Journal of Global Resources
Volume 6 (01)August 2019-January 2020
Page 154-159
UGC –CARE Listed Journal in Group D
ISSN: 2395-3160 (Print), 2455-2445 (Online)

24
LEVEL OF AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT: A BLOCK LEVEL ANALYSIS OF MANDLA:DINDORI REGION, M.P.
Ghanshyam Prasad Jhariya
Guest Lecturer, Govt. College, Anjaniya, Mandla (M.P.), India
Email: jhariyageosgo@gmail.com
Abstract: Present research work, level of agricultural development in Mandla-Dindori Region isbased on secondary sources of data which is collected from agricultural statistics MadhyaPradesh and district statistical handbook Mandla and Dindori district. The level of agriculturaldevelopment is determined with the help of fourteen variables. These collected data have been
analysed with the help of composite Z-Score method and on the basis of composite score, C.D
blocks have been categorised into three categories i.e. high, moderate and low level ofagricultural development. Other hand, Karl Pearson’s correlation coefficient techniques has
been used to find out the correlation among the variables of agricultural development. Finding
portray that most of the CD blocks found in moderate level of agricultural development, while
only three blocks have been found high or better condition and three out of sixteen blocks havebeen under the low level of agricultural development. Deteriorating irrigation system, faulty
water management, lack of proper choice of agricultural technology, its proper use and poor
infrastructure facilities are found to be the major causes of agricultural backwardness of theregion.
Key words: Agricultural development, Spatial distribution, Z-Score,
Introduction
Agriculture is one of the dominant sectors of developing countries in terms of food security,
poverty reduction and employment generation (Barik, 2017). Agriculture has a crucial role tonational development through the economic and social contribution. Simultaneously agriculture
operates as an important social welfare infrastructure in a remote location to creating
development opportunities and producing basic necessities for isolated communities.
Agriculture provides subsistence occupations for millions and permits people to supply
themselves with the three fundamental human needs; food, clothing, and shelter (Stringer,2001). Indian economy is largely dependent on agriculture and about 17.4 percent of GDP isshared by agriculture and allied sectors (Economic Survey 2015-16, Siddiqui et al, 2017).
About 58 percent of rural masses are engaged in this sector serving their livelihood.
Agricultural development is much more and multidimensional concept which normallyunderstood. The term agricultural development refers to the growth and overall changes ofagriculture resulting in vertical expansion. In present time, when the agriculture is one of theimportant sources of income, the commercialization of agriculture is an important element ofagricultural development. The area under cash crop to the total cropped area may be used forthe measure of commercialization of agriculture. The level of agricultural development
considered the degree of agrarian structure gets strengthened leading thereby to increased
production and reflects the income level of cultivators. The crop productivity is one of vital
aspects of agricultural development (Jadhav, 1997).
Objectives
The primary objective of the present work is to analyse the spatial distribution of agriculturaldevelopment and to find out the possible causes of the variation in agricultural development
and suggest some suitable measures to minimise disparities in agricultural performance in thestudy region.
The Study Area
For investigating the problem of agricultural development, the Mandla-Dindori region has beenselected. This region, comprising present Mandla and Dindori districts of Madhya Pradesh,
extends over an area of 14899 square kilometres (4.83 percent of total geographical area of thestate) between 22012` to 23022` North latitudes and 80018` to 81051` East longitudes (Fig.1). It154

is entirely highly dissected and hilly tract and lies in the catchment of the Narmada River. Theregion is bounded on the north by Umaria and Jabalpur, northeast by Anuppur, south by Seoni,west by Balaghat and east by Kabirdham districts of Chhattishgarh state. Administrativelyregion is divided into 8 Tahsils and sixteen development blocks. According to the Census ofIndia 2011, the study region have 17, 57,730 population out of 8, 76,839 was males and 8,80,901 was females, which is 2.42 percent of total population of Madhya Pradesh. The
population density of this region is 138 per Km2. Average literacy rate was 66.9 percent, maleand female literacy rate was 78.55 percent and 55.35 percent respectively.
Figure 01: Mandla-Dindori Region

Indicators of Agricultural Development
Various scholars and Geographers have used different indicators which determine thedevelopment of agriculture. They can be grouped them into three classes as Environmental,
Technological and Institutional. The environmental, which includes the amount and intensity ofrainfall, soil percolation, evaporation, soil fertility and soil erosion, and flood control (Monkhouseand Wilkinson, 1989, Jadhav, 1997). The technological or adoption of new technology
comprises the use of improved quality of seeds, fertilizers, irrigation and mechanization which
stimulates the crop output by extending or intensifying cropping pattern and enhancing cropproductivity (Bawa and Kainth, 1984, Jadhav, 1997). The institutional indicators include theproportion of literate population in agriculture, diversification and commercialization ofagriculture, concentration of markets and societies. Sharma (1964, 1972) analysing the level ofagricultural development on all India level to selected seventeen indicators to measurement ofagricultural development. Same indicators have been employed for the study of Madhya
Pradesh by the agro-economic research centre of JNKVV Jabalpur in 1977. Jain C. K. (1988)
has been used his study pattern of agricultural development in Madhya Pradesh which
incorporates input- output factors. However, they have not considered the social equity andecological balance aspects, but presenting district wise spatial variation in level of agriculturaldevelopment. Jadhav (1997) have been used 12 indicators to study the agriculturaldevelopment of Maharashtra and classified high, medium and low level of agriculturaldevelopment in Maharashtra. There are some other studies which evaluate the agriculturaldevelopment, Zahra; Rifat (2007) has been used eleven indicators for the study of North Bihar
Plain. Rakesh Raman and Reena Kumari (2012) for Uttar Pradesh, Sakti Mandal and ArijitDhare (2012) for West Bengal etc. They have selected various indicators for the measure oflevel of agricultural development in his study. On the basis of some review of previous study,
the following indicators have been selected for the measurement of level of agriculturaldevelopment in the study region.

155

Table 01: Selected Indicators for the Measurement of Agricultural DevelopmentIndicators
X1X2X34X
5X
6X
7X
8X
9X
X10X11X12X13X14Definition
Percentage of Irrigated Area to Net Sown Area
Cropping Intensity (in percent)
Proportion of Cultivators with Cultivated Land
Consumption of Fertilizers (Kg/ Hect.)
Use of HYV Seeds (Kg/ Hect.)Number of Iron Plough Per Thousand Hectare of Cropped Area
Number of Diesel Pump Per Thousand Hectare of Cropped Area
Number of Electric Pump Per Thousand Hectare of Cropped Area
Number of Tractors Per Thousand Hectare of Cropped Area
Number of Tube wells Per Thousand Hectare of Cropped Area
Per Capita Production of Cereals (Kg/ Annum)
Per Capita Production of Pulses (Kg/ Annum)
Per Capita Production of Oilseeds and cash crops (Kg/ Annum)
Literacy Rate (Census 2011)

Database and Methods
For the analysis of level of agricultural development in the study region, secondary data havebeen used which is collected from various published and unpublished records and reports ofgovernment and non-governmental organizations. The basis area unit is community
development block, for which published statistics are not available. But several publications
were consulted and made use to trace the past trend on tahsil and district levels. Data related
to land resources, agricultural production, irrigation and its utilization obtained from theagricultural statistics published by farmer welfare and agricultural department, Govt. of MP
Bhopal, and Land records and Settlement, Gwalior, MP, District Land record office of therelated districts. On the basis of input and output indicators which considered as the indictors ofagricultural development, the developing block wise agricultural development have been
analyzed with the help of composite Z- Score Statistical technique. This method was used bySmith in 1968 in his study then by D. Smith (1973) and many scholars. It may be expressed asfollows:
Xij − Xi
𝑍𝑖𝑗 =𝜎𝑖Where, Zij = Standard value of ith indicators in jth unit. Xij= Actual value of ith indicators in jth unit.
Xi = Mean value of ith indicators and σi = Standard deviation of ith indicators.
After the calculation of standard score of all indictors in all units, the composite score havebeen calculated by adding all standard score of all units and divided by the number ofindicators that called composite score which expressed as:
𝛴𝑍𝑖𝑗𝑁
CS = Composite Score, ΣZij = Z- Score of all indicators in i units and N is the number ofindicators.
𝐶𝑆 =Karl Pearson’s correlation of coefficient technique has been used to show the casual
relationship between the variables of agricultural development.
Level of Agricultural Development and its Spatial Distribution
The composite score of all indicators of every block, the study region have grouped into three
categories of high, moderate and low level of agricultural development describes as follows.
1. High Level of Agricultural Development
Figure no.02 shows the spatial pattern of level of agricultural development in the study region.
There is small area covers by the high level of agricultural development. There is only threeblocks showing the high level of agricultural development i. e. Mandla (0.759), Nainpur (0.517)
and Bijadandi (0.294). These blocks are use adopted high level of modern tools, higher
proportion of irrigated area, and use of HYV seeds for agriculture.
2. Moderate Level of Agricultural Development
Maximum blocks (10 blocks) of the study region are found moderate level of agriculturaldevelopment. These are Karanjiya (0.202), Bajang (0.139), Narayanganj (0.085), Niwas
156

(0.028), Dindori (-0.019), Amarpur (-0.028), Mohgaon (-0.081), Samnapur (-0.085), Bichhiya(-0.144) and Mehandwani (-0.209). These blocks are also use moderate level of adoption ofmodern agricultural tools. Therefore, agricultural development is also moderate.
Table 02: The Spatial Pattern of Agricultural Development in Mandla-Dindori Region
CategoryHigh
ModerateIndex Value> 0.25-0.25- 0.25

Low
< -0.25
Source: Calculated by author

No. of Blocks
3103

Name of the Blocks
Mandla, Nainpur, Bijadandi
Karanjiya, Bajang, Narayanganj, Niwas, Dindori,Amarapur, Mohgaon, Samnapur, Bichhiya,
Mehandwani
Ghughari, Mawai, Shahpura

3. Low Level of Agricultural Development
Three blocks in the study region is found the lowest level of agricultural development i. e.
Shahpura (-0.314), Mawai (-0.548) and Ghughari (-0.596). If we see the standard score ofindicators in these blocks and found that the shahpura blocks have only three indicators whichhave positive score i. e. consumption of fertilizer (0.852), per capita production of pulses(0.931) and oilseeds and cash crops (1.090). Mawai and Ghughari blocks found only two
indicators which show the positive score. The low level of agricultural development in theseblocks is due to the less adoption of modern inputs of agriculture and unfavourable
environmental condition. The blocks are also located at far distance from the sub-divisional
towns and therefore, due to poor transport facility the farmers are inaccessible to various
facilities and subsidies that the governmental bodies are offering to them. Hence, all thesenegative factors resulting to low level of agricultural development in these blocks.
Relationship between the Variables of Agricultural Development
The inter correlation matrix among the variables of agricultural development (X1 to X14) havebeen shown in the table number 03. From the significance test, it is evident that the variable X 1(Percentage of Net Irrigated area) is positively correlated with number of electric pump (X 8),
number of tractors (X9), number of tube wells (X10), per capita production of cereals (X11) andliteracy rate (X14), while it is negatively correlated with only one variable i.e. per capita
production of oilseeds and cash crops (X13).
On the other hand, variable X2 (Cropping intensity) is significantly correlated with only
one variable i.e. literacy rate (X14) and its correlated with other variables is very negligible. The
next variable, proportion of cultivators (X3) is negatively correlated with per capita production ofcereals (X11) with 5 percent level of significance. The consumption of fertilizers (X 4) is strongly
and positively correlated with per capita production of pulses (X12), while it is strongly negatively
correlated with use of HYV of seeds (X5). The variable X5 (Use of HYV of seeds) is negativelycorrelated with consumption of fertilizers (X4), per capita production of pulses (X12) and percapita production of oilseeds and cash crops (X13) with 1 percent and 5 percent level ofsignificance. The variable X6 (number of iron plough) is negatively correlated with number ofdiesel pump (X7) with 5 per cent level of significance. Other hand, it is negligible correlated withother variables. The number of diesel pump (X7) is negatively correlated with only one variablei.e. number of iron plough (X6) with 5 per cent level of significance.
The variable X8 (number of electric pump) is strongly positively correlated withpercentage of irrigated area (X1), number of tractors (X9), number of tube wells (X10) andliteracy rate (X14). The other variable X9 (number of tractors) is positively correlated withpercentage of irrigated area (X1), number of tube wells (X10) and literacy rate (X14) with 1 percent and 5 per cent level of significance. The variable X10 (number of tube wells) is positivelycorrelated with X1 (percentage of irrigated area), X8 (number of electric pump), X9 (number oftractors and X14 (literacy rate) with 1 percent level of significance. The per capita production ofcereals (X11) is positively correlated with only one variable i.e. percentage of irrigated area (X1)with 5 percent level of significance, while it is negatively correlated with proportion of cultivators(X3) with 5 per cent of level of significance. Again the variable X12 (per capita production ofpulses) is strongly and positively correlated with consumption of fertilizers. Other hand, it isnegatively correlated with use of HYV of seeds (X5) with 5 per cent of level of significance.

157

Table 03: Correlation Matrix between the Variables of Agricultural Development
Variables
X1
X2
X3
X1
1
X2
0.263
1
X3
0.039
-0.022
1
X4-0.369
0.058-0.080
X50.327-0.2250.438
X60.001-0.2290.253
X7-0.087
0.400
0.154
X80.714**0.396-0.256
X90.500*
0.391
0.255
X100.652**
0.416
0.079
X110.568*
0.223-0.619*
X12-0.463
0.091-0.374
X13-0.587*
0.025-0.463
X140.705**
0.632**
0.012
Source: Calculated by author* Correlation is significant at 5 percent** Correlation is significant at 1 percent

X4X5X6X7X8X9X10X11X12X13

1-0.652**-0.1490.198-0.348-0.067-0.065-0.0780.732**
0.428-0.10310.032
0.025
0.222
0.246
-0.076-0.156-0.506*-0.745**0.078

1-0.550*-0.0520.055
0.023-0.302-0.304-0.099-0.152

1-0.0540.253-0.080-0.160
0.404
0.117
0.182

10.497*0.648**
0.371-0.220-0.3090.714**

10.720**-0.085-0.293-0.4500.749**

10.222-0.415-0.3300.800**

10.029-0.0470.297

10.590*-0.262

1-0.375

158

X14

1

The per capita production of oilseeds and cash crops (X13) is positively correlated withper capita production of pulses (X12) and there is negatively correlated with percentage ofirrigated area (X1) and use of HYV of seeds (X5) with respective significance. The mostimportant and foremost variable literacy rate (X14) is strongly and positively correlated withpercentage of irrigated area (X1), cropping intensity (X2), number of electric pump (X8), numberof tractors (X9) and number of tube wells (X10), while it is negative relation with consumption offertilizer (X4), number of iron plough (X6), per capita production of pulses (X12) and per capita
production of oilseeds and cash crops (X13).
Conclusion
Above analysis shows that the region is not stand at better position in terms of agriculturaldevelopment in the state of Madhya Pradesh. The inter block position is also varied in terms oflevel of agricultural. As much three out of sixteen blocks is agriculturally well developed, andthree blocks is less developed. Other hand, there is maximum blocks ten blocks out of sixteen
are moderate developed in terms of agricultural development. The blocks of high agriculturaldevelopment are concentrated in the western part of the region. The low level of agriculturaldevelopment blocks found in two areas first is located in northern part and second in located insouth central part of the region. Other hand, most of the less developed blocks situated theentire region especially in the eastern part of the region. The maximum part of the study region
is found moderate level of agricultural development due to deteriorating irrigation system andfaulty water management, low level of agricultural implement adopted by the most smallfarmers, the desirable of increase agricultural production has been difficult to achieve (Jhariyaand Jain, 2018) and poor technical knowledge of the farmers.
References
1. Barik, P. (2017). Regional Disparity in Agriculture Development and Food availability
Status- An inter-district study of West Bengal. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social
Science (IOSR-JHSS), 22(8), 36-48. doi: 10.9790/0837-2208133648
2. Jadhav, M. G. (1997). Agricultural Development in Maharashtra: A Spatial Interpretation.
Transactions of IIG, 19(1), 39-45.
3. Jain, C. K. (1988). Patterns of Agricultural Development in Madhya Pradesh. New Delhi:
Northern Book Centre.
4. Jhariya, G. P. & Jain, C. K. (2018). Factors Affecting the Adoption of Modern FarmPractices in the Farmers of Mandla-Dindori Region, M.P. International Journal of Scientific
Research and Reviews,7(2), 297-304.
5. Mandal, S. & Dhara, A. (2012). Measurement of Agricultural Productivity and Levels ofDevelopment in South 24 Parganas District, West Bengal. International Journal ofAgricultural Science and Research, 2(4), 91-98.
6. Rakesh, Raman & Kumari, Reena (2012). Regional Disparity in Agricultural Development: ADistrict Level analysis for Uttar Pradesh. Journal of Regional Development and Planning,
1(2), 71-90.
7. Sharma, P. S. (1964). A Regional Approach to Agricultural Development in India- Some
Preliminary Results. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, XIX (1), 176-192.
8. Siddiqui, S. H., Afzal, F. & Aktar N. (2017). Levels of Agricultural Development in Dakshin
Dinajpur District, West Bengal: A Block Level Analysis. NAIR Journal of Social Science &Humanities (NAIRJSH), 3(11), 189-201.
9. Stringer, Randy (2001). How important are the 'non-traditional' economic roles agriculture indevelopment? Discussion Paper no. 0118, Centre for International Economic Studies.
Retrievedfromhttps://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4523/bbb437e002649fda976ee5296016f3c21532.pdf
10. Zahra, R. (2007). Agricultural Development and Food Security in North Bihar Plain (Ph. D.
Thesis). Department of Geography, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh. Retrieved fromhttp://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/52632

159