A Comparative Economic Assessment of Certified Organic (Traditional and HYV) Rice and Inorganic Rice Cultivation in Pudukkottai District of Tamil Nadu, India
M. Vinoth *
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture and Research Institute, Karaikal – 609603, Puducherry U.T., India.
L. Umamaheswari
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture and Research Institute, Karaikal – 609603, Puducherry U.T., India.
K. R. Karunakaran
Centre for Water and Geospatial Studies, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore – 641003, India.
A. Pouchepparadjou
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture and Research Institute, Karaikal – 609603, Puducherry U.T., India.
N. Swaminathan
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture and Research Institute, Karaikal – 609603, Puducherry U.T., India.
S. Parthasarathi
Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture and Research Institute, Karaikal – 609603, Puducherry U.T., India.
C. Aroutselvam
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture and Research Institute, Karaikal – 609603, Puducherry U.T., India.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Aim: Rice is a critical crop for a nation's food security. The study estimated the costs and returns, production function, resource-use efficiency, and constraints in certified organic traditional, certified organic HYV, and inorganic rice cultivation using primary data collected from 100 rice farmers in the study area. Analytical tools such as fixed- and variable-cost concepts, the Cobb-Douglas production function, the Marginal Value Product: Marginal Factor Cost (MVP/MFC) ratio, and Garrett’s ranking technique were used.
Place and Duration of the Study: Pudukkottai district, a rice-growing region located in the Cauvery Delta Zone of Tamil Nadu, was purposively chosen as the study area. Primary data were obtained from rice farmers during February-March 2026 using a pre-tested and structured interview schedule. The duration of the study was six months.
Results: Marginal and small farmers constituted 80 per cent of the sample, indicating the prevalence of small-scale rice farming among the sample farms. Human labour and machinery were major components of the total cost of rice cultivation. Returns per rupee of investment were higher for traditional rice (1.42), followed by organic HYV (1.25) and inorganic rice (1.15). Production function analysis revealed that organic inputs and machinery had a positive and significant influence on organic rice yield, whereas seed, neem seed kernel extract, irrigation, and machinery had a positive and significant influence in inorganic rice farms. The constraints reported by farmers were low yield of organic rice, high cost of weeding, and lack of quality seeds in both traditional and organic HYV rice cultivation, whereas pest and disease incidence, high cost of weeding, and labour scarcity were reported in inorganic rice cultivation.
Conclusion: Traditional rice cultivation was more profitable than organic HYV and inorganic rice. In addition, traditional and organic HYV rice cultivation were eco-friendly alternatives for obtaining higher income and protecting soil health.
Keywords: Traditional rice, Organic High Yielding Variety (HYV) rice, inorganic rice, cost and returns, cobb-douglas production function, resource use efficiency, constraints, Garrett’s ranking