Thesis

PRODUCTION AND MARKET DYNAMICS OF
TOMATO IN KARNATAKA
CHANDRAPRABHA, S.
PAL 0120
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL MARKETING,

COOPERATION AND BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
BANGALORE
2012
PRODUCTION AND MARKET DYNAMICS OF
TOMATO IN KARNATAKA
CHANDRAPRABHA, S.
PAL 0120
Thesis submitted to the

University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore
In partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the award of the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE (Agriculture)
IN
AGRICULTURAL MARKETING AND CO- OPERATION
BANGALORE SEPTEMBER, 2012


Affectionately Dedicated to
My Beloved Parents
Sri Srinivasa Murthy, K. and
Smt. Manjula, N., Brother
Mr. Raghu, S. and My Friend
Mr. Sundaresh, M. N.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL MARKETING,
COOPERATION AND BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
BANGALORE
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the project report entitled “PRODUCTION
AND MARKET DYNAMICS OF TOMATO IN KARNATAKA” submitted by
Ms. CHANDRAPRABHA, S., ID No. PAL 0120 in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for award of degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE (Agriculture)
IN AGRICULTURAL MARKETING AND Co-OPERATION to the
University of Agricultural Sciences, Bengaluru, is a record of bonafide
research work done by her during the period of her study in this
University under my guidance and supervision and the Project Report
has not previously formed the basis for the award of and degree,
diploma, associateship, fellowship or other similar titles.
Bangalore (C. P. GRACY)

September, 2012 Professor and Major Advisor
APPROVED BY:
Chairperson : __________________________
(C. P. GRACY)
Members : 1. __________________________
(M. S. JAYARAM)
2. __________________________
(M.R. GIRISH)
3. __________________________
(V. MANJUNATH)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
One would not achieve, without all the help, encouragement and the wishes of
near and dear ones. Teachers, parents, friends and well-wishers are an integral part of
this. I owe a lot and it is always a difficult task expressing and putting into words the
sense of gratitude towards them.
It was my fortune to work under Dr. C. P. GRACY, Professor, Department of

Agricultural Marketing, Co-operation and Business Management, UAS, GKVK,
Bangalore and chairman of my advisory committee. I wish to express my deep sense of
gratitude and heartfelt thanks for her valuable guidance, meritorious support,
unquantifiable help, constant supervision and genuine counselling in making my efforts
focused towards the pursuit of the study.
I am greatly indebted to the Members of my Advisory Committee, viz.,

Dr. M. S. Jayaram, Professor, Department of Agricultural Marketing, Co-operation
and Business Management, UAS, GKVK, Bangalore; Dr. M. R. Girish, (Senior Scale),
Assistant Professor, Department of Agricultural Marketing, Cooperation and Business
Management, UAS, GKVK, Bangalore; Mr. V. Manjunath, Associate Professor,
Department of Agricultural Statistics and Applied Mathematics, UAS, GKVK,
Bangalore.
I am indebted to all my teachers, viz., Dr. M. S. Ganapathy,

Dr. G. N. Nagaraja, Dr. B. M. Shashidhara, Mr. T. N. Venkata Reddy, Dr. P. K.
Mandanna, Dr. B. M. Ramchandra Reddy, Dr. P.K. Mandanna, and Mr. P. V. Rame
Gowda, Department of Agricultural Marketing, Co-operation and Business
Management, UAS, GKVK, Bangalore for their valuable suggestions and support
during the course of my degree programme.
I desire to express my reverential thanks to my parents Sri. Srinivasa Murthy,

K. and Smt. Manjula, my brother Mr. Raghu, S. and my friend Mr. Sundaresh, M. N.
for their invariable encouragement during the course of my study.
I wish to place my respect for the Farmers of Sidlaghatta, Consumers of
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore urban, Kolar and Vaddahalli APMCs for their
cooperation during primary and secondary data collection.
I acknowledge gratefully to my seniors Mamathalakshmi, Shwetha, Nagashree

and Akshatha Nayak for helping me while carrying out study and clearing all doubts
during the study.
Friendship is the most important ingredient in the recipe of life and it adds more
flavour when that is from different states with different language and culture. I am
fortunate to have a myriad of friends here. I am thankful to my beloved friends
Shwetha, B. M., Shilpa, B. V., Javeed, Ravikumar, N. S., Karthik, and many others
for their lovely friendship, love, help and care and for making the two year study very
much enjoyable and memorable.
I remain ever thankful to the non-teaching staff, viz., Mr. Manjunath, Mr.
Vinod and Mr. Rajanna of Department of Agricultural Marketing, Co-operation &
Business Management, UAS, GKVK, Bangalore for providing me the necessary
materials during my project work.
I also acknowledge each and every chunk of help, guidance and suggestion from
all my fellow friends, teachers and well-wishers that contributed for the success of my
work.
……. Omission of any names in this brief acknowledgement does not mean lack
of gratitude.
Bangalore.
September, 2012 [Chandraprabha, S.]
PRODUCTION AND MARKET DYNAMICS OF TOMATO IN
KARNATAKA
CHANDRAPRABHA, S.
ABSTRACT
Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) is one of the common fruit

vegetables grown round the year in almost all parts of India in an area of
8.65 lakh ha under diverse climatic conditions. The World tomato
production was 145.75 million tonnes from an area of 43.38 lakh
hectares in 2010. In India, Karnataka leads with 1.65 lakh tonnes of
tomato from 4.83 lakh hectares area. The study was conducted in
Chikkaballapur, Kolar and Bangalore Urban districts using data from 60
farmers and 100 consumers to assess the economics of tomato
production, market integration of selected tomato markets and consumer
preference for value added products of tomato. The results revealed that,
the per acre total cost of cultivation of rabi season tomato for small,
medium, large and pooled category of respondents was Rs. 1,14,658, Rs.
1,15,476, Rs. 1,17,128 and Rs. 1,15,752 respectively. The respective
gross returns were Rs. 1,55,871, Rs. 1,60,020 and Rs. 1,74,043 per acre.
The Co-integration analysis revealed a simultaneous feedback in prices;
Kolar market prices had greater influence on Vaddahalli market prices.
Kolar market tomato is distributed to Chennai, parts of Andhra Pradesh,
Madhya Pradesh, Kerala, Orissa and from Vaddahalli it is distributed to
Chennai, Kerala, Vizag and Vijaywada. The Best- Worst scaling technique
analysis of preference for tomato ketchup by rural and urban consumers
revealed that ‘no adulteration’ (75.21 and 66.28) was the most important
consideration, while fresh tomato preference was based on ‘size’ (74.5)
and ‘colour’ (71.01) of tomato in respective areas.
September, 2012 (C. P. Gracy)

Dept. of Agricultural Marketing Major Advisor
Co-operation and Business Management,
UAS, GKVK, Bangalore-560 065
PÀ£ÁðlPÀzÀ mÉÆªÀiÁmÉÆ GvÁàzÀ£É ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀiÁgÀÄPÀmÉÖ QæAiÀiÁ²Ã®vÉ
ZÀAzÀæ¥Àæ¨sÀ, J¸ï.
¥Àæ§AzsÀ ¸ÁgÁA±À
mÉÆªÀiÁmÉÆ ªÉÊ«zsÀåªÀÄAiÀÄ ºÀªÁUÀÄt ¹ÜwAiÀÄ°è 8.65 ®PÀë ºÉPÉÖÃgï ¥ÀæzÉÃ±ÀzÀ°è ¨sÁgÀvÀzÀ

§ºÀÄvÉÃPÀ ¨sÁUÀUÀ¼À°è ªÀµÀð ¥ÀÇwð ¨É¼ÉAiÀÄÄªÀ ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ºÀtÄÚ vÀgÀPÁjUÀ°è MAzÁVzÉ. «±ÀézÀ
mÉÆªÀiÁmÉÆ GvÁàzÀ£É 2010 gÀ°è 43.38 ®PÀë ºÉPÉÖÃgï ¥ÀæzÉÃ±ÀzÀ°è 145.75 zÀ±À®PÀë l£ï DVzÉ.
¨sÁgÀvÀzÀ°è, PÀ£ÁðlPÀ 4.83 ®PÀë ºÉPÉÖÃgï ¥ÀæzÉÃ±ÀzÀ°è 1.65 ®PÀë l£ïUÀ¼ÀµÀÄÖ mÉÆªÀiÁmÉÆzÀ
GvÁàzÀ£ÉUÉ PÁgÀtªÁVzÉ. mÉÆªÀiÁmÉÆ GvÁàzÀ£ÉAiÀÄ CxÀð±Á¸ÀÛç, DAiÉÄÌ ªÀiÁrzÀ mÉÆªÀiÁmÉÆ
ªÀiÁgÀÄPÀmÉÖUÀ¼À KQÃPÀgÀt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀiË®å ªÀ¢üðvÀ GvÀà£ÀßUÀ¼À §UÉÎ UÁæºÀPÀgÀ DzÀåvÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß w½AiÀÄ®Ä
60 gÉÊvÀgÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 100 UÁæºÀPÀgÀ£ÀÄß aPÀÌ§¼Áî¥ÀÅgÀ, PÉÆÃ¯ÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯ÉèUÀ½AzÀ
DAiÉÄÌ ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁVzÉ. ¥sÀ°vÁA±ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæwQæ¬Ä¸ÀÄªÁUÀ, aPÀÌ, ªÀÄzsÀåªÀÄ, zÉÆqÀØ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÉÆæÃrüÃPÀj¹zÀ
ªÀUÀðzÀªÀjUÉ »AUÁgÀÄ mÉÆªÀiÁmÉÆzÀ PÀÈ¶¬ÄAzÁV ¥Àæw JPÀgÉUÉ, MlÄÖ ¨É¯É gÀÆ. 1,14,658, gÀÆ.
1,15,476, gÀÆ. 1,17,128 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ gÀÆ. 1,15,752 DVzÉ ºÁUÀÆ MlÄÖ DzÁAiÀÄ ¥Àæw JPÀgÉUÉ gÀÆ.
1,55,871, gÀÆ. 1,60,020 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 1,74,043 DVzÉ. ¸ÀºÀ KQÃPÀgÀt «±ÉèÃµÀuÉAiÀÄ°è ¨É¯ÉAiÀÄ
KPÀPÁ°PÀ ¥ÀæwQæAiÉÄAiÀÄ£ÀÄß §»gÀAUÀ¥Àr¸À¯ÁVzÉ. PÉÆÃ¯ÁgÀ ªÀiÁgÀÄPÀmÉÖAiÀÄ ¨É¯ÉAiÀÄÄ ªÀqÀØºÀ½î
ªÀiÁgÀÄPÀmÉÖ ¨É¯ÉAiÀÄ ªÉÄÃ¯É ªÀÄºÀvÀézÀ ¥Àæ¨sÁªÀªÀ£ÀÄß ©ÃjzÉ. PÉÆÃ¯ÁgÀ ªÀiÁgÀÄPÀmÉÖAiÀÄ mÉÆªÀiÁmÉÆ
ZÉ£ÉÊ, DAzsÀæ ¥ÀæzÉÃ±ÀzÀ ¨sÁUÀUÀ¼ÀÄ, ªÀÄzsÀå ¥ÀæzÉÃ±À, PÉÃgÀ¼À, Mj¸ÁìzÀ°è ªÀiÁgÀlªÁUÀÄwÛzÉ ºÁUÀÆ
ªÀqÀØºÀ½î¬ÄAzÀ ZÉ£ÉÊ, PÉÃgÀ¼À, ªÉÊeÁUï ªÀÄvÀÄÛ «dAiÀÄªÁqÀzÀ°è «vÀj¸À¯ÁUÀÄwÛzÉ. CvÀÄåvÀÛªÀÄ- PÉlÖ
¸ÉÌÃ°AUï vÀAvÀæ «±ÉèÃµÀuÉAiÀÄ°è UÁæ«ÄÃt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £ÀUÀgÀ UÁæºÀPÀgÀÄ mÉÆªÀiÁmÉÆ PÉZÀ¥ïUÉ 'PÀ®¨ÉgÀPÉ
E®è' (75.21 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 66.28)ªÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀæªÀÄÄR CzÀåvÉAiÀiÁV ¥ÀgÀUÀtÂ¸À¯ÁVzÉ. CzÉÃ jÃw vÁeÁ
mÉÆªÀiÁmÉÆzÀ DzÀåvÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß 'UÁvÀæ' (74.5) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ '§tÚ' (71.01) DzsÁgÀzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É ¥ÀæªÀÄÄRªÁV
DAiÀiÁ ¥ÀæzÉÃ±ÀUÀ¼À°è ¥ÀjUÀtÂ¸À¯ÁVzÉ.
¸É¥ÉÖA§gï, 2012 (¹.¦. UÉÃæ ¹)

PÀÈ¶ ªÀiÁgÀÄPÀmÉÖ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀåªÀºÁgÀ ¤ªÀðºÀuÉ «¨sÁUÀ ªÀÄÄRå ¸À®ºÉUÁgÀgÀÄ
PÀÈ¶ «±Àé«zÁå¤®AiÀÄ
f.PÉ.«.PÉ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ-560 065
CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE No.
I INTRODUCTION 1-7
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 8-27
III METHODOLOGY 28-49
IV RESULTS 50-102
V DISCUSSION 103-119
VI SUMMARY 120-125
VII REFERENCES 126-135
APPENDICES 136-155
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
PARTICULARS
No. No.
3.1 Composition of sample respondents of the study 32
Details of respondents, villages and taluks selected for

3.2 33
the study in Chikkaballapur district
4.1 Demographic profile of farmers 51
Shift in tomato acreage planted in response to prevailing

4.2 53
market prices
4.3 Input usage for tomato cultivation 55
4.4 Cost of cultivation of tomato in rabi season 57
4.5 Yield and returns from tomato production 59
4.6 Costs and returns from tomato production 60
Market share of top five traders and dispatch

4.7 62
destinations from Kolar tomato market
Market share of top five traders and dispatch

4.8 63
destinations from Vaddahalli tomato market
Month wise market destinations of tomato from Kolar

4.9 64
APMC
4.10 Results of Unit Root Test (ADF test) 66
Johansen's Co-integration test for selected tomato

4.11 67
markets
4.12 Results of Pair-wise Granger Causality Tests 69
4.13 Vector Error Correction Estimates 70
4.14 Demographic profile of consumers 72
4.15 Consumer preference for fresh tomato 75

TABLE PAGE
PARTICULARS
No. No.
Factors influencing buying decisions of value added

4.16 77
tomato products
Reasons for not consuming value added tomato

4.17 79
products
4.18 Sources of Information on value added products 81
Association between quantity purchased and family size

4.19 83-84
of consumers
Brand loyalty of consumers to tomato value added

4.20 86
products
4.21 Factors influencing brand preference 87-90
Reasons for not preferring brands of value added

4.22 95-97
products
Estimating attributes of tomato ketchup using Best-

4.23 100
Worst scaling
Estimating attributes of fresh tomato using Best-Worst

4.24 102
scaling
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Between
Particulars
No. Pages
1 Map showing the location of the study area 28-29
Share of different items of costs in total cost of

2 57-58
tomato cultivation
Daily price behaviour of tomato in Kolar and

3 64-65
Vaddahalli APMC markets
Introduction
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
India is the second largest producer of vegetables next only to

China with 16.5 mt from an area of 865 thousand hectares. In the
context of alleviating malnutrition in India, efforts are under way to
enrich carbohydrates in cereals, vegetables can be used as a supplement
in a very effective manner. Most of the vegetables being short duration
crops can be grown in succession to realize higher income. The daily
minimum requirement of vegetables, according to the universal dietary
standards is 284 g per head, i.e., about 20 per cent of the daily
requirement of the total food of an adult. This requirement is more in the
case of a vegetarian diet. Although India is one of the leading producers
of vegetables in the world supplying more than 100 types. The per capita
consumption is only 86 g against FAO recommendation of 400 g per day.
This is mainly because of post harvest losses to the tune of 30-40 per
cent of production. In order to improve the quality of the diet of people, it
is essential that vegetable production should be increased considerably.
This objective can be achieved by increasing the yield per unit area
through adopting better agricultural techniques. Among the vegetables,
potato, tomato, cabbage, brinjal, cauliflower, beans, radish, carrot, ladies
finger, knol khol, beetroot, and gourds are the major ones. Tomato
(Lycopersicon esculentum) is one of the commonly used fruit vegetables in
different food preparations. Tomato is being grown under diverse climatic
conditions except extreme weather conditions and water logged soils.
Tomato is used regularly along with other vegetables and it constitutes a
good part of human diet.
Dwindling labour availability and price stagnation of field crops

has resulted in the shift towards horticultural crops. Further National
Horticulture Mission (NHM), a centrally sponsored scheme launched by
Government of India during the year 2005-06 (Tenth Plan). The objective
of this scheme is to provide holistic growth of horticulture sector in India
and to enhance horticulture production. The various development
programmes of NHM have positively impacted horticulture development
on the country. Consequently area, yield and exports of many fruits and
vegetables have increased.
Global tomato production
Tomato is one of the most important "protective foods" both

because of its special nutritive value and widespread production. Tomato
is said to be native of tropical America which spread to other parts of the
world in the 16th century and it became popular in India for the last six
decades. It is the world's third largest vegetable crop after potato and
sweet potato. Tomatoes have been used as food by the inhabitants of
Central and South America since pre- historic times.
The World production was 136 million tonne of tomato from an

area of 48 lakh hectares in 2009-10. China is the largest tomato
producing country in the world, almost contributing for 25 per cent of
world’s tomato production. During 2010-11 China stood first with
annual production of 33.91 mt followed by India (16.5 mt), USA (13.71
mt), Turkey (10.98 mt), Egypt (9.20 mt) and Italy (5.97 mt). These six
countries contributed for around 63 per cent of world’s tomatoes
production.
Status of tomato processing in the world
Tomato is available in the market round the year. It is considered

as an important commercial and dietary vegetable crop. Tomato is a rich
source of minerals, vitamins and organic acid, essential amino acids and
dietary fibre. Tomato hybrids suitable for processing are cultivated to
ease glut in the market. Tomato is processed into ketchup, sauce,
chutney, soup, paste, puree, etc. The world trade of processed tomatoes,
such as puree, paste, sauce and tinned tomatoes has intensified in
recent years as world exports of tomato products continue to increase.
China is one of the largest exporters of tomato products in the World
accounting for 25 per cent of tomato paste exports by volume. Other key
countries that supply tomato paste include the European Union, United
States of America, China, Turkey and Chile. Due to lack of proper
processing technology India’s export potential is limited. Tomatoes are
delivered to factory in open trucks for short distances to minimise
transport and packing cost. India is faced with a paradoxical situation of
farmers dumping tomatoes on streets during glut and on the other hand,
ketchup manufacturers importing tomato paste from China.
Tomato production in India
Tomato occupies a significant position in vegetable production of

the country. Area under tomato in India was 6.34 lakh hectares
accounting for 7.9 per cent of the total vegetables crop acreage. Annual
production of tomato in India was 12.43 million tonnes (NHB, 2010-11)
which was 9.3 per cent of the total vegetable production (Appendix III).
There has been a gradual increase in the area under tomato while the
production has been fluctuating due to weather related factors. In India,
Karnataka is the leading state producing 1.65 lakh tonnes of tomato
from 4.83 lakh hectares with an average productivity of 32.7 tonnes per
hectare.
Status of tomato processing in India
India is not a dominant player in the world market, either in the

context of production, imports or exports. India's share in world
production was only 0.79 per cent. However, the Indian tomato
processing industry prides itself on being the largest in south-east Asia.
Infact, the output of Indian industry is more than twice that of Japan
and considerably greater than Thailand and Taiwan. Another
encouraging trend has been that India's production level of processable
tomato has risen by 50 per cent. Domestic producers of processed
tomato products indicate that the major institutional customers of
tomato paste are restaurants. The manufacturers of ketchup/sauce
account for 80 per cent of the demand. Tomato juice and puree have not
yet established themselves firmly in the middle class food habit, but the
demand for ketchup/sauce is slowly growing in this massive segment.
The major players in tomato processing industry are Kissan, Maggi,
Godrej, Heinz, Campbell, Kagome, Tesco and Dabur India Ltd.
Tomato production in Karnataka
Tomato in Karnataka is produced throughout the year, which

accounts for 10.82 per cent of the total area (43,661 ha) and 18.92 per
cent of total production (17.56 mt) of all the vegetables crops (2010-11).
Among vegetables, tomato occupies first position in the total vegetable
production in the state. The major tomato growing districts in Karnataka
are Kolar, Chikkaballapur, Bangalore, Tumkur, Hassan, Haveri and
Davanagere. The total acreage under tomato in the state was 48.3
thousand hectares with a production of 1.65 million tonnes in 2010-
11(NHB), (Appendix IV). The area of Kolar and Chikkaballapur was 3,566
and 1,060 hectares. The area and production of tomato in Kolar
increased by 3.72 and 5.95 per cent, respectively while that of
Chikkaballapur district increased by 3.39 and 4.21 per cent,
respectively.
Majority of the farmers grow tomato crop with irrigation. Higher

yields are possible under irrigation by adopting intensive cultivation. Due
to incessant efforts of agricultural scientists, high yielding varieties and
hybrids of tomato seeds were initially developed during the early 1970s.
The development of hybrid tomato seeds has boosted the economic
performance of the crop. The first hybrid known as “Karnataka Hybrid”
was developed by Indo American Company and released for cultivation
during 1973. As of now there are several improved varieties or hybrid of
tomatoes available to farmers which perform well under varied agro
climatic situations with respect to yield, size, shape, colour, resistance to
some pests and diseases. Because of these special features, these
hybrids have tremendous popularity among farmers. Majority of farmers
grow hybrids like Abhinav, All round, US-618, US-617, Badshah and
Alankar.
Tomato crop is extensively grown in the state. Although high

volatility of market prices leading to uncertainty is common, there are
instances of producer making huge profit or incurring losses. An analysis
of tomato cultivation would help in knowing income, employment
potential, constraints and supply response. The economic performance of
a crop is assessed on the basis of cost of production and net returns
obtained per unit area. The empirical data on physical inputs and net
returns per unit area would be extremely useful to farmers and policy
makers to augment the productivity and production of this crop
enterprise. There is a need to study cost and returns of tomato to know
the effect of scale economy. Further, it is also essential to analyse the
wide fluctuations in prices of tomato and the relationship between
arrivals and prices.
Market integration explains the relationship between two markets

that are spatially or temporally separated. Integrated markets are those
where prices are determined interdependently. The study results on
market integration could suggest to producer’s regarding where, when
and how much to sell, which in turn will have a bearing on their
production strategies and hence resource allocation. Spatial price
relationships have been widely used to indicate overall market
performance.
In the present context, consumerism is gaining more importance

and the market researchers are concentrating more on the tastes and
views of consumers. Several firms have engaged in production and
marketing of processed products. Hence, consumers have wider options
to choose processed items for consumption. A study on consumer
preference seemed to be important to understand the buying pattern and
preferences for various value added products. Understanding consumer
behaviour would help the firms in formulating strategies to cater to the
needs of consumer and thereby increase their market share. Consumers
tastes and preferences were found to change rapidly, especially in a
dynamic environment.
In view of this, there is a scope for making comprehensive study on

the economics of tomato production, marketing, and consumer
preference for value added products of tomato. Against this backdrop,
the present study was under taken with the following specific objectives.
1.1 Specific Objectives of the study
1. To estimate the costs and returns in tomato cultivation
2. To analyze the market dynamics of tomato crop
3. To study consumer preference for tomato and its value added

products
1.2 Hypotheses
1. There is a scale economy in tomato cultivation
2. Major tomato markets in Kolar are integrated
3. Colour and size are the important quality attributes of fresh tomato
1.3 Presentation of the study
The study has been organized in to several chapters.
Chapter I – Deals with status of tomato production, problems,

objectives and hypothesis.
Chapter II – Pertains to review of literature relating to topic of the

study.
Chapter III – Deals with methodology covering features of the study,

area, sampling design, data collection and analytical tools
used in the study.
Chapter IV – Deals with presentation of main findings of the study

through tables and description.
Chapter V – Discussion of the results of the study in the light of

plausible reasons based on past studies.
Chapter VI – This chapter provides summary and suggests the policy

implications arising from the findings of the study.
Chapter VII – This chapter lists literature referred for the present study.
1.4 Limitations of the study
The study is based on both primary as well as secondary data. The

primary data was collected from farmers through personal interview
method using a pre-tested schedule. Therefore, some amount of recall
bias is bound to be associated with the collected data since the farmers
did not maintain any record about the cultivation expenses, application
of inputs and returns. Similarly primary data from consumers also may
have some recall bias to same on usage of value added products of
tomato. However, efforts were made to minimize them through
crosschecks at the time of data collection.
Review of Literature
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
A review of the research work done earlier pertaining to the present

study has been presented below. Studies pertaining to the economics of
cultivation, integration of different markets and consumer preference for
tomato and its value added products have been presented, keeping in
view the objectives of the study. The review of literature is presented
under the following sub headings.
2.1 Cost of cultivation and returns from crop
2.2 Dynamics and integration of markets
2.3 Consumer preference for value added products
2.1 Cost of cultivation and returns from crop
Basavaraja (1980) studied economics of producing hybrid and local

tomato varieties in Bangalore district. The total cost of cultivation per
hectare of hybrid tomato was twice that of local tomato. Labour was a
major item of input accounting for 29 per cent and 37 per cent of the
cost respectively, for hybrid and local tomato. The gross returns and net
returns over cost C for hybrid tomato were 2.5 times greater than those
of local tomato, indicating higher profitability of hybrid tomato over the
local tomato.
Lohar (1987) estimated the production and marketing costs of

hybrid tomato in Satara district of Maharashtra. The per hectare
cultivation cost and marketing costs of hybrid tomato was Rs. 54,698
and Rs. 28,297.71 respectively. Marketing cost accounted for nearly 52
per cent of the total cost and almost 25 per cent of the gross income.
Among various items of production cost, rental value of land, manures
and fertilizers, human labour; other expenses (such as bamboo sutali for
tying the bamboo) and plant protection charges accounted for 33 per
cent of the total cost. The cost of production per quintal worked out Rs.
74.09. Of the total marketing cost incurred by producers, 55.31 per cent
was towards transport charges. 40.95 per cent towards wooden boxes,
1.02 per cent for sutali and 0.87 per cent for bamboo boxes. The per
quintal marketing costs was Rs. 38.33. The gross profit realized from the
sale of 738.20 quintals of hybrid tomatoes was Rs.1,15,903 and thus,
the net return worked out to Rs. 32, 902 per hectare.
Nanjareddy et al. (1990) studied the economics of producing hybrid

and local tomato varieties in Bangalore district for 1988-89. The inputs
used in the cultivation of hybrid tomatoes were higher than those of local
varieties except seeds and bullock labour. The average total variable cost
per acre of hybrid tomato (Rs. 14,007) was 250 per cent higher than that
of local varieties (Rs. 4,109). The average labour required per acre in the
case of hybrid tomato (313 man days) was 180 per cent higher than that
of local variety (113 man days). The total cost of production of hybrid
tomatoes (Rs 23,364) per acre was 290 per cent higher than that of local
tomato (Rs. 7,894). Yield and gross income per acre of hybrid tomatoes
was (259.92 q and Rs. 45,778) 225 per cent and 400 per cent higher
than that of local variety (79.40 q and Rs. 9,131). The net gain per acre
from the production of hybrid tomatoes over local tomatoes was Rs.
21,182.
Subramanyam and Sudha (1993) reported that the cost of

processing one tonne of finished tomato products was Rs. 11,185 with a
total return of Rs.13,603. The raw material and packing accounted for 71
per cent of the processing cost. Each tonne of tomato processed would
result in an additional return of Rs. 2,596 which was nearly three times
more than the net returns realized from sale of fresh tomato.
Mahajan et al. (1994) analysed the economics of aubergine and

tomato production in Thane district, Maharashtra, India. The per ha cost
of cultivation was Rs. 14,715 and Rs.16,691 for aubergine and tomato,
respectively. The gross return was Rs. 23,716 and Rs. 23,756 per ha, for
aubergine and tomato, respectively. The net returns were Rs. 9,001 and
Rs. 7,065, with benefit-cost ratios of 1.20 and 1.07 respectively.
Singh and Singh (1999) found that highest cost of cultivation was
in potato (Rs. 20,971/ha) followed by cauliflower (Rs. 14,720/ha), tomato
(Rs. 12,296/ha) and chilli (Rs. 11,970/ha) in Varanasi district of Uttar
Pradesh. However, returns per rupee of investment was the highest in
chilli followed by tomato, brinjal, cauliflower and potato.
Siddagangaiah (2000) reported that Chikkaballapur was an

important marketing centre for potato producers of Chikkaballapur area.
Agency-wise sale of potato by producers revealed that 42.86 per cent
was sold in Chikkaballapur market through commission agents, 20.09
per cent to village level traders and 32.35 per cent to wholesalers in
Chikkaballapur market.
Esengun et al. (2005) analyzed tomato production and marketing

in Turkey. The average tomato production area was found to be 6.69
decare (1 decare = 1000m2). Two-thirds of the farms produce tomatoes of
indeterminate cultivars; the rest produced determinate cultivars. The
most important production problems faced by growers include high input
cost, low product price, pests and diseases, and marketing. Major share
of the tomatoes produced by farmers were sold in the city itself or
exported by foreign traders.
Siviero (2005) reported that in Italy area devoted to tomato crop

increased by 28 per cent compared to 2002, to touch 88,000 ha.
Production at around six million tonne was up by 21.4 per cent
compared to 2003, with yield per ha increasing from 65.35 tonne in 2003
to 73.2 tonne in 2004.
Engindeniz (2006) analyzed the economics of pesticide use on
processing tomatoes grown in Torbali-Izmir to determine the problems of
pesticide use. The average area of tomato production was 3.81 ha with a
productivity of 74 341 kg per ha. The average cost of tomato production
was $3410 per ha. Gross margin and net profit were calculated to be
$2833 and $1794 per ha, respectively. The average usages per hectare of
active ingredient of insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, and acaricides
were determined to be 228, 1367, 1007, and nine gms, respectively. Total
pesticide and pesticide application costs were $141 per ha, which were
5.9 per cent of variable costs and 4.1 per cent of total costs, respectively.
The economic threshold for pesticide use was determined to be 2014 kg
per ha.
Suryavanshi et al. (2006) reported that 80 per cent of the tomato

was sold through channel-I (producer-commission agent cum wholesaler-
retailer-consumer in Latur district, Maharashtra. The per quintal cost of
marketing was the highest (Rs. 187.45) in channel-I, while it was the
lowest (Rs. 55.40) in channel-III (producer-consumer). Marketing
efficiency was observed to be the highest (9.70%) in channel-III.
Sreedhara (2010) studied the capsicum production which is

concentrated in northern districts of Karnataka. The results showed that
establishment cost of shade net structure was Rs. 2, 51,110 per unit
(0.10 ha). The cost of cultivation of capsicum under open and protected
conditions was Rs. 38,884 per acre and Rs. 55,080 per unit, respectively.
Further, cost of production per quintal worked out to Rs. 1147 and Rs.
1002 in open and protected conditions, implying efficiency of the modern
technology. The B: C ratios were 1.90 and 3.92 in that order, indicating
higher profitability in protected cultivation.
Chan et al. (2011) studied economic analysis that compares the

profitability and land management capability of four different organic
cropping systems used to produce winter squash and cabbage
vegetables. The results indicated that System 1, which relies on compost
for nitrogen, occasional cover crops with conventional tillage, had the
highest revenues for cabbage. Subsequent sensitivity analyses were
performed across a range of key parameters, and the results indicated
that System 1 and System 4 (ridge-tillage system) consistently yielded
the highest revenues for cabbage and squash vegetable production,
respectively.
Malik and Kapadia (1976) in their study on price movements and

extent of market integration in groundnut oil market used correlation
analysis to determine the integration of markets for groundnut oil prices.
The markets for groundnut oil prices were integrated with each other yet
the market prices differed significantly from each other as well as
between different months, thus implying wide spatial and temporal price
differentials.
Singh and Kahlon (1977) in their study on market integration and

spatial price differences in food grains markets of Punjab, showed that
inter market product mobility was constrained largely due to the
presence of large number of processing units and the transportation
system. The magnitude of the transportation costs set limits for inter-
market price variations without arbitrage. The study also revealed that
with the increase in transportation cost, the correlation coefficient
between two markets declined. Also, the restriction on free movement of
the commodities by the government set an additional barrier to perfect
mobility. They also reported that wheat markets were better integrated
than paddy markets.
Lundahl and Peterson (1982) studied market integration for major

food grains during the period 1969 to 1974. The number of markets
considered was nineteen for rice, eight for grain millet, twenty for grain
corn, eleven for ground corn and fifty for seed beans. Monthly price
series were detrended and the residuals were correlated. The results
revealed that there was no higher correlation between the residuals.
Borsen et al. (1984) illustrated the use of univariate and

multivariate time series analysis in the investigation of dynamic
relationship among selected weekly import prices of rice of the European
community which imported rice from the United States, Thailand and
Argentina. The results showed that Argentinean and United States prices
moved together. These two prices were influenced by the European
market and react quickly to changes in Thailand prices. Thailand prices
responded slowly to US and Argentinean prices.
Bhatta and Bhat (1988) analyzed the extent of price relationship

for arecanut between selected markets of Sirsi and Mangalore using the
correlation coefficient method. The results revealed that Mangalore
market was more efficient than Sirsi market. The commercial nature of
the crop and its varied market behaviour was clear from the fact that
there was a direct relationship between supply and price.
Indira (1998) estimated the extent of price relationship for coffee

between three wholesale centers- Bangalore, Coimbatore, and
Vijayawada. The results revealed that prices have shown positive
relationship with both Coimbatore and Vijayawada prices. Coimbatore
and Vijayawada prices had also shown positive relationship with each
other. However, there was relatively lower influence of Bangalore prices
on Coimbatore prices than on Vijayawada prices.
Prabhakar (1988) studied the market integration of silk cocoon

markets of Ramanagara and Vijayapura in Karnataka. The association
between the two markets was studied using bivariate correlation
analysis. The correlation coefficient was found to be 0.947 and was
highly significant at 1 per cent level, indicating that the two markets
were highly correlated.
Arshad (1990) made use of Ravallion’s regression model in his

study on integration of palm oil market in peninsular Malaysia. He
indicated that the crude palm oil market was spatially price efficient and
the highly integrated nature of the crude palm oil market was not
surprising in view of the efficient and adequate infrastructural facilities
available. The standardization of crude palm oil futures contract had
made crude palm oil a relatively homogenous product and setting up of
palm oil futures market in Kuala Lumpur for price discovery had
increased the accessibility to market information.
Dinkar (1990) assessed the extent of price integration between the

markets by computing coefficient of variation. He noticed a poor
integration between village markets and secondary markets as
demonstrated by significant differences in the coefficient of variation of
prices.
Gemtessa (1991) analyzed integration of Ethiopian coffee prices

with world prices using correlation co-efficient. The correlation co-
efficient of the monthly average prices secured at domestic and world
markets for 12 months lag were calculated. The bivariate correlation co-
efficient between the two market prices of coffee moved together in the
same direction. The lagged cross correlations of domestic prices and
world prices of coffee also moved together in the same direction. The
lagged cross correlations of domestic prices and world prices of coffee for
the period from 1979-80 to 1987-88 indicated that the world prices of
coffee had a stronger influence on domestic prices, compared to domestic
price influence on world prices of coffee.
Arya (1991) analyzed spatial integration of four markets in Gujarat
using zero order price series correlation analysis. She noticed significant
and high correlations in the price movements between the markets and
concluded that the markets under consideration were integrated in terms
of price movements.
Vishnugupta and Arora (1991) examined the quantitative

relationships between the prices of oil and oilseeds. The Koyck’s
distributed lag model was used to analyse the data observed from
Kanpur market of Uttar Pradesh. The study gave detailed account of
vertical and horizontal integration of prices of oils and oilseeds, co-
efficient of short run and long run adjustments and the time required for
90 per cent adjustment in price formation. The results gave a clear
identification of oil seeds and oils wherein bidirectional, unidirectional or
no interaction exists in price formation.
Jayaraj (1992) analysed the spatial price efficiency of groundnut

markets in Tamil Nadu. The price integration was efficient and
instantaneous among the selected markets. The residuals of price series
were well correlated and the high values of correlation coefficients of
absolute price series between markets were not accidental. The price
adjustment mechanism should ensure instantaneous price adjustment
between related markets to help the producers to allocate their limited
resources between crops efficiently.
Baharumshah and Habibullah (1994) employed the co-integration

method developed by Engle-Granger to analyse the long-run relationship
between pepper prices in different markets of Malaysia. The results
suggested that these markets were highly cointegrated, which implied
that commodity arbitrage was working. The prices of pepper moved
uniformly across spatial markets. Importantly, the distance between
markets was not an impediment to efficient adjustment of price to new
information. Thus, the price changes were fully and immediately passed
on to the other markets.
Brahmaprakash and Srivastava (1994) conducted a study on

pattern of marketing arrivals and price of grain in Uttar Pradesh. They
concluded that the coefficient of correlation between monthly arrivals
and average monthly wholesale market prices for different years. The
market arrivals and prices were negatively correlated.
Saikat and Nair (1994) studied the impact of international prices of

Indian pepper on other exporting countries during 1980s and also
whether the domestic prices of pepper had moved synchronously with
international price. Due to the open trade status for pepper, the prices
had moved synchronously indicating the integration of prices in the
world pepper market.
Sinharoy and Nair (1994) studied the international trade and

pepper price variations using co integration approach and showed that
due to the open trade for pepper, prices had moved synchronously
indicating integration of the world pepper market. The oligopolistic
nature of the world market of pepper did not allow prices to deviate
much. The domestic supply variables were responsive to international
market conditions.
Zubaidi and Shah (1994) examined the price efficiency of pepper

markets in Malaysia. Co-integration tests of spatial price relationships
were applied to weekly black and white pepper prices in 6 regional
markets in Sarawak, Malaysia for the period from 1986 to 1991. The
results revealed that the regional pepper markets in Sarawak were highly
integrated. Price changes were fully and immediately passed on to other
markets. The low transportation costs and risk associated with
transportation explain the degree of co-integration observed.
Girish (1995) in his study on econometric analysis of arrivals and
prices in major markets of Karnataka used co-integration approach to
test whether there was any integration between Bangalore and Belgaum
markets, Bangalore- Hubli markets. There was a two-way significant
interdependence, which was true of Belgaum- Hubli. This is a clear
indication of Hubli acting as a transit market between Bangalore and
Belgaum. The influence of Hubli prices on Bangalore prices was more
when compared to the influence of the Bangalore on Hubli prices. Even
between Belgaum and Hubli, the influence of Hubli prices on Belgaum
prices was more than the influence of Belgaum prices on Hubli prices.
Mamatha (1995) analysed market integration of selected spices of

India and New York prices. The co-efficient were found to be negative and
significantly different from zero in Indian and New York prices of pepper,
chillies, turmeric and ginger confirming the series were stationary. It also
indicated that both the Indian and New York price series for selected
spices had the same order of integration.
Nasurdeen and Subramanian (1995) studied price integration of oil

and oilseeds. The analysis of oils and oilseeds in Bombay market
revealed the nature of price integration between oilseeds and oils. The
assumption of complete oil price integration could not be fully accepted
in castor oil. The contemporary belief of influence of groundnut oil prices
on all edible oil prices was also established. The results of vertical
integration confirmed the hypothesis that changes in oilseed price is
linked to changes in its oil and cake prices. The vertical integration in
oilseed price was much quicker as compared to horizontal Integration.
The Bombay oilseed markets showed the characteristics of perfect
market condition by its quick adjustments to price changes.
Lim and Papi (1997) shed light on the determinants of inflation in

Turkey using Johansen’s Co integration technique. The analysis
concludes that money, wages, exports prices and imports prices had
positive influence on domestic price level where as exchange rate exerted
inverse effect on the domestic price level.
Kuijs (1998) analyzed the determinants of three variables; the price

level, exchange rate and output using time series data. Vector
autoregressive model was applied to investigate the relationships. The
study suggested that first lag of prices, 3rd lag of prices, 1st lag of excess
money supply and 1st lag of output gap were directly related to price level
as where 2nd lag of prices, 4th lag of prices and output gap were indirectly
linked with price level in Nigeria.
Mali et al. (1999) analyzed the trend in arrivals and prices of

vegetables (tomato and lady’s finger) in Pune regulated market for the
period from 1978-79 to 1996-97 .The coefficient of variations of arrivals
(56%to 80%) and prices (40% to 80%) of tomato were higher than the
variations in arrivals (27% to 60%) and prices (49% to 75%) of lady’s
finger. The compound growth rate of arrivals (2.11%) and prices (1.02%)
of both the vegetables were significant during the same period and prices
of both vegetables showed increasing trend indicating the good
integration of Pune regulated / vegetable market.
Nawadkar et al. (1999) reported that coefficient of variation of

arrivals (22% to 79%) and prices (30% to 55%) of cabbage in Pune
regulated market from 1978-79 to 1996-97 were found to be higher.
Similar trend in arrivals (31% to 69%) and prices (24% to 54%) was
observed in cauliflower. The compound growth rates of arrivals and
prices (2.20%) of the cole crops were significant in the same period. The
seasonal indices of prices and arrivals of both the vegetables were
inversely related. Prices of both the vegetables showed an increasing
trend indicating good market integration.
Aravind (2000) studied performance of India’s rice exports using
co-integration approach to test the extent of integration between Indian
domestic rice markets with world markets (Bangkok and Houston). The
domestic rice market was not integrated in the long run with the major
rice markets of the world. This is inferred ‘b’ co-efficients of the price
series integration were less than their respective Dickey Fuller critical
values.
Ashalatha (2000) employed co-integration technique to analyze the

theoretical long run equilibrium relation between economic time series.
She examined whether domestic market was integrated with the
international market for cashew kernel. The results amply proved that
there was long run equilibrium of the prices of cashew move in unison
with the international market prices in the long run confirming the law of
one price (LOP).
Liu and Adedeji (2000) established a framework for analyzing the

major determinants of inflation in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Johansen
co-integration test and vector error correction model was used to
examine the results. The analysis had found that lag value of money
supply, monetary growth, four years previous expected rate of inflation
positively contributed towards inflation while two years previous value of
exchange premium was negatively correlated with inflation.
Mahesh (2000) studied the relationship between domestic

(Calcutta) and international (London) market price series of tea using the
co-integration analysis. The result revealed that the tendency of price
series of both domestic and international markets for tea moved in
unison in the long run confirming the law of one price (LOP).
Jayesh (2001) studied market integration for spices using

correlation coefficient. The zero order correlation matrix of prices showed
a strong integration among the selected markets of Kerala, Karnataka
and Tamil Nadu for both pepper and cardamom.
Laryea and Sumaila (2001) examined the major determinants of

inflation in Tanzania. The time series data from 1992 to 1998 on
quarterly basis was used. Ordinary least square method was applied to
obtain estimates. The analysis demonstrated that money supply and
exchange rate had positive impression on consumer price index while
gross domestic product had negative impact on consumer price index of
Tanzania.
Shivaraya and Hugar (2002) made an attempt to examine the

extent of price integration of onion and potato in the selected markets of
North Karnataka, comprising Belgaum, Bijapur, Dharwad, Gulbarga,
Raichur and Hubli. Zero-order correlation matrix between average
wholesale price of onion clearly indicated the integration among the
selected markets, except Bijapur. However, the magnitude of integration
was found to be higher between Belgaum and Raichur (0.9447), between
Hubli and Raichur (0.9439), between Belgaum and Hubli (0.9253),
Raichur and Gulbarga (0.8669) and Belgaum and Gulbarga (0.8393).
Rajesh et al. (2003) found that October and December were the
crucial months when most of the markets showed a wide variation in
prices and hence non-integration in relation to India’s largest potato
markets i.e. Delhi, Ahmadabad and Jalandhar. The correlation
coefficients of potato prices showed that the markets were not integrated
even at shorter distances when there was not a high risk of spoilage in
transportation.
Singh et al. (2004) made an assessment of market infrastructure

and integration in Orissa state. The study revealed that, the importance
of Bankura market for price formation of rice in local market of Orissa.
Out of 8 hypothesized trading market pair, Bio turned out to be
significant only for four pairs that to with Bankura reference market
only. The Bio Coefficient was found to be highest for Jeypore-Bankura
(0.618), indicating that 1 rupee charge in rice in Bankura market would
have 0.618 rupee charge in Jeypore market. Out of all 8 trading pair only
4 pairs having reference market Bankura turned out to be significant.
Hence, it can be concluded that impact of price changes in Bunkura
market was influencing changes in selected local rice markets. However,
the extent of long run integration was highest in Joypore and lowest in
Balasore as compared with Bunkura market.
Khan et al. (2007) used time series data from 1972 to 2005 to
study inflation trends in Pakistan. The ordinary least square analysis
concluded that government sector borrowing, real demand, private sector
borrowing, import prices, exchange rate, government taxes, previous year
consumer price index and wheat support prices were found to have
direct contribution in consumer price index of Pakistan.
Abdullah and Kalim (2009) explored the main determinants of food

price inflation in Pakistan. For that purpose, they used time series data
for the period from 1972 to 2008. Johansen co-integration technique was
employed to estimate long run results. The analysis illustrated that
money supply; per capita GDP, agriculture support price, food exports
and food imports were directly associated with food inflation in Pakistan.
Mosayed and Mohammad (2009) traced out the major

determinants of inflation in Iran. They used the time series data from
1971 to 2006 in their analysis. The study used Autoregressive and
distributed lag model to discover the long run estimates. The study
probed that money supply, exchange rate, gross domestic product,
change in domestic prices and foreign prices were presenting the effect of
Iran or Iraq war on Iran’s economy and all were positively contributing to
the domestic prices in Iran.
Abidemi and Malik (2010) analyzed the dynamic and simultaneous

inter relationship between inflation and its determinants in Nigeria.
Johansen co-integration technique and error correction model were used
to analyze determinants of inflation for the time series data for the period
from 1970 to 2007. The findings revealed that growth rate of GDP, money
supply, imports, 1st lag of inflation and interest rate gave positive
impression on inflation rate. While other explanatory variables such as
fiscal deficit and exchange rate were indirectly associated to inflation.
Khan and Gill (2010) focused on the determinants of inflation in

Pakistan using different price indicators i.e. CPI, WPI, SPI and GDP
Deflator. They used time series data from 1971 to 2005 for the analysis.
Ordinary least square method was employed for the estimation. The
explanatory variables considered were budget deficit, exchange rate,
wheat support price, imports, support price of sugarcane and cotton and
money supply were found to be directly affecting all the price indicators
while interest rate was indirectly related to all the explained variables in
Pakistan.
Olatunji et al. (2010) examined the factors affecting inflation in

Nigeria. The Johansen co-integration technique revealed that previous
year total imports, one year lagged consumer price index for food, one
year lagged government expenditure and one year lagged exchange rate
had negative influence on inflation rate. On the other side, one year
lagged exports, one year lagged agricultural output, one year lagged
interest rate and crude oil exports had negative impact on the rate of
inflation in Nigeria.
Adenegan et al. (2011) studied the level of market integration in
tomato markets in rural and urban markets of Oyo State, Nigeria. The
results revealed that prices of tomato were stationary at their level.
Urban tomato market does not granger cause rural tomato market (P >
0.05), while rural tomato market granger cause urban tomato market (P<
0.05). The markets exhibited uni -directional granger causality
relationship.
Furrukh et al. (2011) studied demand side and supply side

determinants of inflation in Pakistan on economic and econometric
criterion and also the causal relationships among some macroeconomic
variables. Long run and short run impacts were estimated using
Johansen’s co-integration and vector error correction approach. Granger
causality test revealed causal relationships. The study revealed that in
the long run consumer price indices were found to be positively
influenced by money supply, gross domestic product, imports and
government expenditures. Long run elasticities of price level with respect
to money supply, gross domestic product, government expenditures,
government revenue, and imports were 0.61, 0.73, 0.32, -1.37 and 0.41
respectively.
2.3 Consumer preference for value added products
Dhuna and Mukesh (1984) conducted a study to analyze the

pattern of soft drinks consumption. The study revealed that 54 per cent
of consumption was in summer and 46 per cent during other seasons. It
was found that 26 per cent of the respondents were regular consumers
and the rest consumed soft drinks occasionally.
Puri and Sangera (1989) conducted a survey to know the

consumption pattern of processed products in Chandigarh. Jam was
found to be most popular irrespective of income. Orange squash
consumption was maximum in high and middle income families.
Pineapple juice consumption increased with a rise in household income.
Sabeson (1992) conducted a survey to know the consumption

pattern of processed fruit and vegetable products in Pondicherry city.
The study revealed that the processed fruit and vegetable products were
consumed mostly by small households with fewer number of children. It
was found that with increase in literacy level of the head of the family
and housewife, the consumption level of processed fruit and vegetable
products also increased.
Rajarashmi and Sudarsana (2004) revealed that, almost all the

sample respondents preferred branded products and if their favourite
brand was not available in the retail shop, they would go for another
store to buy their favourite brand. If it was not available in the market,
the respondents were ready to postpone purchases.
Al-Weqaiyan (2005) conducted a cross-national study of purchase

intentions of fast-food meals in Kuwait by using attitude behaviour
model, where creating and maintaining a strong brand loyalty was
essential to long-term marketing success. Repurchase intent was a
function of four sets of independent factors such as (1) Attitude that
results mainly from earlier experiences with the brand; (2) Perceived
barriers to switching from the present brand; (3) Tendency to seek variety
to break the boredom resulting from engaging in consistent brand
choices; and (4) Cultural differences represented in some traits of the
national character. The results revealed that factors affecting repurchase
intents varied across the two cultures.
Kim-Hyunah et al. (2005) analyzed the relationship among brand

equity factors (brand awareness, image, preference and brand loyalty)
suggested a strategy for brand management in contract food service
management companies. The brand awareness had positive effect on
brand image and brand preference and recommended that the contract
food service companies should focus on improving brand awareness as a
brand strategy. In addition, brand preference and brand image had
significant positive effects on brand loyalty.
Goodman et al. (2005) used Best-worst scaling to determine drinks

and wine style preferences. The results showed that attributes like
recommendation (friends or seller in the wine store), brand, variety and
food matching were important to wine choice followed by labelling, medal
and health reasons as least important to impact on successful wine
marketing. The recommendation was more important than the rest and
so forth through the list.
Vincent (2006) elicited that quality was an important factor that

draws consumers towards branded products. Branded products were
accepted as good quality products. People do not mind paying extra for
branded products, as they get value for money. Media was a key
constituent in promoting and influencing brand. A child’s insistence
affects family’s buying behaviour. Children were highly aware and
conscious of branded items. Although unbranded products sometimes
gave similar satisfaction as branded products, customers would still
prefer to purchase a branded product.
Karen et al. (2008) reported that acceptance and preferences of the

sensory properties of foods were among the most important criteria for
determining food choice. The results indicated that under controlled
laboratory testing conditions greater discrimination occurred by best–
worst scaling. The consumer acceptance or preference was obtained by
the 9-point hedonic scale, labelled affective magnitude, unstructured line
scale or preference ranking.
Lusk et al. (2009) investigated ways to improve the healthiness of
beef. The results of a nationwide mail survey developed to determine
consumers’ preferences for fat content in ground beef and identify how
consumers would like to improve the healthiness of beef. The choice-
based conjoint experiment indicated that consumers placed significant
value on reducing saturated fat and the omega 6:3 ratio in ground beef,
but were relatively unconcerned about conjugated linoleic acid. The
results of best-worst scaling indicated that consumers preferred feeding
cattle a grass-fed diet as opposed to supplementing cattle feed with
fishmeal or flaxseed to improve the fatty acid content in beef.
Mondelaers et al. (2009) explored consumer preference for fresh

vegetables labelled as organic in combination with health and
environment related quality traits. The health-related traits scored better
than environmental traits in shaping consumer preference for organic
vegetables. Consumers preferred organic products over B-branded
products, but not over A-branded products, which suggests that
consumers classify organic products among other quality niche products.
Price came less important, whereas presence of an organic label came
more important with increasing buying intensity of organic vegetables.
Undesirable traits like pesticide residue levels trigger a stronger response
than desirable traits, such as environmental or health benefits.
Sara et al. (2009) studied the point of purchase in retail locations,

multiple factors exert an influence on consumers’ decisions on wine
buying using best- worst scaling. Among wine drinking New Zealand
consumers living in Auckland, the rank ordered importance of 13 factors
such as ‘tasted the wine previously’, ‘grape variety’, ‘brand name’,
‘medal/award’, ‘someone recommended it’, ‘origin of the wine’, ‘i read
about it’, ‘matching to food’, ‘promotional display in-store’, ‘information
on the shelf’, ‘information on the back label’, ‘attractive front label’,
‘alcohol level below 13 per cent’. The participants’ level of involvement
with wine moderated the importance attached to the 13 factors and
consumers with higher levels of involvement with wine recalled in greater
detail the last bottle of wine they had purchased.
Causse et al. (2010) identified the overall flavour and firmness as

the most important traits for improving tomato fruit quality. The
consumer preferences from different European countries with different
cultures and food practices are segmented following similar patterns
when projected onto a common referential plan. The diversification of
taste and texture was required to satisfy all consumers' expectations as
some consumers preferred firm tomatoes, while others preferred melting
ones and were more or less demanding in terms of sweetness and flavour
intensity. Detailed comparison also showed the importance of the fruit
appearance in consumer preference.
Wiseman and Cheng (2011) studied associations between

consumers' attitudes, preferences, and demographic characteristics with
their consumption of different types of table eggs. The results of the
survey indicated that, compared with consumers of white regular eggs,
consumers of free-range eggs came from smaller households and had a
higher education level and income. These consumers indicated that
health, nutritional value, environmental issues, and animal welfare were
important in egg type selection. Although most consumers rated the
specialty eggs having a higher nutritional value than white regular eggs,
price became the most important deciding factor for those consumers
who selected white regular eggs.
Methodology
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
Formulating sound research methodology with appropriate tools of

analysis is essential to draw a meaningful inference from research study
and for the generalisation of the findings. Hence, this chapter presents
the general characteristics of the study area, the methods adopted in
selecting the sample, the concepts and analytical techniques employed
for the study.
3.1 Selection and description of study area
3.2 Sampling procedure
3.3 Nature and sources of data
3.4 Analytical tools and techniques
3.1 Selection and description of study area
The study was conducted in Chikkaballapur, Kolar and Bangalore

urban districts of Karnataka. The utility of research can be better
appreciated only when the results are analyzed with the background
information of the study region such as physical, social and economic
conditions. This would facilitate in understanding the decision making by
farmers and preference and extent of usage of tomato and its value
added products by consumers.
Prior to 2007-08, Kolar district had eleven taluks. For

administrative convenience it was divided into two districts, namely
Chikkaballapur and Kolar. Kolar district comprises of Bangarpet, Kolar,
Malur, Mulbagal and Srinivaspura. Chikkaballapur district has six
taluks viz., Bagepalli, Chikkaballapur, Chintamani, Gowribidanur,
Gudibande and Sidlaghatta.
Fig 1: Map showing the location of the study area
The total geographical area of Chikkaballapur district is 4,208 sq.
kms, of which 12 per cent area was under forest cover. The district has
six taluks with 1598 inhabited villages. The total population was 12.54
lakhs (2011 census) and 77.74 per cent of them lived in rural areas
(Appendix I and II). The economy of the district is agrarian in nature. The
district is drought prone, occurring atleast 2-3 years in a block of five
years. The area under agriculture is 1.72 lakh hectares and only 27 per
cent of area is under irrigation.
Kolar is popularly known as the ‘Golden Land’ of India. Kolar is

one of the semi-arid drought prone districts of Karnataka. As per the
agro-climatic zonal planning of the Planning Commission, the district
comes under zones X and XII under sub region II. It lies between 77° 21'
to 78° 35' East Longitude and 120° 46' to 130° 58' North Latitude,
extending over an area of 8,225 sq. kms. Kolar district is located in the
southern region of the state and happens to be the eastern-most district
of Karnataka state. The district is bounded by Bangalore rural district in
the west, Chikkaballapur district in the north, Chittoor district of Andhra
Pradesh in the east and on the south by Krishnagiri and Vellore districts
of Tamil Nadu. It receives an average rainfall of 739 mm, 70 per cent of
which occurs during southwest monsoon. This district is predominantly
agrarian with not many major industrial units. The total geographical
area is 3,989 sq. km, out of which six per cent is covered by forests.
Kolar district has five taluks with 1,598 inhabited villages. The total
population (2011 census) was 15.40 lakhs with 10.56 lakhs residing in
rural areas. The net sown area was 3.54 lakh hectares with 24 per cent
under irrigation facilities.
Bangalore is located in the Deccan Plateau in south-eastern

Karnataka. It has population of 84.25 lakh, is the third most populous
city in India and the twenty seventh largest city in the world by
population. With a decadal growth rate of 38 per cent, Bangalore is the
fastest-growing Indian metropolis making it India's third-largest city and
fifth-largest metropolitan centre. It is positioned at 12°97’’ N 77°56’’ E
longitude and covers an area of 2190 km². Bangalore district borders
with Kolar district in the northeast, Tumkur district in the northwest,
Mandya district in the southwest, Chamarajanagar district in the south
and the neighbouring state of Tamil Nadu in the southeast. Because of
its elevation, Bangalore enjoys a pleasant and unflappable climate
throughout the year. The highest temperature recorded is 39°C (102°F)
and the lowest is 11°C (52°F). The wettest months are August, September
and October; with a heaviest rainfall of 180 mm recorded in 24-hour
period. Bangalore's literacy rate of 89.59 per cent is the second highest
for any Indian metropolis, after Mumbai. The city's workforce is
predominantly non-agrarian, with only 6 per cent being engaged in
agriculture-related activities.
3.2 Sampling procedure
Multi-stage sampling method was adopted for the study to collect

the necessary information from farmers and consumers through personal
interview method by using pre-tested structured schedule.
Chikkaballapur district was purposively selected. From among there
Sidlaghatta taluk in which, Nagamangala, Harapanahalli, Cheemangala
and Tadur villages were selected randomly. Primarily, the information
regarding the production and marketing of tomato was collected from
farmers.
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban were selected to know the

extent of preference towards value added products of tomato among
consumers. The data was collected from retail stores and weekly fairs in
Chikkaballapur and super markets of Bangalore Urban. A total of 60
farmers and 100 consumers were selected. The distribution of sample
respondents is presented in Tables 3.1 and 3.2. The secondary data were
collected from the APMC, Department of Horticulture, Bureau of
Economics and Statistics and Department of Agriculture. To know the
scale economy, post tested categorisation was done which is as follows.
Small farmers: Those farmers who had cultivated tomato up to 2.50

acres
Medium farmers: Those farmers who had cultivated tomato in 2.51 to

5.00 acres
Large farmers: Those farmers who had cultivated tomato above 5.01
acres
Table 3.1: Composition of sample respondents of the study
Sl. No. Districts No. of farmers No. of consumers
1 Chikkaballapur 60 _
2 Kolar _ 50
3 Bangalore Urban _ 50
Total 60 100
Table 3.2: Details of respondents, villages and taluks selected for
the study in Chikkaballapur district
Sl. No. Taluk Villages Respondents
1. Sidlaghatta 1. Nagamangala 15
2. Harapanahalli 15
3. Cheemangala 15
4. Tadur 15
Total respondents 60
3.3 Nature and source of data
The selected farmers were interviewed personally using a pre -

tested structured schedule. The data on important socio- economic
characteristics, land holdings, inventory of implements and machinery
were collected. Besides, the data on cultivation of tomatoes and the
marketing practices were obtained.
The secondary data pertaining to daily arrivals and prices of

tomato in the selected markets was collected from Agricultural Producers
Marketing Committee (APMC) in Vaddahalli and Kolar for the year 2011.
The data from consumers were collected using structured

schedule. The data on socio- economic characteristics, preference for
consuming and not consuming value added products of tomato, brand
loyalty, best- worst scaling attributes of tomato and ketchup were
collected.
3.3.1 Period of study
The data pertaining to year 2011-12 was obtained through the

survey carried out in the month of February and March 2012. Care was
exercised to minimize the recall bias.
3.4 Analytical tools and techniques
To fulfil the specific objectives of the study, based on the variables

in the study, nature and extent of data, the following analytical tools and
techniques were used.
3.4.1 Economics of tomato production
To study economics of tomato cultivation, tabular analysis was

used. Different concepts of costs and returns used in the study are
presented in this section. It could be noted here that farmers of this
region were more familiar with using acre as the unit of measuring the
land area instead of hectare. Further, tomato is less capital intensive
crop subject to violent market price fluctuations. Therefore, many
farmers have taken up staggered planting on small pieces of land
measuring 0.5 to 1 acre per time. Accordingly, in the present study all
calculations pertaining to the economics of tomato production were made
on per acre basis.
3.4.1.1 Input and cost concepts
The total costs were divided into three broad categories:
a. Variable costs
b. Fixed costs
c. Marketing costs
a. Variable costs: Variable costs include cost of seeds, manure,

fertilizers, wages of human and bullock labour, plant protection
chemicals, irrigation, staking materials, interest on operational capital
and repair and maintenance charges.
i. Seedlings: The cost of purchased seedlings was based on the

actual amount paid by respondents.
ii. Farm yard manure: The prevailing price per tonne was used to
impute the value of farmyard manure produced on the farm.
iii. Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals: The cost of

fertilizers and plant protection chemicals was based on the
actual prices paid by farmers including the cost of transportation
and other incidental charges, if any.
iv. Labour: The cost of hired labour was calculated at the prevailing
wage rates paid per day (8 hours) in the study area for men,
women, bullock pairs and machine labour. The imputed value of
family particularly in terms of human, animal and machinery
was calculated considering the prevailing market rate in this
region.
v. Staking materials: The staking materials include staking sticks

and gunny twine and iron wire. The cost of staking sticks was
based on the actual amount paid by the respondents. The
staking sticks last for two to three crops and hence, 1/3rd
purchase value of sticks was considered. The cost of gunny
thread and iron wire are for single use and the actual amount
paid by respondents were considered.
vi. Interest on operational capital: The working capital consists of

the expenditure on labour, seedlings, manure, fertilizers, plant
protection chemicals, irrigation and other incidents. Interest on
operational capital was calculated at the rate of 9 per cent per
annum (the rate at which commercial banks advance short term
loans) for six months as the capital is used at different stages of
crop production and was apportioned based on the duration of
the crop.
vii. Repair and maintenance charges: Repair and maintenance

charges of implements and machinery used in the cultivation
were computed on the basis of actual expenses incurred by the
respondents. The amount was apportioned based on the acreage.
b. Fixed costs: These include depreciation on farm implements and

machinery, interest on fixed capital, land revenue.
The measurement and definition of fixed cost components are as

follows.
i. Depreciation charges: Depreciation on each capital equipment

and machinery owned by farmers used for cultivation was
calculated based on purchase value using the straight line
method. Where,
Purchase value – Junk value
Annual depreciation =------------------------------------------
Useful life of the asset
The average life of the asset as indicated by Agril. Engineers was

used in the computation of depreciation. The depreciation cost of each
equipment was apportioned based on its percentage use.
ii. Interest on fixed capital: Interest charges on fixed capital were

calculated at the rate of 14 per cent, as the fixed deposits in
commercial banks would fetch this rate of interest. The items
considered under fixed capital were implements and machinery.
Interest was considered on the value of these assets after
deducting the depreciation for the year.
iii. Land revenue: Actual land revenue paid by farmers was

considered.
iv. Rental value of land: In the study area, the practice of leasing in
and leasing out is absent particularly for tomato crop. Hence, the
rental value of land was considered as 1/3rd of the net returns in
the present study.
c. Marketing costs: The actual marketing charges incurred by

respondents in marketing tomato were considered. These marketing
costs include cost of packing, loading and unloading charges, hamali
charges, transportation costs, wastage, market cess and
miscellaneous charges.
d. Cost of cultivation: It is the sum of variable costs and fixed costs

and expressed on per acre basis.
e. Total cost (TC): Total cost is the sum of cost of cultivation per acre
including cost of marketing the produce.
3.4.1.2 Output and returns: In tomato the output includes the yield of
the crop only.
i. Gross returns: Per acre gross returns were calculated by using the
below mentioned procedure.
Gross Returns (GR) = yield price
ii. Net returns over variable costs: It is the gross returns minus
variable costs.
Net returns over variable costs = GR – TVC
iii. Net returns over cost of cultivation: It is the gross returns minus
variable costs plus fixed costs.
Net returns over cost of cultivation = GR – (TVC+ TFC)
iv. Net returns over total cost: It is the gross returns minus cost of
cultivation plus marketing cost.
Net returns over total cost = GR – (TC + MC)
v. Net returns per rupee of investment: Worked out by taking the

ratio of net return to total cost.
Net returns
Net return per rupee of investment = ------------------
Total cost
3.4.1.3 Marketing costs incurred by the producers
The farmers incurred expenses on packaging materials, loading

and unloading, hamali charges, transportation charges, market cess,
wastage and miscellaneous expenses. All these together constituted the
marketing cost of tomato. The average marketing cost per quintal of
tomato was worked out by dividing the sum of individual costs by the
total quantity of produce sold.
3.4.2 Dynamics and integration of markets
One of the most important structural parameters influencing the

competition is the number of market functionaries operating in the
market and the quantity of product handled by them. In other words, if
the prices are to be competitive, the trade should not be concentrated in
the hands of a few buyers so that a few large traders do not exert any
market power to manipulate the prices by collusive tactics. Therefore, the
study of market concentration helps us to know whether the tomato
markets are competitive or not. The Kolar and Vaddahalli markets were
selected to study the peak and lean season arrivals and distribution in
the markets. The market share of top five traders is computed for both
the markets.
Market integration is an alternative approach to stabilize prices,

allocate resources and rectify market imperfections like entrenched
monopolies or monopsonies and inadequate and costly information
transmission. The rectification of market imperfections smoothens the
way to attain market efficiency, which in turn facilitates the attainment
of agricultural development and equity in income distribution. If markets
are well integrated then government can stabilize price in one key market
and rely on commercialization to produce a similar outcome in other
markets. This reduces the cost of stabilization considerably. Further,
farmers will not be constrained by local demand conditions. It is
important to know spatially separated markets have price movement in
tandem and converge. Such price analysis is attempted in order to know
whether the major tomato markets across the state are integrated.
The co-integration approach to market integration is intuitively
appealing and straight forward in application. Integrated markets are
those where prices are determined interdependently. This has generally
been assumed to mean that the price changes in one market will be fully
transmitted to the other markets. Markets that are not integrated may
convey inaccurate price information that might distort marketing
decisions and contribute to inefficient product movement.
According to this approach, two series are said to be co-integrated

when there exists a long run equilibrium relationship between them. In
other words, two series cannot drift from one another in the long run and
there exists balancing mechanism to bring the two series together.
Applying this concept to any two markets, co-integration between their
price series implies long run dependence between them. Since, the very
essence of market integration is the price dependence across markets, it
follows that co-integration between prices in two given markets implies
integration of the markets.
To examine the price relation between two markets, consider the

following basic relationship used to test for the existence of market
integration.
Pit = α0+ α1Pjt+εt
Where Pi and Pj are price series of a specific commodity in two

markets i and j. ε is the residual term assumed to be distributed
identically and independently. The test of market integration is straight
forward if Pi and Pj are stationary variables. Often, economic variables
are non-stationary. So, it is important to check for the stationarity of the
variables.
3.4.2.1 Test for stationarity
If the series is stationary, this means that the series has a mean
which does not change over the period.
Pt = P + e t
Where, Pt is the observed value of the series at time ‘t’, P is the

mean value of the series and et a random disturbance term. The series Pt
is said to be stationary and expressed as I(0). But often the series tend to
display an increase or decrease, which violates the above condition. In
such case through successive differencing the series is reduced to
stationary, thus,
Pt – Pt-1 = et or Pt = Pt-1 + et
A series becoming stationary after first differencing is said to be

integrated of order 1 and it is expressed as I(1). In general, a series which
must be differenced ‘d’ times to become stationary is expressed as I (d). A
major difference between I(0) and I(d) , d>0 series is that the I(0) series
has a finite mean and variance, while in I(d) series magnitude do not
exist.
Consider the price of tomato in two markets at time ‘t’ expressed as

P1t and P2t then, three situation can be identified,
a) P1t I(0) and P2t I(0). Since both price series are I(0), their means and
variances exist. This in turn implies that in the long run, both the
prices fluctuate around their mean. Any difference in mean values
would reflect the fix component such as middleman’s profit, etc. In
such a situation it is valid to regress P1t and P2t and test the
restriction that the slope coefficient equal to one and the intercept
term equal to zero.
b) P1t I (d) and P2t I (b), d≠b. In this case, prices have different orders of
integration and at least one of either P1t or P2t will exhibit
explosiveness. This can be understood if P1t is I(0), P2t contains an
explosive component which cannot be explained by P1t alone.
c) P1t I(d) and P2t I(d), d>0. Here both price series have the same order of
integration which is greater than zero. Hence, additional information
is needed to examine the validity of integration. Such information is
obtained from the theory of co- integration (Engle and Granger, 1987).
3.4.2.2 Dickey –Fuller Test
To determine the order of integration Dickey – Fuller test was

employed which is based on the relation
∆Pt = a + b Pt-1 + et
Where, Pt denotes the variable being tested and ∆ denotes the

difference operator i.e., Pt–Pt-1, ‘a’ and ‘b’ are parameters to be estimated.
The hypothesis tested is
H0: Pt is not I (0), against
H1: Pt is I (0)
H0 is rejected if the estimate of b is negative and significantly

different from zero.
3.4.2.3 Engle-Granger test for Co-integration
Co-integration states that even though same explosive pattern

characterizes both prices, there exists a parameter which brings them
together in the long run, so that their linear combination is of same order
of integration than the original series. In such a case P1t and P2t are co-
integrated and the following regression is formed:
P1t = a + b P2t + et
Where ‘a’ and ‘b’ are the parameters to be estimated. If et is

integrated of order b (b<d), P1t and P2t are said to be co integrated. Co-
integration between the prices of two markets was evaluated by
regressing the tomato prices of Kolar APMC with that of the prices in
Vaddahalli APMC.
3.4.2.4 Johansen Maximum Likelihood co-integration
Johansen (1988) and Johansen and Juselius (1990) have given

new technique for co-integration for long run as well as short run
relationships for multivariate equation as explained below. Let Yt, Xt and
Wt denote three variables, which can all be endogenous, i.e. (matrix
notation for Zt = [Tt, Xt, Wt]).
Zt = A1 Zt-1 + A2 Zt-2 + ................ + Ak Zt-k + ut
It can be reformulated in a vector error correction model (VECM) as

follows;
ΔZt = r1 ΔZt-1 + r2 ΔZt-2 + ................ + rk-1 ΔZt-k + Π Zt-1 + ut
Where,
ri = (I – A1 – A2 – ….. – Ak) (I = 1, 2, ….., k-1)
Π = – ( I – A1 – A2 – ….. – Ak)
The Π matrix contains information regarding the long run

relationship. In fact Π = a β’, where a will include the speed of
adjustment to equilibrium coefficients while β’ will be the long run matrix
of coefficients.
Therefore the β’ Zt-1 term is equivalent to the error correction term

(Yt-1 – β0 – β1 Xt-1) in the single equation case, except that now β’ Zt-1
contains up to (n – 1) vectors in a multivariate framework.
Assume that k = 1, so as to include two lagged terms in the model
which can be as shown below:
= r1 + * * + et
The error correction part of the first equation could be written as

(i.e. for ΔYt on the left hand side);
Π1 Zt-1 = ([a11 β11 + a12 β12] [a11 β21 + a12 β22])* [a11 β31 + a12 β32]*
Π1 Zt-1 = a11 (β11 Yt-1 + β12 Xt-1 + β13 Wt-1) + a12 (β32 Yt-1 + β12 Xt-1 + β22 Wt-1)
This shows clearly the co-integrating vectors with their respective

speed of adjustment terms a11 and a12.
Johansen (1988) and Johansen and Juselius (1990) have proposed

a few steps for reliable results discussed below.
1. For the application of Johansen Co-integration approach, all time

series variables considered for the study should be integrated of same
order.
2. At second step, lag length would be chosen using VAR model on the
basis of minimum values of Final Predication Error (FPE), Akaike
Information Criterion (AIC), and Hannan and Quinn information
criterion (HQ).
3. At third step, appropriate model regarding the deterministic

components in the multivariate system are to be opted.
4. Johansen (1988) and Johansen and Juselius (1990) examine two

methods for determining the number of co-integrating relations and
both involve estimation of the matrix Π. Maximum eigenvalue
statistics and trace statistic are utilized in 4th step for number of co-
integrating relationships and also for the values of coefficients and
standard errors regarding econometric model.
3.4.2.5 Vector Error Correction Model (VECM)
A vector error correction model is a restricted vector autoregressive

(VAR) designed for use with non stationary series that are known to be
co-integrated. It may be tested for co-integration using an estimated VAR
object.
The VECM has co-integration relations built into the specification

so that it restricts the long run behaviour of the endogenous variables to
converge to their co-integrating relationships while allowing for short run
adjustment dynamics. The co-integration term is known as the error
correction term (speed of adjustment) since the deviation from long run
equilibrium is corrected gradually through a series of partial short run
adjustments.
3.4.2.6 Granger Causality Test
Granger Causality test is useful to study the lead-lag relationships

in prices between selected markets. In the case of two time-series
variables, say X and Y:
“X is said to Granger-cause Y if Y can be better predicted using the

past values of both X and Y rather than it can by using the past values of
Y alone”. We can test for the absence of Granger causality by estimating
the following VAR model:
Yt = a0 + a1Yt-1 + ..... + apYt-p + b1Xt-1 + ..... + bpXt-p + ut
Xt = c0 + c1X t-1+ ..... + cpXt-p + d1Yt-1 + ..... + dpYt-p + vt

Then, testing H0: b1 = b2 =..... = bp = 0, against HA: ‘Not H0’, is a
test that X does not Granger-cause Y.
Similarly, testing H0: d1 = d2 =..... = dp = 0, against HA: ‘Not H0’, is

a test that Y does not Granger-cause X. In each case, a rejection of the
null implies there is Granger causality.
3.4.3 Descriptive statistics
Mean and percentages were compiled for variables indicating socio-

economic characteristics, buying behaviour and purchasing decisions of
consumers.
3.4.4 Chi-square test
It is one of the effective statistical tests which is used to measure

the association between two groups treated independently. Conditions to
apply chi-square
1. Variables considered should be independent in nature.
2. The total frequency (N) should not be less than 30.
3. Cell frequency should be more than 5.
Test statistic of chi-square is as given below:
Chi-square = ∑ (Oi – Ei )2 ~ (r-1) (n-1)df

Ei
Where,
Oi = observed frequency in ith category
Ei = expected frequency in ith category
i = number of categories
r= number of rows
n= number of columns
Likert Scaling technique
Likert Scale was employed for studying factors influencing brand

preferences and reasons for not preferring particular brand of products
by the consumers of instant food products. Traditionally, a five-point
scale is used to obtain extent of agreement to a particular statement like
strongly agree, agree undecided, disagree, and strongly disagree
responses. The statements considered for studying the brand preferences
of consumers were best quality of the product, good brand image,
retailers influence, reasonable price, readily available, good packaging,
advertisements, attractive packaging design and convenience. In
contrast, poor quality, poor taste, high price, poor brand image, poor
flavour, not good colour, low keeping quality were the statements used in
asking the reasons for not using a particular brand of instant food
products. The responses to the above statements were measured on a
five-point scale.
Scaling technique was also used to measure the brand loyalty of

consumers towards products. The statements such as confirm to use the
brand, recommend the brand to others, purchase the brand even if price
increases and purchase the same brand even in absence of sales
promotion were used in the study. The responses to the above
statements were measured in a three-point scale namely; definitely,
probably, definitely not with the score of 3, 2, and 1 to the above scales
and the respondents were classified into three categories based on the
total scores obtained by them. The inferences were drawn based on mean
value, F- statistic and t value for brand loyalty, factors influencing brand
preferences and reasons for not using the value added products.
3.4.5 Best-Worst Scaling
MaxDiff is an approach for obtaining preference scores for multiple

items (brand preferences, brand images, product features, advertising
claims, etc.) using marketing or social survey research. Although MaxDiff
shares much in common with conjoint analysis, it is easier to use and
applicable to a wider variety of research situations. MaxDiff is also
known as "best-worst scaling."
The Best-Worst (BW) was developed by Louviere and Woodworth

(1990) and first published in 1992 (Finn and Louviere 1992). The Best-
Worst approach assumes that there is some underlying subjective
dimension, such as “degree of importance” or “degree of interest” and the
researcher wishes to measure the location of some set of objects along
this dimension (Auger, Devinney and Louviere 2004). The respondents
were provided choice sets to choose the best or most important and the
worst or least important from each set (an example of a choice set is
presented in Appendix V). There is no bias in the rating scale, since there
is only one option to choose something that is “most” or “least” important
(Cohen and Markowitz 2002). BW models the cognitive process by which
respondents identify the items respectively, the most and the least of a
characteristic, from designed sub-sets of three or more items.
Technically, BW models the process of picking the two items that are the
farthest apart on the underlying dimension of scaling interest (hence,
“maximum difference scaling”).
The coefficients are ratio level and can be directly compared, which
is not true for standard rating or ranking tasks. The key issue for
implementation is to design a series of choice sets that include all the
items of interest and all possible comparisons and an equal number of
times for each respondent (Louviere and Woodworth 1990). Typically, any
orthogonal fractional design may be applied to construct BW experiment.
On a more technical level, if there are k attributes to be scaled, and they
are placed in C subsets, there are k(k-1)/2 “BW” pairs and k(k-1)/2 “WB”
pairs associated with each subset. That means that each choice set
contains k(k-1) possible choice options (namely, all the BW and WB
pairs). For any given subset presented to an interviewee, he/she
implicitly chooses from k(k-1) pairs. The random error associated with
each ij pair is ∑ij and it is assumed to be distributed independently and
identically as an extreme value type 1 (Gumbel distribution).
The level of importance for each choice was determined by

subtracting the number of times the attribute was least important (worst)
from the number of times it was most important (best) in all choice sets.
The level of importance of each attribute depends on the number of
respondents and in the frequency that each attribute appears in the
choice sets. The consumer preference for fresh tomato and tomato
ketchup was analysed using BW scale. Hence, the level of importance of
a particular attribute was transformed to a standard score. The reason
for standardization is to allow comparison between different groups of
respondents, where the number differs in each collection.
Countbest – Countworst
Standard score = -------------------------------
kn
Where,
Count best = total number of times an attribute was most important
Count worst = total number of times an attribute was least important
n = the number of attributes
k = is the frequency of the appearance of each attribute in the design
Results
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
The findings of the study are presented in this chapter under the
following headings in consonance with the objectives of the study
4.1 Socio - economic characteristics of the respondents
4.2 Profitability of tomato production
4.4 Consumer preference for value added tomato products
4.1 Socio - economic characteristics of respondents
The socio - economic characteristics of respondents such as, age,

educational status, family size and land holdings are presented in
table 4.1.
Age of the head of the household is important from the point of

view of experience in farming, work participation and innovativeness. It
could be observed that 53.33 per cent of the respondents were in middle
age group. Whereas, 28.33 per cent were more than 50 years age, who
were in old age group category while only 18.33 per cent of the
respondents belonged to young age group.
Results pertaining to education indicated that 3.33 per cent of the

respondents were illiterates, 21.67 per cent had primary education,
36.67 per cent had completed higher primary education, 25 per cent of
the respondents were studied up to high school whereas, only 13.33 per
cent of the respondents were studied up to pre university or degree level.
Family structure of the respondents revealed that a majority of the

respondents (70 %) were in medium size group consisting of four to six
persons in the household. Only 16.67 per cent and 13.33 per cent of
Table 4.1: Demographic profile of farmers
(N=60)
Sidlaghatta
Sl.
Particulars
No.
No. %
1. Age group
a. Up to 30 years 11 18.33
b. 30-50 years 32 53.33
c. > 50 years 17 28.33
2. Education
a. Illiterate 2 3.33
b. Primary education 13 21.67
c. Higher primary education 22 36.67
d. High school education 15 25.00
e. pre university College and above 8 13.33
3. Family size (No. of members)

a. Small size (Up to 4) 8 13.33
b. Medium size (4-6) 42 70.00
c. Large size (>6) 10 16.67
4. Type of family
a. Joint 31 51.67
b. Nucleus 29 48.33
5. Distribution of holdings of farmers

a. Small farmers (<2.5 ac) 3 5(50)
b. Medium farmers (2.51 – 5 ac) 30 50(31.79)
c. Large farmers (>5.01 ac) 27 45(29.32)
Note: Figures in parentheses show the percentage to total tomato growing farmers
farmers were in large and small family size group, respectively. As many
as 51.67 per cent of tomato growers belonged to nucleus family and the
remaining 48.33 per cent belonged to joint family.
The area operated by farmers revealed that majority were in

medium farm (50%) category followed by 45 per cent in large farm
category, while only 5 per cent were in small farm category. Tomato
constituted 50 per cent of the area of small farmers, while it was 31.79
per cent and 29.32 per cent, respectively for medium and large farmers
category. Thus tomato was a major crop of the respondents accounting
for about 1/3rd to 1/2 of the cultivated area.
4.1.1 Shift in tomato acreage planted in response to prevailing

market prices
Tomato being a short duration crop is highly responsive to price

changes. Hence, the acreage under tomato is reported in the light of
market prices during planting. Results pertaining to tomato area under
different conditions presented in table 4.2.
The results indicated that 78.33 per cent of farmers had less than
2.5 acres of tomato in each season under normal price conditions, while,
16.67 per cent were in medium farmers category with 2.51- 5 acres and
only 5 per cent had more than 5.01 acres.
The response of farmers by way of acreage adjustments to market

prices showed that, during normal price situation, 78.33 per cent of
respondents had less than 2.5 acres of tomato, while the percentage of
respondents with less than 2.5 acres during high tomato price was 70
reflecting 10.63 per cent reduction in farmers with smaller acreage. The
high market prices attracted more acreage under tomato. On the
contrary, during low price situation, 88.33 per cent cultivated tomato in
less than 2.5 acres. The average operated area of tomato was 2.17 acres
Table 4.2: Shift in tomato acreage planted in response to prevailing market prices
(N = 60)
During normal
During high price During low price
price
Sl.
Group
No.
% to Avg. % to Avg. % % to Avg. %
No. No. No.
total acre total acre changes$ total acre changes$
1. Small farmers 47 78.33 2.17 42 70 1.6 10.63@ 53 88.33 1.2 12.77*

(<2.5 ac)
2. Medium farmers 10 16.67 3.3 15 25 3.3 50* 5 8.33 3.2 50@

(2.5 – 5 ac)
3. Large farmers 3 5 9 3 5 9 - 2 3.33 10 33.33@

(>5 ac)
Note: * % increase; @ % decrease; $ number of farmers belonging to the group

during normal price, while it was 1.6 and 1.2 acres respectively during
high and low market price scenario.
The demand for tomato from Chennai, Bangalore and other

important urban centers is met by Kolar and Chikkaballapur districts as
soil and climatic conditions are suitable for tomato production. Further,
the market infrastructure and good transport facilities have also
promoted vegetable cultivation in these districts. The cost of production
of tomato is computed to assess the profitability and supply management
of the crop.
4.2.1 Input usage for tomato cultivation
The input usage on per acre basis was computed across different
size groups of farms and for pooled category is presented in table 4.3. On
an average small, medium and large farms used 6,135, 6,168 and 6,447
seedlings respectively. The pooled category planted 6,177 seedlings per
acre. The respondents found to use 4.13 tons of farmyard manure, 394
kg of oil cakes, 199 kg of complex fertilizer and 64 kg of urea fertilizer.
The average expenditure made on plant protection chemicals by small,
medium and large farmers category was Rs. 4,505, Rs. 4,365 and Rs.
4,129 respectively. The number of staking sticks used per acre was
2,306, 2,319 and 2,376 by small, medium and large farmers,
respectively.
The labour employed per acre was 41 man days and 177 woman
days. The number of irrigations per acre of tomato was 26, 22 and 24 in
small, medium and large farms, respectively.
Table 4.3: Input usage for tomato cultivation
(per acre)
Small Medium Large

Input/output Pooled
farmers farmers farmers
A. Inputs
1. Seedling (No.) 6,135 6,168 6,447 6,177
2. Farm yard manure (Tonnes) 4.09 4.26 4.33 4.13
3. Cakes and application (Kg) 404 357 338 394
4. Red earth (tractor loads) 8 6 6 6.6
5. Complex fertilizers (Kg) 203 170 213 199
6. Urea (Kg) 63 67 76 64
Plant protection chemicals 4,505 4,365 4,129 4,333

7.
(Rs.)
8. Staking sticks (No.) 2,306 2,319 2,376 2,347
9. Number of irrigations 26 22 24 24
10 Gunny twine (Kg) 28 27 26 27
B. Labours
11. Men (days) 42 40 39 41
12. Women (days) 176 178 176 177

Cost of cultivation of tomato in rabi season
The cost of cultivation and production of tomato was estimated for

different farm size categories and is presented in table 4.4 and figure 2.
It could be observed from the table that there was not much
difference in per acre cost of cultivation of tomato across small, medium,
and large category of respondents (Rs. 86,658, Rs. 86,676, and Rs.
90,573). Out of total cost, the variable cost amounted to Rs. 72,351, Rs.
70,591, Rs. 70,395 and Rs. 71,111 for small, medium, large and pooled
farm categories. The cost of seedling was 5.27 per cent of the total cost
for pooled category. Wages for human labour amounted to Rs. 26,000,
Rs. 25,800, Rs. 25,400 and Rs. 25,733 by small, medium, large and
pooled category, respectively. Farm yard manures accounted for 11.50
per cent of the total variable cost, while oilseed cake accounted for 8.97
per cent for the pooled category. The fertilizers and plant protection
chemicals shared 6.11 and 6.09 per cent respectively, while staking
sticks accounted for about 7.99 per cent of variable cost.
Among the various items of fixed cost, the rental value of land
constituted 91.90 per cent of total fixed cost per acre. The total fixed cost
of tomato for small, medium, large and pooled category was Rs. 14,307,
Rs. 16,085, Rs. 20,178 and Rs. 16,856 respectively.
The Marketing cost was the major item of expenditure which

accounted for 24 per cent of the total cost of cultivation.
The total cost incurred by small, medium, large and pooled

category farmers was Rs. 1,14,658, Rs. 1,15,476, Rs. 1,17,128 and Rs.
1,15,752 respectively.
Table 4.4: Cost of cultivation of tomato in rabi season
(Rs. per acre)
Farmers Total of
Pooled
Sl pooled
Cost Small Medium Large (value
No. category
farmers farmers farmers Rs.)
(%)
A. Variable cost
1. Seedling 3,681 3,700 3,868 3,750 5.27
2. Farm yard manure 8,196 8,120 8,227 8,181 11.50
3. Cakes and 6,745 6,177 6,210 6,377 8.97
application@
4. Fertilizers 4,463 3,829 4,746 4,346 6.11
5. Red earth 850 800 780 810 1.14
6. Plant protection 4,505 4,365 4,129 4,333 6.09
chemicals
7. Human labour 26,000 25,800 25,400 25,733 36.19
8. Machine hours 3,063 3,163 3,000 3,075 4.32
9. Staking sticks 5765 5798 5,490 5,684 7.99
10. Twines 2,296 2,190 2,180 2,222 3.12
11. Repair and 813 820 800 811 1.14
maintenances of
farm machinery and
equipments
12. Interest on working 5973.97 5828.49 5,565 5,789 8.15
capital @ 9 per
annum
Sub total 72,351 70,591 70,395 71,111 100
B. Fixed cost
1. Rental value of Land 12967.25 14621.5 18881.75 15,490 91.90
2. Depreciation on farm 1,164 1,272 1,126 1,187 7.04
machinery and
equipments
3. Land revenue 10 10 10 10 0.06
4. Interest on fixed 166 181 160 169 1.00
assets 14% per
annum
Sub total 14,307 16,085 20,178 16,856 100
C. Cost of cultivation 86,658 86,676 90,573 87,967 76
(A+B)
D. Marketing cost 28,000 28,800 26,555 27,785 24
E. Total cost (C+D) 1,14,658 1,15,476 1,17,128 1,15,752 100
@ Cakes price varies with the quality
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00 variable cost

fixed cost
30.00
marketing cost
20.00
10.00
0.00
small farmers medium farmers large farmers
Fig. 2: Share of different items of costs in total cost of tomato cultivation

Among the different categories of respondents, the share of
variable costs and marketing cost in total cultivation expenditure was
marginally higher for small farm category (fig. 2).
4.2.3 Yield and returns from tomato production
The details of yield, returns per acre and per quintal are presented
in tables 4.5 and 4.6. The average yield of tomato was 251, 254 and 269
quintal per acre in small, medium and large farms respectively. The
aggregate average yield was 252 quintal per acre. The average gross
returns per acre of tomato for small, medium and large farmers were Rs.
1,55,871, Rs. 1,60,020 and Rs. 1,74,043 per acre respectively. The
average net returns per acre over variable cost were Rs. 83,520, Rs.
89,429 and Rs. 1,03,648 for small, medium and large farm category.
The net returns over all cost (considering fixed, variable and marketing
cost) for small, marginal and large farmers category was Rs. 41,213, Rs.
44,544 and 56,915 per acre, respectively. The pooled category earned
Rs. 86,137 net returns per acre over total variable cost.
The cost of producing a quintal of tomato was Rs. 345.25, Rs.

341.24 and Rs. 336.70 in small, medium and large farmers respectively.
The respective net return per quintal worked out to Rs. 164.20, Rs.
175.37 and Rs. 211.58 (Table 4.6). Thus, the average cost of producing a
kilo of tomato was around Rs. 4.04 excluding the cost of management.
Integration of tomato markets was studied by considering Kolar

and Vaddahalli APMC markets. Kolar market is one of the leading tomato
markets in Karnataka as compared to Vaddahalli market. The arrivals of
tomato in Kolar market was more in summer season (250183 MT)
followed by kharif season (70589 MT) and winter season (27299 MT). On
the other hand Vaddahalli market had higher arrivals during kharif as
Table 4.5: Yield and returns from tomato production
(Rs. per acre)
Sl. Small Medium Large

Particulars Pooled
No. farmers farmers farmers
1. Price (Rs/q) 621 630 647 624
2. Yield (q) 251 254 269 252
3. Gross returns 1,55,871 1,60,020 1,74,043 1,57,248
Net returns over all 41,213 44,544 56,915 41,496

4.
cost
Net returns over 83,520 89,429 1,03,648 86,137

a)
Variable cost
Net returns over 69,213 73,344 83,470 69,281

b)
cost of cultivation
5. Total cost 1,14,658 1,15,476 1,17,128 1,15,752

Table 4.6: Costs and returns from tomato production
(Rs. per q)
Categories
Sl.
Particulars
No. Small Medium Large
Pooled
farmers farmers farmers
1. Variable cost 288.25 277.92 261.69 282.19
2. Fixed cost 57.00 63.33 75.01 60.89
3. Cost of production 345.25 341.24 336.70 349.08
4. Marketing cost 111.5 113.39 98.72 110.26
5. Total cost 456.80 454.63 435.42 459.33
6. Gross return 621 630 647 624
7. Net returns 164.20 175.37 211.58 164.67

compared to the other seasons. The daily arrivals in Kolar market was
more than 1200 qtl during peak periods and less than 700 qtl during the
period of low arrivals, while Vaddahalli market had 600 qtl arrivals daily.
There were 250 traders in Kolar market while, Vaddahalli had only 40
traders handling tomato. Concentration of sellers and buyers were high
in Kolar market. The top 5 traders in Kolar market handled more than 60
per cent of tomatoes arrived in the market during kharif and rabi
seasons (table 4.7). In Vaddahalli market, the top 5 traders handled on
an average 74.22 per cent of tomato in the market (table 4.8). In
Vaddahalli market there is huge arrivals of local variety of tomato due to
demand from Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu markets. Arrivals in Kolar
market was from Kolar, Chikkaballapur, Shidlagatta, K.G.F, Chintamani,
Bangalore rural. While in Vaddahalli market, arrivals were from Kolar,
Vaddahalli local, Chintamani, Tamballi, V.Kota, and Punganoor. In
Kolar tomato market there was no collusion among traders because of
adoption of fair marketing practices. In Vaddahalli a few of tomato
growing farmers have become traders in APMC and brought about
competitiveness in price determination. Normally 3 crops of tomato is
taken up in a year. Kharif crop is grown in June- September months is
harvested upto August-December. The rabi tomato transplanted in
October- December could be harvested in January- March. Summer crop
planted in January- March is harvested upto April- June. Tamil Nadu
and Andhra Pradesh have not much demand for Karnataka tomato
during January to March. The excessive dependence on upcountry
markets makes Kolar market highly vulnerable to price volatility.
During March- July, 20-25 per cent of tomato arrivals in Kolar

markets was supplied to Chennai, Salem, Coimbatore, Trichi, Raikot,
Kumbakonam and Hosur (table 4.9). During the months of March-
September, 15 per cent of tomato supplied to parts of A.P like Vizag,
Vijaywada, Nellore and Ongole. During April- September tomato is
Table 4.7: Market share of top five traders and dispatch destinations from Kolar tomato market
Quantity handled by top five traders (MT)

Quantity Avg. Quantity
Season arrivals handled by Dispatch destinations
Trader Trader Trader Trader Trader
(MT) traders
1 2 3 4 5
Kharif 5500 9800 6840 15000 10400 9508 Andhra Pradesh, Nasik,
(June-Sept) 70589 Erode, Orissa, Kerala
(7.79) (13.88) (9.69) (21.25) (14.73) (67.34)
Rabi 4283 1900 2530 3470 5440 3525 Andhra Pradesh,

(Oct-Jan) 27299 Chennai
(15.69) (6.96) (9.27) (12.71) (19.93) (64.56)
Summer 15000 18500 16100 29000 24980 20716 Kerala, Delhi, MP,
(Feb-May) 250183 Andaman and Nicobar
(6) (7.39) (6.44) (11.59) (9.98) (41.1)
Arrivals from Kolar, Chikkaballapur, Shidlagatta, K.G.F, Chintamani, Bangalore rural
Note: Arrivals data taken from Krishi marata vahini;

Figures in parentheses indicate percentage share of traders to the total arrivals in the season
Table 4.8: Market share of top five traders and dispatch destinations from Vaddahalli tomato market
Quantity handled by top five traders (MT) Avg.

Quantity Quantity Dispatch
Season
arrivals (MT) Trader Trader Trader Trader handled by destinations
Trader1
2 3 4 5 traders
Kharif 3160 1450 2600 1350 1740 2060 Hyderabad,

(June-Sept) 12983.1
(24.34) (11.17) (20.03) (10.40) (13.40) (79.34) Vijaywada, Nellore
Rabi 1080 900 670 995 890 907 Chennai,

(Oct-Jan) 5571.0
(19.39) (16.16) (12.03) (17.86) (15.98) (81.42) Coimbatore
Summer 1350 1470 960 1380 1050 1242 Vijayawada,

(Feb-May) 10031.7
(13.46) (14.65) (9.57) (13.76) (10.47) (61.91) Chennai
Arrivals
Kolar, local area, Chintamani, Tamballi, V.Kota, Punganoor
from
Note: Arrivals data taken from Krishi marata vahini

Figures in parentheses indicate percentage share of traders to the total arrivals in the season
Table 4.9: Month wise market destinations of tomato from Kolar
APMC
Sl. Months Market Destination

No.
1. March- July Chennai, Salem, Coimbatore, Trichi, Raikot,

Kumbakonam, Hosur, Madhya Pradesh
2. April-Sept Orissa, Karnataka (Bangalore, Chitradurga,

Chikmagalur, Belgaum and Haveri markets)
3. March- Sept Vizag, Vijaywada, Nellore, Ongole
4. May-Aug Kerala, Calcutta
5. March Pune
6. April- Aug West Bengal

3500
3000
2500
2000
1500 kolar
vaddahalli
1000
500
Fig. 3: Daily price behaviour of tomato in Kolar and Vaddahalli APMC

markets
supplied to Orissa and, during May-August, to Kerala and Calcutta
markets. Pune gets Kolar tomatoes only in the month of March while,
West Bengal gets tomatoes during April- August months. In Karnataka,
Bangalore, Chitradurga, Chikmagalur, Belgaum and Haveri are major
consumption centers for Kolar tomatoes. Tomato arrivals in Vaddahalli
market are dispatch to Chennai, Kerala, Vijaywada and Vizag. For
nearby markets ripened tomato is supplied and raw tomatoes are
marketed to faraway places.
Tomato is almost an indispensable vegetable in most of the

culinary preparations imparting taste, colour and consistency to food
prepared. Therefore, tomato has widespread demand and is transported
to near and far off places. Prices prevailing in the reference and
destination markets together with cost of transportation would decide the
choice of trade destinations. Market integration explains the relationship
between two markets. The results of market integration are presented in
tables 4.7 through 4.10 and fig 3.
The Augmented Dicky Fuller (ADF) based Unit root test was carried
out to check the stationary of the time series price data from two
representative tomato markets (Table 4.10). The ADF test was carried out
for the period between (01-01-2011 to 31-12-2011). It could be inferred
that ADF test values were above the critical value (1%) given by
Mackinnon statistical tables implying that the series were non stationary
at their levels confirming the existence of unit root. The series became
stationary after first differencing.
The Johansen's multiple co-integration procedure was applied to

study the integration between the markets by using EViews software
which is presented in table 4.11. Both Rank test and maximum Eigen
value indicated the presence of two co-integrating equation at 5 per cent
level of significance. Hence, it is concluded that markets have long run
Table 4.10: Results of Unit Root Test (ADF test)
Market Level Critical value at 1% level
Kolar -2.40
-3.45
Vaddahalli -2.83
Table 4.11: Johansen's Co-integration test for selected tomato
markets
Unrestricted Co-integration Rank Test (Trace)
Hypothesized Trace 0.05 Critical

Eigen value Prob.**
No. of CE(s) Statistic Value
None * 0.046968 24.67575 15.49471 0.0016
At most 1 * 0.020605 7.453692 3.841466 0.0063
Trace test indicates 2 co-integrating eqn(s) at the 0.05 level

* denotes rejection of the hypothesis at the 0.05 level
**MacKinnon-Haug-Michelis (1999) p-values
Unrestricted co-integration Rank test (Maximum Eigen value)
None * 0.046968 24.67575 15.49471 0.0016
At most 1 * 0.020605 7.453692 3.841466 0.0063
Max-eigenvalue test indicates 2 cointegrating eqn(s) at the 0.05 level

* denotes rejection of the hypothesis at the 0.05 level
**MacKinnon-Haug-Michelis (1999) p-values
equilibrium relationship. Granger causality test was performed to
analyse the lead lag relationship among the selected markets. The results
are presented in table 4.12.
The Granger causality result reveals that there is bidirectional

causality between prices of Kolar market and Vaddahalli market. This
means that the prices are determined simultaneously through a quick
feedback mechanism. Thus, the results of the study confirmed that
major tomato markets in Kolar are integrated.
4.3.1 Vector Error Correction Estimates
The price series which are not stationary individually will converge
to stationarity through price correction mechanism in the short run and
by mutual influence in the long run. The adjustment mechanism is
illustrated through Vector Error Correction Model (VECM) estimates. The
results in table 4.13 revealed that both speed of adjustment and long run
price correction in the selected markets.
Kolar market was assumed to be endogenous as it is a lead market

for tomatoes in the state. The co-integration equation shows that in the
long-run Vaddahalli price depends on the one day lagged price of Kolar
(Vaddahalli Price today = -45+ 0.963567*Kolar price yesterday). This
means that while determining prices of Vaddahalli market, the traders
would be able to predict prices on a specific day by taking information on
previous day’s traded price in Kolar market. In the short run, about 10
per cent of the daily price movements gets corrected through market
mechanism in Vaddahalli market, while in Kolar market the speed of
adjustment is as much as 28 per cent. Negative sign of speed of
adjustment shows that the prices would converge towards long run
equilibrium. The prices in Vaddahalli are influenced by the previous two
days prices in the same market and previous day’s traded price of Kolar
market (table 4.13).
Value added tomato products are readily available across the

counters of super markets and convenient stores in all the major cities
and towns of Karnataka. However, consumption of value added products
are negligible as compared to fresh tomato.
4.4.1 Socio - economic characteristics of consumers
The socio - economic characteristics like age, education, gender,

family structure, food habit, monthly income and monthly expenditure of
the consumers were computed (Table 4.14).
It could be observed that 70 and 56 per cent of the respondents in

Chikkaballapur district and Bangalore Urban belonged to middle age
group respectively. Whereas, 26 and 40 per cent of the respondents were
in young age group and only 4 per cent of the respondents in each
district belonged to old age group.
The education status indicated that, only three per cent of the
respondents were illiterates in Chikkaballapur district and no illiterates
among Bangalore Urban respondents. Of the remaining, 26 and 8 per
cent respectively had high school education, 22 and 16 per cent had
completed pre university college education, while 46 and 76 per
respectively had completed graduation.
The family structure revealed that majority of the respondents of

Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban (50 and 60%) was of small family
size with less than 5 members. Only 14 and 36 per cent belonged to
medium family size, while only 36 and 4 per cent of consumers belonged
Table 4.12: Results of Pair-wise Granger Causality Tests
Null Hypothesis Observations F-Statistic Probability Reject H0
Kolar does not Granger Cause Vaddahalli 359 9.621 9.E-10 Yes
Vaddahalli does not Granger Cause Kolar 359 13.442 1.E-13 Yes
Table 4.13: Vector Error Correction Estimates
Cointegrating Eq: CointEq1

Vaddahalli(-1) 1.000000
-0.963567
Kolar(-1) (0.05047)
[-19.0923]
Constant 45.22940
Error Correction D(Vaddahalli) D(Kolar)
-0.100432 0.276494
(speed of adjustment)
(0.05542) (0.05170)
CointEq1
[-1.81224] [ 5.34842]
-0.276861 0.047177
D(Vaddahalli (-1)) (0.06752) (0.06298)
[-4.10066] [ 0.74906]
-0.148821 0.144634
D(Vaddahalli (-2)) (0.06055) (0.05649)
[-2.45764] [ 2.56046]
0.131796 0.079086
D(Kolar (-1)) (0.06322) (0.05897)
[ 2.08475] [ 1.34106]
-0.028963 -0.047525
D(Kolar (-2)) (0.05889) (0.05493)
[-0.49184] [-0.86516]
-5.952447 -2.005791
Constant (8.19747) (7.64688)
[-0.72613] [-0.26230]
R-squared 0.110966 0.152040

Adj. R-squared 0.098479 0.140130
F-statistic 8.886917 12.76619
Table 4.14: Demographic profile of consumers
(N=100)
Bangalore urban
Sl. Group Chikkaballapur (n1=50)
(n2=50)
No.
Number Percentage Number Percentage
Age group
a. Up to 30 years 13 26 20 40
1.
b. 30-50 years 35 70 28 56
c. > 50 years 2 4 2 4
Education
a. Illiterate 3 9 - -
2. b. High school 13 26 4 8
c. Pre university College 11 22 8 16
d. Graduation and above 23 46 38 76
Gender
3. a. Male 36 72 36 72
b. Female 14 28 14 28
Family size
a. Small size (Up to 4) 25 50 30 60
4.
b. Medium size (4-6) 7 14 18 36
c. Large size (>6) 18 36 2 4
Type of family
5. a. Joint 19 38 15 30
b. Nucleus 31 62 35 70
Food habit
6. a. Vegetarian 14 28 17 34
b. Non -vegetarian 36 72 33 66
Decision maker
a. Men 15 30 10 20
7. b. Women 21 42 23 46
c. Children 4 8 2 4
d. Parents 10 20 15 30
Occupation of decision
maker
a. Agriculture 13 26 - -
8. b. Housewife 18 36 7 14
c. Govt. job 7 14 12 24
d. Private job 12 24 17 34
e. Business - - 14 28
Monthly income (Rs.)
a. Up to 9000 18 36 1 2
9.
b. 9000-20000 20 40 29 58
c. >20000 12 24 20 40
Monthly consumption
expenditure (Rs.)
10. a. Up to 2500 7 14 2 4
b. 2500- 5000 33 66 12 24
c. >5000 10 20 36 72
to large family size, respectively. Thus a majority of the households were
in nucleus family group.
It is clear from table 4.14 that majority of the respondents in both

Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban consumed non- vegetarian food.
Whereas, only 28 and 34 per cent of consumers were vegetarians.
In both Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban majority of decision

makers (42%, 46%) were women. The men took purchase decisions in 30
and 20 per cent of the households while, parents made decision on
buying value added products in 20 and 30 per cent of the households.
Children made decisions in only 8 and 4 per cent of households,
respectively.
Regarding the occupation of the decision makers, it was revealed

that Chikkaballapur 36 per cent were housewives in followed by 26, 24
and 14 per cent with agriculture, private and government job,
respectively. Whereas, in Bangalore Urban 34 per cent were employed in
private sector, 28 and 24 per cent were in business and government
sector, respectively. Only 14 per cent of consumers were housewives.
Monthly income earnings by Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban

respondents revealed that 40 and 58 per cent respectively belonged to
middle income group. Whereas, 24 and 40 per cent were in high income
group and 36 and 2 per cent each of the respondents belonged to low
income group respectively.
It is clear from table 4.14 that 66 and 24 per cent of respondents

in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban spent Rs.2500-5000 for
provision of grocery, fruits and vegetables. Whereas, 20 and 72 per cent
spent more than Rs. 5000 per month on grocery, fruits and vegetables.
Only 14 and 4 per cent had spent less than Rs.2500 on purchase of food
articles.
4.4.2 Consumers preference for fresh tomato
Tomato supplied to the market is available in different color,

shape, size and extent of ripening. Consumers consider a number of
attributes while buying tomato. The detailed results regarding preference
for fresh tomato are presented in table 4.15.
Ripened tomato was preferred for cooking by 54 and 76 per cent of

the respondents in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban, respectively.
However, at the time of buying, most of the consumers choose semi
ripened tomato (74 and 98%, respectively) as they bought tomato
required for the whole week at a time. Ripened tomato was bought by 26
and 2 per cent of respondents in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban
respectively.
4.4.3 Factors influencing buying decisions of value added tomato

products
An attempt was made to elicit factors considered for purchasing

value added products like tomato ketchup, tomato sauce, tomato paste,
tomato puree, tomato juice and tomato soup in Chikkaballapur and
Bangalore urban districts. The results of multiple responses are
presented in table 4.16.
It could be noticed from the table that in Chikkaballapur the major

factors considered while buying tomato ketchup were family
preference(52 %) followed by making served food tasty (46%), readily
available (46%), quality of the product (40%), save preparation time
(20%), nutritive value (18%), use in new variety of food preparation (14%)
and influence of friends or relatives (8%). Similarly, Bangalore urbanites
Table 4.15: Consumer preference for fresh tomato
(N=100)
Chikkaballapur Bangalore urban

Sl. (n1=50) (n2=50)
Group
No
Number Percentage Number Percentage
Tomato preference
for culinary
purpose
1.
a. Ripened 27 54 38 76
b. Semi ripened 23 46 12 24
Form of tomato
bought
2.
a. Ripened 13 26 1 2
b. Semi ripened 37 74 49 98
bought tomato ketchup for reasons like improves taste of food served
(36%) followed by liked by the members of the family preference (34%),
nutritive value (20%), readily available (16%), influence of friends or
relatives (16%), helps in new variety of food preparation (16%) quality of
the product (12%) and save preparation time (12%).
The major factors promoting tomato sauce purchase decision

among Chikkaballapur respondents was improves taste of food served
(56%), family preference (42%), quality of the product (30%), readily
available (24%) and save preparation time (22%). Similarly, among
Bangalore Urban buyers the major factors considered were improves
taste of food (34%) followed by save preparation time (12%). All the other
considerations were of minor importance.
The major factors influencing buying tomato paste in

Chikkaballapur was use in preparing new variety of dish (54%) followed
by family preference (28%), increase taste of food served (16%) and
readily available (16%). Similarly, in Bangalore Urban the major factors
considered in buying tomato paste were use in preparing new variety of
dish (26%) followed by improves taste of food (18%), readily available
(18%), influence of friends or relatives (14%), save time of preparation
(14%) and nutritive value (14%).
The major factors considered while buying tomato puree in

Chikkaballapur was quality of the product (8%) followed by liked by the
family (6%), improves taste of food (6%), readily available (6%), nutritive
value (6%), save preparation time (6%), nutritive value (6%), influence of
friends or relatives (4%) and use in preparing new variety of food (4%).
Similarly, in Bangalore Urban the major factors considered were
improves taste of food (30%) followed by nutritive value (18%), use in new
variety of food preparation (14%) and readily available (12%).
Table 4.16: Factors influencing buying decisions of value added tomato products (N=100)
Tomato ketchup Tomato sauce Tomato paste Tomato puree Tomato juice Tomato soup
Sl. Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore
Factors Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur
No. urban urban urban urban urban urban
(n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50)
(n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50)
Liked by 26 17 21 2 14 6 3 1 5 1 7 1
1. the Family
(52) (34) (42) (4) (28) (12) (6) (2) (10) (2) (14) (2)
Improves 23 18 28 17 8 9 3 15 6 6 3 7
2. taste of
food served (46) (36) (56) (34) (16) (18) (6) (30) (12) (12) (6) (14)
Quality of 20 6 15 4 1 2 4 3 4 4 5 3
3. the product
(40) (12) (30) (8) (2) (4) (8) (6) (8) (8) (10) (6)
Readily 23 8 12 4 8 9 3 6 6 4 4 2
4. available
(46) (16) (24) (8) (16) (18) (6) (12) (12) (8) (8) (4)
Save 10 6 11 6 1 7 3 1 5 9 5 4
5. preparation
time (20) (12) (22) (12) (2) (14) (6) (2) (10) (18) (10) (8)
Use in new
variety of 7 8 5 4 27 13 2 7 9 4 4 6
6.
food (14) (16) (10) (8) (54) (26) (4) (14) (18) (8) (8) (12)
preparation
Influence 4 8 1 3 2 8 2 3 5 5 2 5
7. of friends
or relatives (8) (16) (2) (6) (4) (16) (4) (6) (10) (10) (4) (10)
Nutritive 9 10 4 5 7 3 9 8 9 18 15
8. value _
(18) (20) (8) (10) (14) (6) (18) (16) (18) (36) (30)
Note: Figures in parentheses indicate percentage to the number of respondents Multiple responses was taken
The major factors considered while consuming tomato juice in
Chikkaballapur was use in preparing new variety of food (18%) followed
by nutritive value (16%), improves taste of food (12%), ready available
(12%), liked by the family (10%), saves preparation time (10%), influence
of friends or relatives (10%) and quality of the product (8%). Similarly, in
Bangalore Urban major factors considered were save time of preparation
(18%) followed by nutritive value (18%), improve taste of food (12%),
influence of friends or relatives (10%), products in new variety of food
preparation (8%), ready available (8%), quality of the product (8%) and
Liked by the Family (2%).
The consumers of tomato soup in Chikkaballapur indicated that

nutritive value (36%) followed by preference by the family (14%), quality
of the product (10%) and save preparation time (10%) were important
considerations. Similarly, in Bangalore Urban major factors considered
were nutritive value (30%) followed by adds taste to food served (14%),
used in new variety of food preparation (12%), influence of friends or
relatives (10%), save preparation time (8%) quality of the product (6%),
readily available (4%) and liked by the family (2%).
4.4.4 Reasons for not consuming value added products of tomato
Reasons for not consuming value added tomato products, as

opined by the respondents, are presented in table 4.17. It could be
observed that in Chikkaballapur district, 54, 20, 22, 34, 18 and 28 per
cent of respondents of tomato ketchup, tomato sauce, tomato paste,
tomato puree, tomato juice and tomato soup, respectively did not
purchased these products because of differences in tastes between
homemade and purchased products. Fear of adulteration was the second
important reason for not using these products by 6, 18, 48, 20, 56 and
16 per cent of the consumers in Chikkaballapur district. The
respondents to the extent of 24, 28, 52, 10, 22 and 32 per cent dislike
Table 4.17: Reasons for not consuming value added tomato products
(N=100)
Tomato ketchup Tomato sauce Tomato paste Tomato puree Tomato juice Tomato soup
Sl. Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore
Factors Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur
No. urban urban urban urban urban urban
(n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50)
(n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50)
1. Low cost 5 10 21 3 12 7 8 13 11 6 11 14
(10) (20) (42) (6) (24) (14) (16) (26) (22) (12) (22) (28)
2. Differences in
tastes and
quality(between 27 10 10 12 11 19 17 14 9 9 14 12
homemade and (54) (20) (20) (24) (22) (38) (34) (28) (18) (18) (28) (24)
purchased
product)
3. Dislike on 12 12 14 13 26 24 5 18 11 15 16 8
purchased
product (24) (24) (28) (26) (52) (48) (10) (36) (22) (30) (32) (16)
4. Lack of
awareness of
13 7 2 4 6 10 17 9 7 6 10 7
products
(26) (14) (4) (8) (12) (20) (34) (18) (14) (12) (20) (14)
availability in
the market
5. Non-availability 10 2 2 4 2 7 24 5 3 4 11 3
of value added
products (20) (4) (4) (8) (4) (14) (48) (10) (6) (8) (22) (6)
6. Fear of
3 8 9 15 24 14 10 9 28 19 8 8
adulteration
(6) (16) (18) (30) (48) (28) (20) (18) (56) (38) (16) (16)
Note: Figures in parentheses indicate percentage to the number of respondents Multiple responses was taken
the purchase of processed products. The respondents to the tune of 10,
42, 24, 16, 22 and 22 per cent, respectively did not purchase because of
low cost of products. Lack of awareness of products availability in the
market was the reason for not consuming the respective products by 26,
4, 12, 34, 14 and 20 per cent, respectively. The respondents to the extent
of 20, 4, 4, 48, 6 and 22 per cent, respectively opined that non-
availability of value added products as a reason for not consuming the
respective value added products of tomato.
Similarly in Bangalore Urban most of the non consumers did not

buy value added products mainly because of dislike on purchased
products as reported by 24, 26, 48, 36, 30 and 16 per cent of ketchup,
tomato sauce, tomato paste, tomato puree, tomato juice and tomato soup
respectively. The respective non consumers to the extent of 20, 24, 38,
28, 18 and 24 per cent did not purchase the products because of
differences in tastes and quality between home made and purchased
products respectively. Fear of adulteration was another reason for not
preferring the respective products by 16, 30, 28, 18, 38 and 16 per cent
of respondents. The non consumers to the extent of 20, 6, 14, 26, 12 and
28 per cent, respectively quoted that low cost of product for not using
value added products. Lack of awareness of products availability in the
market was another reason for not consuming the respective products by
14, 8, 20, 18, 12 and 14 per cent, respectively. The non consumers to the
extent of 16, 30, 28, 18, 38 and 16 per cent respectively of consumers
opined non-availability of value added products for consumption.
4.4.5 Sources of information on value added products
The sources of information on value added products to consumers

in the study area are presented in table 4.18.
Table 4.18: Sources of Information on value added products
(N=100)
Sources Tomato Ketchup Tomato Sauce Tomato Paste Tomato Puree Tomato Juice Tomato soup
Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore

Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur
urban urban urban urban urban urban
(n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50)
(n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50)
Retail shop 33 30 20 38 12 15 5 15 12 22 21 16
display
(66) (60) (40) (76) (24) (30) (10) (30) (24) (44) (42) (32)
Newspaper or 19 18 22 10 13 25 13 11 11 21 17 7
magazine
(28) (36) (44) (20) (26) (50) (26) (22) (22) (42) (34) (14)
TV/ Radio 10 9 23 10 23 11 8 7 21 8 15 14
advertisements
(20) (18) (46) (20) (46) (22) (16) (14) (42) (16) (30) (28)
Friends/ 10 2 2 5 5 8 8 4 6 10 5 11
relatives
(20) (4) (4) (10) (10) (16) (16) (8) (12) (20) (10) (22)
Note: Figures in parentheses represents the percentage to the number of respondents, Multiple responses was taken
It could be observed that, in Chikkaballapur the respondents to
the extent of 66, 40, 24, 10, 24 and 42 per cent, respectively got
information on tomato ketchup, tomato sauce, tomato paste, tomato
puree, tomato juice and tomato soup by way of retail shop display,
followed by TV/radio advertisements to the extent of 20, 46, 46, 16, 42
and 30 per cent of various products respectively. Newspaper/magazine
were the other sources for getting information on value added products
by 28, 44, 26, 26, 22 and 34 per cent of the respondents respectively.
However, friends/relatives were of minor importance in seeking
information.
In the case of Bangalore Urban, the respondents to the extent of

about 60, 76, 30, 30, 44 and 32 per cent, respectively reported that retail
shop display as source of information, followed by 36, 20, 50, 22, 42 and
14 per cent, respectively obtained information from newspaper or
magazine for tomato ketchup, tomato sauce, tomato paste, tomato puree,
tomato juice and tomato soup respectively. In addition 18, 20, 22, 14, 16
and 28 per cent of the consumers of these products respectively got
information from TV/radio advertisements. The consumers to the extent
of 4, 10, 16, 8, 20 and 22 per cent, respectively obtained information
from friends/relatives.
4.4.6 Consumption of fresh and value added tomato products by

households
The magnitude of value added products purchased depends on the

extent of usage and food habit. The results in table 4.19 reveals that
purchase pattern of tomato ketchup, tomato sauce, tomato paste, tomato
puree, tomato juice and tomato soup depended on family size. It could be
observed that there was a positive significant association between fresh
tomato, tomato puree, juice, paste, tomato soup with the family size
except for Bangalore Urban in the case of tomato ketchup.
Table 4.19: Association between quantity purchased and family size of consumers (N=100)
Family members
Chi-square value
Small family (<5) Medium family (5-10) Large family (>10) Total
Quantity
purchased Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore
Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur Chikkaballapur
urban urban urban urban urban
(n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50) (n1=50)
(n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50) (n2=50)
1. Fresh tomato
Up to 6 kgs 18 (36) 7 (14) - - - - 18 (36) 7 (14)
6-9 kgs 7 (14) 23(46) 3 (6) 8 (16) - - 10(20) 31 (62) 48.33** 27.32**
>9 kgs - - 4 (8) 10 (20) 18 (36) 2 (4) 22 (44) 12 (24)
Total 25 (50) 30 (60) 7 (14) 18 (36) 18 (36) 2 (4) 50 (100) 50 (100)
2. Tomato Ketchup
Not purchased 10 (20) 8 (16) - 3 (6) - - 10 (20) 11 (22)
Up to 500 g 2 (4) 6 (12) 7 (14) 7 (14) 15 (30) 2 (4) 24 (48) 15 (30) 33.64** 6.89NS
>600 g 13 (26) 16 (32) - 8 (16) 3 (6) - 16 (32) 24 (48)
Total 25 (50) 30 (60) 7 (14) 18 (36) 18 (36) 2 (4) 50 (100) 50 (100)
3. Tomato Sauce
Not purchased 16 (32) 16 (32)) - - - - 16 (32) 16 (32)
Up to 500 g 1 (2) 10 (20) - 2 (4) 2 (4) - 3 (6) 12 (24)
33.99** 35.45**
500-600 g 8 (16) - 7 (14) 8 (16) 9 (18) - 24 (48) 8 (16)
>600 g - 4 (8) - 8 (16) 7 (14) 2 (4) 7 (14) 14 (28)
Total 25 (50) 30 (60) 7 (14) 18 (36) 18 (36) 2 (4) 50 (100) 50 (100)
4. Tomato Paste
Not purchased 20 (40) 14 (28) - - 11 (22) - 32 (64) 14 (28)
Up to 70 g 5 (10) 16 (32) 6 (12) 17 (34) 7 (14) - 18 (36) 33 (66) 10.35* 44.85**
>70 g - - - 1 (2) - 2 (4) - 3 (6)
Total 25 (50) 30 (60) 7 (14) 18 (36) 18 (36) 2 (4) 50 (100) 50 (100)
5. Tomato Puree
Not purchased 25 (50) 12 (24) 3 (6) - 14 (28) - 42 (84) 12 (24)
200ml - 5 (10) 4 (8) 13 (26) 2 (4) - 6 (12) 18 (36) 20.71** 20.95**
400ml - 13 (26) - 5 (10) 2 (4) 2 (4) 2 (4) 20 (40)
Total 25 (50) 30 (60) 7 (14) 18 (36) 18 (36) 2 (4) 50 (100) 50 (100)
6. Tomato Juice
Not purchased 22 (44) 13 (26) 3 (6) - 14 (28) - 34 (68) 13 (26)
1 Lit 3 (6) 4 (8) 4 (8) 18 (36) 2 (4) 1 (2) 15 (30) 23 (46) 16.35** 34.95**
2 Lit - 13 (26) - - 2 (4) 1 (2) 1 (2) 14 (28)
Total 25 (50) 30 (60) 7 (14) 18 (36) 18 (36) 2 (4) 50 (100) 50 (100)
7. Tomato Soup
Not purchased 25 (50) 15 (30) 6 (12) - - - 31 (62) 15 (30)
Up to 120 g - 6 (12) 1 (2) 16 (32) 16 (32) - 17 (34) 22 (44) 46.42** 28.98**
>120 g - 9 (18) - 2 (4) 2 (4) 2 (4) 2 (4) 13 (26)
Total 25 (50) 30 (60) 7 (14) 18 (36) 18 (36) 2 (4) 50 (100) 50 (100)
Note: Figures in parentheses represents the percentage to the number of respondents;

* Significant at 5% level; ** Significant at 1% level; NS Non Significant
4.4.7 Brand loyalty of consumers to value added products
Using one way ANOVA, the responses for the statements, like
confirm to use the brand, recommend the brand to others, purchase the
same brand even if price increases and purchase the same brand even in
the absence of sales promotion were analysed (Table 4.20).
The brand loyalty of consumers towards value added products in

Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban is presented in table 4.20. It could
be inferred that there was no significant difference in brand loyalty of
consumers between the regions, whereas, there was significant difference
in agreement to statements depicting the extent of loyalty in both
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban region.
4.4.8 Factors influencing brand preference
The factors influencing brand preference for fresh tomato, tomato

ketchup, tomato sauce, tomato paste, tomato puree, tomato juice and
tomato soup in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban consumers are
presented in table 4.21.
The mean score of fresh tomato in both the regions was high (4.75
and 4.67) but didn’t exhibit any significant difference between the
consumers of selected regions. There was a significant difference in
perception of respondents with respect to quality of tomato ketchup,
tomato paste and tomato puree between Chikkaballapur and Bangalore
Urban.
Tomato ketchup had high mean score (4.2 and 3.98) for availability
in required pack sizes in both the regions. Tomato sauce had a lower
mean score of 2.93 each in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban. There
was a significant difference in opinion on availability of tomato paste in
Table 4.20: Brand loyalty of consumers to value added products
(N=100)
Chikkaballapur Bangalore urban

(n1=50) (n2=50)
Sl. Student’s
Statements
No. t- test
Standard Standard
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
Confirm to use
1. 2.64 0.63 2.78 0.42 1.32 NS
the brand
Recommend the
2. 2.34 0.59 2.32 0.62 0.16 NS
brand to others
Purchase the
3. brand even if 2.00 0.78 2.24 0.72 1.6 NS
price increases
Purchase the
same brand even
4. 2.08 0.77 2.36 0.72 1.87 NS
in the absence of
sales promotion
F-value 8.49** 7.34**
SEm± 0.11 0.10
CD at 5% level 0.30 0.28
Note: * Significant at 5% level; ** Significant at 1% level; NS Non

Significant
Table 4.21: Factors influencing brand preference
Chikkaballapur Bangalore Urban
Sl. (n1=40) (n2=46) Student’s
No. Standard Standard t- test
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
Statement I: Quality of product is good
1. Fresh Tomato 4.75 0.44 4.67 0.47 0.82NS
2. Tomato Ketchup 4.50 0.55 4.02 0.58 3.90*
3. Tomato Sauce 4.10 0.49 4.09 0.81 0.26NS
4. Tomato Paste 3.95 0.55 3.52 0.89 2.70*
5. Tomato Puree 3.47 0.75 4.13 0.62 4.37*
6. Tomato Juice 3.87 1.30 3.47 1.22 1.58NS
7. Tomato Soup 3.50 0.85 3.65 0.99 0.77NS
F-value 15.77** 12.05**
SEm± 0.12 0.12
CD at 5% level 0.33 0.33
Statement II: Available in required pack size
1. Fresh Tomato 3.98 0.66 4.00 0.69 0.17 NS
2. Tomato Ketchup 4.20 0.76 3.98 0.88 1.25 NS
3. Tomato Sauce 2.93 0.99 2.93 1.06 0.05 NS
4. Tomato Paste 3.87 0.85 3.35 0.92 2.77*
5. Tomato Puree 3.60 0.74 3.63 0.93 0.17 NS
6. Tomato Juice 3.33 1.23 3.57 1.03 0.97 NS
7. Tomato Soup 3.40 0.84 3.54 0.91 0.76 NS
F-value 9.72** 7.24**
SEm± 0.14 0.14
CD at 5% level 0.39 0.59
Statement III: Product colour is good
1. Fresh Tomato 4.03 0.62 4.11 0.67 0.60 NS
3. Tomato Sauce 3.43 1.11 3.33 1.05 0.42 NS
4. Tomato Paste 3.90 0.81 3.67 1.01 1.15 NS
5. Tomato Puree 4.00 0.39 3.67 0.87 2.29*
6. Tomato Juice 4.05 0.75 3.13 1.13 4.50*
7. Tomato Soup 3.23 1.05 3.57 0.96 1.56 NS
F-value 5.83** 4.70**
SEm± 0.13 0.14
CD at 5% level 0.11 0.39
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
Statement IV: Stock keeping units in retail shops
1. Fresh Tomato 3.85 1.00 3.83 0.99 0.11 NS
3. Tomato Sauce 3.25 1.19 3.19 0.96 0.23 NS
4. Tomato Paste 2.95 1.24 3.50 0.96 2.29*
5. Tomato Puree 3.47 1.11 3.22 0.96 1.14 NS
6. Tomato Juice 3.63 1.15 2.67 1.27 3.60*
7. Tomato Soup 3.13 1.18 2.76 1.30 1.35 NS
F-value 2.76* 5.92**
SEm± 0.18 0.17
CD at 5% level 0.5 0.47
Statement V: Competitive price
1. Fresh Tomato 4.08 0.92 4.04 0.92 0.16 NS
2. Tomato Ketchup 4.03 1.09 3.30 1.09 3.04*
3. Tomato Sauce 4.00 0.96 3.72 1.13 1.24 NS
4. Tomato Paste 3.95 0.87 3.07 0.93 4.5*
5. Tomato Puree 3.80 1.14 3.39 1.04 1.72 NS
6. Tomato Juice 4.07 1.16 2.83 1.28 4.7*
7. Tomato Soup 3.75 0.95 2.50 1.11 5.6*
F-value 0.65 NS 10.78**
SEm± 0.16 0.16
CD at 5% level 0.44 0.44
Statement VI: Readily available to buy
1. Fresh Tomato 4.13 0.98 4.13 0.91 0.01 NS
3. Tomato Sauce 3.33 1.33 3.52 1.26 0.70 NS
4. Tomato Paste 3.43 1.52 2.72 1.47 3.66*
5. Tomato Puree 4.65 0.66 4.17 1.18 2.46*
6. Tomato Juice 2.60 1.45 3.69 1.41 3.52*
7. Tomato Soup 4.65 0.66 3.61 1.36 4.60*
F-value 17.89** 9.90**
SEm± 0.19 0.19
CD at 5% level 0.53 0.53
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
Statement VII: Good packaging
1. Fresh Tomato 4.43 0.64 4.46 0.58 0.24 NS
2. Tomato Ketchup 4.30 1.06 3.65 1.46 2.36*
3. Tomato Sauce 4.53 0.55 3.85 1.05 3.79*
4. Tomato Paste 4.20 0.88 3.37 1.40 3.30*
5. Tomato Puree 3.58 1.17 2.96 1.26 2.35*
6. Tomato Juice 4.43 0.78 3.02 1.53 5.46*
7. Tomato Soup 4.35 0.83 3.80 0.83 3.03*
F-value 5.33** 8.64**
SEm± 0.14 0.18
CD at 5% level 0.39 0.49
Statement VIII: Good keeping quality
1. Fresh Tomato 3.35 1.00 3.35 0.92 0.01 NS
3. Tomato Sauce 4.17 0.59 3.96 0.63 1.65 NS
4. Tomato Paste 3.63 1.17 3.50 1.52 0.43 NS
5. Tomato Puree 4.05 0.32 3.89 0.82 1.21 NS
6. Tomato Juice 3.50 0.75 2.89 1.49 2.43*
7. Tomato Soup 3.34 1.33 3.08 1.33 0.91 NS
F-value 6.55** 6.94**
SEm± 0.15 0.17
CD at 5% level 0.42 0.47
Statement IX: Good brand image
1. Fresh Tomato 4.07 0.97 4.13 0.88 0.27 NS
2. Tomato Ketchup 4.57 0.87 3.37 1.22 5.31*
3. Tomato Sauce 4.15 0.80 3.83 0.64 2.05*
4. Tomato Paste 3.85 0.89 3.22 1.41 0.98 NS
5. Tomato Puree 3.05 1.50 3.69 1.11 2.23*
6. Tomato Juice 3.55 0.85 3.54 0.94 0.04 NS
7. Tomato Soup 3.00 1.24 2.98 1.06 0.10 NS
F-value 12.49** 6.12**
SEm± 0.17 0.16
CD at 5% level 0.47 0.44
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
Statement X: Right flavor and consistency
1. Fresh Tomato 3.37 1.08 3.43 1.07 0.26 NS
2. Tomato Ketchup 4.03 0.73 3.37 1.27 2.97*
3. Tomato Sauce 3.31 1.09 3.30 1.01 0.02 NS
4. Tomato Paste 3.45 1.11 3.04 1.23 1.61 NS
5. Tomato Puree 3.40 1.26 2.83 1.19 2.16*
6. Tomato Juice 3.47 0.82 3.07 1.20 1.87 NS
7. Tomato Soup 3.30 0.76 3.52 0.94 1.21 NS
F-value 2.56* 2.24*
SEm± 0.16 0.17
CD at 5% level 0.44 0.47
Note: * Significant at 5% level ** Significant at 1% level NS Non significant
required pack size between Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban
regions.
Colour of the tomato juice and tomato soup in Chikkaballapur,

had a high and low mean score of 4.05 and 3.23. Whereas, for Bangalore
Urban, fresh tomato and tomato juice had highest and lowest mean
scores of 4.11 and 3.13 respectively. There was a significant difference in
liking of product among Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban region
with respect to colour of tomato puree and tomato juice.
Retailers respond to consumers by way of stocking the right brand

in required pack size. However, retailers can influence consumers
purchase decisions by choosing stock keeping units according to
retailers’ convenience. The mean score of fresh tomato in both the
regions was high (3.85 and 3.83) whereas, mean score of tomato paste
(2.95) and tomato juice (2.67) in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban
was low. There was significant difference between Chikkaballapur and
Bangalore Urban consumers in respect of tomato paste and tomato juice.
Fresh tomato (4.08 and 4.04) had highest mean score with respect
to price competitiveness, while tomato soup (3.75, 2.50) had lowest mean
score in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban respectively. Opinion of
Chikkaballapur consumers on product prices was not statistically
significant while, in Bangalore Urban there was significant difference.
There was a significant difference with respect to product pricing of
tomato ketchup, tomato paste, tomato juice and tomato soup between
the regions.
Easy availability generally promotes consumption of branded

tomato products as it saves consumers search time. The results revealed
that the range of products available in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore
Urban were significantly different. Tomato puree (4.65) and tomato juice
(2.60) had high and low mean values in Chikkaballapur. Whereas, in
Bangalore Urban, tomato puree (4.17) and tomato paste (2.72) had high
and low mean values, respectively. Between Chikkaballapur and
Bangalore Urban there was significant difference in availability of tomato
paste, tomato puree, tomato juice and tomato soup.
Attractive packaging appeals first time buyers of any product and

thus promotes consumption. In Chikkaballapur, regarding packaging
tomato sauce (4.53) and tomato puree (3.58) had high and low mean
values. Whereas, in Bangalore Urban, for fresh tomato (4.46) and tomato
puree (2.96) had the highest and lowest mean scores, respectively. There
was a significant difference among the products in Chikkaballapur and
Bangalore Urban regions with respect to good packaging of the tomato
products like tomato ketchup, tomato sauce, tomato paste, tomato
puree, tomato juice and tomato soup.
It could be inferred from the table that tomato sauce (4.17) and
tomato ketchup (4.04) had high mean scores for keeping quality in
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban respectively. Tomato soup (3.34)
and tomato juice (2.89) had least mean values respectively. There was
significant difference among the consumers in Chikkaballapur and
Bangalore Urban regions for tomato juice.
The mean score of tomato ketchup (4.57) and tomato soup (4.13)
in Chikkaballapur, fresh tomato (4.13) and tomato soup (2.98) in
Bangalore Urban had highest and lowest mean scores for brand image.
There was a significant difference among tomato ketchup, tomato sauce
and tomato puree regarding brand image between Chikkaballapur and
Bangalore Urban.
Regarding right flavour and consistency of products in

Chikkaballapur, tomato ketchup (4.03) and tomato soup (3.30) had high
and low mean scores. Whereas, in Bangalore Urban, tomato soup (3.52)
and tomato puree (2.83) had the highest and lowest mean scores,
respectively. There was a significant difference among products like
tomato ketchup and tomato puree between Chikkaballapur and
Bangalore Urban regions.
4.4.9 Reasons for not preferring brands of value added products
The results pertaining to reasons for not preferring value added

products like tomato ketchup, tomato sauce, tomato paste, tomato
puree, tomato juice and tomato soup are presented in table 4.22. The
various statements were evaluated using F and t tests.
It is a general apprehension among consumers that processed

products have more preservatives which affects purchase decisions. The
results revealed that tomato juice (4.60) and tomato puree (3.15) had
high and low mean values in Chikkaballapur reflecting that the
consumers were more concerned about presence of preservatives in juice
which is directly consumed, rather than buying tomato puree. Whereas,
in Bangalore Urban, tomato ketchup (4.53) and tomato paste (3.08) had
highest and lowest mean scores, respectively. There was a significant
difference in tomato juice consumed in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore
Urban regions.
Food adulteration is rampant in unbranded processed products.

Consumers reported that tomato puree (3.03) and tomato soup (3.10)
had high mean value in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban
respectively. While, tomato juice (1.98) and tomato sauce (2.25) had the
lowest mean values in both the regions. There was a significant
difference regarding opinion on food adulterants in tomato juice in
Chikkaballapur as well as Bangalore Urban regions.
Prices of tomato are volatile showing wide gap between maximum
and minimum prices during a year. Prices of value added products seem
high in comparison to the prevailing market prices of fresh tomatoes.
Many a time consumers compare prices of fresh tomato with products
like juice and puree. The results revealed that among the products in
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban, there was significant difference in
consumer opinion on price of value added tomato products. Tomato
paste (3.55) had high mean value while tomato sauce (2.48) had lowest
mean value in Chikkaballapur. Whereas, in Bangalore Urban, tomato
puree (3.48) and tomato juice (2.53) were having high and low mean
values, respectively. Between Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban,
differences were statistically significant in the case of tomato juice.
Buying decisions are influenced by disposition and conviction of

consumers. The liking for tomato products (table 4.22) shows that the
mean score of tomato ketchup (3.60) had high mean value and tomato
sauce (2.98) had the lowest mean value in Chikkaballapur. Whereas, in
Bangalore Urban, tomato ketchup (3.50) and tomato puree (3.12) had
high and low mean values, respectively. Between Chikkaballapur and
Bangalore Urban consumers, there was no significant difference among
different value added products.
Customs and traditional food preparations in the households also

have a bearing on purchase decisions. Tomato puree (3.40) and tomato
sauce (3.18) had high mean value scores reflecting that such products
were traditionally prepared at home rather than bought from markets.
However, tomato ketchup (2.85) and tomato puree (2.60) had low mean
scores inferring that such products were bought rather than prepared at
home. However, these mean scores were not statistically different among
the different value added products in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore
Urban except tomato puree.
Table 4.22: Reasons for not preferring brands of value added
products
Sl. (n=40) (n=40) Student’s
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
Statement I: Too much preservatives
1. Tomato ketchup 4.18 0.93 4.53 0.72 1.93NS
2. Tomato sauce 4.50 0.97 4.20 0.94 1.45 NS
3. Tomato paste 3.30 1.14 3.08 1.42 0.79 NS
4. Tomato Puree 3.15 0.98 3.18 1.15 0.13 NS
5. Tomato Juice 4.60 0.78 3.78 1.35 3.50*
6. Tomato soup 3.70 1.16 3.28 1.30 1.58 NS
F-value 12.86** 10.34**
SEm± 0.16 0.19
CD at 5% level 0.44 0.53
Statement II: Fear of adulteration
1. Tomato ketchup 2.37 0.74 2.43 0.81 0.29 NS
2. Tomato sauce 2.45 1.06 2.25 0.98 0.90 NS
3. Tomato paste 2.80 1.14 2.50 1.13 1.22 NS
4. Tomato Puree 3.03 1.03 3.08 0.97 0.23 NS
5. Tomato Juice 1.98 0.95 2.60 1.15 2.76*
6. Tomato soup 2.85 1.19 3.10 1.11 1.00 NS
F-value 5.65** 4.64* *
SEm± 0.16 0.16
CD at 5% level 0.44 0.44
Statement III: It is more expensive
2. Tomato sauce 2.48 1.34 2.54 1.32 0.17 NS
3. Tomato paste 3.55 1.04 3.43 0.96 0.58 NS
4. Tomato Puree 3.33 1.07 3.48 1.13 0.63 NS
5. Tomato Juice 3.40 1.06 2.53 1.01 3.91*
6. Tomato soup 3.28 1.15 3.13 1.04 0.63 NS
F-value 4.95 ** 5.50**
SEm± 0.18 0.18
CD at 5% level 0.51 0.51
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
Statement IV: not needed in food preparation
2. Tomato sauce 2.98 1.25 3.17 1.29 0.73 NS
3. Tomato paste 3.55 1.30 3.43 1.41 0.43 NS
4. Tomato Puree 3.07 1.44 3.12 1.26 0.17 NS
5. Tomato Juice 3.37 1.28 3.13 1.32 0.89 NS
6. Tomato soup 3.28 1.32 3.48 1.22 0.73 NS
F-value 1.54NS 0.79NS
SEm± 0.20 0.20
CD at 5% level 0.55 0.55
Statement V: Traditional consumers
2. Tomato sauce 3.13 1.34 3.18 1.22 0.18 NS
3. Tomato paste 3.00 1.28 2.95 1.32 0.18 NS
4. Tomato Puree 3.40 1.13 2.60 0.98 3.48*
5. Tomato Juice 3.05 1.22 2.67 1.39 1.34 NS
6. Tomato soup 3.20 1.16 2.90 1.43 1.07 NS
F-value 0.91 NS 1.03 NS
SEm± 0.19 0.20
CD at 5% level 0.53 0.55
Statement VI: Flavour is not good
2. Tomato sauce 2.27 1.15 2.35 1.16 0.29 NS
3. Tomato paste 2.32 1.07 2.75 1.08 1.83 NS
4. Tomato Puree 2.77 1.14 2.25 0.84 2.39*
5. Tomato Juice 2.45 0.99 2.85 1.19 1.71 NS
6. Tomato soup 2.85 1.23 2.57 1.28 1.01 NS
F-value 1.84 NS 1.89 NS
SEm± 0.18 0.18
CD at 5% level 0.51 0.51
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
Statement VII: Difficult to get processed products
2. Tomato sauce 2.70 1.30 3.02 1.40 1.11 NS
3. Tomato paste 3.52 1.24 3.57 1.17 0.19 NS
4. Tomato Puree 2.42 1.15 3.70 1.09 5.25*
5. Tomato Juice 3.67 1.18 3.27 1.45 1.41 NS
6. Tomato soup 2.60 1.19 3.45 1.19 3.29*
F-value 8.35** 1.35 NS
SEm± 0.19 0.20

CD at 5% level 0.53 0.55
Statement VIII: Not right consistency
2. Tomato sauce 3.15 1.19 3.00 1.19 0.58 NS
3. Tomato paste 2.45 1.01 2.25 1.08 0.88 NS
4. Tomato Puree 2.63 0.87 2.50 0.96 0.63 NS
5. Tomato Juice 2.67 0.97 2.87 0.88 0.99 NS
6. Tomato soup 2.47 1.01 2.37 0.84 0.49 NS
F-value 2.65* 4.04**
SEm± 0.17 0.16
CD at 5% level 0.47 0.44
Statement IX: Believe in own preparation of value added products
2. Tomato sauce 3.15 1.48 3.40 1.41 0.79 NS
3. Tomato paste 3.63 1.44 4.00 1.32 1.25 NS
4. Tomato Puree 4.23 1.02 3.23 1.46 3.71*
5. Tomato Juice 4.17 1.06 3.07 1.40 4.13*
6. Tomato soup 3.85 1.31 3.08 1.67 2.41*
F-value 3.76** 3.20**
SEm± 0.20 0.23
CD at 5% level 0.55 0.64
Note: * Significant at 5% level ** Significant at 1% level NS Non significant

Flavour of product influences buying decisions of consumers. The
low mean score values in general shows that consumers didn’t have
much problem with accepting flavour of various products. Tomato soup
(2.85) and tomato juice (2.85) had high mean score while tomato sauce
(2.27) and tomato puree (2.25) had lowest mean score in Chikkaballapur
and Bangalore Urban, respectively. Only tomato puree showed a
significant difference between Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban
consumers confirming the dislike towards flavour of processed products.
Availability of products in neighbourhood stores improves product

sales. Whether consumers were staying away from value added products
due to non availability on the shelves was assessed. The mean score of
tomato juice (3.67) was high while tomato puree (2.42) had lowest mean
value in Chikkaballapur. Whereas, in Bangalore Urban, tomato puree
(3.70) and tomato sauce (3.02) were having high and low mean values
respectively. Between Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban consumers,
statistically significant differences were noticed with respect to
availability of tomato puree and tomato soup.
Suitable consistency is important while using value added

products in household food preparation. It could be inferred from table
4.22 that tomato sauce (3.15 and 3.00) and tomato paste (2.45 and 2.25)
had highest and lowest mean score in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore
Urban respectively. There was no significant difference between
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban consumers with respect to their
opinion on consistency of products.
Consumers are sometimes sceptical about quality of food products

made available in the stores. Such people have faith in preparing value
added products at home. Among the various products, tomato juice
(4.17) and tomato sauce (3.15) were having high and low mean scores
respectively, in Chikkaballapur. Whereas, in Bangalore Urban, tomato
paste (4.00) and tomato juice (3.07) had highest and lowest mean scores,
respectively. Further, significant difference between Chikkaballapur and
Bangalore Urban regions for selected products like tomato puree, tomato
juice and tomato soup.
4.4.10 Best-Worst scaling for estimating attributes of tomato

ketchup
Best-worst scaling is useful in identifying preferred attributes for

products. The results of the data collected using the Best-Worst method
in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban is shown in Table 4.23.
Respondents were asked what factors were important in affecting their
selection of tomato ketchup for purchase. The BW method is to
investigate the complex nature of tomato ketchup attributes and factors
that affect purchase decisions.
The consumers of Chikkaballapur had chosen tomato ketchup due

to the fact that ‘no adulteration’ in the product (75.21). The second
important attribute was ‘flavour’ (58.57), followed by brand name,
availability of the product, price, awareness about the product and pack
size. Similarly, in Bangalore Urban, ‘no adulteration’ (66.28) was the
most important factor in purchase of tomato ketchup. The ‘flavour’
(56.47) was the second most important attribute followed by, pack size,
brand name, price, availability of the product and awareness about the
product.
4.4.11 Best-Worst scaling for estimating attributes of fresh tomato
The preference for fresh tomato was studied through Best- Worst
technique. The results are presented in table 4.24. Respondents were
asked to indicate important factors influencing consumers selection of
fresh tomato for their purchase. It is straight forward to see how
Table 4.23: Estimating attributes of tomato ketchup using Best-Worst Scaling
(N=100)
Chikkaballapur (n1=50) Bangalore Urban (n2=50)

Sl.
Statements
No. Best Worst Standard Best Worst Standard
Ranking Ranking
counts counts score counts counts score
1. Size 16 102 12.35 VII 57 49 55.25 III
2. Flavour 60 30 58.57 II 59 53 56.47 II
3. No adulteration 76 22 75.21 I 67 20 66.28 I
4. Price 32 57 29.28 V 30 38 28.19 V
5. Brand name 57 38 55.19 III 44 48 41.71 IV
Availability of the
6. 40 23 39.17 IV 28 60 25.86 VI
product
Awareness about
7. 18 28 16.66 VI 15 32 13.47 VII
the product
potentially useful and powerful the BW method is in analysing the
factors that affect purchase.
In Chikkaballapur, consumers were interested in ‘size’ (74.5) as the

most important factor. ‘semi ripened tomato’ (69.94) was the second
most preferred attribute which affect the purchase of fresh tomato,
followed by colour, local variety, use of plant protection chemicals,
uniform ripening of tomato, hybrid, long keeping quality, price,
fuzziness/mottled appearance and pest and insect incidence. In
Bangalore Urban, ‘colour’ (71.01) of tomato was most important factor
affecting the purchase decision. Consumers prefer ‘local variety’ of
tomato (68.91) for purchase followed by, size, price of tomato,
fuzziness/mottled appearance, hybrid variety, semi ripened, pest and
insect incidence, uniform ripening of tomato, usage of plant protection
chemicals and long keeping quality.
Table 4.24: Estimating attributes of fresh tomato using Best-Worst Scaling
(N=100)
Chikkaballapur (n1=50) Bangalore Urban (n2=50)

Sl.
Statements Best Worst Standard Best Worst Standard
No. Ranking Ranking
counts counts score counts counts score
1. Colour 40 26 39.21 III 72 30 71.01 I
2. Size 75 11 74.5 I 45 32 43.55 III
3. Fuzziness /mottled 15 36 13.90 X 30 27 29.18 V

appearance
4. Pest and insect 11 38 9.85 XI 21 50 19.48 VIII

incidence
5. Price of tomato 19 71 16.85 IX 42 39 40.82 IV
6. Uniform Ripening 21 12 20.64 VI 10 8 9.76 IX
7. Semi ripened 70 2 69.94 II 21 0 21 VII
8. Usage of plant 22 36 20.91 V 10 19 9.42 X

protection chemicals
9. Local 39 44 37.67 IV 70 36 68.91 II
10. Hybrid 21 55 19.33 VII 23 77 20.67 VI
11. Long keeping quality 20 21 19.05 VIII 6 32 4.55 XI

Discussion
CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION
The results of the study are discussed in this chapter under the
following headings.
The socio-economic profile of respondent farmers pertaining to age,

education, family type and experience in tomato production were
analysed and the results are presented in table 4.1
It could be observed that over fifty per cent of the respondents are
in middle age category (30-50 years old). Whereas, 28.33 per cent are
more than 50 years age categorized as old age group and 18.33 per cent
of the respondents belonged to young age group. Thus, farmers in the
age group of 30-50 years are actively involved in tomato cultivation. The
higher mean age shows that farmers are well experienced and skilled in
tomato cultivation. It is a general observation that only older folk are into
farming while youngsters have migrated to nearby cities in search of
employment.
State government has initiated a number of programmes to

eradicate illiteracy of rural and urban population. It could be noticed that
the percentage of illiterates in the sample is only 3.33, 21.67 per cent
have primary education, 36.67 per cent with higher primary education,
25 per cent of the respondents studied up to high school while, only
13.33 per cent of the respondents studied up to pre- university or degree
level indicating that majority of farmers had higher primary education.
Education is one of the social assets influencing decision making and
adoption of technologies. This confirms that individuals with higher
education are not into agriculture.
Family structure of the respondents reveals that a majority of the

households have four to six persons in the household (70 %). Only 16.67
per cent and 13.33 per cent of farmers are in large and small family size
group, respectively. Availability of family members is important for timely
agricultural activities on the farm as there is scope for division of work,
sharing of ideas and information in large families. As many as 51.67 per
cent of tomato growers belonged to joint family while remaining 48.33
per cent belonged nucleus to family.
Tomato being a highly labour and capital intensive crop requiring

over one lakh rupees towards cultivation expenses, farmers prefer to
operate convenient acreage under tomato. It is observed that a majority
of the respondents were in medium size group between 2.51 to 5 acres
irrigated land with an average area of 4 acres. The large and small farms
constituted 45 per cent and five per cent respectively. Among these,
tomato constituted 50 per cent of the area of small farmers, while it was
31.79 and 29.32 per cent, respectively for medium and large category.
Thus tomato was a major crop in the study region accounting for about
1/3rd to ½ of the cultivated area.
5.1.1 Shift in tomato acreage planted in response to prevailing

market prices
Tomato cultivation is both labour and capital intensive also highly

responsive to market prices. Hence, the acreage under tomato is reported
in the light of market prices during planting (table 4.2).
The farmers with 78.33 per cent had less than 2.5 acres of tomato
in each season under normal price conditions, while, 16.67 per cent were
in medium farmers category with 2.51- 5 acres and only 5 per cent had
more than 5.01 acres.
The response of farmers by way of acreage adjustments to market

prices showed that, during normal price situation, 78.33 per cent of
respondents had less than 2.5 acres of tomato, while the percentage of
respondents with less than 2.5 acres during high tomato price was 70
reflecting 10.63 per cent reduction in farmers with smaller acreage. This
shows that farmers prefer to cultivate tomato on a smaller extent of area
to cope with price risk. The high market prices attracted more acreage
under tomato. On the contrary, during low price situation, 88.33 per
cent cultivated tomato in less than 2.5 acres. The average operated area
of tomato was 2.17 acres during normal price, while it was 1.6 and 1.2
acres respectively during high and low market price scenario.
The input usage and profitability of tomato cultivation across

different size groups of farms and pooled category is presented in tables
4.3 and 4.4.
The total cost of cultivation including marketing cost for small,

medium, large and pooled categories of respondents differed marginally
which is statistically not significant. The average cost per acre worked
out to Rs. 1,14,658, Rs. 1,15,476, Rs. 1,17,128 and Rs. 1,15,752
respectively.
The total variable cost per acre for small, medium, large and
pooled category respondents is Rs. 72,351, Rs. 70,591, Rs. 70,395 and
Rs. 71,111 respectively. Thus, the total variable cost per acre is more for
small farmers compared to large farmers. The same trend is observed in
the case of fixed costs also. The seedling cost for small, medium, large
and pooled category of farmers on an average is Rs. 3,681, Rs. 3,700, Rs.
3,868 and Rs. 3,750 (5.27%) per acre respectively. The higher
expenditure by large farmers is because of more number of seedlings
used by such farms. However, good quality tomato could be obtained
only by maintaining optimum plant population. Ideal number of
seedlings is 6000 per acre as against the present level of 6,447.
Labour wages is the single largest item of variable cost accounting

for 36.19 per cent of total cost of tomato cultivation. On an average the
large farmers spent less on labour (Rs. 25,400) compared to small
farmers (Rs. 26,000) because of the scale economy. The average labour
requirement amounted to 41 man days and 177 woman days per acre.
The cost of FYM is Rs. 8,196, Rs. 8,120, Rs. 8,227 and Rs. 8,181
for small, medium, large and pooled farmers per acre, respectively.
Another important item is the cost of fertilizers amounted to Rs. 4,463,
Rs. 3,829, Rs. 4,746 and Rs. 4,346 for small, medium, large and pooled
category of farmers, respectively. This shows that farmers are
replenishing soil nutrients partially for obtaining higher yields.
Tomato growers may be suitably guided regarding the importance

of soil testing, appropriate level of use of FYM, fertilizers and seeds. This
helps producer to realize quality produce and higher income.
Marketing cost amounts to 24 per cent of total cost of cultivation.

There is not much difference in marketing cost across small, medium,
large and pooled categories of farmers respectively spent Rs. 28,000, Rs.
28,000, Rs. 26,555 and Rs. 27,785 towards marketing. The plausible
reason could be higher cost of transportation and labour expenditure by
small farms. Most of the large farmers have their own transportation
facilities or due to scale economy the costs are lower than small farmers.
The average yield of tomato is 25 tonnes per acre (Table 4.5).
The findings of the study indicated that large farmers are not only
efficient in production but also in marketing of the produce compared to
small farmers. The difference in the net income realization by different
categories of tomato farmers is due to difference in the productivity as
well as the price realisation.
The difference in yield between the categories of producers was

mainly due to the differential level of use of fertilizers, plant population,
farm yard manure application, besides technological difference.
Kolar is the major supplier of tomatoes within the state as well as

to markets in Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa, Kerala etc., Although
tomato market of Kolar has 254 trader cum commission agents, about
50 are trading actively, compared to Vaddahalli with 40 intermediaries
(tables 4.7 and 4.8). Since Vaddahalli is situated on the Bangalore to
Chennai national highway (NH4), the major destination from this market
is Chennai. Kolar market is one of the leading tomato markets in the
state receiving huge arrivals and distribution to upcountry markets. The
concentration of sellers shows that top five per cent of traders handled
60 per cent of the produce, while top 10 per cent accounted for 80 per
cent. Throughout the year tomato is sent to Chennai, Kerala, West
Bengal, Madhya Pradesh markets. While except for March-July and
March- September months tomato is demanded from Tamil Nadu and
Andhra Pradesh markets. Ripe tomatoes are demanded from Bangalore
and Chennai markets, while semi ripe or raw tomatoes are dispatched to
Orissa, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Delhi (table 4.9). The major
varieties grown during Kharif is US 501 and Alankar while during rabi
season Simhadri, Samruddi, US 2535 and in summer season Abhinav,
US 811, Raina varieties are grown. The varieties such as, US 501,
Badusha, US 1389 are grown throughout the year.
The integration of Vaddahalli and Kolar markets are studied using

daily prices for one year period. The Augmented Dickey Fuller test values
above the critical value (1%) given by Mackinnon statistical tables
implied that the series are non stationary at their levels confirming the
existence of unit root. The series became stationary after first
differencing (table 4.10).
The results of trace test and Maximum Eigen value test of

Johansen’s co-integration test indicated the presence of two co-
integration equations at 5 per cent level of significance. The long run
equilibrium relationship is established among tomato markets studied
(table 4.11).
The Granger causality result reveals that there is bidirectional

causality between Kolar market prices and Vaddahalli market. This
means that the prices are determined simultaneously through a quick
feedback mechanism. The results of the study confirmed that major
tomato markets in Kolar are integrated (table 4.12).
The results of vector error correction estimates show both speed of

adjustment and long run price correction in the selected markets. The
prices in Vaddahalli are influenced by the previous two days prices in the
same market and lagged price of Kolar market (Table 4.13). These
findings are different from those of Adenegan et al. (2011) found that
prices of tomato exhibited unidirectional granger causality relationship.
Value added tomato products in the form of ketchup, sauce, puree

are used in various food preparations and as taste maker while serving
food. However, the food habits and purchase decisions are determined by
a number of socio-economic and family demographics. The consumption
is compared between Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban districts to
find out if there is any difference in the preferred products across the
various attributes.
5.4.1 Socio - economic characteristics of the consumers
It could be observed that 70 and 56 per cent of the respondents in

Chikkaballapur district and Bangalore Urban belonged to middle age
group respectively (Table 4.14).
The education status indicates that, only 3 per cent of the

respondents are illiterates in Chikkaballapur district and no illiterates
among Bangalore Urban respondents. Of the remaining, 26 and 8 per
cent respectively have high school education, 22 and 16 per cent
completed pre university college education, while 46 and 76 per cent
respectively have completed graduation. This indicates that majority of
the respondents are aware about the value added products of tomato.
The family structure revealed that majority of the respondents of

Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban (50 and 60%) is of small size
category with less than 5 members. Only 14 and 36 per cent belonged to
medium family size group while 36 and 4 per cent of consumers belonged
to large family size, respectively. Further, a majority of the households
are in nucleus family type. Family size is an important factor for sharing
ideas and information regarding tomato and its value added products.
The family type determines the quantity of products purchased.
Majority of the respondents in both Chikkaballapur and Bangalore
Urban are non- vegetarian constituting 72 and 66 per cent respectively.
Vegetarians preferred to try new type of value added products as
compared to non- vegetarians.
Majority of decision makers (42 and 46%) are women in both

Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban. In both rural and urban areas
women took decisions regarding what and how much to purchase, which
product and quality characteristics, etc. are to be considered while
making purchase decisions. Only 30 and 20 per cent of buying decisions
are by men in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban.
With regard to occupational status, majority of respondents

belonged to agriculturists in Chikkaballapur. While, in Bangalore Urban,
a majority of respondents are employed in private sector, business and
government sectors. In urban areas most of the respondents are with
high educational qualifications who are engaged in professional jobs as
compared to rural areas.
Monthly income earnings by Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban

respondents revealed that 40 and 58 per cent respectively belonged to
middle income group. It may be noted that 66 and 24 per cent of
respondents in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban spent Rs. 2,500-
5,000 for provision of grocery, fruits and vegetables. Whereas, 20 per
cent in Chikkaballapur and 72 per cent in Bangalore urban consumers
spent Rs. 5,000 per month on grocery, fruits and vegetables. Only 14
and 4 per cent reported to have spent less than Rs. 2,500 on purchase of
food articles. Urban consumers purchased almost all food articles unlike
rural households with own farm produced several items used in
consumption.
The respondents in both rural and urban preferred ripened tomato
than semi ripened tomato for food preparation. However, at the time of
buying, most of the consumers choose semi ripened tomato in rural and
urban areas because majority of them buy tomatoes once a week (Table
4.15).
5.4.2 Factors influencing buying decisions of value added tomato

products
Majority of the respondents considered factors like preference of

the family, adds taste to food served, ready availability, quality of the
product, save preparation time, nutritive value, products easily available
for preparation and influence of friends or relatives for consumption of
value added products like tomato ketchup, tomato sauce, tomato paste,
tomato puree, tomato juice and tomato soup in Chikkaballapur and
Bangalore urban districts (table 4.16).
It can be noticed from the table that in rural area majority of

respondents considered factors like preference of family followed by adds
taste to food served, products easily available for preparation, quality of
the product and nutritive value in consuming the value added products.
Consumers in urban areas, considered factors like improving taste

of food served followed by easy availability of products for preparation,
quality of the product, save preparation time and nutritive value for
consumption of value added products.
Most of the urban consumers have paucity of time as they are

employed in private or government jobs and prefer to buy value added
products. Therefore, ready availability of tomato products makes it easy
in the preparation of tasty food for household consumption. The buying
decision is influenced by family members liking of value added products
as also.
5.4.3 Reasons for not consuming value added products of tomato
Although value added products are available in market places,

consumers may not end up buying due to various socio-economic
reasons. Rural consumers did not prefer value added products mainly
because of differences in tastes between homemade and purchased
product. In urban areas, consumers did not prefer because of dislike on
purchased products, fear of adulteration and non availability of required
value added products. Therefore, it is important to ease these constraints
by way of building brand loyalty, quality assurance, adding right flavor to
match ethnic cuisine etc., for promoting value added products
consumption (Table 4.17). Rural respondents prefer homemade products
than ready to eat foods as compared to urban consumers because of the
customs and traditions.
5.4.4 Sources of information on value added products
The major source of information regarding value added products

for consumers is from various publicity materials like retail shop display,
TV/radio advertisements, newspaper/magazine and friends/relatives. In
both rural and urban areas, majority of respondents got the information
from the retail shop display. This shows that consumers try out new
products upon seeing display in the store counters (Table 4.18).
The relationship between quantity of tomato products purchased

and family size is analysed using chi-square test and found that quantity
purchased is positively associated with the family size in both rural and
urban consumers except in the case of consumption of tomato ketchup
among urban consumers (Table 4.19). This shows the positive
association of quantity purchased with family size.
5.4.5 Brand loyalty of consumers to value added products
The responses for the statements depicting consumer loyalty are

measured using one way ANOVA (Table 4.20). A comparison of brand
loyalty of value added products between rural and urban purchasers
revealed that there is no significant difference. However, there is a
significant difference in agreement to statements depicting the extent of
loyalty in both regions. It shows that consumers are not using the same
brand for all product categories but consumers are brand loyal. Among
the agreement to statements, extent of brand loyalty varies in rural and
urban areas because the consumers prefer small pack size like sachets
and low priced products for their consumption in rural areas as
compared to urban.
5.4.6 Factors influencing brand preference
Respondents rated different value added products on a five point

likert scale describing various aspects of product features (Table 4.21).
With respect to quality there is significant difference among the

products in rural and urban areas. Quality perceived by rural and urban
consumers significantly differed with respect to tomato ketchup, tomato
paste and tomato puree. The mean value for quality consideration while
buying fresh tomato is found to be high in both rural and urban areas.
The visible attributes like uniform ripening, size and firmness of flesh are
the quality parameters considered.
The extent of usage of different value added products is not the

same. Therefore availability of products in required pack size is one of
the important factors promoting consumption. There is significant
difference among various products availability in required pack sizes for
consumers. The higher mean scores reflect agreement to better quality of
selected products among rural and urban consumers. Between regions,
consumers differed in their opinion on quality of tomato ketchup, paste
and puree available in the market. Similarly consumer opinion on
product availability in required pack size as a reason for consumption
differed across product range in both Chikkaballapur and Bangalore
Urban consumers. This is because certain products are available in
convenient pack sizes like small sachets while the others are of bigger
size containers. If the value added products is used occasionally, then
consumers wouldn’t prefer to buy big size packs. There is a significant
difference in their opinion on availability of tomato paste in required sizes
between Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban regions. Tomato ketchup
is commonly preferred by consumers because of its availability in
required quantity. Value added products availability in small pack sizes
in rural areas could promote consumption.
Colour of value added products is important especially when it is

used as a taste maker or seasoning food. The consumers differed in their
opinion on this count as reflected through statistically significant mean
values. Between the regions, consumers opinion differed with respect to
colour influencing tomato puree and juice buying decisions. Based on
the colour of the product some consumers dislike value added products.
Retailers have to respond to consumers by way of stocking the

right brand in required pack sizes. However, sometimes retailers would
stock limited product range for want of shelf space. Regarding availability
of right stock keeping unit, consumers’ opinion differed significantly with
respect to tomato paste and tomato juice between rural and urban
consumers. Similarly comparing range of products in rural and urban
areas, consumers opinion differed significantly with respect to selected
products.
The factors like ready availability, good packaging, competitive

price, good keeping quality of the products, good brand image and right
consistency of the product in promoting value added products
consumption significantly differed across the selected product categories
in rural and urban areas. This suggests that consumers opinion differed
with respect to product categories. Regarding competitive price, there is
significant difference in products like tomato ketchup, paste, tomato
juice and tomato soup between the regions.
The results revealed that among the value added products in

Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban, there is significant difference in
the availability of products such as, tomato paste, tomato puree, tomato
juice and tomato soup. The availability of products varies across type of
product and place. Retailers are more likely to respond to such local
demand from regular buyers.
Regarding attractive packaging, tomato sauce and tomato puree

are having good and attractive packing according to rural and urban
consumers. Between Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban consumers
opinion on good packaging as the reason for promoting consumption
differed with respect to products like tomato ketchup, tomato sauce,
tomato paste, tomato puree, tomato juice and tomato soup. It is clear
that not all of the value added products in rural and urban areas are
made available in good and attractive packs preferred by consumers.
Influence of good keeping quality as a factor in promoting

consumption differed with respect to tomato juice between
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban. Keeping quality of the products
determines the extent of consumer preference to buy value added
products.
Another important factor influencing consumer preference is brand

image. There is significant difference between rural and urban
consumers in their opinion on brand image of products promoting
consumption of tomato ketchup, tomato sauce and tomato puree. Good
brand image creates its own demand for particular product in the
market.
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban consumers opinion on

flavour and consistency of tomato ketchup and tomato soup being
offered at required level differed between rural and urban consumers.
Ideal flavour and consistency of products improves consumers preference
of value added products.
5.4.7 Reasons for not preferring brands of value added products
Consumption of value added products of tomato is negligible in

some of the households. Therefore, the plausible reasons for not
preferring different brands of value added products are obtained on a five
point scale. A comparison of mean scores between rural and urban
consumers is made to identify most distinguishing reasons across
product range (Table 4.22).
Consumers are concerned about the presence of excessive

preservatives in processed products and avoid buying such products.
Among the six products considered, there is significant difference among
rural and urban consumers of Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban
with respect to opinion on tomato juice having high preservatives. Local
brands are likely to contain more preservatives compared to national
brands. Thus, consumers in both rural and urban areas are
apprehensive of presence of undesirable preservatives which may cause
health risks.
The non consumption of value added products could be due to fear

of adulteration. Consumers opinion on adulteration as a reason for not
preferring value added products differed across the product range in
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban regions. However, only the mean
sore of tomato juice significantly differed between rural and urban
consumers. Extent of adulteration varies with the form of product and
place. In rural areas adulteration is high as compared to urban. It is
easy for sellers to exploit consumers in rural areas by adding adulterants
to products and sell under different imitation brand because consumer’s
knowledge level is limited in rural areas.
Value added products command higher prices compared to fresh

tomatoes. Many a time, the high price may act as a barrier in purchase
decisions. The respondents opinion with respect to value added products
being expensive differed significantly in tomato juice between
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban regions.
The reasons for consumers do not preferring value added products

like, they don’t cook such products, traditional food habits and product
being not with right flavour are not statistically significant to establish
difference with respect to dislike for tomato value added products among
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban consumers. Flavour is one of the
major factors influencing the buying decision of consumers. There is no
significant difference between the Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban
respondents with respect to product flavour among the various products
except for tomato puree.
Easy availability of product is one of the determinants of

consumption. There was significant difference in respondents’ opinion on
non availability of products as a reason for not consuming value added
products in Chikkaballapur, while among Bangalore Urban, there was no
significant difference in their opinion on availability of various products.
However, between Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban consumers, the
opinion on availability of tomato puree and tomato soup differed
significantly. In rural areas availability of range of value added products
is low as compared to urban areas. This is mainly due to consumers in
rural areas prefer fresh form of products than the processed products.
Demand for value added products in rural areas is found to be negligible
as compared to urban areas.
Suitable consistency of processed product is important while using

in different food preparations. There is significant difference in
consumers opinion on unsuitability of product consistency as the reason
for not buying value added products in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore
Urban regions.
Many households have traditional food preparations with fresh

tomatoes rather than using value added products. It is observed that
consumers opinion on preparing own value added products at home
differed with respect to various types of products among Chikkaballapur
and Bangalore Urban regions. Between Chikkaballapur and Bangalore
Urban, there is statistically significant difference with respect to their
opinion on tomato puree, tomato juice and tomato soup. The high mean
scores shows that consumers prefer homemade products rather than
buying. This is because of their perception and dislike on the value
added products. The high mean score values of reasons like processed
food contains high levels of preservatives, not needed in food preparation
and consumer faith in preparing own value added products are the major
reasons for not buying tomato value added products.
5.4.8 Best-Worst scaling for estimating attributes of tomato Ketchup
Consumer preference of tomato ketchup is estimated using best-

worst scaling. Respondents are asked to indicate the most important and
least important considerations in selection of tomato ketchup for
purchase.
The consumers, in rural and urban areas prefer tomato ketchup

without no adulteration of the product followed by, flavour of the
product. Therefore, consumers choose to buy reputed brands of tomato
ketchup which has ideal flavour. Apart from this, the availability and
price of the product are also important considerations influencing
product choice (Table 4.23).
5.4.9 Best-Worst scaling for estimating attributes of fresh tomato
Tomato is almost inseparable from Indian curries and other food

preparations. It is eaten fresh along with other vegetables in the form of
salads or processed to prepare value added products. It could be inferred
that the most important factor which affect purchase decision of fresh
tomato in rural area is size and semi ripeness of tomato for their
purchase. Fuzziness, pest and insect incidence and price of tomato are
least preferred attributes (Table 4.24).
In Bangalore Urban, colour of tomato is the most important

consideration while buying fresh tomato. Majority of the consumers
prefer ‘local variety’ of tomato for purchase followed by size and price of
fresh tomato. The least preferred factors is long keeping quality and
usage of plant protection chemicals. This shows that consumers are not
really concerned about pesticide as every farmer applies plant protection
chemicals. These findings are similar to those of Steven et al. (2005)
observation on most important attributes of wine choice like brand,
variety and foods matching as opposed to labelling, medal and health
reasons are least important.
Summary
CHAPTER VI
SUMMARY AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Vegetables supply minerals, vitamins and crude fiber required for

human health and thus forms an important part of food consumption. In
the context of alleviating protein malnutrition in India, efforts are under
way to enrich the cereals with vegetables. The daily per capita minimum
requirement of vegetables according to the standard dietary prescription
is 284 grams per head i.e. about 20 per cent of the daily requirement of
the total food of an adult. In order to improve the quality of the diet of the
people, it is essential that the production and consumption of vegetables
are increased considerably.
Tomato is an important fruit vegetable commonly used by almost

all the urbanities in daily diet. The tomatoes have high medicinal value,
being prescribed in the diet of the patients suffering from skin disease,
night-blindness and stunted growth. The crop ranks first in terms of area
and production among vegetables in Karnataka. The major tomato
producing districts in Karnataka are Kolar, Chikkaballapur, Bangalore,
Tumkur, Hassan, Haveri and Davangere. In the present study
Chikkaballapur taluk was purposively selected considering the larger
area under tomato crop. The study was taken up to assess the economic
performance of production and marketing of tomato, market integration
in selected tomato markets and consumer preference for value added
products of tomato.
The specific objectives of the study are:
1. To assess the costs and returns in tomato cultivation
2. To analyze the market dynamics of tomato crop
3. To study consumer preference for tomato and its value added products
Hypotheses
1. There is a scale economy in tomato cultivation
2. Major tomato markets in Kolar are integrated
3. Colour and size are the important quality attributes of fresh tomato
The study was conducted in Chikkaballapur district of Karnataka

state. The district was selected because of large area and production
under tomato crop. Sidlaghatta taluk is selected randomly. In this taluk,
four villages viz., Nagamangala, Harapanahalli, Cheemangala and Tadur
were selected for preliminary investigation.
In each village, 15 farmers were selected randomly. Thus, the total

of 60 respondents from 4 villages constituted the sample for this study.
Data collection was done by personal interview method with pre-tested
structured schedule prepared for the purpose. The data was collected
during February and March 2012.
Co-integration analysis was employed to examine whether Kolar

APMC is integrated with Vaddahalli market or not. Distribution and
arrivals of tomato in Kolar and Vaddahalli markets were studied.
To know the extent of consumer preference for tomato and its

value added products, the study was carried out in Chikkaballapur and
Bangalore Urban districts of Karnataka. For this study 100 consumers
were selected, 50 consumers from each district was selected. The data
was collected using pre-tested structured schedule.
Major findings of the study
 The percentage of area under tomato indicated that 78.33 per cent of
growers belonged to small farmers whereas, 16.67 per cent belonged
to marginal farmers and only 5 per cent of them were big farmers.
 The total cost of cultivation of tomato for small, medium, large and
pooled category of respondents was Rs. 1,14,658, Rs. 1,15,476, Rs.
1,17,128 and Rs. 1,15,752 per acre respectively. The variable costs
amounted to Rs. 72,351, Rs. 70,591, Rs. 70,395 and Rs. 71,111
respectively.
 The per kilo average cost of production was Rs. 4.56 for small farmers
as compared to 4.35 for large farmers.
 The average gross returns of tomato for small, medium and large
farmers were Rs. 1,55,871, Rs. 1,60,020 and Rs. 1,74,043 per acre
respectively.
 Cost and return analysis for small, medium and large category of
farmers indicate direct relationship between area under tomato crop
and the total cost of cultivation. Large farmers total cost of cultivation
was relatively less, when compared to small farmers. The yield of
tomato per acre showed a direct relationship with the area under
tomato for small, medium and large farmer.
 Large farmers used comparatively higher levels of inputs like FYM,

and fertilizers when compared to small farmers.
 Gross and net returns per acre from tomato increased as the area
under tomato increases. The net return over all costs obtained by
large farmers was higher (Rs. 56,915) than small farmers (Rs. 41,213).
 The Co-integration analysis revealed a simultaneous feedback in

prices of Kolar market had greater influence on Vaddahalli market
prices.
 Vaddahalli market prices were integrated with Kolar market prices.

Thus, the prices of Kolar market influence prices in Vaddahalli
market in the short run. Tomato is highly price sensitive due to high
fluctuations in supply. Though there is strong integration between
markets, the benefits of integration are not being reaped by farmers
as tomato crop is highly perishable. Therefore, the benefit of
integration goes to traders.
 Kolar market tomato is distributed to Chennai, parts of Andhra

Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Kerala, Orissa and from Vaddahalli it is
distributed to Chennai, Kerala, Vizag and Vijaywada.
 In both rural and urban areas majority of the tomato buying decision
makers were women (42 and 46%). The occupation of the decision
makers was housewives (36%) in rural areas, whereas, in urban areas
34 per cent of decision makers were working in private sector.
 The major factors considered while consuming tomato ketchup in

rural and urban areas were liking of the family (52 %) improves taste
of food (36%).
 The major factor considered for buying tomato sauce was to improve
taste of food served (56 and 34%) by consumers of rural and urban
areas.
 Rural (54%) and urban (26 %) consumers preferred tomato paste

because it could be used in new variety of food preparation.
 Tomato puree was preferred by consumers because of the quality of

the product (8%) and improve taste of food (30%) respectively in rural
and urban areas.
 Tomato juice was consumed in rural areas as it helps in preparing

blended juice (18%) and in urban areas, consumers preferred the
product as it saves preparation time (18%).
 The rural and urban consumers prefer tomato soup mainly because of
its nutritive value (36 and 30%) respectively.
 The non consumers did not prefer tomato value added products in
rural areas because of difference in tastes between homemade and
purchased products as revealed by 54, 20, 22, 34, 18 and 28 per cent
for tomato ketchup, tomato sauce, tomato paste, tomato puree,
tomato juice and tomato soup respectively. Similarly in urban areas
consumers did not consume value added products because of dislike
on purchased products as reported by 24, 26, 48, 36, 30 and 16 per
cent, respectively.
 The source of information to purchase value added products in rural

and urban areas was retail shop display, followed by TV/radio
advertisements. Majority of the consumers took impulse decisions to
purchase value added products.
 There was positive and significant association between family size and
purchase quantities of fresh tomato, tomato sauce, tomato paste,
tomato puree, tomato juice and tomato soup in both the areas of
consumers. Whereas, for tomato ketchup there was no association
with family size and purchase quantities of consumers in urban
areas.
 The brand loyalty of consumers found that there was no significant

difference between the regions, whereas, there was a significant
difference in agreement to statements depicting the extent of loyalty in
both Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban region.
 The factors influencing brand preference of consumers for fresh

tomato, tomato ketchup, tomato sauce, tomato paste, tomato puree,
tomato juice and tomato soup in Chikkaballapur and Bangalore
Urban revealed that there was significant difference among the
products in both the regions except for competitive price in rural area.
Whereas, between the regions there was significant difference found
in some products.
 It is a general apprehension among consumers that processed
products have more preservatives which affects purchase decisions.
There was significant difference in their opinions on tomato juice in
Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban regions. Another fear is that of
food adulteration in unbranded processed products. There is
significant difference in consumers perception on presence of
adulterants in tomato juice between Chikkaballapur and Bangalore
Urban.
 The consumers chose tomato ketchup based on ‘no adulteration’

(75.21 and 66.28) of the product and fresh tomato was based on ‘size’
(74.5) and ‘colour’ (71.01) of tomato in rural and urban areas
respectively.
6.2 Policy implications
The minimum procurement price of tomato must be fixed at least to

cover the cost of production under market intervention scheme
introduced by Govt. of Karnataka.
Scientific cultivation practices with ideal spacing and pest and

nutrient management bring down the cost of production. Therefore
suitable training and extension programmes to educate farmers is
advocated.
The problem of adulteration and use of excessive preservatives are to

be addressed by complying ISO specification of value added products.
The tomato farmers must consider grading fresh tomatoes to uniform

colour and size for better price realisation.
References
CHAPTER VII
REFERENCES
ABDULLAH, M. AND KALIM, R., 2009, Determinants of food price

inflation in Pakistan. Paper presented in the conference of
University of Management Sciences, 1 – 21.
ABIDEMI, O. I. AND MALIK, S. A. A., 2010, Analysis of inflation and its

determinant in Nigeria. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 7(2): 97
– 100.
ADENEGAN, K. O. AND ADEOYE, I. B., 2011, Price analysis of tomato in

rural and urban retail markets of Oyo State. International Journal
of Agricultural Economics & Rural Development, 4(2): 90-96.
AL-WEQAIYAN, A., 2005, A cross-national study of repurchase intentions

of fast-food meals. J. Int. Food and Agribusiness Marketing, 17(1):
95-116.
ARAVIND, K., 2000, Performance of Indian rice exports. M.Sc. (Agri.)

Thesis, (Unpublished), Univ. Agri. Sci., Bangalore.
ARSHAD, F. M., 1990, The integration of palm oil market in peninsular

Malaysia. Indian J. Agril. Econ., 45(1): 21-30.
ARYA, A., 1991, Spatial integration of regulated markets in Kheda

district of Gujarat. Indian Journal of Agricultural Marketing,
5(2):207-209.
ASHALATHA, 2000, Export trade performance of Indian cashew. M.Sc.

(Agri.) Thesis, (Unpublished), Univ. Agri. Sci., Bangalore.
AUGER, P., DEVINNEY, T. M. AND LOUVIERE, J. J., 2004, Consumer’s
social beliefs, an international investigation using Best-Worst
scaling methodology. Working paper, University of Melbourne.
BAHARUMSHAH, A. Z. AND HABIBULLAH, M. S., 1994, price efficiency

in pepper markets in Malaysia; a co-integration analysis. Indian J.
Agril. Econ., 49(2): 205-216.
BHATTA, R. AND BHAT, A. R. S., 1988, An economic analysis of price

and supply of arecanut in Karnataka – A case study of Sirsi and
Mangalore Markets. Journal of Institute of Economic Research,
23(1): 46-48.
BASAVARAJA, B., 1980, Economics of Karnataka hybrid tomato in

Bangalore district. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, (Unpublished), Univ. Agri.
Sci., Bangalore.
BORSEN, B. W., CHAVAS, J. P. AND GRAND, W. R., 1984, Dynamic

relationships of rice import prices in Europe. European Review and
Agricultural Economics, 11(1): 29-42.
BRAHMAPRAKASH AND SUSHILA SRIVASTAVA, 1994, Pattern of

marketing arrivals and price of gram in Uttar Pradesh. Indian
Journal of Agricultural Marketing, 8(1):13-116.
CAUSSE, FRIGUET, COIRET, LEPICIER, NAVEZ, LEE, HOLTHUYSEN,

SINESIO, MONETA AND GRANDILLO, 2010, Consumer
preferences for fresh tomato at the european scale: a common
segmentation on taste and firmness. Journal of Food Science, 75(9):
S531-S541.
CHAN, STEPHANIE, CALDWELL, BRIAN, R. AND BRADLEY, J., 2011, An
economic examination of alternative organic cropping systems in
New York State. Department of Applied Economics and
Management, 1-31.
COHEN, S. H. AND MARKOWITZ, P., 2002, Renewing market

segmentation: some new tools to correct old problems. ESOMAR.
DHUNA AND MUKESH, 1984, An analysis of consumer behaviour. Indian

Journal of Agricultural Marketing, 14(7): 26- 28.
DINKAR, B. L., 1990, Commodity system of edible oilseeds: A case study

of Groundnut in Karnataka, Fellow thesis. National Institute of
Bank Management, Pune.
ENGLE, R. F. AND GRANGER, C. W. J., 1987, Co-integration and error

correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica,
55: 251 – 276.
ENGINDENIZ, S., 2006, Economic Analysis of Pesticide Use on

Processing Tomato Growing. Crop Protection, 25(6): 534-541.
ESENGUN, K., SAGILI, M. AND AKCA, H., 2005, Tomatoes Production,

Marketing Structure and Solution. Journal of Applied Sciences,
5(10): 1854-1857.
FINN, A. AND LOUVIERE, J. J., 1992, Determining the appropriate

response to evidence of public concerns: the case of food safety.
Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 11(1): 12-25.
FURRUKH, B., SHAHBAZ, N., KALSOOM, Y., USMAN, K., JAHANZEB, K.
AND MUHAMMAD, J. Q., 2011, Determinants of inflation in
Pakistan: an econometric analysis using johansen co-integration
approach. Australian Journal of Business and Management
Research, 1(5): 71-82.
GEMTESSA, K., 1991, An analysis of the structure of Ethiopian coffee

exports. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, (Unpublished), Univ. Agri. Sci.,
Bangalore.
GIRISH, M. R., 1995, An econometric analysis of arrivals and prices in

major markets of Karnataka. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, (Unpublished),
Univ. Agri. Sci., Bangalore.
GOODMAN, S., LARRY LOCKSHIN AND ELI COHEN., 2005, Best-Worst

scaling: a simple method to determine drinks and wine style
preferences. Proceedings of the 2nd International Wine Marketing
Symposium, Sonoma: 1-16.
INDIRA, M., 1998, An economic analysis of coffee marketing in India.

Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Social and Economic Change, Bangalore.
JAYESH, T., 2001, Production and export performance of selected spices

of South India – An economic analysis. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis,
(Unpublished), Univ. Agri. Sci., Dharwad.
JAYRAJ, D., 1992, Spatial pricing efficiency in ground markets for Tamil
Nadu. Indian J. Agril. Econ., 47 (1):79-89.
JOHANSEN AND JUSELIUS, J., 1990, Maximum likelihood estimation

and inference on cointegration with applications to the demand for
money. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics.
KAREN, A., HEIN, SARA, R. JAEGER, B. TOM CARR AND CONOR M.
DELAHUNTY, 2008, Comparison of Five Common Acceptance and
Preference Methods. Food Quality and Preference, 19(7): 651-661.
KHAN, A. A., BUKHARI, S. K. H. AND AHMAD, Q. M., 2007,

Determinants of Recent Inflation in Pakistan. MPRA paper no.
16254: 1 – 16.
KHAN, R. E. A. AND GILL, A. R., 2010, Determinants of Inflation: A Case

of Pakistan (1970 – 2007). Journal of Economics, 1(1): 45 – 51.
KIM-HYUNAH, YANG-ILSUN AND HEO-EUNJUNG., 2005, Cause-effect

analysis of brand equity factors in contract food service
management company in college and university in Incheon area.
Korean. J. of Nutrition, 38(5): 395-403.
KUIJS, L., 1998, Determinants of inflation, exchange rate and output in

Nigeria. IMF working paper no. 160: 1 – 33.
LARYEA, S. A. AND SUMAILA, U. R., 2001, Determinants of Inflation in

Tanzania. Chr. Michelsen Institute Development Studies and
Human Rights, Working paper no. 12: 1 – 17.
LIM, C. H. AND PAPI, L., 1997, An Econometric Analysis of the

determinants of Inflation in Turkey. IMF Working paper no. 170: 1 –
32.
LIU, O. AND ADEDEJI, O. S., 2000, Determinants of Inflation in the

Islamic Republic of Iran: A Macroeconomic analysis. IMF Working
paper 127:1 – 28.
LOHAR, M. S., 1987, A study of economics and marketing of hybrid
tomatoes in Satara district (Maharashtra). Agriculture Banker,
10(1):32-33.
LOUVIERE, J. J. AND WOODWORTH, G. G., 1990, Best-worst scaling: a

model for largest difference judgments. Working paper, Faculty of
Business, University of Alberta.
LUNDAHL, M. AND PETERSON, E., 1982, Price series correlation and

market integration: Some further evidence. Indian J. Agril. Econ.,
37(2): 185-190.
LUSK, J., PARKER AND NATALIE, 2009, Consumer preferences for

amount and type of fat in ground beef. Journal of Agricultural and
Applied Economics, 41(1): 75-90.
MAHAJAN, R. S., PATIL, H. N. AND BORUDE, S. G., 1994,

Economic analysis of brinjal and tomato production in Thane
district of Maharashtra. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural
Universities, 19(3): 437-439.
MAHESH, N., 2000, Economic constraints facing the India Tea industry:
strategies for post WTO era. Ph.D. Thesis, (Unpublished), Univ.
Agri. Sci., Bangalore.
MALI, B., NAWADKAR, D. S., SALE, D. L. AND PAGIRE, B. V., 1999,

Trends in arrivals and prices of fruit and vegetables in Pune
regulated market of Maharashtra. Indian Journal of Agricultural
Marketing, 13(2):32-35.
MALIK, R. P. S. AND KAPADIA, B. L., 1976, A study of price movements

and extent of market integration in groundnut oil market. Indian
Journal of Marketing, 6(11): 29-31.
MAMATHA, B. G., 1995, Export trade of selected spices in India. An
economic analysis. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, (Unpublished), Univ. Agri.
Sci., Bangalore.
MONDELAERS, VERBEKE AND HUYLENBROECK, 2009, Importance of

health and environment as quality traits in the buying decision of
organic products. British-Food-Journal, 111(10): 1120-1139.
MOSAYED, P AND MOHAMMAD, R., 2009, Sources of Inflation in Iran:

An application of the real approach. International Journal of
Applied Econometrics and Quantitative Studies, 6(1): 61 – 76.
NANJAREDDY, C., VENKATARAM, J. V., GRACY C. P. AND NAGARAJ, G.

N., 1990, Economics of production of hybrid tomato in Bangalore
district, Division of Agricultural Economics, M. Sc. (Agri) Thesis,
(Unpublished), Univ. Agri. Sci., Hebbal, Bangalore.
NASURDEEN, P. AND SUBRAMANIAN, S. S., 1995, Price integration of

oils and oil seeds. Indian J. Agril. Econ., 50(4): 624-633.
NAWADKAR, D. S., MALI, B. K. AND BIRDAR, K. S., 1999, Price and

supply variability of cole vegetables. Indian Journal of Agricultural
Marketing, 13(2): 40-41.
OLATUNJI, G. B., OMOTESHO, O. A., AYINDE, O. E. AND AYINDO, K.,

2010, Determinants of Inflation in Nigeria: A Co-integration
approach. Paper presented at the Joint 3rd African association of
agricultural economists: 1 – 12.
PRABHAKAR, Y. S., 1988, An economic analysis of silk cocoon marketing

in Karnataka. M.Sc. (Agri) Thesis, (Unpublished), Univ. Agri. Sci.,
Bangalore.
PURI, R. AND SANGHERA, J., 1989, Nutritive value and consumption
pattern of some processed foods. Ind. J. Marketing, 46(6): 24-27.
RAJARASHMI, P. S., AND SUDARSANA, G., 2004, Buyer behaviour of

home appliances with special reference to microwave products in
Bangalore city. Ind. J. Marketing, 34(1): 19- 24.
RAJESH K. R., ARUN, P., N. K. PANDEY, AND N. R. KUMAR, 2003,

Market integration between important potato markets of India,
Indian Potato Assoc., 30(2): 205-206.
SABESON, R., 1992, Consumer preference towards processed fruits and

vegetable products- A case study in Coimbatore city. M.Sc. (Agri)
Thesis, (Unpublished), Tamil Nadu Agri. Uni., Coimbatore.
SAIKAT, S. AND NAIR, S. R., 1994, International trade and pepper price
variations: A co integration approach. Indian J. Agril. Econ., 49(3):
417-425.
SARA R. J., PETER J. D. AND RODERICK J. B., 2009, Wine purchase

decisions and consumption behaviours: insights from a probability
sample drawn in Auckland, New Zealand. Food Quality and
Preference, 20(4): 312-319.
SHIVARAYA, B. AND HUGAR, L. B., 2002, Pace and pattern of arrivals

and prices of vegetables in Karnataka. Rural India, 65(4): 72-75.
SIDDAGANGAIAH, 2000, An analysis of potato marketing system-A case

study of Chikkaballapur APMC. M.Sc. Thesis, (Unpublished), Univ.
Agri. Sci., Bangalore.
SINGH, B. AND KAHLON, A. S., 1977, Market integration and spatial
price differences in food grains markets of Punjab. Agricultural
Marketing, 20(2):15-19.
SINGH, A. K., VASISHT, B. R., ATTERI AND DAROGA SINGH, 2004,

Assessment of market infrastructure and integration: A case study
of Orissa. Indian Journal of Agricultural Marketing, 18(3): 220-242.
SINHAROY, S. AND NAIR, S. R., 1994, International trade and pepper

prices. Indian J. Agril. Econ., 49(3): 417-425.
SINGH, K. AND SINGH, R. V., 1999, Resource Use, Farm size and
returns to scale in Indian Agriculture. Indian J. Agril. Econ., 16(1):
32-46.
SIVIERO, P., 2005, Area and Production of Processable Tomato.

Informatore Agrario., 61(3): 37-38.
SREEDHARA, D. S., 2010, Comparative economics of capsicum

production under protected and open conditions in northern
Karnataka, M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, (Unpublished), Univ. Agri. Sci.,
Dharwad.
SUBRAMANYAM, K. V. AND SUDHA. M., 1993, Economics of linking

tomato processing with production and marketing. Indian Food
Packer, 47(3): 29-33.
SURYAVANSHI, B. P., NAGURE, D. V., YADAV, M. U., SOLANKE, A. S.

AND PHUKE, K. D., 2006, An economic analysis of tomato
marketing in Latur District of Marathwada Region (M. S.). Journal
of Soils and Crops, 16(1):135-138.
VINCENT, N., 2006, A study on brand consciousness among children
and its effect on family buying behaviour in Bangalore city. Indian
Journal of Agricultural Marketing, 36(1): 12-18.
VISHNUGUPTA AND ARORA, V. P. S., 1991, Inter relations between the

prices of oils and oilseeds in Uttarpradesh. Indian Journal of
Agricultural Marketing, 5(1): 90.
WISEMAN, B. AND CHENG., 2011, Influences of demographic

characteristics, attitudes, and preferences of consumers on table
egg consumption in British Columbia, Canada. Poultry-Science,
90(5): 1088- 1095.
ZUBAIDI, A. B. AND SHAH, M. H., 1994, Price efficiency in pepper

markets in Malaysia: A co-integration analysis. Indian J. Agril.
Econ., 49(2): 205-216.
Appendices
APPENDIX-I
General information on Chikkaballapur District, 20010-11
Sl. No. Particulars Chikkaballapur
1 Population (No.) 1,254,377
A Males (No.) 637,504
B Females (No.) 616,873
2 Number of females per 1000males 968
3 Rural population (No.) 975188
4 Urban population 279189
5 Population density (No/Sq. Km) 298
7 Population growth rate (%) 9.17
8 Total geographical area (ha) 404,501
9 Total forest area (ha) 49,704
10 Total cultivated area (ha) 171,589
11 Irrigated area (ha) 41,079
12 Total number of villages (No.) 1,598
13 Total number of taluks (No.) 6
Source: Government of Karnataka, Chikkaballapur district at a glance,

2010-11, District Stastical Information Center, Chikkaballapur, Karnataka.
APPENDIX-II
General information on Kolar, Chikkaballapur and Bangalore Urban

Districts
2010-11
Bangalore
Description Kolar Chikkaballapur
Urban
Actual Population 1,540,231 1,254,377 8,425,970
Male 779,401 637,504 4,401,299
Female 760,830 616,873 4,024,671
Area Sq. Km 4,012 4,208 2190
Sex Ratio (Per 1000) 976 968 914
Child Sex Ratio (0-6 Age) 955 945 940
Average Literacy (%) 74.33 70.08 89.59
Male Literacy 81.94 78.36 92.63
Female Literacy 66.56 61.55 86.25
Total Child Population (0-6 161,877 124,719 862,493

Age)
Male Population (0-6 Age) 82,814 64,129 444,639
Female Population (0-6 Age) 79,063 60,590 421,778
Literates 1,024,555 791,692 6,775,942
Male Literates 570,799 449,291 3,664,959
Female Literates 453,756 342,401 3,110,983

www.indiastat.com
APPENDIX - III
Area, Production and Productivity of Tomato in India
Area % of % of Total
Production Productivity
Year (In '000 Total Veg.
(' 000 MT) (MT/ha)
ha) Veg. Area Production
1987-88 237.3 5.8 3330.5 6.8 14.0
1991-92 289.1 5.2 4243.4 7.2 14.7
1992-93 305.6 6.1 4549.6 7.1 14.9
1993-94 345.9 7.1 4934.0 7.5 14.3
1994-95 351.8 7.0 5261.3 7.8 15.0
1995-96 355.7 6.7 5442.0 7.6 15.3
1996-97 391.2 7.1 5787.8 7.7 14.8
1997-98 413.7 7.4 6183.7 8.5 14.9
1998-99 466.3 7.8 8271.8 9.4 17.7
1999-00 456.5 7.6 7426.8 8.2 16.3
2000-01 460.1 7.4 7242.4 7.7 15.7
2001-02 458.1 7.4 7462.3 8.4 16.3
2002-03 478.8 7.9 7616.7 9.0 15.9
2003-04 502.8 8.0 8125.6 8.7 16.2
2004-05 505.4 7.5 8825.4 8.7 17.5
2005-06 546.1 7.6 9820.4 8.9 18.0
2006-07 596.0 7.9 10055.0 8.7 16.9
2007-08 566.0 7.2 10303.0 8.0 18.2
2008-09 599.0 7.5 11149.0 8.6 18.6
2009-10 634.4 7.9 12433.2 9.3 19.6
2010-11 865.0 10.2 16826.0 11.5 19.5
www.indiastat.com
APPENDIX- IV
Area, Yield and Production of Tomato in Karnataka
Year Area (ha) Yield (Kg/ha) Production (MT)
1992-93 11747 13490 158466
1993-94 13614 11884 161792
1994-95 16927 10994 186087
1995-96 20354 9518 193737
1996-97 22808 11371 259357
1997-98 23633 11386 269077
1998-99 26595 10874 289182
1999-00 26447 12216 323088
2000-01 29069 10795 313794
2001-02 29474 8053 237366
2002-03 26417 8260 218203
2003-04 34253 6705 229669
2004-05 26756 9407 251682
2005-06 31261 8480 265094
2006-07 37816 10201 385778
2007-08 27980 9787 273841
2008-09 34352 9657 331731
2009-10 48773 13430 1673051

Source: www.indiastat.com
APPENDIX -V
Project title: Production and Market Dynamics of Tomato in

Karnataka
Schedule for farmers
I General information
A. Name of the respondent: Ph. No. :
B. Age: Village : Taluk :
District :
C. Occupation
a. Main :
b. Subsidiary :
D. Education : Illiterate/ can read/ HS/PUC/Graduation/PG
E. Membership : Political/ Co-operatives/ Sponsored
F. Family type: Joint / Nucleus
G. Family composition:
Sl. Name the off farm
Name Age(yr)
No. farm activity employed
Adult male
1
2
3
Adult female
1
2
3
Children studying
1
2
3
H. Land holding and Cropping pattern
Plot Area Kharif 2011 Rabi 2011 Summer 2010
no. acre Area Crop I/R Area Crop I/R Area Crop I/R
1
2
3
4
Normal area under High price

Low price acreage
tomato acreage
I. Farm assets
Year of Annual
Sl. Purchase Expected
Name No. the maintenances
No. value life(yrs)
purchase cost
1 Tractor
2 Bullock cart
3 Hand sprays
4 Drip irrigation
& accessories
5 Bore Well
6 Others(specify)
i. Depth of BW
ii No. of BW dug
iii
II. Information on input use and costs
Crop: variety: acres:

season:
Wage rate: men: Rs/day women: Rs/day

bullock labour: Rs/day Machine labour: Rs/day
Material input Labour input
Human labour Bullock labour Machinery labour
Operations Frequency Unit Cost (No.) (No.) (No.)
Qty
cost 1 Cost Cost Cost
family Hired family Hired family Hired
2 3 4
Ploughing
Harrowing
Clod
crushing
Preparation
of irrigation
channels
FYM and
application
Cakes and
applications
Fertilizers&
applications
N.
P.
K.
Cost of
seedlings
Planting
cost
Cost of
staking
Irrigation
Weeding
PP
measures
&application
Watch and
ward
Harvesting
Packing
J. Harvesting details of Tomato
Variety:
No. of Total Qty Price Place To
Sl. Crop No. of Cost
Month Bags/ Qty sold received of whom
No. area pickings incurred
boxes (kg) (kg) (Rs) sale sold
1 March
2 April
3 May
4 June
5 July
6 August
7 September
8 October
9 November
10 December
11 Jan
12 Feb
Wastage of tomato during harvesting (in Qtl):
K. Financial status
Did you borrow any money for crop production? YES / NO
If yes give the details
When
Sl. No Particulars Amount Duration Security Interest Remarks
borrowed
1 Commercial
bank
2 Cooperatives
(ST)
3 Land
development
bank (LT)
4 RRB
5 Money lender
6 Relatives/
friends
III. Marketing
1. Marketing :
Self-Marketed
Commission agents/ retailers/ Cart vender
Wholesaler/ SAFAL Market/ HOPCOMS
2. Whether produce was graded: YES/ NO
If Yes:
a. The basis of grading:
b. Number of grades:
c. Grading done at the market/ field:
d. Labour required:
e. Amount spent:
Method of packing: Gunny bags/ wooden crates/ plastic crates
Capacity:
Number of bags/ Crates required for packing the produce per picking:
Cost of packing material: (Rs/ unit)
Who bears the cost of packing material?
Commission charges paid:
a. Rate:
b. Total amount paid:
Other charges paid at the market place:
a. Market fee:
b. Charges paid at check post:
c. Others
Schedule for consumers
Socio-Economic characteristics:
1. Name of the respondents: 2.
Age:
3. Location/Area: 4.
City:
5. Education: Illiterate/can read/ HS/PUC/Graduation/PG 6.
Occupation:
7. Monthly income (Rs.):
8. Type of family: J/N
9. Food habit: Veg/Non-veg
10. Food type: South Indian / North Indian
11. Family particulars

Family members Number
Adult males
Adult females
Children
Total
Monthly Expenditure
Items Expenditure (amount in Rs)
Food
Vegetables
Processed food
Others
Non- food
1. Which type of tomato do you prefer?
Local / Hybrid
2. In which form do you prefer?
a. Whole / Sliced / Salad
b. Ripened / semi ripened
3. In which form do you buy?
a. Raw
b. Ripened / semi ripened
Monthly consumption pattern on tomato and its value added

products
Quantity purchased per month
Brand/ Price/ Total
Product Quan Purchased
prepared unit Amount
tity From
/ traders (Rs) (Rs)
Fresh Reliance fresh/
tomato SAFAL/Big Bazaar/
Food Bazaar
Tomato Kissan/ Maggi/ Godrej
Ketchup
Tomato Maggi/ Kissan/ Heinz/
Sauce Godrej/ Delmonte
Tomato Godrej/ greenfields/viva
Paste
Tomato Godrej/Tomato/ Magic
Puree
Tomato Godrej/ Campbell/
Juice Kagome
Tomato Godrej
soup
a) Who makes buying decisions? : Husband / wife/ children/parents

Age: Education: Occupation:
Factors influencing buying decisions of value added tomato
products
Sl. Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato
Reasons
No Ketchup Sauce Paste Puree Juice soup
1 Liked by the
Family
2 Improve taste
to food
3 Quality of the
product
4 Readily
Available
5 Save
preparation
time
6 Use in new
type of food
preparation
7 Influence of
friends or
relatives
8 Nutritive value
Reasons for not purchasing value added products of tomato

Sl. Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato
Reasons
No Ketchup Sauce Paste Puree Juice soup
1 Low cost
2 Differences in
tastes and
quality (between
home
prepared and
purchased)
3 Dislike on
purchased
product
4 Lack of
Awareness of
products
availability in the
market
5 Non-availability
of value added
products
6 Fear of
adulteration
Products Purchase Frequency
Fresh Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato
Frequency
tomato Ketchup Sauce Paste Puree Juice soup
Weekly once
Fortnightly
once
Monthly
once
Two months
once
Three
months
Occasionally
Sources of Information
Fresh Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato
Sources
tomato Ketchup Sauce Paste Puree Juice soup
Retail Shop
display
Newspaper or
magazine
TV/ Radio
Advertisements
Friends/
relatives
Any other
Brand Loyalty of consumers to value added products

Sl. Definitely
Statements Definitely Probably
No not
1 Confirm to use the brand
2 Recommend the brand to
others
3 Purchase the brand even if
price increases
4 Purchase the same brand
even in case of absence of
sales promotion
Factors Influencing Brand Preference
Fresh tomato Tomato Tomato Sauce Tomato Paste Tomato Juice
Tomato Puree Tomato
(Reliance fresh/ Ketchup (Maggi/ Kissan/ (Godrej/ (Godrej/
Statements (Godrej/ soup
SAFAL/Big (Kissan/ Heinz/ Godrej/ greenfields Campbell/
Tomato/Magic) (Godrej)
Bazaar/) Maggi/ Godrej) Delmonte) /viva) Kagome)
SA
product is
Quality of
A
good
the
U
DA
SD
SA
pack size
Available
required
A
U
in
DA
SD
SA
colour is
Product
A
good
U
DA
SD
SA
keeping
units in
A
shops
Stock
retail
U
DA
SD
SA
Competiti
ve price
A
U
DA
SD
Right
flavour Good Good Readily
Good
and brand keeping available
Packaging
consisten image quality to buy
cy
A
A
A
A
A
U
U
U
U
U
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
DA
DA
DA
DA
DA
Reasons for Not Preferring value added products
Statements Tomato Ketchup Tomato Sauce Tomato Paste Tomato Puree Tomato Juice Tomato soup
SA
preservative
Too much
A
U
s
D
SD
SA
adulterants
A
Fear of
U
D
SD
SA
expensive
It is more
A
U
D
SD
SA
preparation
No needed
A
in food
U
D
SD
SA
Traditional
consumers
A
U
D
SD
Believe in
own Difficult to
Flavour is
preparation Not right get
not
of value consistency processed
good
added products
products
A
A
A
A
U
U
U
U
D
D
D
D
SA
SA
SA
SA
SD
SD
SD
SD
Estimating attributes of tomato ketchup using Best-Worst
LEAST IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTICS MOST IMPORTANT
Size
Flavour
Adulteration
Price

Adulteration
Price
Brand name
Availability of the product

Price
Brand name
Size

Adulteration
Brand name
Flavour
Awareness about the product

Size
Flavour

Adulteration
Size
Estimating attributes of fresh tomato using Best-Worst
Colour
Size
Fuzziness /mottled
appearance
Pest and insect incidence

Size
Fuzziness /mottled
appearance
Price of tomato

Fuzziness /mottled
appearance
Price of tomato
Uniform Ripening / semi
ripened

Colour
Price of tomato
Usage of plant protection
chemicals
Local

chemicals
Local
Hybrid
Long keeping quality
chemicals
Local
Hybrid
ripened

Hybrid
ripened
Long keeping quality
Colour

Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PRODUCTION AND MARKET DYNAMICS OF

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL MARKETING,

Thesis submitted to the

MASTER OF SCIENCE (Agriculture)

BANGALORE SEPTEMBER, 2012

Bangalore (C. P. GRACY)

It was my fortune to work under Dr. C. P. GRACY, Professor, Department of

I am greatly indebted to the Members of my Advisory Committee, viz.,

I am indebted to all my teachers, viz., Dr. M. S. Ganapathy,

I desire to express my reverential thanks to my parents Sri. Srinivasa Murthy,

I acknowledge gratefully to my seniors Mamathalakshmi, Shwetha, Nagashree

Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) is one of the common fruit

September, 2012 (C. P. Gracy)

mÉÆªÀiÁmÉÆ ªÉÊ«zsÀåªÀÄAiÀÄ ºÀªÁUÀÄt ¹ÜwAiÀÄ°è 8.65 ®PÀë ºÉPÉÖÃgï ¥ÀæzÉÃ±ÀzÀ°è ¨sÁgÀvÀzÀ

¸É¥ÉÖA§gï, 2012 (¹.¦. UÉÃæ ¹)

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE No.

II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 8-27

III METHODOLOGY 28-49

VII REFERENCES 126-135

3.1 Composition of sample respondents of the study 32

Details of respondents, villages and taluks selected for

4.1 Demographic profile of farmers 51

Shift in tomato acreage planted in response to prevailing

4.3 Input usage for tomato cultivation 55

4.4 Cost of cultivation of tomato in rabi season 57

4.5 Yield and returns from tomato production 59

4.6 Costs and returns from tomato production 60

Market share of top five traders and dispatch

Market share of top five traders and dispatch

Month wise market destinations of tomato from Kolar

4.10 Results of Unit Root Test (ADF test) 66

Johansen's Co-integration test for selected tomato

4.12 Results of Pair-wise Granger Causality Tests 69

4.13 Vector Error Correction Estimates 70

4.14 Demographic profile of consumers 72

4.15 Consumer preference for fresh tomato 75

Factors influencing buying decisions of value added

Reasons for not consuming value added tomato

4.18 Sources of Information on value added products 81

Association between quantity purchased and family size

Brand loyalty of consumers to tomato value added

4.21 Factors influencing brand preference 87-90

Reasons for not preferring brands of value added

Estimating attributes of tomato ketchup using Best-

Estimating attributes of fresh tomato using Best-Worst

1 Map showing the location of the study area 28-29

Share of different items of costs in total cost of

Daily price behaviour of tomato in Kolar and

India is the second largest producer of vegetables next only to

Dwindling labour availability and price stagnation of field crops

Global tomato production

Tomato is one of the most important "protective foods" both

The World production was 136 million tonne of tomato from an

Status of tomato processing in the world

Tomato is available in the market round the year. It is considered

Tomato production in India

Tomato occupies a significant position in vegetable production of

Status of tomato processing in India

India is not a dominant player in the world market, either in the

Tomato production in Karnataka

Tomato in Karnataka is produced throughout the year, which

Majority of the farmers grow tomato crop with irrigation. Higher

Tomato crop is extensively grown in the state. Although high