Literature (e.g., O'Mara, 1980; Shapiro et
al., 1992; Sasmal, 1993; Saha, 2001; and Kim and
Chavas, 2003) reveals that several subjective and objective
factors are responsible for the incomplete adoption of
High Yielding Varieties (HYV) paddy seeds cultivation.
Both HYV and traditional paddy seed varieties have respective
merits and demerits (Table 1). Adoption of a particular
variety depends on farmers' perception of those characteristics.
Some of the advantages of HYV seeds are shorter maturity
duration, higher yield, higher profit, all season cultivability,
etc., compared to traditional seeds. Goyari (2007) observed
that a majority of the sample farmers were found adopting
the new paddy seeds because of the above-mentioned advantages
of the new seeds. However, besides these advantages there
are also some disadvantages associated with HYV adoption.
For instance, HYV seeds have been found to exhibit higher
fluctuations in yields and profits across plots and farm
households than traditional seeds. So, a rational farmer
may like to allocate his available land between the two
technologies (between new and local varieties) to avoid
or to reduce risk, rather than completely switching to
the former. This argument, as pointed out by Saha (2001),
is based on two assumptions: one, farmers are risk averse,
and two, the HYV cultivation involves greater risk compared
to traditional paddy cultivation. That the farmers associate
higher risk with HYV paddy cultivation has been considered
an important factor (among many socioeconomic factors)
for the incomplete adoption of HYV seeds (Feder et
al., 1985). The perception of greater risk being
involved in the cultivation of HYV paddy seeds compared
to the traditional varieties may be due to several factors.
Table 1 presents some of these factors.
There are difficulties in the measurement of risk involved in the adoption of HYV seeds. Researchers have used different techniques to measure the extent of risk associated with the new crop technology adoption (Table 2). Econometrically, one way of measuring the risk is through examining the marginal effects of inputs on the variance of output or yield of the specific crop variety. The present study is an attempt in that direction. It is often found that higher variability/uncertainty in HYV yield levels can be due to greater use of yield enhancing inputs such as chemical fertilizers, plant protection chemicals, controlled irrigation and other purchased inputs, and strong complementarity among these inputs. HYV seeds are more responsive to yield-enhancing purchased inputs such as chemical fertilizers, controlled irrigation, etc. By using more of such inputs, productivity per hectare of land can be increased. Ultimately, HYV yields fluctuate more across plots, across households and over time. These purchased inputs are believed to have positive marginal risk effect on yield (Just and Pope, 1979; and Mehra, 1981). Due to such factors, the HYV paddy cultivation may be riskier than that of traditional seed. Contrary to this, traditional varieties are less responsive to the above-mentioned purchased inputs and hence are of less fluctuating nature. Thus, traditional seeds are considered by farmers less risky. Thus, the relative riskiness of two seed technologies can be examined by estimating marginal input risks on the mean of yield and on the variance of yield. |
