2. INTRODUCTION
ďś Indian Vegetable market is unorganized.
ďś Supports larger population and provides direct
employment.
ďś Northeastern vegetable market is more or less
discouraging and has received little attention.
ďś The motto of the policy should be such that the
grower earns more profit.
ďś Vegetable markets is scattered and unorganized in
Arunachal Pradesh.
ďś The climatic conditions of the state do supports for
the vegetation but because of the mountainous
region it becomes tough to do vegetation here.
3. SIGNIFICANCE
ď§ Knowing current prices of vegetables in
Itanagar and Harmutty market.
ď§ Knowing reasons for differences by
comparing the prices of the two area.
ď§ Helped to know the causes of the price
fluctuation and composition of price.
4. LIMITATIONS
ď§ Based on only vegetables market and no
other market are considered.
ď§ It compares only Itanagar and Harmutty
Market.
ď§ Lack of cooperation from marketers.
ď§ Time and Money constraints.
ď§ It lacks universal applicability.
14. Findings
ď§ Free and open competition in price.
ď§ Sources of vegetables supplies relies mainly on
profitability of bringing vegetables.
ď§ Itanagar Shopkeeper enjoys higher profit.
ď§ The Vegetables supplied by Govt. is not sufficient.
ď§ Govt. hardly plays any role in determining the price.
ď§ No role of market welfare committee which is
generally expected.
ď§ Consumers are more aware in Assam then in
Itanagar.
ď§ Itanagar consumers are not that price conscious as
they are in Harmutty.
15. Suggestion
ď§ Better area should be provide for the cultivation of vegetables
to the local farmers.
ď§ Easy transport facility should be provided to avoid vegetables
damages and loss of quantity.
ď§ Regular maintenance of price charts in market should be
encouraged.
ď§ Govt. should play important role in price checking.
ď§ Middleman syndromes can be handled by more production
only.
ď§ Awareness among consumers should be done by proper
authority.