The reuse of wastewater in agriculture is a common practice in the world. However, evidences from literature show that the reuse of wastewater in agriculture has both positive and negative impacts. Wastewater is a reliable source of water supply to farmers for crop production; conserves nutrients thereby reducing the need for artificial fertilizers; increase crop yields and returns from farming; provides source of income through its use in other enterprises such as aquaculture and it is a low-cost method for sanitary disposal of municipal wastewater. Regarding the disadvantages of wastewater, it increases exposure of farmers, consumers and neighboring communities to infectious diseases; it lead to groundwater contamination; has negative impacts on socio-ecological systems and property values in the vicinity and it has a negative impact on soil resources by increasing soil acidity and salinity. The poor quality of ground water and lack of alternative water sources have resulted in the use of untreated wastewater for local irrigation in urban, peri-urban and even rural agriculture.
It has been estimated that 50 percent (100 million) of the population of Pakistan in 2025 will be residing in cities. The growing population and fresh water scarcity increase the scope of reuse of urban wastewater in agriculture. A recent nation wide assessment showed that total water supply is 4.6 x 106 m3/day, and about 30 percent of wastewater is used for irrigating. An area of 32,500 ha. It has also been estimated that 64 percent of total wastewater of Pakistan disposed of either into rivers or into Arabian Sea. Similarly 400,000 m3/day wastewater is additionally added to canals. Therefore, it is the need of hour to look into the prospects of sewerage irrigation to manage this nutrient rich water resource. The magnitude of these potential benefits and costs of wastewater varies from region to region and from community to community depending on the volume and source of wastewater, composition of wastewater, level of treatment before use and management of wastewater both at its disposal and its use at farm level. These potential impacts are reflected through the impacts on crop production, public health, soil resources, property value and ecosystem.
Impact of wastewater use
In case of its impact on public health, indicates that wastewater contains microorganisms such as bacteria, viruses and parasites that can pose high risk to health of consumers, users and neighboring community such as gastrointestinal disease. The health of individuals in all age groups can be affected though the effect varies across age groups living with in and outside the waste irrigation zone. Its economic impacts on crop production depend on the degree of treatment and composition of municipal wastewater, type and nature of crops grown and the overall farm level water management practices. Given the agronomic and water management practice, it can be used as supplementary water for irrigation, reduce fertilizer cost and can increase/decrease yield depending on the plant nutrient content of the waste water, which has implication for profitability of crop production.
The impact of wastewater on soil resources is mainly on its productivity, which, in turn, affects crop yields and farm household income. The impact depends on the presence of high nutrient content such as potassium and phosphorous, high total dissolved solids, heavy metals and others that pollute the soil resources, and result in soil salinity and water logging if used for longer time. This may, in turn, result in lower crop yield though the impacts depend on soil property, plant characteristics, and source of wastewater. At least four groups of impacts on soil resource have been identified from economic point of view. These include potential yield loss of soil productivity capacity depreciation in market value of land and cost of additional nutrients and soil reclamation measures. Similarly, the impact on property values can be seen in different ways, and one way is to see it through the impacts on the loss of soil productivity due to the induced salinity and sodicity.
This has, in turn, an impact on land value in that a decline in soil productivity may have a negative influence on land price and lease revenue due to a decrease in crop yield or lack of demand for the crops produced in fear of the health impacts given other factors such as availability of information being constant. Secondly, it may have positive impacts on property value depending on the attributes of the property such as proximity to waste irrigation site, to road, market and population center etc. with regard to the ecological impact of wastewater use for irrigation it can be said that drainage of wastewater irrigation in to small confined lakes and water bodies can influence the presence of aquatic life such as plant communities of water bodies, water birds, fish and affect the biodiversity. Accordingly, the change in aquatic life (for e.g. death in fish.) due to the wastewater irrigation can have an economic impact to the communities who are using the aquatic life as means of livelihood. Wastewater has impacts on the society by creating odor, nuisance, poor environmental quality, etc, which deteriorates the life of the society. The society may develop risk perception on the impacts that may create business risks.
Karachi and Hyderabad are large cities of SindhProvince, where wastewater from these cities is used for irrigation in the peri-urban agriculture and disposed off downstream areas. Waste disposal service in the city is not only much below the required but it is also managed inefficiently.Industries in these cities, do not have functional waste treatment facilities or waste disposal systems connected with the city’s network. The wastes generated from these industries are categorized as toxic or hazardous to human and animal health. A number of reasons have been mentioned by different writers and researchers for the poor management of the waste generated in these cities. The rural areas around the city are highly integrated in to the economy of Karachi and Hyderabad since these cities are the main market place for their agricultural products. Farmers within these cities and the peri-urban areas are producing different types of crops both for market and home consumption using irrigated agriculture. The crops grown in the peri-urban areas of these cities possess high market value such as vegetables, and they are the main source of income for the villagers. In the peri-urban areas, the main source of irrigation water for crop production is wastewater of these cities. No treatment is being done before the wastes are used. This untreated wastewater has both advantages and disadvantages to the society, and its use in irrigation shares the different impacts explained previously.
However, government officials are condemning/denying the practice of using untreated wastewater in agriculture for public health reasoning based on the findings of few studies that focus on specific impacts such as the composition of waste and contribution of the different generators of the waste, or study on only the health impacts from epidemiological point of view, which is based on limited samples and focus on limited local negative health impacts, ignoring the different possible impacts on the down streams and other possible target groups. The government also did not consider the poor farmers who do not have other alternatives to sustain their livelihoods. Restricting crop production using wastewater may prevent human health problems but may have disadvantage of reducing economic benefits from the use of wastewater. Decisions made based on limited information usually do not meet Pareto optimal criteria since they usually benefit some group of people at the expense of others.
Therefore, to avoid such handicapped decisions, policy or decision makers should be provided reliable and full information based on scientific research findings that consider the different socioeconomic, health and environmental impacts of wastewater use in agriculture. The findings should also able to advise policy/decision makers to solve the biggest problem they have on how to best minimize the negative effects of wastewater use while at the same time obtain the maximum benefits of wastewater resources.
Conclusion
The existing situations the potential and actual impacts of wastewater, no systematic studies or researches have been undertaken on a holistic approach to understand advantages and disadvantages of municipal wastewater in agriculture in the area or country. There seems lack of awareness and information concerning the impacts of using untreated municipal wastewater for irrigation on the parts of the Karachi and Hyderabad cities and the farmers’ producing crops. Therefore, regarding the socio-economic, health and environmental impacts of the reuse of wastewater in the peri-urban and urban area, certain basic questions should be answered Given that there are no other options for farmers’ livelihood, it seems also very crucial to ascertain whether the current practice of wastewater use in the peri-urban villages should be discontinued so as to minimize the negative impact? Second, given that the high cost required and the budgetary problem it should also necessary to know whether treatment should be done, and if it is to be done, at what degree and at what cost? Third, should regulatory mechanisms be enforced or incentive based measures be adopted and what type? And fourth what should be the bases for policy decisions? In general, if meaningful results are to be achieved, both the cost and benefit of using wastewater in agriculture should be properly identified, and that policy interventions should be based on sound judgments.
In Pakistan sugarcane is grown over about 10314 thousand hectares, its average yield about 53.12 tons per hectare and production 12529 thousand hectares with 8.70% recovery, is much lower that the world average of 60 tons/ha, where as the potential is between 150-250 tons per hectare. Pakistan ranks fourth in area and production among the leading sugarcane producing countries of the world.There are several reasons for low cane yield and recovery. But the main reason of low yields is cultivation of old varieties by the growers in the country. Besides sugar production, sugarcane produces various valuable products like alcohol, ethanol, bagasse, press mud, wax and tops and trash used as feed for animals. In Sindh, about 214 thousand hectares of sugarcane was cultivated and harvested 12529 thousand tons during the year 2006-07. The average yield was recorded 58 tons ha. The highest cane yield 58 tons/ha was produced by Sindh followed by Punjab (52) and NWFP (45) tons /ha. The recovery % was recorded i.e: 9.14, 8.54% and 8.53 from Sindh, NWFP and Punjab respectively.
The southern part of Sindh province is most suitable for sugarcane cultivation and may be called the Cuba of Sindh. It has got the potential of becoming the center of Pakistan Sugar Industry. The southern part is located in 24.5North, most suitable for sugarcane cultivation owing to its longer growing season, frost free area, mild winter and higher atmospheric humidity. The favourable coastal climate and well drained alluvial soils are natural gift for high cane and sugar yields. The area of this region (lower Sindh) has a high yield is low around 50-65 t.ha.
Despite an increase in area under cultivation, timely rain, judicious use of fertilizers, improved cultural practices and better management, sugar crisis is still looming large in the country. The average cane yield at the rate of 53 ton per hectare is far below the existing potential of the country’s crop. From our in-depth discussion with sugarcane growers and key information, the following causes of low sugarcane production are identified as below.
The causes of low yields are as under
Conventional production practices.
Lack of suitable high yielding varieties.
Imbalance use of fertilizer.
Water scarcity.
Poor irrigation system.
Water logging and salinity.
Chocked drains.
Poor agronomic status of soil.
Poor management of ratoon crop.
Lack of plant protection.
To achieve the high yield of sugarcane up to 110 t/ha and 11.0 sugar recovery %, can be achieved. It has been reported that high yielding variety contributes about 20-25%, while good cultural practices contributes 75-80%. Thus could be possible with the development of high cane yield and sugar varieties, improved production technology and proper plant protection measures as under.
Land Preparation
Land preparation is an important operation in sugarcane cultivation. Sugarcane is a deep-rooted and exhaustive crop which will flourish well if planted on well prepared soil. Crop penetrating up to 90cm inside soil, tillage practices can help in development of better root system and optimal growth of the crop. Proper land preparation is very essential for good establishment and growth of the crop. It needs deep plowing up to 20-30 cm with the help of chisel plough, not any soil turning, use of sub soiler after every there years, 2-3 subsequent disc harrows and 2-3 cultivators are enough to achieve good pulverized seed bed. It is very important to level the land with the laser leveler in a precise way of even distribution of water for irrigation purpose. Open the furrows with the help of tractor drawn ridger at distance of 90 cms in the East – West direction.
Variety
Improved and high yielding of sugar varieties are one of the major sources through which cane and sugar yield per unit area cane be increased. Varieties should be cultivated according to the areas.
Seed Rate and Planting Season
Selection of quality seed is important for high yields. Seeds for varieties of sugarcane with variable sugar contents are available in different parts of the country. Sets or cuttings used for propagation should be fresh and juicy, free from insect pest and disease and 9-10 months old. Eyes buds for seed should be fully developed from, planted crop. The seed should be treated with proper fungicides.
To prevent the seed setts being attacked by fungal diseases and also to improve germination, the seed setts are dipped into 0.5 percent solution of Agallol (3%) or 0.25 percent solution of Aretan (6%) or Tafasam (6%) before planting. Aretan along with gamma BHC is also recommended. Aretan improves germination and keeps off fungal attack while gamma BHC keeps away the termites and shoot borers.
To maximize production, it is necessary to follow planting times without affecting yield from late planting. However, September crop is harvested with higher yield of 25-35 percent and better sugary recovery due to luxurious vegetative growth compared to February plantation. Appropriate seed rate with proper row or furrow spacing are the key top achieving optimum plant population for high production. Generally for medium to thin varieties high seed rate is used than tick cane in order to get desired plant population and to facilitate intercultural operations.
Recently, spaced transplanting method with single eye set, paired row and wide furrow row method have been introduced in neighboring country. To get optimum plant population the following practices may be followed for seed selection and planting.
The seed of plant crop of 6-8 months should be used for better germination.
Healthy and disease free cane should be used.
The seed from ratoon crop and commercial crop should not be used.
Optimum seed rate should be 100-110 mds / acre for thick variety and 80-90 mds/ acre for thin variety or 20,000 three budded sets, 15,000 four budded and 12,000 five sets i.e. 60,000 budded / hectare should be planted. The sets should be placed on ¼ over lapping the furrows,
For better germination 1/3 bottom neither portion of cane seed should not be used.
In Sindh sugarcane crop can be planted in spring and autumn season, but in lower Sindh, sugarcane plantation should be done during autumn season (Sep. – Nov.) to obtain high cane yield.
Planting Method
Sugarcane crop can be planted by the wet method or dry method. Wet planting method is mostly done in low to medium fertile soil. In this method the furrows are thoroughly irrigated and treated setts are placed 3.5 cm deep insuring that all the eye buds face upwards. In the highly fertile soil dry, method of planting can be adopted. The setts are placed in dry furrows at specified distance and covered with soil and then a field is irrigated.
Fertilizer
Sugarcane is a heavy feeder and will respond to adequate doses of fertilizer. Fertilizer requirements for various varieties and soil types differ from each other. According to soil types, climate and availability of water, the timings of application of fertilizer is also differ, the dose NPK fertilizer for lower Sindh is NPK (225-112-168kg/ha) recommended by ARI, Tandojam. 1/3 N and full dose of P and K should be applied as basal dose at planting time and remaining dose of the nitrogen will be applied into 2 splits at the time of 1st earthing up (February – March) and 2nd earthing (April – May) or before the month of June. Quality of sugarcane is very much affected by carelessness of balanced nutrition and in timely application to sugarcane crop which greatly impairs in productivity of sugarcane. In addition micronutrients i.e. Boron, Zink, and Manganese have assessed to increase the yield and improve the quality of sugarcane.
Organic Matter
Against the minimum required level of 1.0% soils of Sindh have organic matter contents of about 0.4% or even low. Due to low organic matter land productivity is depleting and can not expect for good yields. Therefore, the application of F.Y.M is essential, in the absence of manures the organic matter in soil can be increased by:
Growing of green manuring crop i.e. Susbania, Leguminous crop and barseem etc.
Application of press mud.
Incorporating sugarcane trash in inter row spaces of cane.
Irrigation
The irrigation is the most important aspect of sugarcane next to fertilization. Sugarcane crop required 89-90 acre inches about 20-25 irrigations for whole season. Use of irrigation at proper intervals will ensure optimum production. Water requirements vary with the climate, type of soil and planting season. Framers should take care of irrigation in sugarcane particularly during the summer and should adjust irrigation requirements according to available water at far level.
Weeding
There is need of integrated practice to control weeds, insects and pests in sugarcane to get high yield. These include intercultural practices for weed control, earthing up, and application of herbicides for proper weed control with the help of technical experts. Weed control is necessary that there seed formation and sprayed, should be properly checked in time. The germination of cane takes about 45 days and weeds grow vigorously during the period, weeding operation is thus necessary for better development of the crop, besides manual eradicating weeds, many herbicides (per emergence and post emergence) are also available in the market should be applied. All broad and narrow leave weeds will get killed by these. Control of weeds resulting increasing the tiller.
interculturing
To keep field free from weeds inter-culture of crop is helpful as it provides proper aeration in the effective root zone. Hoeing is done for better aeration water penetrability and wee control. In sugarcane intercropping of onion. Potato etc. is done for getting high economic return at early stages pf cane crop. Inter-crop species should be restorative, not heavy feeder, with shallow root system and of short duration. Interculturing should be done twice during Feb-April with tractor drawn implements, plowing with bullocks, spade or using herbicides i.e. Gesapax or any other weeidicide available in market.
Earthing up
Two earthing ups should be done; first earthing up should be done in March-April and second earthing up should be done in May-June.
Control of Insect, Pest and Diseases
Effective plant protection measures are very essential in plant crop as well as in ratoon crop. The Top borer, Stem borer, Root borer, Gurdaspur borer, Mealy bug, Mice and Termites are the common insect of sugarcane in various areas, the smut is the common disease should be controlled by chemically are biologically measurers identified and decided by the experts working for their control at proper time. For better crop, disease-free, healthy seeds should be used. Preferably disease-resistant varieties treated with fungicide should be planted. Diseased plants should be removed form the field and should either be buried or burnt.
Harvesting
Harvesting should be done when the crop is fully ripened. Harvesting of either immature or over-aged cane with improper method leads to loss of yield, sugar recovery, poor juice quality and problems in milling. One month prior to harvesting, irrigation should be stopped and the harvested crop should not be left in the field for long. Of at all kept in the field for longer period, it should be covered with trash. Different varieties should be harvested according to their period of maturity. Several methods are available to determine the maturity of the crop so that it may be harvested at right time. Many farmers harvest their crop based on its age and appearance. Sometimes farmers harvest the crop even before it attains maturity necessitated by mills demand. Delays in harvesting are also quite common, particularly when there is excess cane area. Harvesting should always be at right time employing right method for better yield.
Sugarcane is ready for harvest in about 12-14 months after planting. Early maturity variety and ratoon crop should be harvested first. Harvest should be done as possible close to the surface. The cane should immediately be delivered fresh to the mill otherwise weight and sucrose losses occurs. Indent should be arranged before load purpose.
Ratoon Management
In Sindh, about 20-25% area under sugarcane is remained as ratoon crop. Rationing offers many advantages in the economy of the growers. It saves the cost on procurement and preparation of seed, land preparation. The yields of ratoon crop in Sindh are very poor since, moist of the rations are neglected or subjected to miss management. The productivity of ratoon cane be enhance to the level of plant crop are even better. Proper cultural practices and efficient crop management is needed for better growth and obtained optimum yield as follow.
Harvesting should be done as close to the ground as possible.
Trash should be burnt immediately after harvesting or spread in inter row spaces to control the weeds.
Plowing between the rows immediately.
Fill in the gaps by planting sets directly or transplanting per germinated plants in polythene bags to maintain the plant population.
Early fertilization of ratoon crop is essential to obtain high yield.
Effective weed control through interculturing, mechanically and chemically is essential.
The crop harvested during February-March gives good ratoon crop.
Sugarcane is an important cash crop of Pakistan. It ranks at the 5th position in its acreage and production and almost 15th position in sugar production in the world. Sugarcane is mainly grown for manufacturing sugar and other sweeteners (Shakar and Gur) and its by-products are used in chipboard and paper industries. It is an important source of income and employment for the farming community also. The share of sugarcane in total agricultural value added and GDP are 4.5% and 0.9%, respectively. Although both the sugarcane area and production were increased in past two decades, but in a cyclical fashion (Government of Pakistan, 2007). In sugarcane growing areas, about 64% of total area under this crop has been planted by farm sizes ranging from 1 to 10 hectares (Agricultural Census of Pakistan, 2000). Currently, there are 77 sugar mills in the country with a distribution of 41 mills in Punjab, 29 in Sindh and 7 in NWFP province. These mills crushed nearly 74% of total sugarcane produced in the country to produce 3.52 million tons of white sugar.
In Pakistan sugarcane is widely planted in Sindh, Punjab and NWFP provinces. The highest sugarcane production was recorded in Punjab with the average yield of 690mds/acre during the year 2007-08, while the lowest sugarcane yield was recorded for NWFP province with an average yield of 566mds/acre during the same year. The average yield of sugarcane during the last few years ranges between 45 to 50 ton/hectare. It is one of the poorest among 16 sugarcane producing countries as a major crop. The yield of sugarcane is quite low, 500-800 mds/acre, considerably less than the potential yields. The gap between potential and actual yield is very wide due to poor management practices and post-harvest losses. It is also found that sugarcane production system has passed down from previous generations and is dominant among the growers. The traditional methods are commonly used in sugarcane management and labor is an important input in the sugarcane production process. Production process is not mechanized and is mostly labor intensive. Majority of the growers do not follow modern practices like proper use of FYM, inter-culturing, fertilizer application, sprays and timely irrigation. The problems of post harvest losses include improper handling, harvesting and inadequate transport facilities. Therefore, this study was conducted to investigate the major factors affecting sugarcane production in Pakistan.
Sugarcane Production System
The aim of this analysis is to identify the major factors responsible for low sugarcane production and to explain various sugarcane production systems in Pakistan. The main concern is to help assess incentives for sugarcane producers given those incentives for any product play a key role in its development and the distribution of benefits from its production. The efforts have been made to describe the management practices, input use, sugarcane varieties, insect-pests and disease problems.
Land Preparation
Sugarcane is a deep rooted crop and proper land preparation plays an important role in the development of cane root system, for achieving optimal growth of the crop. Land should be prepared by deep ploughing at least after every subsequent year. While the main source of ploughing was tractor 62.5 per cent followed by tractor and animal was 34.9 per cent and 2.6 per cent animals. An average 1 hour of ploughings of cultivator and goble and 1.5 planking were applied by the farmers respectively. Generally it was found that number of cultivator and goble ploughing and planking were used for seedbed preparation.
Planting Seasons
Sugarcane planting usually carried out in spring and autumn season. Autumn planting is recognized as high yields and high sugar recovery, compared to spring planting. In fact, October planting of sugarcane gives very luxuriant growth, which is mostly vulnerable to lodging. The crop gives good appearance till June-July but is subject to lodging in July or even earlier if there is windstorm or excessive rains. It was investigated that 27 percent of growers planted sugarcane in February, 21 percent in October, 16 percent in March and 11 percent in September. While 25 per cent of the growers in the study area planted in spring (Feb-March) and in autumn (Sept-Nov) seasons respectively.
Planting Method
The most common method of sugar cane planting is “overlapping”, “end to end” and “double set” methods. The overall per acre cost for planting/sowing was recorded Rs.872 respectively. Furthermore, it was inspected that none of the sample respondents used seed treatment before planting of sugarcane.
Farm Yard Manure
Farmers generally use quantity of farmyard manure to sugarcane crop in order to restore soil fertility for better yield as compared with other kharif crops. Well rotten farmyard manure should be applied prior to land preparation press mud from the sugar industry is another excellent source of organic matter and nutrients. It was investigated that in NWFP sugarcane growers highly applied an average 3.7 tractor trolleys per acre of farmyard manure followed by Punjab 2.5 tractor trolleys per acre, whereas very low use of farm yard manure was seen in Sindh of about 0.3 trolleys per acre. Despite the fact that the overall average usage of farm yard manure were recorded 1.9 tractor trolleys per acre.
Sugarcane varieties
The sugarcane varietal adoption in Sindh was analyzed and found that overall THATTA-10 was the dominant variety and accounted for about 51.3 percent during 2006-07 and slightly decreased 49 percent during 2007-08. The other major recommended varieties included BL-4 and SPSG-26; were grown on 13.18 and 4.5 percent in 2006-07, while BL-4 and SPSG-26 had an increasing trend in the next cropping year acquiring 15.96 and 6.60 percent respectively during 2007-08. The varieties BL-4 and THATTA-10 were being adopted because of high sucrose content, having more than (18%). The other varieties Gulabi-95, NIA-98, L-113, L-116 and PR-1000 were in the initial stages of adoption. About 23 and 22 percent of the sugarcane acreage was allocated to non-recommended varieties during 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively. Sugarcane varieties TRITON and CP-20/72 were the non-recommended cultivars grown on an area of 16.94 and 4.04 percent during 2006. However, the farmers are continuing cultivation of these varieties on account of certain characteristic of these varieties, especially for quality of white colour Gur (molasses), etc.
Sugarcane varietial adoption in Punjab was analysed and found that overall HSF-240 was the leading variety and was planted on about 21.9 percent during 2006-07 and about 36.7 percent during 2007-08. The other major RSV included SPSG-79 and CPF-237; these are grown on 4.9 and 4.3 percent during year 2006-07, while these varieties had an increasing trend during 2007-08 acquiring 4.3 and 4.9 percent respectively. These varieties were mainly adopted because of high sucrose content. The varieties CP 43-33, CP 77-400, HSF-242, SPF-234, L-118, SPSG-26 and COJ-84 were released in the past and were in the stages of adoption. A large percent (60.8 and 44.7 percent) of the sugarcane acreage was planted under non-recommended varieties. While the figures illustrate a declining trend towards non-recommended varieties, the sugarcane varieties CPF-238 and CO-1148 were the main at non-recommended cultivars grown 56.4 and 3.9 percent during 2006, while in 2007 these varieties were prone and were growing on 37.7 and 3.9 percent area for CPF-238 and CP 77-400 respectively. However, the farmers were continuing cultivation of these varieties on account of certain characteristic of these varieties.
Sugarcane varietial adoption in NWFP was analysed and found that overall CP-77-400 was the leading variety and accounted for about 98 percent during 2006-07 and 2007-08 in the total sugarcane acreage in NWFP. A tiny area of almost 2 percent overall of the sugarcane acreage was allocated to non-recommended varieties. While the statistics illustrated that the trend was towards recommended varieties gradually.
Fertilizer
Fertilizer application is important for obtaining optimum yield of sugarcane. Most of the growers use only nitrogenous fertilizers while others use an unbalanced combination of N and P. The use of K is almost negligible in cane crop. It is very important to use proper doses of balanced fertilizers to obtain the maximum yield of cane crop. Department of Agriculture Sindh recommended the fertilizer doses of 200-300 kg, 100-125 kg P202 and 125-175 kg, K20 per hectares for various regions of the province. It was found that, sugarcane growers applied urea an average 5 bags per acre in Sindh followed by an average of 4 bags per acre in NWFP and 3 bags per acre in Punjab.
Weeding
Weeds in sugarcane restrict the light, nutrients and moisture to the crop and also serve as alternative hosts for many insect pests. These pests reduce the yield and adversely affect the cane quality. For proper weed control, Gesapax combi (80 WP) may be applied @ 1.4 kg per acre in medium textured soils and @ 1.8 kg per acre in heavy soils in 100 to 120 liters of water. The weedicide should be used with the device of the technical experts. It was investigated that averagely 3 weeding /hoeing was carried out each for manually, bullock and tractor in Sindh, similarly in Punjab 2 weeding /hoeing was carried out with tractor and bullock each, while in NWFP 4 weeding/ hoeing were carried out manually and 3 weeding/hoeing were carried out by tractor.Overall 3 weeding / hoeing were carried out in study area.
Irrigation
The recommended number of irrigation were 26-33 for autumn crop and 21- 26 for spring crop. Results shows that 62 percent used canal water followed by canal and tube-well 35 and only 8 percent used tube well for irrigation purpose. Whereas the average availability of canal water per 6th turn was for 15 hours, while 80 percent annual, 12 percent seasonal availability of canal water.
Harvesting
Sugarcane harvesting is done by hand, which employ labor intensively. On average, one person can harvest 25 mds (10000 kg) of cane in a day. The right time for harvesting sugarcane is when the crop is 12-14 months old. The sugarcane is cut as sticks from the ground level using a special type of knife. When the cane is harvested, it has a sugar content of about 10 percent. The roots are left in the ground as they will eventually sprout and grow to form the next crop. After cutting, the cane is stripped, topped and bound in bundles of 10-15 kg for loading. Harvested cane should be sent to the mill within 24-48 hours of cutting, since later transportation will result in sugar loss. A high average per acre yield of sugarcane crop in Punjab was recorded 690 mds followed by Sindh 598 mds and apparently low in N.W.F.P was 566 mds. While overall average per acre yield was recorded 632 mds respectively in the study area.
Snags in Sugarcane Production
Sugarcane production is a complex process and can be conceived as a function of several variables. The knowledge of the relative importance of the resource inputs influencing sugarcane production is essential for the sugarcane growers for introducing desirable changes in their operation at the micro level, and for the policy makers for formulating plans for improvements in agricultural sector productivity based on sound economic principles at the macro level. Production practices such as, soil type, planting time, varieties, inputs use and availability of irrigation water; they all have considerable impact on sugarcane production. While analyzing the input costs and net returns relationship of sugarcane production, the important inputs such as, chemical fertilizer, FYM, irrigation and use of labour were considered.
The following factors were highly significant at 5% level for the sugarcane production i.e. cost of DAP, Urea, land preparation, irrigation, FYM, seed and its application and weeding are set in the econometric model.
Cost of DAP
The regression coefficient of cost of DAP was positive (0.22510), which implied that 1% increase in the use of DAP would increase the returns by 0.2% holding other factors constant. This co-efficient was significant indicating that revenue increased significantly due to moderate use of DAP increased the profit effecting incline in the revenue shown in Table 5. The estimated co-efficient was significant, indicating that the cost of DAP significantly influenced the sugarcane revenue due to moderate use of DAP.
Cost of Urea
The regression coefficient of cost of urea was positive (1.93717), which implied that 1% increase in the use of fertilizer would increase the returns by 1.9% holding other factors constant. This co-efficient was significant indicating that revenue increased significantly due to moderate use of urea increased the production effecting incline in the revenue (table 1). The estimated co-efficient was significant, indicating that the cost of urea significantly influenced the sugarcane revenue due to moderate use of urea.
Cost of land preparation
The regression coefficient of the variable of cost of land preparation was positive (0.86008) at 5% level of significance, which is some how significant indicating that the cost of land preparation should be reduced as it has positive impact on sugarcane revenue and returns.
Cost of Irrigation
The regression coefficient of cost of irrigation was positive (0.08484) and significant at 5% level of significance, which implied that 1% increase in use of irrigation would change in the cost of irrigation would be favourable for the production cost by 0.08%, keeping the other factors constant. Decreasing the cost of irrigation would decrease the cost of production causing a growth in the returns.
FYM application
The regression coefficient of cost of FYM application was negative (-0.07020) and significant at 5% level of significance, which implied that 1% increase in the cost of FYM would benefit the returns by -0.07%, keeping the other factors constant. Increasing use of FYM it would increase production towards organic farming causing a strong crop and enrich the soil overall.
Cost of Seed and Application
The regression coefficient of the variable cost of seed and application was negative (-0.08420), which was non-significant, which implied that 1% increase in the use of seed and application would decrease the returns by 0.08%, indicating that the cost of seed and application must be improved as it has positive impact on sugarcane production and revenue.
Cost of Weeding
The regression coefficient of cost of weeding was negative (-0.16364) and significant at 5% level of significance, which implied that 1% increase in cost of weeding in sugarcane crop would decrease returns by -0.16%, and would be helpful, keeping the other factors constant. Increasing use of weedicide would help in decreasing weeds and shrubs from the sugarcane crop increasing the revenue and returns overall.
The coefficient of multiple determinations R2 was 0.9249, which indicated that 92% variation in the input production cost was explained by all of the explanatory variables and the adjusted R2 is 92%. The F-value was 666.94 and was highly significant at 5% level of significance, indicating that the regression model of production function fitted very well.
Table 1.Estimated value of coefficient in Production function of sugarcane
Variables
Coefficient
Std Error
T Ratio
P
Cost of Urea
1.93717*
0.28503
6.80
0.0000
Cost of DAP
0.22510*
0.02658
8.47
0.0000
Cost of land preparation
0.86008*
0.03899
22.06
0.0000
Cost of Irrigation
0.08484*
0.01507
5.63
0.0000
Cost of FYM
-0.07020*
0.02047
-3.43
0.0007
Cost of Seed
-0.08420ns
0.07874
-1.07
0.2856
Cost of Weedings
-0.16364*
0.03288
-4.98
0.0000
* = 5% level of significance
The marginal value of products and allocative efficiency parameters (K) below shows that all major input cost in sugarcane production are under utilized by the growers. It appears that cost of, DAP, FYM, and land preparation were poorly utilized and cost of urea, weeding and irrigation were over utilized in the sugarcane production. Results also suggest that there are opportunities to cut sugarcane production cost by decreasing major costs of inputs and management practices (table 2).
Table 2. Marginal value of Product and Ratio in Sugarcane Production.
Variables
Coefficient
MVP
Ratio of (MVP) ‘K’
Cost of Urea
1.93717
5.19
0.61
Cost of DAP
0.2251
44.69
5.98
Cost of FYM
0.86008
11.70
3.67
Cost of Land Preparation
0.08484
118.58
14.23
Cost of Weedings
-0.0842
-119.48
-22.71
Cost of Irrigation
-0.16364
-61.48
-11.37
Problems and constraints of sugarcane production
The major constraints in sugarcane production were asked from the growers. Further they were divided in three categories, such as economic, technical, and social problems.
The economic problems and constraints were related to the financial difficulties, which were lack of capital, high prices of input, low price of output, and late payments etc. All farmers reported that a high price of inputs was an acute problem in the way of practicing the production of sugarcane. High procurement problems were another major problem for the growers in the study area. Lack of resources was also important problem sugarcane growers’ and low price of output. Technical constraints were related to production techniques and technologies, such as lack of scientific knowledge, land preparation, seeds, pesticides and insecticides, inadequate irrigation, and natural calamities, etc. Social problems were related to theft of sugarcane, cutting tops, most of the farmers reported that the villagers were habituated to cut the tops of sugarcane for using it as cattle feed. Sugarcane is an attractive and tasty crop, people; especially children are generally attracted to it. Chewing of cane was third social problems reported by sugarcane growers in the study area.
Conclusion
The present research was undertaken to identify the factors affecting sugarcane production in Pakistan. Data were collected from 387 sugarcane growers of Sindh, Punjab and NWFP province. Data were collected during the period 2007-08. The study reveals that the input costs ofsugarcane i.e. urea, DAP, FYM, land preparation, seed and its application, weeding and cost of irrigation were the important factors which influenced the returns of sugarcane growers. Technical efficiency was examined by using the Cobb-Douglas production function; MVP and allocative efficiency were calculated. The coefficient of multiple determinations R2 was 0.9249, and the adjusted R2 was 0.9235. The F-value was 666.94 and was highly significant at 5% level of significance. It appears that cost of, DAP, FYM, and land preparation were poorly utilized and cost of urea, weeding and irrigation were over utilized in the sugarcane production. High prices of inputs, procurement problem, and low price of output and lack of scientific knowledge were the major problems in sugarcane production cost.
Recommendations
In order to enhance the productivity of sugarcane, government and other related organizations must solve the identified problems of the growers to enhance the sugarcane production in order to earn higher net return. Results also suggest that there are opportunities to reduce the cost of sugarcane production by decreasing the major inputs costs and management practices.
