Performance and Innovation System: A Study of Plantation Sector in India
Namrata Thapa
Ph.D. Scholar
Centre for Development Studies
Trivandrum, Kerala.
Email: [email protected]; [email protected]
The role of agricultural sector in the Indian economy is well understood. However, despite
massive investments and much vaunted technological progress, agricultural sector has witnessed
more or less constant growth rate over most of the last five decades. Considerable concern has
been expressed over signs of deceleration in this sector during the last decade. As such it has
been rightly pointed out that “critical examination of past growth experience and the factors
underlying the persistently slow growth is, therefore, important for better appreciation of the
constraints impeding agricultural growth, which is essential to reshape future programmes and
policies” (Vaidyanathan, 2010). Several studies have attempted to understand the growth
experience of Indian agriculture and the factors behind the slowing of agricultural growth
(Bhalla & Singh, 2010; Balakrishnan et.al., 2008).
The situation in plantation agriculture is no different. As in case of agricultural sector in general,
plantation agriculture in particular has also been facing several structural rigidities and the
intensity of these problems varies from crop to crop (Joseph & George, 2011). Historically
plantations in India, as in other developing countries, were promoted as a means of foreign
exchange earner to overcome its acute shortage (Nayyar & Sen, 1994). Given this role, the sector
received considerable attention of the state. This is manifested in the setting up of commodity
boards1 for each of the crops and drawing up of legislations that empowered these boards to
undertake various activities needed for plantation development. Further, despite agriculture being
a state subject, on account of their role in export earnings these boards were kept under the
Ministry of Commerce, Central Government. Having had such elaborate institutional
1
Coffee Board was established by an Act of Parliament in 1942; Rubber Board by Rubber Act of 1947;Tea Board in
1954 under the Tea Act, 1953; Cardamom Board in 1964 and later it became the Spices Board by covering all the
52 major and minor crops under it in 1986.
1
arrangements, plantations can be expected to perform better than agriculture. Nonetheless,
evidence suggests that this sector too follows the same trend as agriculture in general2.
Further, the sector is operating in a changed environment of policy regimes. Over the years3 with
an improvement in the condition of the external sector, the pressure on these primary
commodities to earn foreign exchange has eased considerably. As such the role of the plantation
sector in the Indian economy and the institutional arrangements for plantation development has
undergone major changes. Where the earlier regime was that of protection and state intervention
in almost all spheres of plantation development, the current regime4 is characterised by selective
state intervention and removal of tariff barriers. So the survival of the sector is dependent on
maintaining its competitiveness both in the domestic and international market (Joseph and
George, 2011). This pressure to maintain its competitiveness can be expected to have intensified
in the regime of new trading environment resulting from formation of WTO and signing of
various international trading agreements. It is in this context that the need arises to compare and
contrast the performance of plantation crops. The importance of the sector can be understood
from the fact that though it accounts for only 5 per cent of the net sown area, contributes to 10
per cent of agricultural income and 13 per cent of agricultural exports; the estate sector alone
provides 2.5 million days of employment and it is also a source of livelihood for small holders
whose numbers are rising over the years (Joseph and George, 2011). Thus it is a major source of
livelihood and employment for the population of regional economies.
2
Preliminary analysis of the performance of four major crops Coffee, Tea, Rubber and Cardamom from 1980 to
2009 in terms of selected indicators showed that there was deceleration in the growth rate of majority of these crops
particularly during 2000-2009 (further details given in the section on recent trends).
3
In 1950-51, plantation crops (tea, coffee and spices) accounted for 20.8 percent of India’s merchandise exports
which declined to 13 percent in the early 1970s and in 2007-08, its share is only a little over 1 percent.
4
Harilal and Joseph (1998) argued the change has been in the form of intensified intervention by the boards in the
sphere of production and an almost withdrawal from marketing.
2
Plantation Crops: Recent Trends
Keeping this context in mind, an analysis of the performance of four major crops namely Tea,
Rubber, Coffee and Cardamom5 was undertaken to get a preliminary understanding of the trends
and patterns in the performance of these crops and locate the problem therein.
Several studies have considered varied indicators for capturing the performance of the crops.
Drawing from the earlier literatures, the study has used production related indicators such as
production, area and productivity; and marketing related indicators such as export, domestic
consumption6; as well as prices; and other indicator such as employment for analyzing the
performance of the plantation crops. The time period considered for the analysis is from 1980 to
2009. The period of analysis has been considered on the basis of comparable data base for all the
four crops and also for the fact that the liberalized economic policies had initiated in the 1980s
which undeniably had an impact on Indian agriculture.
We start with an analysis of the trends in the above mentioned variables over time. Here analysis
has been done by using simple tools such as growth rates and proportions. To estimate growth
rates, trend equations were fitted to the time series data. In case of unavailability of time series
data for certain variables, compound annual growth rate has been computed. The time period
from 1980 to 2009 has been divided into three sub periods namely 1980s, 1990s and 2000-2009.
The data provided by the respective commodity boards and Handbook of Statistics on Indian
Economy, RBI has been used.
Trends in Production, Area and Productivity
Production
In absolute terms, production of coffee increased from 118.65 million kg in 1980 to 289.60
million kg in 2009 recording a trend growth rate of 3.42 percent per annum during 1980 to 2009
5
Tea, coffee, rubber, cocoa, coconut, areca nut, cashew, oil palm, palmyrah, spices which include 63 different crops,
sugarcane, tobacco and wattle etc. are generally called plantation crops. They are essentially perennial crops. Among
them the major plantation crops are coffee, tea, rubber and cardamom. These four crops covered less than 0.5% of
the total cropped area in the mid-1980s, but accounted for over 10% of the added value in agriculture (Giriappa,
1989).
6
Mitra (1991) in his study of the performance of Indian tea sector has pointed out that for analyzing the
performance; two major aspects that are required to be considered are production and marketing. Where the two
important components of production are area under cultivation and yield (production per hectare), marketing is
concerned with both sales in domestic markets and exports.
3
(See Figure 1). For tea, the production figure in 1980 was 569.60 million kg which increased to
991.18 million kg in 2009 and the overall trend growth rate during that period was 1.97 percent
per annum. The production figures for rubber increased from 153.10 million kg to 831.40 million
kg in 2009 recording a growth rate of 6.57 percent per annum over the period. The production of
cardamom increased from 4.40 million kg in 1980 to 10.08 million kg in 2009 recording a
growth rate of 5.41 percent per annum.
Figure 1: Production of Four Plantation Crops (1980 to 2009) (in million kg)
Source: Data compiled from respective commodity boards
Thus, among the four crops, rubber is seen to be doing comparatively better in terms of
production as is evident from the high overall growth rate (6.57 percent) from 1980 to 2009 (See
Table 1).
Now considering the decadal growth rates it is seen that production of coffee grew at the rate of
2.34 percent in the 1980s which increased to 5.84 percent in the 1990s but was followed by a
sharp decline (-0.83 percent) in 2000-09. For tea, there was a fall in the growth rate during 1990s
followed by a marginal increase in 2000-09. Despite showing a high overall growth rate
compared to other crops, the growth rate in the production of rubber is observed to be steadily
decelerating over the three sub periods. There was a striking growth in the production of
cardamom from mere 1.61 percent in 1980s to 7.57 percent in the 1990s but again there was a
sharp decline (-1.07) during 2000-09. As such it can be said that in the recent sub period (200009) except for tea which experienced a marginal increase in production, growth rate in the
production of coffee and cardamom has declined while that of rubber has decelerated.
4
Table 1: Decadal Trend Growth Rate in Production (1980 to 2009)
Crops
1980-90 1990-2000 2000-09 1980-09
Coffee
2.34
5.84
-0.83
3.24
Tea
2.65
1.86
2.09
1.97
Rubber
7.80
6.72
3.94
6.57
Cardamom
1.61
7.57
-1.07
5.41
Source: Data on coffee and tea compiled from Handbook of Statistics on
Indian Economy, RBI while rubber and cardamom data from respective
commodity boards.
It needs to be borne in mind that contribution to the production of these crops comes from both
the large growers and small growers7. Initially there was the dominance of large growers but
over the years there has been a growing proliferation of small growers in the production of
plantation crops. The contribution of small growers to the production of these crops has been
explored in the following sub-section to get an understanding of their increasing importance.
Production across land holdings size
It needs to be mentioned here that data across land holdings size is not available for most of the
variables and for certain crops. Further the data is very patchy but here attempt has been made to
put together the available data on certain variables and crops to get an understanding of the
increasing importance of the small holdings in plantations.
Before getting into the production across land holdings size, we can get an understanding of the
number of small growers and large growers who are engaged in the cultivation of the respective
crops.
Table 2 shows that for coffee, the share of small growers in total number of units engaged in
cultivation increased from 97.46 percent in 1985 to 98.77 percent in 2007. The number of units
under small coffee growers registered a growth rate (1985 to 2007) of 4.26 percent per annum.
The share of small tea growers in total number of units engaged in tea cultivation increased from
7
The categorization of small growers and large growers is different for different crops. For rubber, small growers
comprise plantations with less than and including 20 ha of land and large growers are those having land above 20 ha.
For tea, small growers are ones with area up to 10.12 ha of land and large estates are ones with more than 10.12 ha
of land. For coffee, small growers are those with less than 10 ha of land and large growers are those with more than
10 ha of land.
5
86.70 percent to 98.94 percent. In case of small tea growers, the number of units grew at the rate
of 10.19 percent per annum from 1980 to 2008. For rubber, the share of small growers in total
number of units increased marginally from 99.77 percent in 1980 to 99.98 percent in 2008. The
number of small rubber growers recorded a growth rate of 5.75 percent per annum from 1980 to
2008.
Table 2: Trends in the Distribution of Number of Units across different land size holdings.
Coffee
Year
1980
1990
2000
2008
CAGR (%) (1980 to 2009)
SG
97.46*
98.41 #
98.77 ^
4.26
Tea
LG
2.54
1.59
1.23
0.81
SG
86.70
87.82
98.56
98.94
10.19
LG
13.30
12.18
1.44
1.06
0.19
Rubber
SG
LG
99.77
0.23
99.96
0.04
99.97
0.03
99.98
0.02
5.75
-2.55
Source: Data compiled from respective commodity boards
Note: ‘*’ the share corresponds to the year 1985; ‘#’ the share corresponds to the year 2003 instead of
2000; ‘^’ the share corresponds to the year 2007 instead of 2008.
SG- Small Growers; LG- Large Growers; CAGR- Compound Annual Growth Rate.
Table 3 shows an increasing trend in the share of small growers in total production for both tea
and rubber over the years. The share of small growers in total tea production increased from a
mere 0.02 percent in 1980 to 26.25 percent in 2009, registering a compound annual growth rate
of 32.47 percent. The share of small growers in total rubber production increased from 70.35
percent in 1980 to 93.01 percent in 2009 and it grew at the rate of 7.03 percent per annum. In
2007-08, for coffee the share of small growers in total production was 70 percent. It can be
observed that unlike tea, the contribution of small growers in total production is relatively higher
than that of the large growers in case of rubber and coffee.
Table 3: Share of crops in total production across land holdings size
Tea
Year
1980
1990
2000
2009
CAGR (%) (1980-09)
SG
0.02
0.06
18.21
26.25
32.47
LG
99.98
99.94
81.79
73.75
1.72
Rubber
SG
LG
70.35
29.65
81.46
18.54
87.84
12.16
93.01
6.99
7.03
0.86
Source: Data compiled from respective commodity boards.
6
Unlike other annual crops, plantation crops have a long gestation period between planting and
harvesting. Undeniably, the production of these plantation crops depends on several factors such
as the age structure of the crops, extension, replanting and replacement activities, agro-climatic
conditions and so on. However, production has two components namely yield and acreage. The
production of crops can be changed by varying either of these two components (Mitra, 1991).
Besides other factors, production, yield and area can be considered as important variables which
determine the supply aspects of these crops. In the following sections, trend in area under the
crops and trend in productivity (yield) has been discussed.
Area under cultivation
Table 4 shows among all the crops, area under cardamom have registered a decline in overall
growth rate during 1980 to 2009. Over the three sub periods too, same trend is visible for the
growth rates in area under cardamom. There was an increase in growth rate of area under coffee
in 1990s followed by a deceleration in 2000-09. Growth rate in the area under tea showed steady
increase over the three decades. Rubber saw a deceleration in its area during 1990s and an
increase during 2000-09.
Table 4: Decadal trend growth rates in area under the four crops
Crops
1980-90 1990-2000 2000-09 1980-09
Coffee
1.45
4.15
3.08
2.66
Tea
0.93
1.70
1.90
1.53
Rubber
5.35
1.57
2.25
2.59
Cardamom
-0.05
-1.82
-0.17
-1.42
Source: Data compiled from respective commodity boards.
For all the three crops, the share of small growers in total area under cultivation shows an
increasing trend over the years (See Table 5). The share of small coffee growers in total area
increased from 57.90 percent in 1985 to 74.64 percent in 2008. The area under small coffee
growers grew at the rate of 4.39 percent from 1985 to 2008. In case of tea, the share of small
growers in total area under tea cultivation increased from 2.58 percent in 1980 to 28.19 percent
in 2008. During 1980 to 2009, area under small tea growers recorded an average annual growth
rate of 10.59 percent per annum. For rubber, the share of area under small growers increased
from 75.82 percent in 1980 to 89.94 percent in 2008. The area under small growers registered an
average annual growth rate (1980 to 2009) of 3.70 percent per annum.
7
Table 5: Share of crops in total area across land holdings size
1980
1990
2000
2008
CAGR (%)
Coffee
Tea
Rubber
SG
LG
SG
LG
SG
LG
57.90*
42.10
2.58
97.42
75.82
24.18
57.82 #
42.18
2.77
97.23
83.66
16.34
65.20
34.80
19.35
80.65
88.04
11.96
74.64
25.36
28.19
71.81
89.94
10.06
4.39
0.84
10.59
0.44
3.70
-0.11
Source: Data compiled from respective commodity boards
Note: The latest data on area across size holdings were available for 2008, hence
instead of 2009, the year 2008 has been taken. (‘*’ the data corresponds to the year
1985 instead of 1980. ‘#’ the data corresponds to the year 1987 rather than 1990, as
data corresponding to 1980 and 1990 was not available)
Yield (kg per hectare)
Across the four crops, cardamom yield has registered the highest overall growth rate of 6.28
percent over 1980 to 2009 (See Table 6). Considering the growth rate in the yield of the crops
over the three sub-periods, for coffee it increased from 0.75 percent in the 1980s to 1.80 percent
in the 1990s but declined to -2.06 percent in 2000-09. For tea, the growth rate has decelerated
from 1.72 percent in the 1980s to 0.05 percent in the 1990s followed by an increase to 0.25
percent in 2000-09. The growth rate in the yield of rubber increased from 3.08 percent in 1980s
to 4.12 percent in 1990s but decelerated to 2.02 percent in 2000-09. Cardamom experienced a
high growth of 9.46 percent in 1990s from a mere 2.03 percent in 1980s but there was a very
sharp decline to -0.04 percent in 2000-09. Here it can be said that in the recent sub-period of
2000-09, expect for tea, coffee and cardamom experienced a decline in yield while rubber
witnessed a deceleration in yield.
Table 6: Decadal Trend growth rate in yield (kg per hectare) (1980 to 2009)
Crops
Coffee
Tea
Rubber
Cardamom
1980-90
0.75
1.72
3.08
2.03
1990-2000
1.80
0.05
4.12
9.46
2000-09
-2.06
0.25
2.02
-0.04
1980-09
0.88
0.47
3.29
6.28
Source: Data compiled from respective commodity boards
8
Going by this preliminary analysis on area, production and productivity of the crops, it can be
noted that for coffee the trend in production follows similar pattern as the trend in area and yield
over the three sub-periods perhaps indicating that both area and yield had an impact on the
production of coffee. For tea over the sub periods, trend in production is observed to closely
follow the trend in yield, so yield can be expected to have an impact on production. For rubber,
the trend in production is observed to follow trend in area during the sub period of 1990s while it
is seen to follow the trend in yield in the recent period of 2000-09. In case of cardamom, the
growth pattern in production is witnessed to have closely followed growth pattern of its yield
over the three sub periods. However, it needs to be pointed out that for a detailed understanding
of the effect of area and yield on the production of these crops, there is a need to undertake a
decomposition analysis of these variables.
The important findings related to production can be summarized as follows. There has been a
change in the organization of production from large growers to small growers. The share of small
growers in total area under cultivation showed an increasing trend over the years. Except for tea,
the contribution of small growers in total production is relatively higher than that of the large
growers in case of rubber and coffee. The overall growth rate in production is highest for rubber
compared to other crops. However a different picture is noticeable when the growth rates in three
sub-periods are considered. It was found that the growth rate in production of rubber has been
decelerating over the three sub-periods. In the recent sub period (2000-09) except for tea which
experienced a marginal increase in production, growth rate in the production of coffee and
cardamom has declined. Among all the crops, area under cardamom has registered a decline in
growth rate over 1980 to 2009. There was an increase in growth rate of area under coffee in
1990s followed by a deceleration in 2000-09. Growth rate in the area under tea showed steady
increase over the three decades may be due to the cultivation of tea being taken up by small
growers in the non-traditional8 areas. Rubber saw a deceleration in its area during 1990s and an
increase during 2000-09. This increase in area in recent sub-period may be reflective of the
expansion of rubber plantation in non-traditional areas9. Across the four crops, cardamom yield
Major tea growing states such as Assam, West Bengal, Tripura, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh
and Uttaranchal are also the traditional tea growing areas. Tea plantation has come up recently in states like
Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Bihar, Orissa which are the non-traditional areas.
9
Traditional regions are Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu whereas non-traditional regions are north-eastern states
especially Tripura, Assam and Meghalaya.
8
9
has registered the highest overall growth rate of 6.28 percent over 1980 to 2009. In the recent
sub-period of 2000-09, expect for tea, coffee and cardamom experienced a decline in yield and
rubber witnessed a deceleration in yield.
Trends in Export and Domestic Consumption
Volume of Exports
Table 7 shows that over the entire period of analysis from 1980 to 2009, tea and cardamom have
registered a decline in the growth rate of exports. Rubber is seen to have a high growth rate of
around 25 percent during 1980 to 2009. This high growth is mainly due to the fact that the
volume of exports of rubber was nil in 1980 which increased to 25.09 million kg in 2009. It has
been pointed out that the increase in the volume of exports of rubber is partly due to subsidy
driven distress export to clear the glut in the domestic market for six years from 1998 to 2003
(Mohanakumar, 2012). During the three sub periods, in case of coffee, there was an increase in
the growth rate from 1980s to 1990s followed by a sharp decline in 2000-09. This decline in the
volume of exports of coffee is worth noting as it is primarily an export-oriented crop in
comparison to other three crops considered here. For tea, there was a decline in the growth rate
in the 1980s which revived back in the 1990s followed by a deceleration in 2000-09. There was
a marginal increase in the growth rate of rubber exports from 1990s to 2000-09. Growth rate in
the exports of cardamom showed wide fluctuations in the sub periods, with a decline in the
1980s, followed by a sharp increase in 1990s and then a drastic decline in 2000-09.
Table 7: Trend growth rate in the volume of exports of four plantation crops
Crops
Coffee
Tea
Rubber
Cardamom
1980-90
2.18
-0.74
-*
-18.67
1990-2000
6.38
0.56
11.02
9.32
2000-09
-1.55
0.27
11.52
-0.85
1980-09
3.06
-0.38
25.15
-1.09
Source: Data compiled from respective commodity boards
Note: ‘*’ volume of exports of rubber was nil from 1980 to 1990.
Figure 2 shows that the share of exports in total production for crops such as coffee and tea has
fallen over the years. For coffee, the share has fallen from around 75 percent in 1980 to 48
percent in 2009; while for tea, it has fallen from around 40 percent in 1980 to around 20 percent
in 2009. The share of exports in total production for rubber has increased from zero in during
1980s to around 3 percent in 2009. For cardamom, the share has sharply fallen from around 53
10
percent in 1980s to around 8 percent in 1990 and then revived back in 2000 followed by a fall
and stagnation and then an increase to around 20 percent in 2009.
Figure 2: Share of Exports in Total Production (1980 to 2009)
Source: Data computed from respective commodity boards
Domestic Consumption
Table 8 shows that all the three crops registered a positive growth rate in domestic consumption
over the period of 1980 to 2009. During the sub-periods, growth rate in the domestic
consumption of coffee decelerated in the 1990s followed by an increase in 2000-09. For both tea
and rubber, there was a deceleration in the growth rate of domestic consumption over the three
sub-periods.
Table 8: Trend Growth Rate in Domestic Consumption (1980-2009)
Crops
Coffee
Tea
Rubber
1980-90
1.16
3.64
7.55
1990-2000
0.21
2.67
5.86
2000-09
5.79
2.60
4.36
1980-09
1.85
2.99
5.89
Source: Data compiled from respective commodity boards
Note: Since the data on the domestic consumption of cardamom is
not available hence its analysis has not been done.
11
Having considered the demand and supply factors related to the performance of these crops, we
will see the trends in the domestic prices of these crops.
Trends in Prices
Here average domestic prices have been considered for the analysis. In absolute terms, the price
of all the crops is seen to have increased over the years from 1980 to 2009 (See Table 9).
Considering the growth rate in prices, it can be observed that for tea it has been decelerating over
the three sub-periods from 10.04 percent to 5.18 percent per annum. For rubber, there was a
sharp increase in the growth rate of price from 4.5 percent in 1980s to 15.86 percent per annum
in 2000-09 and it has registered highest growth in price in comparison to other crops, over the
entire period of analysis. The growth rate in the price of cardamom increased from 4.53 percent
in 1980s to 6.38 percent in 1990s but again sharply decelerated to 0.10 percent in the recent subperiod of 2000-09.
Table 9: Trend growth rate of average domestic price (Rs per Kg)
crops
1980
1980-90
1990-2000
60
coffee
13.6
tea
12.41
rubber
98.91
cardamom
43.23
(10.04)
21.29
(4.50)
251.67
(4.53)
61.71
(6.35)
30.36
(4.27)
569.86
(6.38)
2000-09
127.71
(12.11)
105.6
(5.18)
114.98
(15.86)
749.32
(0.10)
Growth rate (1980-09)
5.74*
5.87
6.77
4.86
Source: Data compiled from respective commodity boards
Note: Figures within the parentheses indicates trend growth rates. ‘*’ For coffee, the data on price was available
from 1998 onwards; hence the figure 5.74 percent corresponds to growth rate from 1998 to 2009 instead of 1980 to
2009.
All these indicators discussed above are bound to have an impact on the labour market as
demand for labour is a derived demand. Here for the analysis only employment aspect have been
focused.
Trends in Average Daily Employment
The average daily employment in all the three crops in absolute terms shows an increasing trend
over the period (See Figure 3). For tea, the number of labour employed increased from around
8.4 lakh in 1980 to around 12.5 lakh in 2007 registering a growth rate of 1.48 percent per annum.
12
In case of coffee, the average daily employment increased from around 3.7 lakh in 1985 to 5.9
lakh in 2009, growing at the rate of 1.99 percent per annum. The average daily employment in
rubber plantations increased from around 1.9 lakh to around 4.4 lakh showing a growth rate of
2.93 percent per annum.
Figure 3: Trends in Average Daily Employment in Plantations (1980 to 2009)
average daily employment
(number)
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
tea
coffee
rubber
Source: Data compiled from respective commodity boards
Considering the three sub periods, the growth rate in the average daily employment in coffee
plantations registered a sharp increase from 0.16 percent in 1980s to 4.63 percent in 1990s (See
Table 10). But it witnessed a sharp deceleration to 0.84 percent per annum in 2000-09. Similar
pattern is seen in the case of average employment in tea plantations. The growth rate increased
from 1.54 percent in 1980s to 2.06 percent in 1990s followed by a deceleration to 0.58 percent in
2000-09. For rubber, the growth rate in average daily employment decelerated from 3.91 percent
in 1980s to 2.09 percent in 1990s followed by an increase to 2.78 percent in 2000-09.
Table 10: Annual Compound Growth Rate of Average Daily Employment
Crops
Coffee
Tea
Rubber
1980-90
-0.16*
1.54
3.91
1990-2000
4.63#
2.06
2.09
2000-09
0.84
0.58
2.78
1980-09
1.99
1.48
2.93
Source: Data computed from respective commodity boards
Note: Due to unavailability of data for certain years, ‘*’ the figure corresponds to CAGR for 1985 to 1991; ‘#’ the
figure corresponds to CAGR for 1991 to 2000.
13
From the above discussion, the overall picture that is observed can be summarized as follows.
Over the entire period of analysis from 1980 to 2009, tea and cardamom has registered a decline
in the growth rate of exports. There was a sharp decline in the growth rate of exports of coffee
and cardamom in the recent sub period of 2000-09. While the growth rate of exports in case of
tea experienced a deceleration. Both tea and rubber witnessed deceleration in the growth rate of
domestic consumption over the three sub-periods. Considering, the growth rate of domestic
prices, it can be observed that for tea it has been decelerating over the three sub-periods. Rubber
has registered highest growth in price in comparison to other crops, over the entire period of
analysis. There has been a sharp deceleration in the growth rate of price of cardamom in recent
period of 2000-09. The growth rate in the average daily employment in coffee and tea plantations
has sharply decelerated in the recent period.
To sum up, unlike in the earlier decades, in the recent sub period of 2000 to 2009, growth rate in
production, productivity, exports, domestic prices and employment was found to be decelerating
for majority of crops. Given the export oriented nature of these crops (except for rubber), it is
imperative to look at their performance in the light of the changing policy regimes both in terms
of trade policy reforms in India and multilateral trade liberalization internationally. During the
initiation of the reforms during the 1980s which got intensified in the 1990s, the growth rate in
productivity and production of certain crops10 was showing an increasing trend. However, the
deceleration in the growth rate came about during the period of 2000-09. This trend cannot be
delinked, interalia, from the changing international trading environment. It can be expected that
the greater integration of domestic market with the world market following the formation of
WTO in 1995 and signing up of different free trade agreements ( for eg. India-Sri Lanka, 1999;
India Thai, 2003; India-ASEAN, 2009) has not left the sector untouched. More over, there are
indications to show that there has been significant change in the role of commodity boards. As
argued by Harilal and Joseph (1998 ), the change has been in the form of intensified intervention
by the boards in the sphere of production and an almost withdrawal from marketing.
Though the overall picture obtained was that of decelerating trend in these indicators; in a
comparative perspective some crops were found to be performing relatively better than other
crops in terms of certain indicators, thus reflecting inter-crop variation in the performance of
10
From 1980s to 1990s, growth rate in production increased for coffee and cardamom while that in productivity
increased for coffee, rubber and cardamom.
14
these crops. For instance, tea was found to be doing comparatively better than other crops in
terms of production, productivity, and area. Compared to 1990s, in the recent sub-period there
was a marginal improvement in the growth rate in production of tea, its area under cultivation
and yield while there was a fall in exports, domestic prices and employment; and also a fall in
domestic consumption though marginally. Rubber was seen to be performing relatively better in
terms of exports, domestic prices and employment. Despite the fact that domestic demand for
rubber exceeds its production, exports in rubber has significantly increased over the years. The
growth rate in production of rubber has been decelerating over the three sub-periods. In the
recent sub-period, Coffee is observed to have experienced a decline in growth rate in production,
yield, exports and an increase in growth rate in prices and domestic consumption. Cardamom is
observed to be performing worst of all the crops in terms of indicators such as production,
productivity, area, exports and prices. However, it is not expected that these crops should
perform similarly but given the fact that all these crops are governed by their respective
commodity boards11, under the Ministry of Commerce, which carries out elaborate schemes12 for
the all-round development of these crops, it is expected that there would not be much of variation
in their performance. Hence in the light of these facts and the above observed findings, it is
important to ask the question as to what accounts for such poor and differential performance
among these crops.
Keeping this broad question in mind, the proposed study intends to undertake a detailed
investigation regarding the performance of these crops with special focus during the period under
globalization. Though it needs to be pointed out that these crops being historically export
oriented and given the pressure to maintain international competitiveness, their decelerating
export performance and issues related to price fluctuations and consequent fall in employment
are of major concern, but it can be argued that before understanding these issues it is important to
understand the factors that are at play in influencing the production conditions. Further, exports
and domestic consumption are invariably related to production conditions which govern the
11
The Coffee Board was established by an Act of Parliament in 1942. The Rubber Act of 1947 led to the
establishment of Rubber Board. The Tea Board of India is a statutory organisation established in 1954 under the Tea
Act, 1953 by the Government of India. Cardamom Board was established in 1964 and later it became the Spices
Board by covering all the 52 major and minor crops under it in 1986.
12
The commodity Boards are key organisations dealing with all aspects related to production, processing, marketing
and R&D in plantation crops (Joseph, 2012). For instance there are schemes to promote production such as planting
and replanting schemes. Export promotion schemes are also there in place.
15
supply of these crops. Further, there are studies (Veeramani 2012; Mohanakumar 2012; Nagoor
2010) which have carried out detailed analysis of the trade aspects of plantation commodities but
a comprehensive study regarding production aspects have been seriously lacking.
Review of Literature
Understanding Agricultural Performance
The existing literature on agricultural performance has been dwelt upon to draw further insights
regarding the issue. There are studies which have attempted to understand the production
conditions in agriculture. Bharadwaj (1974) analyses some aspects of production conditions in
Indian agriculture by focusing on the technological relations between inputs and outputs,
especially in relation to the size of the holdings. She has argued that production conditions
should not be treated as mere production activities wherein each producing unit is characterized
as a sort of black box turning inputs into outputs rather it has to consider the specific
characteristics of agrarian market relations. In similar lines, Vaidyanathan (2010) has pointed
that crop production is a function of two distinct but interrelated sets of factors. The first factor is
the agro-climatic conditions, technology of agriculture and agriculture-associated activities. The
second is the economic, social and institutional environments that shape the extent and efficiency
in the use of technology. Their roles and the nature of their influence on production and the
underlying processes are very different.
The issue of deceleration in the growth rate of yield and production has been widely discussed in
the context of Indian agriculture and the factors responsible for such a trend has been pointed out
by these studies. Balakrishnan et al.’s (2008) study of agricultural performance since 1991 finds
that the factors likely to be responsible for slow growth is a stagnation of public investment for
almost a quarter of a century, a slowing of irrigation expansion since 1991 and a downscaling of
production due to farm fragmentation. These factors along with the environmental stress have
amounted to a hardening of production conditions in Indian agriculture. They argue that the
slowing of agricultural expansion cannot be intrinsically linked to the reform in the economic
policy regime rather they point to structural factors on the supply side of Indian agriculture as
being worthy of greater attention in the explanation of slow agricultural growth. They bring out
the role played by non-price factors in the determination of agricultural growth largely via yield.
16
In his analysis of the agricultural performance since independence, Bhalla (2007) has also
pointed to underdeveloped infrastructure, lack of adequate irrigation and other infrastructural
facilities, lack of scientific knowledge among cultivators and lack of resources for using
adequate amount of inputs as well as lack of developed institutional facilities like credit
institutions, markets etc behind the low levels of yield in India. He emphasizes on the need for
strengthening R&D in agriculture and in renovating the extension systems in order to raise the
yield levels of major crops. On similar lines, Bhalla & Singh (2010) in their study of variations
in regional patterns of levels and growth of agricultural output during 1962-65 to 2003-06, has
pointed out that for reversing the trend towards deceleration of agricultural growth, it is
important to increase public investment in irrigation and other rural infrastructure in particular in
agricultural research and extension in all parts of India. Rao & Storm (1998) analyzing the
trajectory of Indian agriculture in its productive and distributive dimensions suggests that public
investment in rural infrastructure (including irrigation, research and extension, power and
transportation) have a direct and leading influence on the growth of India’s agricultural potential.
This observation has two important implications. One is that the growth of agricultural potential
depends only to a limited extent on the private accumulation process and therefore, on market
prices facing agricultural producers. The other is that the political economy of public investment
assumes fundamental significance. Vaidyanathan (2010) have pointed out that non-price factors
are far more important in determining the rate and pattern of output growth. However, with the
significant exception of land relations and agrarian structure, the role of institutional factors in
determining agricultural growth has received limited attention. Besides these studies on
agriculture in general, there is one important study by Mani & Santhakumar (2011) which have
specifically looked into the differential performance of two plantation crops, coconut and natural
rubber. They have explained the differential productivity of these crops in terms of relative rates
of diffusion of new technologies facilitated by their respective Sectoral Systems of Innovations.
It can be understood from the above discussion that all these studies have mainly highlighted the
importance of public investment in rural infrastructure in explaining the growth of agriculture.
Studies have stressed the importance of research and extension to the acceleration of agricultural
growth. It has been suggested that despite its importance, in the study of the factors underlying
the growth of agriculture, the issue of research and extension has received less attention than it
deserves (Balakrishnan et al., 2008).
17
Plantation Crops: Some Characteristics
Drawing from studies on production conditions as discussed above, the production function for
plantation crops can be conceptualized as being dependent on inputs such as land, labour, capital
and knowledge (among other inputs to production, one important knowledge based input is
research and extension services). However it may become evident that such a narrow approach
may not be adequate when we consider the specificities of plantation crops. Notwithstanding the
similarities between agriculture and plantations; there are certain characteristics of plantations
and different institutional and organizational framework governing it, which sets it apart from
agriculture. Plantations are said to have traditionally stood on a different footing from general
agriculture because of their mono-crop orientation (Sivaram, 2002). They are perennial crops
with a gestation lag between planting and harvesting. Unlike annual crops, the gestation period is
long, ranging from three to four years for cardamom, coffee and tea and about seven to eight
years for rubber. The production could continue for decades, once the gestation period is over.
Hence, in case of short duration crops like wheat, paddy and cotton, where farmers have the
option to periodically shift to other crops in line with the market situation, cultivators of
plantation crops will have to necessarily continue with the same crop over a long period (Joseph
and Joseph, 2005).
When it comes to market conditions, as has been mentioned earlier, plantation crops have always
been an important source of foreign exchange earnings for the economy. For these crops, the
open trade regime has continued from the colonial era. However, in the sphere of agriculture,
foreign trade flows have been perceived as a residual whether exportables or importables are
considered13 (Nayyar & Sen, 1994). Given the role of plantations as a foreign exchange earner, it
received considerable attention of the state. This is manifested in the setting up of commodity
boards for each of the crops and legislations that empowered these boards to undertake various
activities needed for plantation development. Further, despite agriculture being under state
subject, on account of their role in export earnings (import substitution in case of Natural
Rubber) these commodity boards were kept under the Ministry of Commerce, Central
13
“For exportables, the difference between actual domestic production and estimated domestic consumption has
determined the surplus available for export. For importables, the difference between estimated domestic production
and desired domestic consumption has deter-mined the volume of imports” (Nayyar & Sen, 1994)
18
Government of India. Over the years there has been an improvement in the condition of the
external sector and the pressure on these primary commodities to earn foreign exchange have
eased considerably. For instance, in 1950-51, plantation crops (tea, coffee and spices) accounted
for 20.8 per cent of India’s merchandise exports which declined to 13 per cent in the early 1970s
and in 2007-08, its share is only a little over 1 per cent (Joseph and George, 2010). As noted
earlier, the role of commodity boards also has undergone major change as the general economic
policy regime shifted from active role of the state to that of a facilitator.
As such the role of the plantation sector in the Indian economy and the institutional arrangements
for plantation development has undergone major changes. Where the earlier regime was that of
protection and state intervention in almost all spheres of plantation development, the current
regime is characterised by selective state intervention and the removal of tariff barriers. So the
survival of the sector is dependent on maintaining its competitiveness both in the domestic and
international markets. This pressure to maintain its competitiveness can be expected to have
intensified in the regime of new trading environment resulting from formation of WTO and
signing of various international trading agreements14 . This requires the sector to supply its
product at competitive prices in comparison to other competing countries both in the domestic as
well as foreign market. In the light of this heightened pressure to maintain its competitiveness, it
is important to ask the questions as to how has been the system of production and innovations
being doing over the year and how has the institutions changed to gear up the sector to this new
trading environment?
These questions needs to be dwelt upon by keeping in mind the following interventions related to
production, labour market, marketing, including trade and so on, that has a bearing on the system
of production and innovations in the plantations. At the instance of the commodity boards,
various production augmenting measures such as subsidized replanting/new planting schemes,
certified nursery scheme, water harvesting and irrigation schemes along with institutional
arrangements for financing these schemes have been undertaken. Further, research institutes
14
Several studies (Harilal & Joseph, 1999; Veeramani & Saini, 2011; Mohanakumar, 2012; among others) have
tried to analyse the impact of trade agreements on plantations commodities. For instance, Veeramani and Saini
2011, study of the impact of ASEAN-India FTA on coffee, tea and pepper shows that this agreement may cause a
significant increase in India’s import these commodities.
19
have been established under the respective commodity boards for each of these crops. They
facilitate technological innovations by undertaking R&D on all aspects of the crops concerned.
They were instrumental not only in developing high yielding varieties but also in evolving
package of practices oriented towards increasing productivity. Moreover an elaborate extension
network has also been established for the diffusion of R&D outcomes among the growers.
In the sphere of marketing, institutional intervention in the form of various rules and laws for the
regulation of the behaviour of different actors involved in marketing along with trade promotion,
also came into existence from time to time to ensure a fair share for the producers in consumers’
rupee and to enhance international competitiveness. Given the high instability associated with
the price of most of the commodities the marketing interventions were also aimed at ensuring
stability in prices and income for farmers (Narayana 1994). Here again, there has been a
withdrawal of the state from its active interventions in the spheres like market to greater focus on
production and export competitiveness (Joseph and George, 2011).
Concerning the labour market in plantations, there has been an important institutional
intervention in the form of Plantation Labour Act, 1951 (PLA) which provides for the welfare of
plantation labour and regulates the conditions of work in plantations. PLA is the result of an
attempt on the part of the government to reformulate the master-servant relationship that existed
during the colonial period to that of employer-employee relationship. This Act has been enacted
by the central governments but administered by the state governments. It is applicable to any
land used as plantations, which measures 5 hectares or more in which 15 or more persons are
working. The state governments are however free to declare any plantation land less than 5
hectares or having less than 15 persons to be covered by the Act. PLA is unique in the fact that
while the Indian labour legislation in general restricts itself to wages and working conditions at
the place of work, the PLA is the only Act that seeks to raise the living standards of plantation
workers (Bhowmik, 2002; Bharali, 2004). It contains several provisions related to housing
conditions, health and hygiene, education and social welfare which the employers are required to
provide to the workers and it also imposes restrictions on working hours. Under the Act, the
employers have to provide to their workers, compulsory housing, sanitary facilities and water
supply in the labour residences, medical facilities; crèches for infants and primary school for
children. However, with the opening up of plantations to international competition leading to
20
large price fluctuations, the growing age of plants, declining productivity and stagnant
profitability has led to clamour amongst the growers to reduce this social cost burden of
plantation labour on them (Joseph & George, 2011).
In the light of the above discussion, some important questions can be raised in this regard.
Despite an elaborate institutional and organizational mechanism in place what explains for the
existing performance of the plantation crops and the inter-crop variation therein. What are the
institutional arrangements governing the production conditions in the plantation sector and how
has it changed over the years? What has been the role of the state in influencing the production
conditions? What has been the impact of the performance of the crops on the major stakeholders
such as growers, especially the small and marginal growers who dominate the sector at present
and the workers? To the extent that domestic production conditions along with international
trading arrangements and institutional context has undergone major change, analysis of the issue
at hand calls for an evolutionary perspective. Here it needs to be noted that the studies on
plantation crops mostly focused on the trade aspects of plantation commodities with very limited
attempt to understand the production system in the plantation sector and this add relevance to the
proposed study. The only plausible exception in this regard is the study by Strasser (2009) who
in the context of economic liberalization, a reduced role of the state and changing institutional
setting has tried to study the various impacts of these processes on the livelihood of the rubber
growers in Kerala. But his study has looked into livelihood strategies and not on the system of
production and innovations which undeniably has an impact on the livelihood of the growers.
The proposed study intends to address this gap.
Objectives
Based on the above discussion, the following objectives have been laid out for the proposed
study.
To trace the evolution of institutional settings and organizational arrangements- both domestic
and international, governing the plantation commodities.
To analyse the performance of plantation crops and the intercrop variation therein across space
and time in the light of the changing institutional context,
21
•
Here we will try to focus on factors such as Research and Extension Services, various
production promotion schemes, labour market interventions, plantation infrastructure
such as marketing and processing which have a bearing on production.
To analyse the impact of performance of these crops on the growers and workers
• In this objective the study will look at the impact of performance of the plantation crops
on growers and workers in terms of selected indicators.
Analytical Framework
The issue is that of understanding the performance of the plantation crops and the factors
underlying its performance. In this respect the question that arises is how much of the black box
regarding the conversion of inputs into output has been opened up. Studies have looked into
technology which is a narrower view, so studies have suggested about broader aspects such as
the role of institutions. Thus it can be argued that an understanding of the interaction and
learning between various actors involved in the production process within the framework of
institutional arrangements is required. Hence production conditions can be understood in terms
of system of innovation and production framework.
In the following lines, we briefly engage with the literature on the innovation system and then go
on to explain how this framework on system of innovation can be applied to the plantation sector
for understanding the production process.
The concept of innovation system is said to have originated with the work of Georg Friedrich
List (1841). His work ‘National System of Political Economy’ was primarily concerned with
exploring the ways and means by which a developing country (Germany of 19th century) could
catch up with a developed country (England of 19th century). This induced to List to propound
the idea of infant industry protection15. In 1987 some of the ideas of List for national capability
building was articulated by Christopher Freeman for analyzing the emergence of japan as a
major economic power. He showed how by developing a national system of innovation Japan
has opened up a new ‘Technology gap’ over other countries. Thus the ‘National System of
15
For details see Joseph (2012) “Towards a Sustainable System of Innovation: The Case of Plantation Sector in
Kerala”
22
Political Economy’ of List was given the name of ‘National System of Innovation’ by Freeman.
Further Lundvall (1992) and Nelson (1993) have made considerable contribution towards
evolving the concept of National Innovation System (NIS). In their studies, knowledge was
considered as the most important resource in the modern economy and its acquisition as an
interactive process. They deviated from the traditional version to technology and innovation and
propounded a modern version. The traditional version or the narrow and linear approach to
technology and innovation (invention-innovation-diffusion) was confined to product and process
innovation. The modern version is a broader interdisciplinary approach in an evolutionary
perspective with focus on interactive learning and competence building within an economy as
key to economic growth and welfare. It emphasizes on interdependence and non-linearity
wherein institutions or certain rules and norms play a central role in defining the nature and
substance of the relationships between various actors. Thus the narrow version links innovation
to science while the broader one encompasses learning, innovation and competence building
(Lundvall 2007). In a narrower perspective, the innovation system is in tune with the earlier
analyses of national science systems and national technology policies. It aimed at mapping
indicators of national specialization and performance with respect to innovation in new products
and process, research and development efforts; and science and technology organisations. In
contrast, the broader perspective considers social institutions, macro-economic regulation,
financial systems, education and communication infrastructures and labour market conditions as
far as these have impact on learning, innovation and competence building process (Gu and
Lundvall 2006). It links the micro behaviour to the system level. There exists two-way relation
between them- changes in the system levels are seen as outcomes resulting from interactions at
the micro level whereas the system shapes the learning, innovation and competence building at
the micro level. Keeping this broader perspective in mind, thereafter there has been subsequent
developments focusing on systems of innovations at the regional (Asheim and Gertler, 2004),
local (Lastres and Cassiolato 2005), sectoral (Malerba, 2004) and technological (Carlsson and
Stankiewitz 1995) levels (as cited in Joseph 2012).
Taking cue from the innovation system framework, the innovation system in plantation sector
has been conceptualized by Joseph (2012) with the help of the following diagram.
23
Figure 4: Innovation System in India’s Plantation Sector
International Governance sub system
Organisations and institutions
Knowledge Subsystem
Research & Extension
Organisations , rules and
Laws governing them
Production sub systems
Producers, workers
Associations of planters,
trade unions
Commodity boards
Marketing/Demand
subsystem
Dealers exporters
National governance Subsystem
Domestic organisations and Institutions
Source: Adapted from Joseph, 2012
In the figure, three different versions of the innovation system is presented- very narrow, narrow
and the wider version. In a very narrow perspective, innovation system in plantation will involve
only the knowledge generating and diffusing organisations and institutions16 like policies, rules,
norms, practices and so on. The narrow perspective of the innovation system involves the
producers (both small and large), workers (both in organized large estates and informal workers);
other organisations like commodity boards, trade unions, associations of planters; and other
agents involved in processing and marketing (both domestic sales and exports). The actions and
interactions between these actors are governed by various institutions (Joseph 2012).
The wider version of the innovation system involves international organisations ( e.g WTO) and
institutions (eg multilateral agreements with bearing on plantations like the Agreement on
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures); as well as national organisations (eg commodity boards)
and the organisations and institutions both at the state and national level (eg rules on land
utilization).
16
Institutions are the rules of the game in a society or more formally, are the humanly devised constraints that shape
human interaction (North, 1990). He makes a clear distinction between organizations and institutions. Organisations
are defined as group of individuals bound by some common purpose to achieve objectives. As such institutions are
the rules of the games while the organisations are the players.
24
Considering this innovation system framework, the production process in plantation sector will
essentially be an outcome of the interaction between different agents in the innovation system
and the institutional framework that govern such interactions.
Data sources and Method of Analysis
This study will be based on both secondary and primary sources of data. First a detailed analysis
of the performance of the plantation sector with respect to selected plantation crops will be
undertaken. For this purpose, the study will explore secondary data from the respective
commodity boards and the existing literature. The theoretical discourse on production conditions
and the empirical evidence on the factors affecting it would be examined from the existing
literature on agriculture in general and plantation in particular. The relevant institutional
interventions governing production conditions will also be studied and critically examined in this
context. To capture the micro processes of the situation, a structured primary survey would be
conducted among the various stakeholders related to the sector namely growers, commodity
boards, applying multistage stratified random sampling.
References:
Asheim, B and Gretler, M. (2004). The Geography of Innovation: Regional Innovation Systems,
in J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery and R.Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford:
Oxford University Press
Balakrishnan, P., Golait, R., & Kumar, P. (2008). Agricultural Growth in India Since 1991.
Development Research Group, Study no. 27, Department of Economic Analysis and Policy,
Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai.
Bhalla, G. (2007). Indian Agriculture Since Independence (First.). New Delhi: National Book
Trust.
Bhalla, G and Singh, G. (2010). Final Report on Planning Commission Project Growth of Indian
Agriculture : A District Level Study.
Bharadwaj, K. (1974). Production Conditions in Indian Agriculture: A Study based on Farm
Management Surveys. Cambridge University Press.
Bharali, G. (2004). Labour Unrest and Social Security of Plantation Workers: A Case Study.
Seminar on Labour and Employment Relations in Plantations in a Globalising Economy.
Guwahati: V.V Giri National Labour Institute.
25
Bhowmik, S. (2002). Productivity and Labour Standards in Tea Plantation Sector in India. In A.
Sivananthiran, & C. V. Ratnam (Eds.), Labour and Social Issues in Plantations in South Asia.
New Delhi: International Labour Organisation.
Carlsson, B and Stankiewicz, R. (1995). On the Nature, Function and Composition of
Technological Systems, in Carlson (ed.) Technological Systems and Economic Performance: The
Case of Factory Automation. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Freeman, C. (1987). Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan
(London; Pinter).
George k, T., Haridasan, V., & SreeKumar, B. (1988). Role of Changes Structural Government
and Industry Plantation Rubber in. Economic and Political Weekly, 23(48), M158-M166.
Giriappa, S. (1989). The Role of Plantation Crops in Agricultural Development (p. 208). Daya
Publishing House, Delhi.
Gu, S. and Lundvall, B.A. (2006b). China’s Innovation System and the Move Toward
Harmonious Growth and Endogenous Innovation, Innovation, Management, Policy and Practice,
8(1/2), 1-26.
Harilal, K. and Joseph, K. (1999). India-Sri Lanka Free Trade Accord. Economic and Political
Weekly, 34(13), 750-753.
Harilal, K. and Joseph, K. (1998). Natural Rubber Perils of Policy. Economic and Political
Weekly, 33(27), 1689-1690.
Hartemink, A. E. (2005). Plantation agriculture in the tropics Environmental issues, 34(1), 1
Joseph, B. and Joseph, K.J. (2005). Commercial Agriculture in Kerala after the WTO. South Asia
Economic Journal, March 2005 , Vol. 6 no. 1, 37-57.
Joseph, K. J. and George, P. S. (2010). Structural Infirmities in India's Plantation SectorNatural Rubber and Spices. National Research Programme on Plantation Development. Centre
for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram.
Joseph, K. (2010). Towards a New Paradigm for Plantation Development in India: An Analysis
of the System of Production and Innovation from an Inclusive Growth Perspective. Discussion
Paper No.1, National Research Programme on Plantation Development. Centre for Development
Studies,Thiruvananthapuram.
Joseph, K. (2012). Towards a Sustainable System of Innovation: The Case of Plantation Sector
in Kerala, Paper prepared for the Kerala Environmental Congress, 16-18 August, 2012.
26
Lastres, H. and Cassiolato J. (2005). Innovation Systems and Local Productive Arrangements:
New Strategies to Promote the Generation, Acquisition and Diffusion of Knowledge, Innovation:
Management, Policy and Practice, 7(2-3): 172-187.
List, F. (1841). The National System of Political Economy, English Edition (London: Longman
1904)
Lundvall, B. A. (ed.) (1992) National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation
and Interactive Learning (London: Pinter Publishers).
Lundvall, B.A. (ed). (2007). Innovation System Research: Where it came from and where it
might go, Globelics Working Paper, No. 2007-01, available at www.globelics.org.
Malerba, Franco. (2004). Sectoral Systems: How and Why Innovation differs Across Sectors, in
J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery and R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Mani, S. and Santhakumar, V. (2011). Diffusion of New Technologies and Productivity.
Economic and Political Weekly, xlvi(6), 58-64.
Mitra, N. (1991). Indian Tea Industry: Problems and Policies. Economic and Political Weekly ,
26 (48), M153-M156,.
Mohanakumar, S. (2012). Plantation Crops under Trade Liberalisation: Analysis in the Contextof
Indo-ASEAN FTA. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67(1), 139-156.
Narayana, D (1994), Government intervention in Commodity Trade: An Analysis of the coffee
Trade in India, Working paper No. 256, Centre for Development Studies, Trivandrum
Nayyar, D. and Sen, A. (1994). International Trade Sector and in the India Agricultural.
Economic and Political Weekly, 29(20), 1187-1203.
Nelson, Richard.R. (1993). National Innovations Systems: A Comparative Analysis, Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
North, D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Sivaram, B. (2002). Plantations in South Asia: Improving Working Conditions and Productivity
through Social Dialogue. In A. Sivananthiran, & C. V. Ratnam (Eds.), Labour and Social Issues
in Plantations in South Asia. New Delhi: International Labour Organisation.
Strasser, B. (2009). We are as Flexible as Rubber! Livelihood Strategies, Diversity and the Local
Setting of Rubber Small Holders in Kerala, South India. Manohar: New Delhi.
27
Rao, J. M. and Storm, S. (1998). Distribution and Growth in Indian Agriculture. In T. Byres
(Ed.), The Indian Economy: Major Debates Since Independence (pp. 193-248). Delhi: Oxford
University Press.
Vaidyanathan, A. (2010). Agricultural Growth in India: Role of Technology, Incentives and
Institutions (First., pp. 1-217). New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Veeramani, C. and Saini, G. K. (2011). Impact of ASEAN-India Preferential Trade Agreement
on Plantation Commodities : A Simulation Analysis. Economic and Political Weekly, XLVI(10),
83-92.
Gu, S. and Lundvall, B. A. (2006a). Policy Learning as a Key process in the Transformation of
the Chinese Innovation Systems in B.A Lundvall, P. Intarakurmend and J. Vang (eds), Asian
Innovation Systems in Transition, Cheltenham: UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar
28