By Subhasis Mandal, D. Burman, S.K. Sarangi, B.K. Bandyopadhyay, B. Maji (Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, West Bengal, India) Revitalizing the Ganges Coastal Zone Conference 21-23 October 2014, Dhaka, Bangladesh http://waterandfood.org/ganges-conference/

1. Homestead Production Systems (HPS) in Sundarbans,
West Bengal, India
Current Status and Opportunities
SUBHASIS MANDAL, D. BURMAN, S. K. SARANGI, B.K. BANDYOPADHYAY AND B. MAJI
Central Soil Salinity Research Institute
Regional Research Station
CANNING TOWN
West Bengal (India)

2. Outline of presentation…
HPS – how important ?
Methodology
-Data sources & sampling design
-Analytical techniques
Results and discussions
-Current status of HPS
- Socio-economic features of homestead farmers
-Resources in HPS
-Fisheries in HPS
-Contribution of HPS to household (HH) food security
-Economics of HPS
Harnessing the opportunities of HPS
-Linking HPS to the markets !!
Conclusion

3. HOMESTEAD- It’s national importance
Concepts and Definition - NSS report No 493 (2002-03)
Homestead land
– dwelling house
– courtyard
– compound
– garden
– out-house
– place of worship
– family graveyard
– guest house
– household enterprises
– tanks
– wells
– latrines
– drains and boundary walls
3

4. Central Statistical Organisation estimates
STATEWISE ESTIMATES OF VALUE OF OUTPUT FROM AGRICULTURE AND
ALLIED ACTIVITIES (1999-2000 to 2005-06)
Kitchen garden/Homestead:
This production of crops in foreyard/backyard of houses was
taken into account for the first time in the national accounts in
the 1993-94 series.
4

5. 5
y = 241.26x + 3978.7
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04
Value of output from Kitchen garden - West Bengal
West Bengal
Linear (West Bengal)
Annual Compound Growth Rate:
West Bengal ------ 4.23 %
India ------ 1.64 %
Rs
Lakh
Year

6. HPS – importance in coastal WB
Value of output from homesteads more important for small-
holders.
In coastal areas of West Bengal the operational farm holding
are dominated by marginal farmers (86%).
HPS systems contributes to livelihoods and household level
food security in this region
The utilization of these available homestead water resources
are not to their potential.
With scientific/improved interventions to enhance resource
efficiency and productivity.

7. Issues
The HPS system is the way of life but complex in terms of
quantification
Key questions are –
• What is the current status of HPS that includes socio-economics of
farmers, resources in system and production ?
• Quantifying the benefits and how to improve the production
capacities of the system?
• How the HPS is linked with the existing market? Can the system
responds to the higher demand in the market, if arises?
• What kind of support / intervention is needed to improve the
production system?

8. Sampling design
(multistage stratified random sampling)
8
Level Site/unit Criteria Number Cumulative
units
State West Bengal
(coastal)
Purposive 1 1
District N 24 Parganas Purposive
(one of the
coastal
districts)
1 1
Block/PS Sandeshkhali I and
Sandeshkhali II*
Random
(random from
6 salt affected
blocks)
2 2
Gram Panchayat
(GP)
Hatgachi in
Sandeshkhali I and
Bermajur-I,
Bermajur-II &
Durgamandap are in
Sandeshkhali II
Random 2
(from each
block/PS)
4
Village Dakhin Kanmari,
Semulhati, Bermajur,
Jupkhali, Daudpur
and Durgamandap **
Random 3
(from each GP)
12
Households
(HH)
Homestead farmers Random 20 240
* N 24 Parganas has 6 salt affected blocks

9. Study area

10. Major occupation of HPS farmers
10
34
27
21
18
% of respondents (as per
time spent)
Cultivation
Pisciculture+cultiva
tion
Wage Labourers
Others
38
39
19
4
% of respondents (as per
income source)
Cultivation
Pisciculture+cultiva
tion
Wage Labourers
Others

11. Current status of HPS
Gender participation
All family members including the children (below 14 years
of age) participate in activities of HPS on daily basis at least
for few minutes to few hours. The HPS system is a way of
life and considered to be a family affair.

12. Overall HH income pattern – sources and amount
12
17188
23334
5100
3715253450
38173
Avg. Income (Rs/hh/year)
Cultivation
Pisciculture
Vegetable
Wage labourer
Brackishwater aquaculture
Others

13. Homestead production system - ponds
• Majority farm households one or more pond within or outside
the homestead production systems (few have >5 no).
• Avg. age of ponds 58 years, some were > 80 years and 5-6
years.
• Over 50 % of the total ponds >60 years, followed by < 20 years
(18%), between 40-60 years (15%) and 20-40 years (11%).
• Average size of ponds 0.11 acre.

14. Fisheries in HPS
14
Fishes are grown in HPS ponds as composite fish culture.
rohu, catla, mrigal, japani punti, silver carp, tangra, vetki, tilapia,
mourala, prawn, pangas, golden carp, sol, koi, magur etc.
Without scientific management – stocking, feeding, harvesting
Avg. number of fish seeds used 2000-2500 no/year.
Avg. production 75 kg/pond/year and 143 kg/HH/year.
Avg. value of fish produced Rs. 8250/- per pond/year and the
same was Rs. 15730/HH/year.

15. Non-aquaculture enterprises in HPS
• No of Vegetables grown in HPS brinjal, bhindi, potato, cabbage,
cauliflower, pumpkin, yam, spinach, colocasia, amaranthus, cucumber,
bitter gourd, beet, carrot etc.
• Vegetable area in HPS was 200-250sq.m. Inputs like seeds, pesticides and
human labour (mainly family labour) were key cost components.
• Input cost (excluding imputed value of human labour) and average
production of vegetables was Rs. 450/- or 340 kg per HH
• Value of vegetables produced in HPS was Rs. 5100/- per HH

16. Contribution of HPS to the households’ food security
16
Items
Contribution (%)
Average
production
(kg/HH)
Home
consumption
% to total
requirement
Marketed
Vegetables 70-75 30-40 25-30 340
Fish 30-35 50-60 60-65 143
Fruits 85-90 - 5-10 -
Livestock 80-85 50 10-15 -

17. 17
Risk and uncertainty mitigation and HPS
Cyclone (aila) in this coastal area during May 2009 entire farmland inundated
with saline water. Growing crops to these lands was impossible thereafter for
few subsequent seasons.
The HPS was only areas feasible for cultivation due to its high land situation
and less intrusion of saline water.
Saline water recedes quickly or salinity washed away after few shower and
the plots under HPS became suitable for growing crops.

18. Financial analysis of existing HPS
Financial analysis:
IRR = 11% (<12 %, the discounting rate),
NPV = Rs. (-)2816,
BCR = 0.98.
18
Assumptions:
1. Economic life – 15 years
2. Discount rate – 12%
3. Full benefit at 2nd year onwards
4. Major excavation/repair after 10-12 years
5. Major components – fish, vegetables
Under current practices long term investment in HPS was not a financially
attractive proposition but provides multiple services
The system can be contribute more the economy of the region through technological
intervention and financial support

19. Harnessing the opportunities of HPS – Linking farmers
with markets
Primary objective of the HPS to supplement the daily
food requirement without commercial motive.
The area of operation under HPS is very small and the
quantity of marketable surplus limited.
Area under individual crops very limited, the quantity
available for sales were not driven by the high or low
market prices of a produce, therefore weakly linked
with the market demand

20. Improved resource management – aquaculture
and vegetables production
Existence of some kind of dichotomy between adopting
management techniques for vegetable production and
aquaculture practices.
Aquaculture – traditional and non-scientific (way of life)
Vegetables – intensive and preference for new varieties ( max. output)
Needs financial and technical support to the farmers for better
utilization of their existing resources through scientific management

21. Priority setting - crop mix or diversification
Crop mix and diversity – high or low ?
Household food and nutrition vs better income ?
EITHER less number of crops focusing on the market demand to raise income
OR diverse crops for better HH food security, sacrificing the expected higher
return from specialized crops.
Needs govt. schemes to promote HPS as per farmers preference, socio-economic
conditions and priorities of practicing HPS (HH food security or commercial)

22. Conclusion
HPS contributes substantially to meet daily needs of food and
nutrition, cash income and employment to whole family.
Resource use under this system can be made more productive and
contribute more to regional food security.
Need ensured supply of quality inputs and training on production
management of all enterprises, fish, vegetables and livestock.
HPS was an all-out family affair, any skill up-gradation programme
should be focusing on whole family, including men, women and
children (12-18 years of age).
Farmers’ need financial support to enhance their investment
capacities
Enhancing production level would increase the quantity of
marketable surplus and better linkage with the market.