Socio-economic and Psychological Profile of Farmers Practicing Integrated Farming Systems (IFS) in Andhra Pradesh
T. Sri Chandana *
Department of Agricultural Extension, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, S.V. Agricultural College, Tirupati 517502, A P., India.
P. L. R. J. Praveena
Department of Agricultural Extension, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, S.V. Agricultural College, Tirupati 517502, A P., India.
T. Lakshmi
Department of Agricultural Extension, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, S.V. Agricultural College, Tirupati 517502, A P., India.
D. Subramanyam
Department of Agricultural Extension, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, S.V. Agricultural College, Tirupati 517502, A P., India.
B. Ravindra Reddy
Department of Agricultural Extension, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, S.V. Agricultural College, Tirupati 517502, A P., India.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Agriculture is always been considered as the backbone of our country. In India, 70 per cent of the rural population is engaged in agriculture and 80 per cent of the population lives directly or indirectly on agriculture. There are 115 million operational holdings in the country and about 80 per cent are marginal and small farmers [1]. Indian agriculture has been taken the responsibility of providing food and employment to its millions of people. The present study described the socio-economic and psychological profile of Integrated Farming System practicing farmers in Chittoor from Rayalaseema region, East Godavari from North East Coastal region and Srikakulam from North Coastal region. The sample constituted to a total of 189 farmers. The farmers practicing Integrated Farming System were middle aged (52.38%), completed graduation (26.98%), were small land holders (43.39%) with high experience in IFS (55.56%), had nuclear family (88.89%) and with fair cropping pattern (69.31%). The major occupation of the IFS farmers was cultivation (51.85%) with medium family size (67.72%), annual income (49.21%), extension contact (43.39%), mass media exposure (43.92%), economic motivation (54.50%), decision making ability (46.03%), risk preference (53.44%), enterprise combination (100.00%) and members of at least one organization (65.08%).
Keywords: IFS, enterprise combinations, livelihood, sustainability and nutritional security