Poverty analysis in Maize cultivating farmers under different land-holding categories

The research probes the relationship between the Minimum Support Price (MSP) price and its income impact on the farmers with different agricultural land-holdings. It examines maize crop cultivation income under three conditions if a farmer is getting crop production value at MSP, above 20% of MSP and above 40% of MSP. It then evaluates the farmers belonging to marginal, small, semi-medium, medium and large categories position in terms of poverty criteria suggested by the World bank. For analysis purposes, it uses an economic-model approach and suggest the concept of survival income for agricultural farmers. Its findings prove that marginal and small farmers require benefits beyond the MSP rate to push them above the poverty line.

cultivation income under three conditions if a farmer is getting crop production value at MSP, above 20% of MSP and above 40% of MSP. It then evaluates the farmers belonging to marginal, small, semi-medium, medium and large categories position in terms of poverty criteria suggested by the World bank. For analysis purposes, it uses an economic-model approach and suggest the concept of survival income for agricultural farmers. Its findings prove, marginal and small farmers requires benefits beyond the MSP rate to push them above the poverty line.
Literature Review: (Chenchen Ren), research findings mentioned that increase in agricultural land-holdings has a positive impact on farmers' income due to economic, technical and labour efficiency. Also, it states that with an increase in farm size, a significant decrease in fertilizer and pesticides is observed. (SAIN DASS, 2012), describe maize as ideal for crop diversification and a solution to depleting water levels and soil erosion.
Even my earlier works (Ahmed, Poverty and Deprivation: Study of a most impoverished population for better management of resources, 2021) points out how the rural population suffers in terms of low living standards and survive with limited assets (Ahmed, Multidimensional Poverty Index and Need to Revise the Methodology for Counting Poor, 2018) where development multidimensional poverty index provide additional information and suggest need to revise methodology to count poor on the basis of it. (Ahmed, Inadequate Land Reforms Reason for Poverty and Social Unrest, 2014) world bank conference paper highlights the plight of poor farmers who are waiting for land reforms, and in the absence of it, social unrest is common in the interior regions.
Crop specific information was accessed from (India Maze Scenario, 2021), (Maize, APEDA, 2021) and (Maize, Directorate of Millets Development, 2021) while authenticating data for analysis purpose was from the government of India, publications. The main statistical reports used are (Cost of Cultivation/Production & Related Data , 2017-18), (Economic Survey 2020-21), (Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2018, 2019), (India at a Glance, 2021) and (Agriculture Census, 2015-16). For the latest information on Consumer Price Index (CPI) agriculture and Minimum Support Price (MSP), Indian government press notification is consulted.
The Masood's Input Cost-Survival model: The model provides the relationship between the MSP price and its income impact on the farmers with different sizes of land-holdings. Data from the government sources were used in the preparation of the model, and it provides details in the form of the total cost of cultivation. The cost of cultivation is from the year 2017-18, inflation impact is added, and the current cost of cultivation is derived.
The model uses the concept of survival income, which denotes former earnings which keep him in the occupation. It is his family's contribution that results in income which, if he delegates to an outsider, will make crop cultivation a loss-making proposition.
The model examines crop cultivation income under three conditions if a farmer is getting crop production value at MSP, above 20% of MSP and above 40% of MSP. It then evaluates the farmers belonging to marginal, small, semi-medium, medium and large categories position in terms of poverty criteria suggested by the World bank (Extreme Poverty, Moderate poverty, Vulnerable, Safe) when their crop yield is in the highest category and when it falls to minimum category.

Results:
1 Maize cultivation is a boon for farmers. It offers options for other crop cultivation but results in decent income from its production in a short period. If marginal farmers are able to get production value at MSP (Table 6) from a higher yield, they will be in a vulnerable category, while in case they get the low yield, they fall into the extreme poverty category. 2 At higher yield and MSP price, all other categories are in safe income zone, while if they fell in getting higher yield at low yield small and average land-holders are in a vulnerable position, but semi-medium, medium and large scale farmers enjoy an income that put them in the safe category. 3 When farmers are able to get a price above 20% of MSP (Table 7), all category farmers except marginal category are in safe income zone, whether they get high yield or low yield. Marginal farmers with high yields remain vulnerable, but low yields fall in the moderate poverty category. 4 In case farmers are able to get a price above 40% of MSP (Table 8), while for every category income increase by the mentioned percentage, for marginal farmers category remain same, with high yield they remain vulnerable and at low yield they will be in moderate poverty category. It is an extra benefit for all other categories as they already achieve a safe category with 20% above the MSP price.

Conclusion:
The data provided by the model conclude that marginal, small and average land-holders need market prices above the government announced MSP rate. While a rate above 20% of MSP is sufficient for farmers with small and average land-holdings, marginal farmers need extra benefit more than 40% above the MSP rate to achieve an income under the safe category in both high and low yield scenarios.
At all India level population of marginal farmers is huge, and (Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2018, 2019) data state that only 42% of marginal and 35% of small farmers has access to irrigation facilities. Besides lack of irrigation facilities, they also lack access to financing options, technological inputs and the ability to input proper fertilizer and pesticides for better crop management.