space for kitchen garden. Of the total respondents surveyed during the endline 73% (122 women farmers) had space for Kitchen Garden. Of these, 98% have cultivated a Kitchen Garden. (See Figure 35)

Women who do not have land in their house premises, have come together and cultivated community kitchen gardens where the responsibilities as well as the yield are shared. The Kitchen gardens cultivated by the MKSP members includes a variety of plants including green leafy vegetables, creepers and fruit plants. The endline survey (2017) brought forth different varieties of plants grown in the kitchen gardens. This has been tabulated below (Table

Figure 35: Adoption of Kitchen Garden Practice

17%

2%

84%

98%



No Yes

Figure 34: Kitchen Garden in Dhamangaon Wathoda

45

15). A major difference observed from the Baseline (2012) is that the MKSP members have also started growing a variety of vegetables and have also started growing fruits in their kitchen gardens.

Table 15: Vegetables grown in the Kitchen gardens of MKSP members

Green leafy vegetables

Other vegetables Fruits and flowers

Coriander Pumpkin Carrots Pomegranate Lemons Fenugreek Cucumber Black-eyed Beans

Banana Ramphal

Spinach Ridge Gourd Brinjal Papaya Marigold Neem Barbati Radish Custard Apple Mogra Mint leaves Pudina

Bitter Gourd Green Chilies Guava Rose

Kenaf Ambadi

Ginger Turmeric Beetroot Tomatoes Sapodilla Chikoo

Dil Shepu

Garlic French Beans Mango Bush Plum Karvanda

Ladies Fingers Drum sticks Amla Plum Jambhul

Cluster Bean Gawar

Field Bean Val

Almond Badam

Tur

5.3.2. Impact The primary benefits of the kitchen garden were the ‘availability of sufficient food’ (91%); ‘nutritional support to family’ (84%) and ‘access to pesticide free food’ (83%). Figure 36 given below depicts the benefits of the Kitchen Garden as stated by respondents of the survey.

84% stated nutritional

support to the family

83% stated access to

pesticide free food

91% stated Availability of sufficient food

2% stated reduction in expenses on vegetaables

Figure 36: Benefits of having a Kitchen Garden (n2=136)

46

While the benefits of ‘reduction of expenses on vegetables’ was recorded by only 2% of the respondents, the FGD discussions with women in project villages stated that their expenses of vegetables have reduced. The women stated that they cultivate seasonal vegetables and fruits thus ensuing holistic nutrition for the family.

Testimonial: Chanda Kamble, 43, is a resident of Paloti village (Wardha) and member of Jijai Jagrut Mahila Shetkari Samiti which she joined in 2012.

Before joining the Samiti, Chanda would use chemical fertilizers which made agriculture un-affordable. She had to regularly take loan from the village Sahukar. With the association with MKSP and application of SAP/IAP like INM and IPM, her expenses on agriculture have reduced. She gradually reduced the use of chemical fertilizers and inputs and would apply nutrients as per the results of the soil test.

She states that being associated with the Mahila Samiti has led to many benefits for her and her family. Her confidence has increased and regularly participates in the village and Gram Sabha meetings. The information shared in the Samitis have helped her improve her agriculture practices and better her yield while reducing expenses – that is the major benefit according to her. The initiatives like the Seed Bank, Kitchen Garden and CFC have all contributed in making agriculture more sustainable for her.

The Seed Bank is managed by Chanda Kamble and the village women collectively have stored over 50 varieties of seeds which they share with the larger village community as well as villagers from outside who visit them. 5.4. Seed Bank: Usage and Impact

5.4.1. Usage The endline survey looked at the usage of Seed Banks initiated under MKSP. The survey brought forth that of the total respondents of the endline (2017), 62% accessed the Seed Bank established in the village under the MKSP. The seeds accessed by individual women farmers have been mentioned in the Table 16. The Seed Bank in conjunction with the practice of kitchen gardening has been beneficial in providing women farmers with a variety of seeds for vegetables and fruits.

Table 16: Seeds stored by MKSP members

Green leafy vegetables

Other vegetables Fruits and

flowers Dil Shepu

Pumpkin Carrots Rajgira Pomegranate

Spinach Cucumber Black-eyed Beans

Moog Banana

Neem Ridge Gourd Brinjal Til Papaya Coriander French Beans Radish Garlic Custard Apple Fenugreek Bitter gourd Green Chilies Drum sticks Guava

Figure 37: Seed Bank in Paloti (Wardha)

47

5.4.2. Impact The Seed Banks and encouraging the practice of seed storage among the MKSP members have had an impact on their food security too. 62% of the respondents of the endline survey (2017) accessed the Seed Banks in their village. The total number of respondents who accessed the Seed Bank also noted the benefits of same. This has been represented in Figure 38.

Testimonial: Ms. Sindhu Kakas, 55, is a resident of Kelapur village (Wardha) and member of the Jagrut Mahila Shetkari Samiti. She practices organic agriculture without application of any chemicals. She practices mixed farming and cultivates over 20 different crops like udad, moog, soybean, cotton, tur, til, jowar, gavar, and other seasonal leafy vegetables. Sindhu Kakas has a keen interest and understanding of seeds. She manages the Seed Bank in her village and has collected over 50 varieties of seeds. Along with this she also has a flourishing Kitchen Garden with fruits like pomegranate, guava, lemons etc. Her interest in seeds and kitchen garden encouraged her to start her own nursery thereby adding to her income source. Being a single mother (her husband passed away 3 years ago), Sindhu has been able to independently practice agriculture, and expand her livelihood. Her association with MKSP has boosted her morale and provided her support in times of her personal crisis. Testimonial: Ms. Vanita Santoshi Kakade, 35, is a resident of Waifad (Wardha). She has successfully managed the Seed Bank established in her village in 2015. She has started a Kitchen Garden which complements her work with the Seed Bank. Both together have contributed in

Barbati Ridge gourd Ladies Fingers Chickpea Tomatoes Kenaf Ambadi

Ginger Turmeric Beetroot Soybean Mango

Red kidney beans Cluster Bean Gawar

Cluster Bean Gawar

Amla

Field Bean Val

Split Red Gram Tur

Almond Badam

Preservation of local varities of seeds

88% Ease of access to good quality/traditional variety of seeds

76% Asset for agriculture for the farmer community

34%

Figure 38: Benefits associated with Seed Bank and seed storage

Figure 39: Ms. Sindhu kakas with her Seed Bank

48

availability of nutritious food for her household – she has stopped buying vegetables from the market; and supplemented the household income. Additionally she saves approximately 1500 INR per month Vanita accessed the loans given by the Federation to start off her seed/nursery business. Vanita prepares small seed trays with seed of brinjal, tomato, green chilli and sells them at 120 INR per tray. It has become a viable source of income for her. She plans to further develop it by taking a bigger loan and wishes to build a full-fledged nursery.

Figure 40: Women accessing Seed Bank

Figure 41: Seed Bank initiated under MKSP

49

Chapter 7 Perception of Mahila Kisan Samiti members

Chapter 7 explores the perceptions of the Mahila Kisan Samiti members vis-à-vis the MKSP Project. This includes the benefits of the training received and of being associated with MKSP as perceived by the survey respondents.

Perception of MKSP members: Benefits Future Association with MKSP

7.1. Perceptions of the MKSP members: Benefits

7.1.1. Benefits of Trainings received

A number of Mahila Kisan Samiti members interviewed through the survey and focus group discussions in various villages stated that they received training like one would in a school – they attended lectures, demonstrations and participated in exposure visits through MKSP. The table below collates the findings from the interview schedules and the FGDs conducted during the Endline survey. (See table 17)

Table 17: Benefits of training received through MKSP

Women Farmers surveyed (n2=168)

Testimonials

79% stated that they now have better information on

agricultural practices

In an FGD with the women farmers in Malkapur (Wardha), they stated that earlier they would farm ‘just like that’. Through MKSP they have a better understanding of agriculture and agricultural practices. This sentiment was echoed in Chana Takli (Wardha) where the most beneficial intervention according to the Samiti members was introducing more scientific methods of practicing agriculture

The women in Kelapur (Wardha) stated that the exposure visits to Dhamangao Wathoda and Purna to witness organic farming was illuminating. It was a good experience and to develop the understanding that organic practices are also beneficial

Mixed cropping, application of organic as well as chemical fertilizers – as per the soil test results are the changes recorded by Samiti members in Dahegaon Miskin (Wardha)

58% stated that they are now capacitated to

take informed decisions

Better understanding about agriculture – a structured knowledge has helped us in taking decisions. The women stated that they contribute to household decisions with respect to agriculture.

In FGD with the Samiti members in Dahegaon Miskin (Wardha), they asserted that women have now become more confident to take decisions regarding agriculture; their mobility has increased and have started participating in the Panchayat. The women have also begun to address social issues within the village

Another 58% stated that they income from

agriculture has increased

In Paloti and Dahegoan Miskin (Wardha), the women stated that reduction in expenses on manure, pesticides and vegetables has led to savings for the household

In Dahegaon Miskin (Wardha) the women stated that earlier people would

Most adopted practices (as shared by Samiti members in the FGDs) include:

Mixed cropping Jeevamrut Neemastra Seed Treatment Kitchen Garden Seed Bank Organic manure Soil testing Sowing across slopes

Decision making on agriculture related matters has alerted from ‘male only’ to ‘joint decision-making’ and/or women themselves deciding

50

give their land for share cropping- but now families are taking up cultivation themselves.

The Samiti members in Vihirgaon (Yavatmal), stated that income from agriculture has increased and they have been able to educate their children, buy household items (furniture, invest in gold etc.) and repay loan.

44% stated that adoption of SAP/IAP

resulting in better yield

Across the Project region the women farmers recorded using chemical manure and pesticides prior to the Project interventions. The women those who do implement SAP/IAP have recorded reduction in expenses and better yield as well.

In Chana Takli (Wardha)the women recorded that the per acre yield has increased for the following crops:

- Cotton yield has increased from 6-8 quintal per acre to 10 quintal - Tur yield has increased from 7-8 quintal per acre to 9-11 quintal per

acre

The Samiti members in Bhidi (Wardha) also testified for the increase in yield. This they attributed to better organization of agriculture; using mixed cropping method; application of organic fertilizers; availability of equipment through the CFC and availability of timely credit through the Federations

A rating and ranking exercise was conducted with the Mahika Kisan Samiti members across 5 villages including Dahegaon Miskin, Malkapur, Chana Takli, Bhidi and Chikana. The women participants ranked various statements depending on whether they ‘completely agree’, ‘agree somewhat’ or ‘completely disagree.’ (See Table 18)

Table 18: Rating and Ranking Exercise conducted with the Women Farmer Groups

Completely Agree

Agree somewhat

Disagree

a. The project has increased awareness on agri. practices like IAP, INM, SAM, IPM etc.

b. The MKSP has helped improve our agri. Practices c. The project inputs have led to an increase in the

crop produce

d. The land under cultivation of individual Samiti members has increased on an average

e. Members have a better understanding of market

f. Being associated with MKSP has improved our bargaining power

g. The project interventions have led to an increase in our household income

h. The project has improved the nutritional status of the family

i. Access to Government schemes and welfare benefits has increased amongst the members

j. There is improved awareness on health and nutrition issues

k. Members are more empowered to take decisions within the family

l. Members are more empowered to take decisions within the village community

m. There is an enhanced sense of confidence and self-reliance amongst the members

n. There is a general improvement in the standard of living and well being

51

o. Members are better prepared to manage/face distress situations in the future

As can be seen from the Rating and Ranking exercise the impact of the Project is seen on agricultural practices and produce, on the household food security and health. The activities have also resulted in increase in confidence of women within the family and the larger village community.

On certain parameters like ‘gaining a better understanding of the market’, the women stated that since it is the male members of the household who go to the market for sale of produce, the women have not developed a thorough understanding of the market place yet. Similarly, while the women did state that with increase in agriculture yield has led to increase in income, the women were unsure if they are equipped to deal with distress situations in the future. They stated that with agriculture being dependent on monsoons, it is not possible for them to plan ahead.

7.1.2. Benefits of being associated with MKSP

The endline survey explored the benefits of being associated with MKSPs as perceived by the respondents. The findings have been presented in Figure 43 – categorized under specific sub heads. These heads represent benefits vis-à-vis agriculture practices and their impact, impact on members as women farmers and lastly as individuals within the family and community

Maximum women (76%) identified improved access to knowledge as a benefit of being part of MKSP, closely followed by increase in household income (72%). Better access to nutritious food was also considered a benefit (69%). 62% women also stated that their decision making ability has improved owing the knowledge they have gained through MKSP.

With respect to women farmers as individuals in the family and community, 14% stated that their position in the family has improved while 10% stated that they now have better access to the Panchayati Raj Institution (PRI).

Figure 42: Seed Bank seeds on display

52

7.2. Future associating with MKSP

The Endline Survey sought to understand the perception of women in continued application of the SAP/IAP as well as continuing their association with MKSP. Of the total women surveyed 96% stated that they would continue using these practices. This includes those respondents who have not applied these methods but would like to use them in the future. Further, 96% respondents also stated that they would continue to be associated with the Mahila Kisan Samitis. (See Figure 44)

The major motivation to continue with the Samitis is the new information and knowledge which they gain. Additionally the benefits which they have accrued as a result of the project namely,

96%

3% 1%

96%

2% 2%

Yes No No response Yes No No response

Would you continue using the various agri practicesintroduced through this programme?

Would you continue being associted withthe MKSP

Direct benefit vis-a-vis livelihood

•Improved access to knowldge - 76%

•Increased household Income - 72%

•Improved nutrition and access to food - 69%

•Improved standard of living - 40%

Benefit to the Women Farmer

•Enhanced decision making ability - 62%

•Improved bargaining power - 46%

•Increase in confidence - 30%

•Improved sense of Secuirty - 6%

Women Farmer vis-a-vis family and community

•Improved position within family - 14%

•Access to centres of power and decidion making (PRI) 10%

•Enhanced recognition within the village community - 6%

Figure 44: Future association with MKSP (n2=168)

Figure 43: What key benefits do you think you accrued by being part of MKSP? (n2=168)

53

scientific knowledge on agriculture, increase in yield, reduction in input costs, increase in income from agriculture better availability of nutritious food, improved access to government schemes and access to credit through the Federation are some of the reasons cited for continued association.

Testimonials: A woman farmer Chana Takli (Wardha) noted that being associated with MKSP has inspired her to take up agriculture and also develop an understanding of her rights. Another Samiti member from Bhidi (Wardha) adds that MKSP has provided encouragement to practice ‘better agriculture.’ A woman farmer from Shrirampur (Yavatmal) states that her son has also learnt and adopted the SAP/IAP.

54

Chapter 8 Learnings/Key Takeaways

The MKSP sought to empower the women farmers by institution building, and strengthening their capacities. The project aimed to ensure household food security for the members of the Mahila Kisan Samitis. The project has been able to achieve its objectives in various measures as has been elaborated in the earlier sections. They key learnings emergent from the endline survey have been discussed here. 8.1. An overview of changes observed

The MKSP’s aim of working with women farmers and capacitating them on sustainable/integrated agricultural techniques can be observed in the adoption of practices. Table 19 captures the change by depicting ten such indicators where a perceptible change in adoption is noted.

With increase in access to government schemes (like constructing a well under MGNREGA or the Jawahar Vihir scheme), there is an increase in the land brought under irrigation. Cultivating across the slope has increased from 5% of the total respondents during the baseline to 60% of the respondents during the endline. Similarly undertaking soil testing has improved from 23% during baseline to 74% during the endline. The application of SAP/IAP like Jeevamrut, vermicomposting and Neemastra has also recorded significant increase. Using pheromone traps has increased from 1% to 65% under the IPM practices. The component of ensuring household food security has been particularly well received under the MKSP project with kitchen gardens and community kitchen gardens being adopted across the target villages.

Table 19: Comparison between key indicators of the Baseline and Endline

8.2. Introduction of Sustainable/Integrated Agriculture Practices (SAP/IAP)

The introduction of SAP/IAP in the Project areas has received a positive response. The women farmers have been able to adapt their agricultural practices to include methods of INM and IPM to favourable outcomes. Application of Jeevamrut and Neemastra has been widely observed in the Project villages. Additionally the practice of ridge and furrow planting has also been widely accepted. Soil testing is another practice adopted by the women farmers to effectively apply the required nutrients. Samiti members have noted the benefits of these practices as increase in yields and reduction in expenditure.

The intervention has been able to diversify the crops cultivated. A case in point would be the Samiti members in Bhidi (Wardha) who stated that apart from cotton, soybean and tur women farmers have also started cultivating other crops (like green chilies) which can also be remunerative. Options have thus increased thereby reducing dependence on one type of crop.

Key indicators Baseline (2012) (n1=220)

Endline (2017) (n2=168)

Cultivation across a slope 5% 60% Soil testing 23% 74% Jeevamrut 1% 55% Vermicomposting 0% 53% Neemastra 8% 74% Pheromone traps 1% 65% Kitchen garden 84% 98%

55

8.3. Kitchen Garden as a means of ensuring Household Food security

Kitchen Garden has been one of the most successful initiatives under the MKSP Project. The change in the adoption of Kitchen gardens from the baseline (2012) to the endline (2017) has been significant. The women farmers have keenly invested time and efforts to grow seasonal vegetables. This has resulted in availability of nutritious food and reduction in expenditure incurred on buying vegetables. The Kitchen Garden along with the Seed Bank is also a site for interaction among women farmers within the Samiti as well as women farmers from the larger village community. It is a site for give and take of seeds, sapling and exchanging of information on vegetables and food preparations.

Kitchen garden has been channelized by some women as a source of income. In Kelapur (Wardha) a member has invested in her Kitchen Garden by taking credit from the Federation. She prepares seed trays to be sold in the market. In Kelapur (Wardha) another women has invested in a nursery which is a source of income for her. A member in Paloti (Wardha) cultivated marigold and mogra flowers which are sold in the market, thereby generating income for the household. In Paloti (Wardha) another member uses the lemons from her Kitchen Garden to make lemonade for the children in the Anganwadi during summers. She also makes pickles from these lemons and sells pickled bottles in the local market.

8.4. Participation of women farmers in Gram Sabha and Accessing Entitlements Apart from disseminating agriculture related information and practices, the Mahila Kisan Samitis also act as channels for information on various government schemes and entitlements. Participation in the Gram Sabha has improved access to information for the MKSP members. 84% of the respondents stated that their participation in Gram Sabha has increased over the Project period. The Samiti members in Chikana (Yavatmal) stated, “Mahila bolayla laglaya, majboot zhalya!” (Women have started talking, they have become stronger). Not only has the participation increased, but women are proactively becoming members of the Gram Panchayat. A case in point would be Kelapur (Wardha) where women Samiti members fought elections and formed an all woman’s Panchayat. The women farmers have become better aware about the various schemes and entitlements they can access. This has resulted in an increase in the schemes the respondents have accessed. Figure 45 given below depicts the various schemes access by the survey respondents. The scheme accessed by maximum women farmers (and/or their household) is the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana with 42%. This is followed by Mahatma Gandhi National rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNRENA) at 40% and Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) at 39%. The latter two schemes, i.e. the MGNREGA and the AAY facilitate ensuring food security of vulnerable households. Other infrastructure related entitlements have also been accessed including housing under Indira Away Yojana (30%) and toilets under Swaccha Bharat Abhiyan (38%). Social protection schemes like agriculture insurance (20%) and pensions (14%) have also been accessed by MKSP members and/or their households.

56

Figure 45: Access to government schemes

8.5. Creation of supportive environment

The Mahila Kisan Samitis along with the Federations have created a supportive environment for the women farmers by making accessible information, technical support and credit. Women respondents stated that they started taking more interest in farming after joining the Project as members.

In Chikana (Yavatmal), a Samiti member has been able to adopt irrigated agriculture after constructing a well in the fields under MGNREGA. This information she received from the Mahila Kisan Samiti in her village. Similarly women are accessing the Community Facility Center (CFC) to meet their equipment need. The women farmers are also accessing credit from the Samitis and Federations to meet their cash requirement during agriculture season to buy seeds, fertilizers etc. In Chana Takli (Wardha), Samiti members have taken loan from the Federation to start enterprises like noodle manufacturing thereby diversifying their sources of livelihood.

The Samiti members in Vihirgaon (Yavatmal) believe that the Federation(s) will manage and monitor the Samitis once MSSRF exits the Project area. This indicates not only towards continued association with the Samiti and the Federation(s) but also towards the aspiration of sustaining the work initiated under MKSP.

8.6. Availability of inputs as a challenge to adopt SAP/IAP

While adoption over the Project period has been positive among the Samiti members, the sustained and continued use would be dependent on external factors like availability of cow dung and urine. Since not all Samiti members own cattle, a major limiting factor in application of INM and IPM is the availability of cow dung and urine.

8.7. Mahila Kisan Samitis as agents of change and empowerment

The MKSP has been able to empower women to effectively contribute to decision making. This is visible through the gradual increase in application of SAP/IAP. Starting from 2 lines in the field to 2 acres, the women farmers have been able to change the way agriculture is practiced. While some farmers still use chemical fertilizers and pesticides, there is a slow but steady reduction in the amount used. Another key transformation is the realization amongst the Samiti members of centrality of women in the agriculture process and thereby asserting themselves by way of decision making, which earlier was seen as the prerogative of the male members of the household.

In Paloti (Wardha) the MKSP members organize a Dabba Party 3-4 times a year. They invite all the village women for this gathering which takes place in the fields. In this they share different food preparations along with their nutritional content. These preparations are usually made

42%

40%

39%

38%

30%

20%

14%

7%

5%

4%

3%

PM Jan Dhan Yojana

MGNREGA

Antyodaya Anna Yojana

SBA

Indira Awas Yojana

Agriculture Insurance

Pensions

NRLM

PM Swasthya Suraksha Yojana

PMGKVY

ICDS/MDM

57

from the vegetables grown in the Kitchen Garden. The women share recipes and encourage others to grow their own vegetables. The women members in Paloti (Wardha) shared that this initiative has evoked interest amongst the women, few of who have started growing Kitchen gardens.

In Chana Takli (Wardha), the Samiti members stated that their position in the family too has undergone a change. Their role and contribution in decision making has increased and they noted instances where the male members would return from the market and show the bill of sale to their wives.

The members of the Mahila Kisan Samitis now increasingly participate in the Gram Sabha. They raise questions regarding schemes and village development activities. This is a significant change where women are actively engaging with the PRI. Not only are they accessing this forum but also making it accountable. In Chikana (Yavatmal), for instance, the women members came together and got a bore-well installed in the village. Similarly the Samiti members are seen to petition the Government officials for any village work and/or information without the fear of authority.

Samiti members in Chikana (Yavatmal) stated that the Mahila Kisan Samiti members have spoken about SAP/IAP in the village Gram Sabha. As a result a few women farmers (non-members) showed initiative and inquired about these practices and have adopted them in their fields. The Samiti members further stated that earlier there was little or no presence of any official from the Krishi Sevak Kendra. Post the Project, this has changed and the women are seeking information from the Centre – this has resulted in increased presence over the project period.

Another instance in Bhidi reinforces the change in position of women in the larger community. In Bhidi (Wardha), the Samiti members compelled the Gram Panchayat to utilize the funds allocated under women and child development to organize Women’s Day events.

The self-reliant attitude and transformation of MKSP project is reflected in the statement of Nanda Junghare, 42, a Mahila Shetkari Samiti member from Dahegaon Miskin (Wardha) - “Balkat mahilaa banachay!” (We want to become strong/empowered women!”).

Figure 46: Kitchen Garden in Paloti

58

Annexures

Annexure I: Village-wise break of no. of respondents

S. No. Block Name of the Village Total No. of IDIs conducted

Wardha District

1. Wardha Ajgaon 2

2. Amla 1

3. Ashta 1

4. Bodad 2

5. Chikani 0

6. Dahegaon Miskin 5

7. DhamangaonWathoda 7

8. Ekurli 2

9. Kelapur 5

10. Kurzadi Fort 3

11. Kurzadi Jamatha 5

12. Lonsawali 5

13. Neri 1

14. Paloti 4

15. Sonegaon Station 8

16. Talegaon Talatule 1

17. Waifad 1

18. Waigaon Nipani 0

19. Wathoda 1

20. Zadgaon 1

21. Deoli Adegaon 5

22. Bhidi 2

23. Chana Takli 6

24. Chikhali 3

25. Chondi 2

26. DahegaonGawande 3

27. Digdoha 2

28. Durgada 3

29. Jamni 4

30. Malkapur 7

31. Muradgaon Khose 3

32. Nagzari 3

33. Ratnapur 1

34. Sonegaon Bai 2

35. Talani 5

36. Wabgaon 4

37. Yesgaon 3

Yavatmal district

38. Ralegaon Chikana 5

39. Jalka 7

59

40. Karanji 5

41. Khadaki Sukali 1

42. Khairgaon 3

43. Krushnapur 1

44. Loni 0

45. Mengapur 1

46. Pimpalkhuti 6

47. Raveri 1

48. Sakhi 1

49. Sawner 0

50. Sheli 1

51. Takali 0

52. Vihirgaon 12

53. Warana 2

54. Yekurli 3

55. Zargad 4

56. Hinganghat Allipur 2

Total 168

60

Annexure II: In depth Interview Tool

Village: Taluka: Gram Panchayat:

Name of the Enumerator: Name of the Supervisor:

Informed consent: The purpose and nature of the interview has been explained to me. I understand that I will not be identifying me by name in any reports using information obtained from this interview, and that my confidentiality as a participant in this study will remain secure. I agree to be interviewed for the purposes of a research study being conducted. Signature of the Respondent______________________

I. Respondent Profile 1. Name of the Samiti Member: ________________________________ 2. Age

A. 18 – 25 B. 26 – 30

C. 31- 40 D. 41- 50

E. 51- 60 F. 61 and above

3. Name of the Samiti_________________________________

4. Samiti Membership (mention month and year) ________________________

5. Do you have kind of Physical disability? A. Yes B. No 6. If yes, please mention the kind of disability

A. Physically Challenged B. Mentally Challenged

C. Visual Impatient D. Hearing Impairment

E. Not applicable

7. Religion

A. Hindu B. Muslim

C. Jain D. Christian

E. Buddhist F. No Religion

8. Caste

A. Scheduled Caste B. Scheduled Tribe C. OBC

D. Nomadic Tribe E. VJNT F. Specially Backward Class

G. General Category

II. Household Details

No. Name Relationship with respondent

A. Self B. Husband C. Son/ Son in law D. Daughter / daughter

Sex

A. Male B. Female C. Transgender

Age

A. 0 – 6 B. 7- 14 C. 15 – 20 D. 21- 30 E. 31- 40 F. 41 – 50

Marital Status

A. Married B. Single C. Separated D. Divorced E. Widow

Education A. Illiterate B. Functionally literate C. Primary Schooling (Class 1-4) D. Secondary Schooling (Class 5-10) E. Higher Secondary (Class11-12) F. Diploma/Technical education

Primary Occupation

A. Cultivators B. Agri. Labour C. Livestock; forestry; fishing;

hunting; plantations and allied activities

D. Mining and quarrying

61

in law E. Father/ Father in law F. Mother/ Mother in law G. Brother H. Sister I. Grandson J. Granddaughter K. Any other

(Specify)_____

G. 51 – 60 H. 61&above

(er)

G. Graduation H. Post-Graduation I. Any other (Specify

E. Manufacturing; processing; servicing and repairs in household industry

F. Construction G. Trade and commerce H. Transport; storage and

communications I. Housework J. Student K. Unemployed L. Any other (Specify)

III. Household Assets Ownership

9. House Type

A. Kuccha B. Semi pucca C. Pucca

10. Nature of House Ownership A. Own B. Rented

11. Whether House is electrified A. Yes B. No

12. Availability of safe sanitation/ toilet facility? A. Yes B. No

13. Usage of toilet/sanitation facility A. Yes B. No

14. Primary source of drinking water

62

A. Well B. Hand pump

C. Piped water supply D. Pond

E. River F. Any other (specify) _______

15. Consumer durables owned by Household (multiple ticks) A. TV B. Radio C. Bicycle

D. Motorcycle E. Fridge F. Cell phone

G. Cell phone owned by Samiti member

IV. Ownership of Agricultural Assets

16. Do you/your household own land? A. Yes B. No 17. Have you bought land in the past 5 years? A. Yes B. No 18. If yes, please mention the following

Amount of new land bought (in acres) Land owned by (mention family member)

19. Please give details of cultivable land currently owned by household

Category Area under Rainfed Area under Irrigation Total Area A. Owned

B. Leased in

C. Leased Out

D. Govt. land

20. Please give details of cultivable land currently owned by Samiti member (land registered in her name)

Category Total Area

A. Area under Rainfed

B. Area under Irrigation

21. Agricultural Implements (fill quantity)

Plough Pump Set Sprayer Seed drill Tractor Cart Thresher Harrow Hoe Sickle Spade Pick Axes

63

Owned before 2012-13

Bought in past 5 years

22. Livestock owned (fill quantity)

Bullock Buffalo Cow Goat Poultry Owned before 2012-13 Bought in past 5 years

V. Agricultural practices

23. Have you cultivated land in the past 12 months? A. Yes B. No

24. List the crops grown in Kharif Season 2016-17

S. No.

Crop Area cultivated in the last Kharif season (2016-17) Land left fallow Rainfed Irrigated

25. List the crops grown in Rabi Season, 2016-17

S.

No. Crop Area cultivated after the project in the last Rabi season Land left fallow

Rainfed Irrigated

64

26. Land improvement Practices adopted (tick for yes, cross for no)

Practices Before the Project

A. Yes B. No

After the Project A. Yes B. No

A. Bunding, Bund repair

B. Farm ponds

C. Ridge & furrow planting

D. Cultivation across the slope

E. Gravel removal

F. Soil Test

G. Any other

27. Are you aware of seed treatment practices? A. Yes B. No

28. If yes, who was the primary source of information on seed treatment?

A. Family B. Other farmers C. MSSRF

D. MKS E. Govt. Agency F. Media

G. Other NGOs H. Any other _______________

29. Have you practiced seed treatment in the past 5 years? A. Yes B. No

30. If yes, please mention the crops for which seed treatment was applied

A. Cotton B. Jowar C. Soyabean D. Tur

E. Wheat F. Bengal gram G. Black gram H. Green gram

I. Ground nut J. Sesame K. Any other__________________ L. Any other _____________

31. Which of the following practices are you aware of, who was the source and which of these have you adopted in the past 5 years?

Nutrient management practice Awareness

A. Yes B. No

Source A. Family B. Other farmers C. MSSRF D. MKS/

Federation E. Govt. Agency

Did you use these practices

prior to the project

A. Yes

Adopted any time during last 5years

A. Yes

65

F. Media G. Other NGO H. Any

Other___________

B. No B. No

Nutrient Management

A. Farm Yard Manure

B. Sheep penning

C. Biomass/Green Manure

D. Composting/organic manure

E. Vermicomposting

F. Biofertilisers/Jeevamrut

G. Soil testing

H. Soil test based nutrient management

I. Mixed Cropping

J. Crop Rotation

Integrated Pest Management

K. Botanical Extracts /neemastra

L. Pheromone Traps/Yellow Sticky Traps

M. Bio pesticides

N.

O.

P.

32. What challenges did you face in adopting these practices?

33. Mention the positive and/or negative impacts of the above practices on agriculture A. Improvement inquantity of yield B. Improvement in quality of yield C. Improved soil quality

66

D. Better prepared to take appropriate decisions E. Reduction in expenses F. Increase in expenses G. Reduction in yield H. Time consuming I. Any other_____________

34. Post-Harvest Processing: Before and After. Please state the post harvesting processing adopted for various crops before and after the project.

Crops Before the project After the project

For Marketing For consumption For Marketing For consumption

VI. Marketing details

35. Which are the channels through which produce is sold?

Crop Marketing Channel used (mention quantity in quintals)

Middlemen Within village to trader Outside village to trader APMC Private Co. Any other

VII. Awareness levels and Trainings

36. Sources of information related to agriculture and agri. Practices A. Other farmers B. MKSP C. MSSRF D. Radio E. TV

F. Newspaper G. Internet H. Government sources I. Companies/Private individuals J. Any NGO

K. Any other

67

Information Sources(put the codes mentioned above) On rain and climate conditions On latest variety of seeds/manure/pesticides

On agricultural practices

On prices of produce

On processing of produce

On different marketing options/channels

On credit facilities

On government schemes related to agriculture On health and nutrition issues

37. Mentions the various training/ capacity building sessions you have received as a Samiti member over the past 5 years

Trainings Tick Cultivation practices Land improvement On Nutrient management On Integrated Pest Management Seed treatment practices On Kitchen Garden On seed Bank On credit related issues On accessing Govt. Schemes On health and nutritional issues Any other Any other

38. Mention the various training/ capacity building sessions you have received from any Govt. Agency or other NGO

Govt. agency Other NGOs

39. What benefits have you received from the above mentioned trainings (multiple ticks)

68

A. Better information on agricultural practices B. Capacitated to take informed decisions on agri matters C. Adoption of sustainable/integrated agricultural practices

resulting in improvement in quality of yield D. Increase in quantity of produce E. Enhanced income from agriculture

F. Improved access to market G. Improved understanding of produce prices H. Enhanced bargaining power in market I. Reduction in risks associated with cultivation J. Any other ___________________

40. Decision making: Has the awareness/trainings and capacity building translated into decision making at the household and community

level? A. Self B. Husband C. Father in law

D. Mother in law E. Son

F. Daughter G. All decide together

Before the project After the project On which crop to produce On how much land to cultivate On what INM practices to adopt On what IPM practices to adopt On what SAP/IAP to adopt On sale of produce On credit related matters On expenditure of household income On decisions related to health On family disputes/issues

41. Has your participation in Gram Sabha increased after the project interventions? A. Yes B. No 42. If yes, what is your nature of engagement? Please elaborate

VIII. Food Security and Health

43. Do you have space for a Kitchen Garden? A. Yes B. No 44. Did you have a Kitchen Garden prior to project intervention (2012-13)? A. Yes B. No 45. Have you had a Kitchen Garden over the last 5 years? A. Yes B. No 46. Types of vegetables/fruits cultivated in the Kitchen Garden

69

47. Benefits of having a kitchen garden

A. Availability of sufficient food / Eliminated threat of hunger B. Nutritional support to the family

C. Access to pesticide free food D. Any other _________________________________

48. Did you store seeds prior to the project? A. Yes B. No 49. Do you still continue to practice storage of seeds? A. Yes B. No 50. Did you have access to a Seed Bank prior to project intervention (2012-13)? A. Yes B. No 51. Have you accessed (borrowed and contributed) to the projectSeed Bank over the last 5 years? A. Yes B. No 52. Mention the seeds borrowed and contributed

53. Benefits of the same

A. Preservation of local varieties of seeds B. Ease of access to good quality/ traditional variety of seeds

C. Asset for agriculture for the farmer community D. Any other __________________

54. Has being associated with MKSP and the project increased you awareness on various Govt. schemes? A. Yes B. No

55. If yes, which of the following Govt. schemes have you/ your family members accessed over the past 5 years? A. ICDS/MDM B. Antyodaya Anna Yojana C. Indira AwasYojana D. MGNREGA E. Swaccha Bharat Abhiyan F. Pradhan Mantri Jan DhanYojana

G. PrahanMantriSwasthyaSurakshaYojana H. NRLM I. Pradhan MantriGraminKaushalVikasYojana J. Pensions – old age/widow/disability K. Agriculture Insurance L. Any Other _____________________________

56. Prior to the project was any member of your household tested positive for anaemia? A. Yes B. No

57. If yes who? Please mention the relation and their age

A. ___________ B. _____________

C. ____________ D. _____________

70

58. Is any member of your household currently anaemic? A. Yes B. No

59. If yes who? Please mention the relation and their age A. ___________ B. _____________

C. ____________ D. _____________

60. Do you think the project interventions have improved the health and nutritional status of the family? A. Yes B. No 61. If yes, please elaborate how?

62. Has there been any agriculture related distress death in the family prior to the project? A. Yes B .No

63. If yes, please mention how the project helped you overcome the challenges resulting from death of the family member?

64. Has there been any agriculture related distress death in the family after the project in the last 5 years? A. Yes B .No

IX. Household Income 65. Mention the annual household income from various sources, before and after the project

Before the project After the project Agriculture Animal Husbandry Non-farm business Wage employment Collection and sale of NTFP Private service Remittances Pensions Any other

66. Do you think there has been a significant change in your household income owing to project interventions? A. Yes B. No 67. If yes, what has been the major change with respect to income? (in terms of source and quantity)

71

X. Impact

68. What key benefits do you think you accrued by being part of the MKSP? (multiple ticks)

A. Increased household income B. Improved nutrition and access to food grains and vegetables C. Improved access to knowledge/ information D. Improved bargaining power (through collectivisation) E. Improved standard of living F. Enhanced decision making ability G. Increase in confidence and independence H. Improved sense of security I. Improved position within the family J. Enhanced recognition within the village community K. Access to centres of power and decision making (PRI) L. Any other _________

69. Would you continue using the various practices you were introduced to via this programme? A. Yes B. No

70. If yes/no why?

71. Would you continue being associated with the Samiti and/or Federation? A. Yes B. No

72. Any other notes/observatio

Annexure III: MSSRF Endline Survey Tools

Tool 2: Semi Structured Interviews (SSIs) with MSSRF Project Staff

1. Name and position of staff being interviewed

2. Association with MKSP (in years)

3. Project Background

a. Socio economic context of project region

b. Identification and mobilisation of Samiti members

c. Has there been an increase/decrease in membership over the project period? Reasons thereof

d. Total no. of Samitis formed and the various activities undertaken

e. Capacity building interventions

f. Technical support provided

g. Market linkages provided if any

h. Financial inclusion activities undertaken

i. Any other

4. What is the current status of the Common Facility Centres (CFCs)

5. Challenges faced during implementation of the project. How were these challenges addressed?

6. Which project component was the most well received one by the women farmers? Reasons for the

same

7. Which project component was not very successful/ did not receive the required response from the

women farmers? Reasons for the same

8. Provide a brief journey of the MKSP project and the changes incorporated in the project strategy based

on feedback from the women’ groups/ field realities/ midterm evaluations conducted etc.

9. Highlights/Achievements of the MKSP – changes registered at individual (women) farmer level

a. Improvement in awareness levels (of SAP/IAP etc.)

b. Adoption of these agricultural practices (increase in production, better return for produce, etc.)

c. Improvement in socio-economic conditions (income, standard of living, general well-being and

nutritional security)

d. Change in social position of women (enhanced recognition of group members, increased

participation of Samiti members in Gram Sabha etc.)

10. Benefits accrued through forming women’s collectives

a. Mahila Kisan Samitis

b. the Federations at the Block level

c. What is the nature of ownership amongst the members vis-à-vis the Samitis and Federations?

11. What are the key learnings of the MKSP project? Way ahead for the project.

12. Is there an exit strategy in place for the MKSP project? If yes, please elaborate on the same. What role

did the women members play in deciding on this strategy?

Tool 3: Checklist for Focus Group Discussion with Women Farmers 1. Profile of the group

2. Details of Women’s Farmers Group(s)

a. Name

b. Formation year

c. Objectives

d. Membership (total number/increase /decrease and reasons thereof)

e. Frequency of meetings

f. Topics discussed at meetings

g. Activities undertaken

h. Challenges faced

i. Resolutions/ solutions sought

3. Challenges faced by the women prior to the project wrt agriculture and related matters. How did MKSP

interventions/inputs help address these challenges?

73

4. Has there been any change in the agricultural practices since MSSRF’s interventions? If yes, what are

those changes?

5. Which is the most widely adopted practice (introduced by the project) amongst the group members?

Reasons for the same

6. Which project component was the most beneficial according to you? Reasons for the same

7. Which project component was the least beneficial according to you? Reasons for the same

8. Impacts of the project on the Samiti members and their families (awareness levels, adoption of

agricultural practices, socio-economic condition, status of women in family and community etc.)

a. Positive changes observed

b. Has there been any negative effect? If yes, what and why?

9. Participation in Gram Sabha

a. Has participation of Samiti members in Gram Sabha increased after the project interventions?

b. Have members raised questions/ sought answers

c. Have samiti members been able to mobilize GP schemes/ funds for either individual samiti

members or for the samiti itself?

d. Are MKSP group members consulted on matters related to agriculture etc. by the larger village

community?

e. Have the MKSP members reached out to other non-member women farmers from the village?

If yes, what has been the nature of engagement?

10. MKSP

a. If the project withdraws, will you continue to practice the measures? If yes or no, why?

b. If the project withdraws will you continue with this group? If yes or no, why?

c. Has an exit strategy been shared with the Samiti members? If yes, how/what do you feel about

it? What role did you play in deciding the exit strategy?

74

Tool 4: PRA Exercises 1. Rating exercise on the impact of the MKSP on the lives and livelihoods of the women

Completely

Agree

Agree

somewhat

Disagree Reasons

a. The project has increased awareness on agri. practices like IAP, INM, SAM, IPM etc.

b. The MKSP has helped improve our agri. practices

c. The project inputs have led to an increase in the crop produce

d. The land under cultivation of individual Samiti members has increased on an average

e. Members have a better understanding of market

f. Being associated with MKSP has improved our bargaining power

g. The project interventions have led to an increase in our household income

h. The project has improved the nutritional status of the family

i. Access to Government schemes and welfare benefits has increased amongst the members

j. There is improved awareness on health and nutrition issues

k. Members are more empowered to take decisions within the family

l. Members are more empowered to take decisions within the village community

m. There is an enhanced sense of confidence and self-reliance amongst the members

n. There is a general improvement in the standard of living and well being

o. Members are better prepared to manage/face distress situations in the future

2. Decision making before and after the project. Name the household member who was the key decision

maker. Has the project interventions empowered Samiti members to take decisions at household and

village level?

Decision making on…. Before the Project After the Project Reasons a. Agricultural matters b. Adoption of newer agri.

Practices (SAP/IAP IPM, INM etc.)

c. Which crop to produce d. Selling of produce e. Accessing credit facilities f. Accessing Govt.

schemes/welfare benefits

75

g. Household matters h. Household finances i. Participation in Gram Sabha

findings from the endline survey of the mahila kisan ...mssrf-fs-mksp.org/docs/mssrf-mksp_endline...

Documents