Analysis of Marketing and Management Strategies to Enhance Pesticide Use For

Agriculture Sector: A Case Study of

Hyderabad District. Scholar

Zahid Hussain QaziAssistant Professor

Institute of Business Administration

University Of Sindh, Jamshoro

Guide

Prof. Dr. Marhab Qasmi

Chairperson

Department of Economics

University of Sindh, Jamshoro.

IInd Seminar-Ph.D

1

Introduction Literature Review Study Rationale Research Objectives Research Hypotheses Research Methodology References

2

Meaning of Green Revolution The Green Revolution means introduction of new technology in agriculture sector, in order to increase its production through different measures.

Many of the world’s countries made diversified efforts through following measures.

1. Introduction of new highly yield varieties of wheat, and rice and maze.

2. Improvement in per acre yield through quality fertilizer, pesticide to compensate for deficiencies in many developed countries.

3. Pesticide and insecticides have expanded the acreage a single farmer can

tend by reducing the time required to disinfect the crop.

4. Irrigation has made double cropping feasible in many countries where formerly one harvest a year was standard.

5. New methods of rotating crop were developed which increased land productivity.

6. New shorter plants have been discovered that are more responsive to fertilizer. Similarly some sturdier type are more disease resistant.

Stages of Green Revolution. For the study analysis the green revolution can be classified into four

groups. Scientific Breakthrough : The scientific breakthrough is the discovery

of high yield varieties of seeds. This is usually associated with Mexican wheat varieties

Mexi-Pak.

Technological Breakthrough: To achieve optimal level of out put from HYV’s pertinent technological development were made in the field of mechanization and water utilization.

Production breakthrough: With production breakthrough a large scale supply of all the inputs was made available.

Agriculture Breakthrough: It covered all the main crops and also the various enterprises. The agriculture produce directly and indirectly benefited the small as well as large scale farmers.

Why the Green revolution?

Green Revolution is a public relations term, probably coined in the 1960s by William Gaud, then Director of the U.S. Agency for international Developme- nt, that symbolized the modernization of agriculture in less industrialized countries by means of technological change rather than violent of:

“Red Revolution” (Communism) The essence of the Green Revolution was developing fertilizer-

responsive varieties of wheat and rice that would increase national yields of these basic cereals; however, other non-sustainable practices of farming such as over drafting of groundwater were also advanced to create short term gains, with long term detriment. With the increased national yields, promoters of this agricultural modernization saw the potential for reducing hunger, poverty, misery, and the potential for violent social upheaval that would threaten the geopolitical interests of the United States and other western powers.

Scientific research that underlay the green revolution is generally dated from the establishment of the Mexican Agricultural Program by the Rockefeller Foundation in 1943, and the successful technological changes were well in place by the 1970s in many parts of Asia and Latin America. Green revolution technology is now almost universally the “normal” way to do agriculture in all parts of the world.

The term used to describe a period from around 1960 to 1990 when there was a tremendous boom in agricultural productivity in the developing world. During these decades, in many regions of the world, especially in Asia and Latin America, the yield of the major cereal crops (rice, wheat and maize) more than doubled. There were significant increases for other crops, too. It happened mainly because governments in both developed and developing countries invested heavily in agricultural research. Modern science was put to use to find ways of producing more food and this revolutionized the way the agriculture was done. Intensive breeding and selection led to the development of high-yielding varieties of crops and more productive breeds of livestock. There were also breakthrough in the development of agro-chemicals, like pesticides and fertilizers. And to bring the revolution directly to farmers’ fields, governments supported producers with encouragements to use these new farming techniques and technologies. Initially, the revolution was seen as a tremendous success. As populations grew and demand for food increased, so did the food supply. Food prices remained stable. But since the 1990s we have become aware that the Green Revolution’s surge in productivity came with a heavy price.

Historical back ground of Green Revolution The green revolution which begin in 1945,was the increase in

food production stemming from the improved strains of wheat, rice, maize and other cereals in the 1960’s by Dr. Norman Borloug in Mexcio and other countries' experts under the sponsorship of the Rock feller foundation. In 1943 the Rockefeller Foundation established the precursor to CIMMYT to assist the poor farmers of Mexico. The program's initial goal was to teach Mexican farmers new farming ideas, but Borlaug soon had the institution seeking agricultural innovations. One was "shuttle breeding," a technique for speeding up the movement of disease immunity between strains of crops. Borlaug also developed cereals that were insensitive to the number of hours of light in a day, and could therefore be grown in many climates. Some say the revolution was a promise to end hunger through miracle of seeds, fertilizer, and pesticides.

Norman Borland was Benefactor of Humanity considered the father of the Green Revolution. He was awarded the Nobel peace prize. in 1970’s He was developed special what strains that allowed Mexico or other countries to become more independent agriculturally. Instead of needing to import all of their wheat by were able to provide for themselves. The wheat that was produced by cross-breeding a large range of varieties this was produced helped not only Mexcio but also other developing countries such as India and Pakistan to increase the productivity of their crops. There were warehouse filled with food but the people who really needed it were not able to afford it. Because of a large amount of the low-income families lack the purchasing power to buy enough food. Introducing any new agriculture technology in to the social system stacked in favor of the rich against the poor farmers who are poor cannot afford by the large amounts of fertilizer seeds and pesticides and other material that are needed to tend to their crops. The smaller farmers also do not receive discounts for buying large amount like the more wealthy farmers do. The best result require the right amounts of chemicals fertilizer and pesticides and irrigate water. It seems that even though more food was produced in the end it did not solve the problem of world hunger. More food was produced but the people who needed it the most were not able to get it..

The goal at focusing on increasing food production can not alleviate hunger because it fails to alter the tightly concentrated distribution of economic power. During the 1960’s there was an important breakthrough in food production this revolution was step-forward for not only the developed countries, but also for third world counties. Since the green revolution evolved the farmers have needed to up-date their methods and ways of handling crops. The technologies of farming have also developed causing people to struggle financially to keep up with the new trend of the revolution. Today farming is not a job that can not be done without proper training successful agriculture nearly requires ecological trainings in management and marketing strategies, successful modern farming requires a successful modern economy through fertilizer, pesticides and very special component i-e irrigate water. People and farmers are unable to keep-up their pace with the rising prices And therefore can not keep properly nourish themselves and their families. As the years go-on the population is steadily increasing through-out the world. People do not realize how much of the food resources they are using and wasting. The poor pay more and get less. Poor farmers can't afford to buy fertilizer and other inputs in volume; big growers can get discounts for large purchases. poor farmers can't hold out for the best price for their crops, as can larger farmers whose circumstances are far less desperate.

Because farming methods that depend heavily on chemical fertilizers donot maintain the soil's natural fertility and because pesticides generateresistant pests, farmers need ever more fertilizers and pesticides justto achieve the same results. At the same time, those who profit from theincreased use of fertilizers and pesticides fear labor organizing and usetheir new wealth to buy tractors and other machines, even though they are not required by the new seeds. This incremental shift leads to theindustrialization of farming. Green Revolution proponents claim increases in net incomes from farms of all sizes once farmers adopt the more responsive seeds pesticides and water. But study show another trend outlays for fertilizers and pesticides may be going up faster than yields. Green Revolution farmers are now facing what world’s farmers have experienced for decades-a cost-price wring. In much of the world, water is the limiting factor in farming success, and irrigation is often out of the reach of the poor. Canal irrigation favors those near the top of the flow. Tube wells, often promoted by development agencies, favor the bigger operators, who can better afford the initial investment and have lower costs per unit. After all, the United States-not Mexico-is the true birthplace of the Green Revolution. Improved seeds combined with chemical fertilizers and pesticides have pushed yields up nearly three-fold since 1950, with smaller but still significant gains for wheat, rice since World War II, as larger harvests have pushed down the prices farmers get for their crops while the costs of farming have shot up, farmers' profit margins have been drastically narrowed. By the early 1990s, production costs had risen from about half to over 80 percent of gross farm income.

History Green Revolution in pakistan (1960) The Green Revolution took place in Pakistan in two stages. The first stage

(1960-1964/5) was mainly driven by improvements in water provision and irrigation. While this was definitely aided by govt’s success in resolving Pakistan’s water security issues with India through the signing of the Indus Water Treaty under the guarantee of the World Bank in 1960, the primarily vehicle for this increase in irrigation were the tube-wells.

The second stage of the green revolution (1964/5 to 1969/70) comprised the introduction of scientific farming, including high yielding variety (HYV) of seeds, chemical fertilizers, and pesticides followed by mechanization—mainly tractorization—of Pakistan’s agriculture. Between 1960/1 and 1964/5, about 25,000 new tube-wells were installed in Pakistan at the cost of around Rs. 5,000-12,000 per tube-well (Zaidi, 1999, p.29). This doubled the farm area irrigated by tube-wells in the country. During this time the availability of irrigation water increased from 82 to 117 MAF (or million acre feet) or a jump of over 43% within a decade (Husain, 1999, p.52). There are studies that indicate at least half of the growth in Pakistan’s agriculture sector during the decade may be attributable to the increase in irrigation and the availability of water through tube-wells. In the second half of the 1960s, two near high yield varieties of crops were introduced in Pakistan, namely, the Mexi-Pak wheat (developed at International Wheat and Maize Institute in Mexico) and IRRI rice (developed an International Rice Research Institute at the Philippines). The introduction of these varieties were in a sense facilitated by better availability of water since these required considerably more water than the breeds that they replaced.

The green Revolution in Pakistan during the 1960-70 introduced new high yielding varieties of wheat including the Mexi Pak cultivar and 80%improved varieties of rice. Mechanization, water resources development and fertilizer, and pesticides use also increased. As a result wheat and rice production doubled and agricultural production as whole grew at a rate of 6% West Pakistan become self sufficient in food grains and began to export rice although East Pakistan which become Bangladesh now still is not self-sufficient. Higher yields increased incomes. The implementation of price support, favorable terms on trade, subsidies and credit also contributed to increased incomes. But the advantages brought by the green Revolution were not sustained due to the lack of changes on other component of the food production system. The use of inefficient flood irrigation methods continued food storages capacity did not increased farmers ability to market their produces did not improve agro-based industry did not developed and the credit and subsidies benefited the land lords more than the landless sharecroppers who are actually farmed the lands. If you look at Pakistan from space, you will see this green kind of dragon moving down, “and that Green Revolution not have been possible if we did not have irrigation and irrigation based agriculture. However, the “Decade of Development” or the “Controversial Sixties”, there is unquestionable evidence of an increase in disparities between social classes and between regions of the country. True, that bulk of agricultural development could only have happened in areas where conditions (most notably land and climate) were suitable to it. However, a wise set of economic policies would have compensated those regions that couldn’t participate in this development in other areas of economic development. We know, with the benefit of perception after the fact, that this didn’t happen (e.g. in the case of East Pakistan.

In May 1967 Pakistan harvested 600,000 acres to new high-yielding wheat seed. This spring (1968) the farmers of Pakistan will harvest the new wheats from an estimated 3.5 million acres. They will bring in a total wheat crop of 7-1/2 to 8 million tons - a new record. Pakistan has an excellent change of achieving self-sufficiency in food grains in another year. In 1967 the new high-yielding wheats were harvested from 700,000 acres in India. This year they will be planted to 6 million acres. Another 10 million acres will be planted to high-yield varieties of rice, sorghum, and millet. India will harvest more than 95 million tons in food grains this year - again a record crop. She hopes to achieve self-sufficient in food grains in another three or four years. She has the capability to do so.

Turkey has demonstrated that she can raise yields by two and three times with the new wheat. Last year's Turkish wheat crop set a new record. In 1968 Turkey will plant the new seed to one-third of its coastal wheat growing area. Total production this year may be nearly one-third higher than in 1965.

The Philippines have harvested a record rice crop with only 14% of their rice fields planted to new high-yielding seeds. This year more land will be planted to the new varieties. The Philippines are clearly about to achieve self-sufficiency in rice. These and other developments in the field of agriculture contain the makings of a new revolution. It is not a violet Red Revolution like that of the Soviets, nor is it a White Revolution like that of the Shah of Iran. I call it the Green Revolution.

1960 Pakistan used little fertilizer - 30,000 tons - and practically none on food crops. In 1969 Pakistan will need 430,000 tons, most of it for food crops. Only foreign assistance can satisfy this need. The Agency for International Development (A.I.D.), which over the past three years has made over $70 million in Development Loans available for fertilizer exports in Pakistan, proposes to lend Pakistan $60 million for this purpose in 1969 alone. During 1960-64 increased water availability due to greater supply of surface water and more importantly rapid expansion in tube wells installation mostly in the private sector was the cutting edge of development. But in the second phase i-e 1964-69.High yielding varieties' of seed, fertilizer, pesticides, farm mechanization and continued increase of supplementary water supply contributed to the breakthrough in the agriculture of the country. (Ahmed and Chaudhary1989) The liberal subsidization of inputs and higher output price incentives provided the needed motivation in the form of Higher profitability to the farmer s for adopting new technologies. The result of these economic incentives and technological improvement was that while the agriculture sector grew at an annual growth rate only 1.8% during the first plan period its growth rate jumped to 3.8 % per annum during the second plan and to 6% during the third plan period. The peak growth of 11% was registered during 1967-68The tempo of high growth rate could not be maintained for long. The rate of agricultural out put growth plummeted from 7.5 % to per year during 1966-70 to 1.9% during 1970-78. The green revolution came riding on a wave of significant increase to public expenditure on subsidies, which propelled the initial state of the breakthrough. But since the concomitant development of support service, like agricultural extension services and education and training did not take place.

The agricultural sector began despite the greater availability of most key inputs like fertilizer, high yielding varieties of seed and water to experience diminishing return due to inadequate attention paid to their efficient of their use (Greer-2008).Further even land reforms inner-directed in the early seventies could not keep the green revolution from fading due to the institutional failure. However agricultural production once again showed a rising trend in the late seventies, mainly because of favorable weather conditions better input distribution and more appropriate farm price incentives. It has variously been argued that since the overall growth and development of the economy depends largely on the prosperity of agriculture effort must be directed to enable it to generate a reasonable marketable supply each year so that the needs of abundant supply of cheap food and fiber. Large volume of exports and rising incomes of people connected with agriculture for them to be able to absorb a reasonable proportion of industrial output are fulfilled satisfactory.( Hamid 2008). Unfortunately, the role of agriculture was not viewed in this perspective in the 1950’s and 1960’s industrialization was considered the key to economic development. The result was that agriculture stagnated and the industrial sector lost its major source of support. Economic development of the country thus came to a standstill. Although the potential role of the agricultural sector began to b e emphasized in the1970’s natural disaster combined with inefficient government policies acted to restrict the growth of agriculture to a low level. Now the seemed to have realized the potential of this sector and a little progress has since been made in formulating an effective long term strategy for encouragement and support of all forms of agriculture activity.

Whereas industry had experienced considerable growth during the early 1950s, agriculture had largely lagged behind. The annual growth rate in agriculture between 1949 and 1958 was a mere 1.43% per annum—falling behind even the population growth of that time (Zaidi, 1999, p. 28). During this time, Pakistan not only experienced a severe drought—partly due to wrong-minded agricultural and water policies—but also experienced several years of negative growth rate in agricultural output (1950/1, 1953/4, and 1959/60). Throughout the 1950s, agriculture suffered because the ruling elite of the time thought that rapid industrialization was a more urgent and desirable objective. Observers have claimed that during this period there was a net transfer of resources from agriculture to industry in the sense that policies were pursued that not only made more available to industrialization but promoted industry at the expense of agriculture. Stephen Lewis, for examples, goes to the extent of saying that the early industrial development of Pakistan was financed by the agriculture sector. (Lewis 1970 quoted in Husain, 1999, p.  51) growth rates in Pakistan’s agriculture sector. Between 1959 and 1964, agriculture grew at an average growth rate of 3.7% per annum only to be overshadowed by an even more impressive 6.3% per annum between 1965 and 1970. In fact, between 1966/7 and 1967/8, the years when the Green Revolution is supposed to have been at its peak, the agriculture sector grew at an average of 11.7 %, (Zaidi, 1999, p. 29). During the decade of the green revolution, for instance, wheat production increased by 91%, rice output by 147%, and sugar cane production by a similar margin (Husain, 1999, p. 53).

Pakistan Green Revolution in term of the only wheat crop through it is really much broader than that including rice, maize and other crops .Pakistan’s farmers have achieved an enormous success with wheat production going from 4 millions tons in 1967 to over 9 millions tons in 1977 to a crop today of some 20 millions tons.

Since Pakistan's population has increased more than five fold since independent from about 30 millions in 1947 to perhaps 185 millions today. The successful increase in food production has been essential. The Green Revolution in Pakistan in wheat came from research that produced improved verities of seed better water management and adoption of new fertilizer and pesticides strategies and of course from the hard work of pakistan’s farmers. These new verities were developed through research at international and national research efforts and centers.

Agriculture Credit of Green revolution Farm credit is major source of acquiring new technology for an efficient

and profitable agriculture and the key determinant of the level of production

(Khan. 1999) Income from harvest in Pakistan generally comes only twice a year and is subject to fluctuation. Farm households thus rely on borrowing to tide over periods between harvest and poor crops. First farmers fulfill consumption requirements from production and then sell the surplus to buy inputs from the market. However, the growing popularity of “HYV’s agriculture has enhanced the importance of rural credit significantly. Farmer now need credit in ever increasing amounts to finance timely purchase of modern inputs and farm implements. Credit helps not only in removing financial constraints but also provides incentives to growers for adopting new technology and practices with new aspiration and horizon. Provided it is properly delivered (Rao & Khan 1991: Malik 1991) However the clientele of the rural credit markets are an often small farmer who often fined it difficult to fulfill the collateral requirements of the lending institution. In order to facilitate the adoption of HYV’’s technology amongst small farmers, the government has disbursed large amounts of credit often at highly subsidized rate .The trend of credit disbursement is depicted by Figure-6.Peak expansion rate of credit was observed during the1970’s.The rural credit expansion rate was estimated at 42% per year during 1969-70 to 76-77.

Such a surge in rural credit during this period was due to the nationalization of the commercial banks (Qureshi.1992.Bastin 2008).Nationalization banks aside, overall agriculture credit has tended to increase at an annual average of 25%

over the period from 1965-66 to 2006-2007 which has been higher than the average growth rates of all the other agricultural inputs. In certain cases credit was not available to small farmers who duo to lack of financial resources could not purchase important inputs and HYV’s required for accelerated growth. The credit was only available to big farmers e.g during 1970-71 86.4% of credit went to the holding 12 acres or more than 12 acres land. Agriculture credit plays a pivotal role in agriculture development of country Credit requirements of the farming sector have been increasing over the years mainly due to the rise in the use of seed, fertilizer, and pesticide as well as for purchase of agriculture Machinery etc. in order to cope with the increasing demand for agriculture credit, institutional credit to formers is being provided through Zari Taraqiati Bank limited and other financial institutions. The Govt has allocated Rs: 250 billion for agriculture sector which is 25% higher the allocation of the preceding year i-e Rs:200 billion. farmers. Government-subsidized credit overwhelmingly Credit is also critical. It is common for small farmers to depend on local moneylenders and pay interest rates several times as high as wealthier benefits the big farmers. Most of all, the poor lack clout. They can't command the subsidies and other government favors accruing to the rich. With the Green Revolution, farming becomes petro-dependent. Some of the more recently developed seeds may produce higher yields even without manufactured inputs, but the best results require the right amounts of chemical fertilizer, pesticides, and water. So as the new seeds spread, petrochemicals become part of farming. In order to cope with the increasing demand for agricultural credit, institution credit to farmers is being provided through public and private financial institutions. Adequate availability and access to institutional credit is essential for accelerating the pace of agriculture development and ensuring food security in the country

The agricultural Credit Advisory Committee (ACAC) has allocated Rs:260 billion for the year 2009-10 compared to 250 billion fixed for last year which indicates an increase of 11.6% over the distribution of Rs: 233 billion during the year 2009-10 Table No:2

Supply of Agricultural Credit By Public and Private Financial Institutions.

Year ZTBLE COMMR BANK PPCBLE Domestic/ P:Bank Total Rs:in million

% change 2005-06 47549.14 67967.4 5889.49 16023.38 137474.4 26.4

2006-07 56473.05 80393.19 7988.06 23976.16 168830.46 22.8

2007-08 66938.99 94749.29 5931.45 43940.92 211560.66 25.3

2008-09 75138.55 110666 5579.43 41626.33 233101.31 10.1

2008-09* 45899.87 74364.6 3538.89 28557.24 151860.6 9.6

2009-10* 48986.53 85177.16 3530.02 28641.15 166344.86 9.5

July-March (Source State Bank Of Pakistan 2009-10)

Water resources and irrigation system.

Pakistan is divided into three hydrological units: the Indus basin. covering an area of over 566,oooKm (70% of the surveyed area in the country) the kharan desert in west Baluchistan with its inland drainage, and the arid Makran coast along the Arabian Sea in the south. The total watershed area of the Indus basin, or the region that drains into the river as well as the river system itself, is 944,000 Km 60% of which lies in Pakistan.

The Indus river system consists of the Indus River and its eastern and western tributaries. The major eastern tributaries are the Jhelum, Chena, Ravi, Sutlej, an

Beas rivers, while the major western tributaries are the Kabul and Kurram rivers. In addition there are numerous small tributaries such as the Soan and Haro revivers, and hill torrents which drain either directly or indirectly into the Indus basin. The 1960 Indus Basin Treaty with India, which apportioned water from the primary rivers of the province of Punjab between the two countries, allocated the flow of three western rivers namely the Indus Jhelum and Chenab, with occasional spills from the Sutlej and Ravi rivers to Pakistan. The flows in all these rivers are quite variable in different cropping seasons and years. About 84% of flows occur in the kharif (Summer) crop season and only 16% occur in Rabi (winter) season. If the population’s current 2.1% rate of increase persists the country population will double after two decades which will tremendously increase pressure on freshwater resources. The surface water resources in the country are constituted by precipitation in the catchments area or the area that drain into the river-- of the Indus river system and of glacier melt in the upper basin. The water resources of the Kharan desert (West Baluchistan )and the Makran coast (Southern Baluchistan are limited and the desert in the south (Thar and Cholistan) have no appreciable water.

Traditionally, irrigation was only used in the Punjab as an insurance against crop failure in times of severe drought. The new seeds, however, need intensive irrigation as an essential input for crop yields. Although high-yielding varieties of wheat may yield over 40 per cent more than traditional varieties, they need about three times as much water. In terms of water use, therefore, they are less than half as productive. One result of the Green Revolution has therefore been to create conflicts over diminishing water resources. Where crops are dependent on groundwater for irrigation, the water table is declining at an estimated rate of one-third to half a meter per year. A recent survey by the Punjab Directorate of Water Resources, has shown that 60 out of the 118 development blocks in the state cannot sustain any further increase in the number of tube wells. Recently water resources are scared and expensive in Pakistan. Large farms benefit because they can afford canal irrigation, whereas small farmer s need to resort to taking out loans with high interest rates to irrigate their fields. The growth in equality in rural areas stem in large profit from the fact that small poor peasants who have restricted access to credit, technical knowledge and the material means of production are unable to innovate as easily or as quickly as those who are landed liquid and literate (Griffin 1979)

Pakistan's estimated current per capitia water availability of around 1,066 M3)Table Show per capitia water availability

Year Population(Million)

Per capitia water availability (M3)

1951 34 5260

1961 46 3888

1972 65 2751

1981 84 2129

1991 115 1565

2002 139.5 1282

2010 167.7 1066

2020 195.5 915

2025 208.4 585

Land ownership of Green Revolution 1960 In Pakistan given the highly unequal distribution of land ownership the

introduction of the new technology in agriculture has unleashed powerful contradiction which are not only likely be come constraints on continued agriculture growth but are also generating actual social tension the nature of the economic process, in the absence of an effective land reform in such that it is enriching the rural elite at the expense of the rapid deterioration in the economic and social conditions of the majority of the rural population. Agricultural growth during the 1960’s and 70’s was predicated on the rapid increase in yields of the relatively large farms continued growth in the next two decades will have to be derived from increasing yields per acre of the small farmers. An essential production for this is the institutional and economic change which will give the small farers better access over the new inputs and great control over his production process and invest able surplus. The distribution of land ownership in Pakistan is much more unequal than the distribution of operational holdings. Out estimated based on the 1972 census of agriculture show that as much as 30% of total farm area in Pakistan was owned by landowners in the size class 150 acres of more by contrast the percentage of farm area operated by farmers in the size class was only 9.2% The observed divergence in the degree of concentration of farm area between owned and operated holdings suggests that many of the larger landowner must be renting out some or all of their owned area to smellers farmers .

The propositions is supported by the data which show that compared with any other category in Pakistan and Punjab respectively.

The larger landowners attracted by the high profitability of owner cultivation following the availability of HYV’s technology tended to resume their formerly rented out land to cultivated themselves on large farmers with their formerly rented out land to cultivate them selves. Evidence for the resumption of land during 1960-1978 for owner cultivation, we found that farms in the size classes 50-150 acres and more have experienced a substantial in their area over the period. The system of land ownership regulates the relationship of the people to the land, specifically the power of disposition over land and the right to use the land. As it is practically impossible, on the one hand, to increase the amount of land while, on the other hand, it is the basis of agrarian production, living, and recreation, in other words, the basis of existence for a rural society, the amount of land controlled and the type of distribution determine the social conditions. Rights in land bring with them work and income, prestige, and influence. Anyone without rights in land is dependent in an agrarian society. He is forced to work on someone else's land in order to earn his livelihood. There are two forms of rights to the land-the right of disposition over the land and the right to use the land.

The occupier has the right to use the land. This right regulates the cultivation of the land. In the case of an owner-cultivated family farm, the family has both the right of disposition as well as of use. A tenant, in contrast, has no right of disposition over his land but can only use it.

Private ownership of land is a Western concept that was first introduced into many developing countries by Europeans. It arose under a specific legal order by original acquisitioning of land (occupying and making the land arable) or changes in ownership (conquest, contract, inheritance). Until today, some societies have still not developed any forms of personal, private rights to land that would grant a right of disposition. Instead, the individual is allotted land for his own usage that reverts to the hands of the group (tribe) as soon as it is no longer used. The question of the private ownership of land is strongly affected by the ideological point of view. On the one land, it is argued that the owner's interest in his land turns 'sand into gold." In contrast to this argument is the experience that especially increasing population pressure has fairly often resulted in the economically weak losing their land and that the land has become concentrated in the hands of a few people. According to the socialistic viewpoint, private ownership of the production factor land has led to exploitation and should, therefore, be abolished.

Land becomes property by the state (tribe, clan, etc,) guaranteeing an. individual this right to a scarce factor and, thus, warranting him the possibility of harvesting the fruits of his labour in the production process. Property rights, in other words, are granted to the individual by the society and always include certain limitations. Such restrictions and/or obligations are imposed upon the owner by custom, private rights, or public law. Among these are, e.g. , the obligation to maintain and expand the farm, creditors' claims, rights of access and transit, services, taxes, market regulations, etc. As a consequence of conquest, purchasing, gifts, and seizure, land belongs to the state in many countries in the same way as other areas belong to private people. In the USSR, the majority of the land has been turned into state property. In other socialist countries, only a part until now. This was done to prevent exploitation resulting form private ownership of the land as well as unearned income derived from ground rent. Otherwise, state ownership plays a large role if public interests cannot be satisfied by private ownership, or if the land is not of interest to private people from an economic standpoint (catchment areas, waste land, forest, frontiers, experimental farms, etc,). The state partially cultivates its own land (government farms, government forests) and also partially leases it out. In some countries, the church likewise has a great deal of landed property. The process by which the church gained possession of the land and its function is similar to that in the case of state land.

Table 1Land Concentration Ratios for Operational and Ownership Holdings of Households.

Type of Holdings/Pakistan and Provinces 1960 1972 1980  

A. Operational Holdings 1. Pakistan 0.62 0.52 0.53 2. Punjab 0.59 0.49 0.51 3. Sind 0.51 0.43 0.47 4. NWFP 0.73 0.64 0.64 5. Balochistan 0.71 0.64 0.62 B. Ownership Holdings 1. Pakistan -- 0.66 0.65 2. Punjab -- 0.63 0.62 3. Sind -- 0.69 0.63 4. NWFP -- 0.68 0.69 5. Balochistan -- 0.69 0.68 

Table .1 Land Concentration Ratios for Operational and Ownership Holdings of Households

Land Concentration Ratios

Type of Holdings/Pakistan and Provinces 1960

1972 1980 A. Operational Holdings 1. Pakistan 0.62 0.52 0.53 2. Punjab 0.59 0.49 0.51 3. Sind 0.51 0.43 0.47 4. NWFP 0.73 0.64 0.64 5. Balochistan 0.71 0.64 0.62 B. Ownership Holdings 1. Pakistan -- 0.66 0.65 2. Punjab -- 0.63

0.62 3. Sind -- 0.69 0.63 4. NWFP -- 0.68 0.69 5. Balochistan -- 0.69 0.68 

Source: Nagvi, Khan and Chaudhry (2010). 

Table .2 Area of Ownership and Operational Holdings, Area Leased and Self-cultivated Area by Farm Size for 1972 and 1980

Farm Area Farm Size Holdings of Ownership Categories Holdings 1972 1980

Under 1.0 Acres 135 150 1.0 – 5.0 Acres 3064 3721 5.0 - 12.5 Acres 6967 8726 12.5 -25.0 Acres 6945 8276 25.0 - 50.0 Acres 6948 7333 50.0 - 150.0 Acres 8590 8723 150.0 Acres and above 8870 8484

Farm AreaFarm Size Holdings of Operational HoldingsCategories 1972 1980 Under 1.0 Acres 77 891.0 - 5.0 Acres 248 32305.0 - 12.5 Acres 13338 1285512.5 - 25.0 Acres 13061 1161725.0 - 50.0 Acres 9215 838650.0 - 150.0 Acres 7402 6913150.0 Acres and Above 4482 4004 

Area Farm

Farm Size Holdings Leased-out

Categories by Owners

1972 1980

Under 1.0 Acres 58 611.0 - 5.0 Acres 579 4915.0 – 12.5 Acres -6371 -412912.5 - 25.0 Acres -6116 -334125.0 - 50.0 Acres -2267 -105350.0 - 150.0 Acres 1188 1810150.0 Acres and Above 4388 3480 

Area Farm Size Holdings Self

cultivatedCategories by

Owners 

1972 1980

Under 1.0 Acres 60 781

.0 - 5.0 Acres 1556 22675.0 - 12.5 Acres 5288 690812.5 - 25.0 Acres 5904 682325.0 - 50.0 Acres 5024 544450.0 - 150.0 Acres 5000 5319150.0 Acres and Above 3556 3434

History of pesticides in Pakistan

Chemical pesticides were first used in Pakistan in the 1950s to combat locust attacks. In 1954, 254 tons of formulated pesticides were imported, which marked the beginning of the pesticide business in the country. Till 1980, the Government of Pakistan controlled the import of pesticides and subsidized its distribution. The sale of pesticides in 1995 was worth Rs9 billion (US$222 million), which does not include the large amount of pesticides smuggled into the country from across the border. About 145 pesticide formulations have been registered, with pyrethroids having the greatest share (45 per cent) of market value, followed by organophosphates (39 per cent), chlorinated hydrocarbons (9 per cent) and carbamates (4 per cent). According to the agriculture census of 1980, 4 per cent of total farms used chemical plant protection measures, but this rose to around 25 per cent in the 1990s; that is 1.28 million farms or up to 16 per cent of total cropped area.

Pesticide in pakistan

According to sources of the Pakistan Agriculture Pesticides Association (PAPA), there appears to be sufficient scope in the country, on the basis of demand/supply analysis, for further expansion in the capacity of insecticide formulation in liquid, powder and granule forms.They added that the consumption to pesticides in 1993-94 was estimated to be 27961 tonnes, which, in view of the projected growth rate of five per cent per annum, was estimated to increase by 10,840 tonnes to about 37,470 tonnes by 1999-2000. The future demand for insecticide formulations depends on the area under plant protection, population, hospital beds, health centres and basic health units. During the last 10 years, 1982-83 to 1992-93 Similarly, hospital beds have increased by 5 per cent, rural health centres by 3 per cent and the population is increasing at the compound growth rate of 3 per cent. It should be added here that the basic, active ingredients of pesticides are imported and converted into liquid, emulsion, dust, powder, and granular forms by formulation processes for ultimate application for crop protection, and in the public health sector and households, the area requiring plant protection increased by 6 per cent per annum, on average

Sales of pesticides. The basic manufacture of insecticides and

pesticides is practically non-existent in the country with the exception of the production of DDT and BHC. Modern pesticides manufacturing process is very complex and also involves hazards of pollution around a plant like the Bhopal tragedy. At present, about a dozen companies are reported to be engaged in marketing and distribution of pesticides in Pakistan. Out of these, eight companies have developed their own formulation facilities mostly with technical assistance from their foreign principals. According to statistics of Pakistan Agriculture Pesticides Association, the consumption of liquid, granules and dust/powder types of pesticides has reflected a steady increase as brought out in a separate tale. It may be pointed out that liquid pesticides account for about 95 per cent of total pesticides used in Pakistan.

Thank you

20

Theory Z is humanistic approach to management approach by William Ouchi.

The key features of Japanese industrial organizations, according to Ouchi are as follows:

Offer lifetime employment (at least for their core workers). Insist on mandatory retirement of core workers at age 55.Employ a large number of temporary employees mostly women. There is a high degree of mutual trust and loyalty between management and employees.

SummaryAsia accounts for over 60% of the world population with almost 3.8 billion people. China and India together have about 40 percent of the world's population. Africa follows with 840 million people, 12% of the world's population. Europe's 710 million people make up 11% of the world's population. North America is home to 514 million (8%), South America to 371 million (5.3%), and Australia to 21 million (0.3%).

SummaryAsia accounts for over 60% of the world population with almost 3.8 billion people. China and India together have about 40 percent of the world's population. Africa follows with 840 million people, 12% of the world's population. Europe's 710 million people make up 11% of the world's population. North America is home to 514 million (8%), South America to 371 million (5.3%), and

Australia to 21 million (0.3%). Population Concentrations of the World

Macro Economics The study of the behavior an economy at

the aggregate level, as opposed to the level of a specific subgroups or individuals (which is called microeconomics). For example, a macroeconomist might consider the industrial sector, the services sector or the farm sector, but he/she will not consider specific parts of any of these sectors. Factors studies include inflation, unemployment, and industrial production, often with the aim of studying the effect of government policy on these factors.

Study of the entire economy in terms of the total amount of goods and services produced, total income earned, level of employment of productive resources, and general behavior of prices. Until the 1930s, most economic analysis focused on specific firms and industries. The aftermath of the Great Depression and the development of national income and production statistics brought new interest to the field of macroeconomics. The goals of macroeconomic policy include economic growth, price stability, and full employment.