Content uploaded by Pramod K Singh
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Pramod K Singh on Nov 04, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Working Paper
235
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
OF CROPPING PATTERNS IN
GUJARAT
Pramod K. Singh and Abhishek Nair
The purpose of the Working Paper Series (WPS) is to provide an
opportunity to IRMA faculty, visiting fellows, and students to
sound out their ideas and research work before publication and
to get feedback and comments from their peer group. Therefore, a
working paper is to be considered as a pre-publication document
of the Institute.
Institute of Rural Management Anand
Post Box No. 60, Anand, Gujarat (India)
Phones: (02692) 263260, 260246, 260391, 261502
Fax: 02692-260188 Email: corpas@irma.ac.in
Website: https://www.irma.ac.in
December 2012
1
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY OF CROPPING
PATTERNS IN GUJARAT
Pramod K. Singh1 and Abhishek Nair2
Abstract
Modernisation of agricultural practices in the developing world is often
accompanied by adverse environmental consequences. This paper tries to
examine the environmental sustainability of cropping patterns in Gujarat, a
state in western India, which has witnessed spectacular growth in the
agricultural sector over the last decade. The interaction between agriculture
and the environment has been studied in the context of environmental
damages. The historic trend in cropping patterns including drivers that
facilitated this change has been analysed in this study. Environmental
perturbations including soil and water salinity and groundwater depletion has
been studied. Irrigation being the key driver of shift in cropping patterns is
heavily dependent on groundwater. The paper concludes that cropping patterns
evolving over a period of time have led to not only secular depletion of
groundwater tables but also salinisation of soil and water. The paper suggests
options for sustainable water management, soil conservation practices and
cropping patterns based on soil, climate, and water availability in order to
encourage the shift towards sustainable agricultural practices.
Keywords: Sustainable agriculture, environmental sustainability, cropping
pattern
1 Associate Professor, Institute of Rural Management, Anand-388001, Gujarat, India
E-mail : pramod@irma.ac.in
2 Research Associate, Institute of Rural Management, Anand-388001, Gujarat, India
E-mail: abhishek@irma.ac.in
2
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY OF CROPPING
PATTERNS IN GUJARAT
1. INTRODUCTION
About 44% of India‘s geographical area is used for agricultural purposes and
is the principal source of livelihood for about 58% of its population. Modern
agricultural practices have brought in high yielding crop varieties, intensive
cultivation, an ever-increasing application of fertilisers, and applied irrigation.
Some challenges in the agricultural sector that India has faced over the last
decade include degradation of the natural resource base, increased
vulnerability to the changing climate, lack of institutional support, rapid and
widespread decline in groundwater tables and land fragmentation. Modern
agricultural practices gradually suffused Gujarat, which witnessed high growth
in the agricultural sector in the late 70s, the early 80s, and over the last decade.
The cultivation of non-traditional crops like castor, tobacco, rice, wheat, and
sugarcane has increased (Dholakia and Datta 2010). Unfortunately, the change
in cropping patterns, coupled with erratic rainfall, led to a decline in food crop
from 47% in 1960 to 38% in 2008 (Dholakia and Datta 2010). Post 2000,
Gujarat has seen spectacular agricultural growth due to meticulous planning
and implementation of programmes aimed at increasing water availability and
has helped farmers increase productivity. Gujarat, over the last decade,
witnessed an agricultural growth rate of over 9% per annum (Dholakia and
Datta 2010). Non-traditional food grains' production has increased
considerably and the state has now seen the sustained growth of rice and
wheat although diversity in food crops has declined. Modern agricultural
practices have caused widespread environmental degradation in this period
owing to the change in cropping patterns from traditional to non-traditional
crops.
1.1. Sustainable Agriculture: The Conceptual Framework
Sustainability has been the buzzword since the 1987 Brundtland Commission.
With the environment movement that commenced in the late 1960s and 1970s,
3
mainstream development became linked to environmental issues. We are now
moving towards sustainable cities, economies, resource management,
business, and livelihood to achieve the overall goal of sustainable
development. Sustainability as a concept and value has been widely advocated
over the last few decades with numerous definitions being proffered. Here, we
will look at defining the boundary of sustainable agriculture in the context of
Gujarat. Douglass (1984) identified three different views on sustainability.
The first view concerned 'sustainability as food sufficiency.' This type of
sustainable agriculture seeks to maximise food production within the
constraints of profitability. The second view of sustainability was described by
the phrase 'sustainability as stewardship' and defined sustainability in terms of
controlling environmental damage. The third view of sustainability subscribed
to 'sustainability as community' and defined sustainability in terms of
maintaining and reconstructing rural value systems. These views are similar to
those highlighted by Smith and Smithers (1993).
The definition of sustainable agriculture was conceived by the Food and
Agriculture Organisation (1992), according to which ‗the management and
conservation of the natural resource base, and the orientation of technological
and institutional change in such a manner as to ensure the attainment and
continued satisfaction of human needs for the present and future generations‘.
Such sustainable development (in agriculture, forestry, and fisheries' sectors)
conserves land, water, plant and animal genetic resources, is environmentally
non-degrading, technically appropriate, economically viable, and socially
acceptable. Smith and McDonald (1998) suggest that despite the diversity in
conceptualising agricultural sustainability there is some broad consistency
amongst definitions. Definitions are generally based on three important
criteria – i) environmental quality and ecological soundness, ii) plant and
animal productivity, and iii) socio-economic viability. To achieve
sustainability we must learn to conduct our affairs within the limits of
environmental absolutes and not continue to delude ourselves that we can only
do this if we can afford it (Hill 1992).
4
As this paper looks at the aspect of environmentally sustainable cropping
patterns, a boundary on environmental sustainability is built through literature.
Consensus on the definition of environmental sustainability was brought about
by Morelli (2001) who suggested it as a condition of balance, resilience, and
interconnectedness that allows human society to satisfy its needs while neither
exceeding the capacity of its supporting ecosystems to continue to regenerate
the services necessary to meet those needs.‘ An environmentally sustainable
agriculture is one that is compatible with and supportive of: i) meeting the
basic needs of all peoples, and giving this priority over meeting the greeds of a
few; ii) keeping population densities, if possible, below the carrying capacity
of the region; iii) adjusting consumption patterns and the design and
management of systems to permit the renewal of renewable resources; iv)
conserving, recycling, and establishing priorities for the use of non-renewable
resources; and, v) keeping environmental impact below the level required to
allow the systems affected to recover and continue to evolve (Gold 1999).
Environmental sustainability of agricultural systems defined by Sands and
Podmore (2000) suggests that an agricultural system is considered to be
environmentally sustainable if certain inherent qualities of soil and water
resources are maintained and no drifts of nutrients, chemicals or sediments
occur from the system.
Unsustainable agriculture has been commonly traced to a period of farming
development in the late twentieth century termed as 'productivism' or 'the
second food regime' (Le Heron 1993). Modernisation in agriculture has given
rise to unsustainable agricultural practices and increased intensification,
increasing costs, thereby, of agricultural inputs (e.g.: chemical fertilisers, new
technologies and farm machineries). Specialisation in agriculture has enabled
farmers to gain economies of scale by limiting production to fewer products
on the farm and, thus, concentrating the cost of production over a narrow
range of crops (monoculture). The negative impact of modernisation in
agricultural practices has increased environmental problems including loss of
biodiversity, rising soil salinity, lowering of groundwater tables, and even
pollution of water resources (Bowler 2002). Our study area described in the
5
following section has achieved high agricultural growth due to modern
agricultural practices. The area has witnessed intensification and specialisation
in agricultural practices in order to achieve this high growth rate. This has led
to severe environmental implications. In this paper, the discussion is focused
on the spatial shift in cropping patterns and linkages with unsustainable
agriculture.
1.2 Overview of the Study Area
Gujarat is the microcosm of India and displays considerable heterogeneity in
terms of agro-meteorological and climatic conditions not to mention soil and
water regimes. Covering an area of 19.6 million hectares Gujarat is the fourth
largest state of India. Administratively, it is divided into 27 districts. It has a
total population of about 60 million with 34 million comprising the rural
population and dependent on agriculture as the main source of livelihood. The
various climatic conditions and soil and water regimes have attracted the
attention of researchers for understanding the cropping patterns and trends in
resource utilisation for India. Gujarat‘s agriculture, over the period 1960–
2000, has invariably drawn attention to its erratic and uneven development
performance. This has been attributed to the inadequate, uneven distribution of
rainfall that the state receives during monsoon often with water scarcity in
Kutch, Saurashtra, and North Gujarat. This period has also seen water scarcity,
which was manifested during irrigation development. Gujarat aims to be the
leader in agricultural development and industrialisation. It is a frontrunner
amongst Indian states in terms of agricultural growth rate, which has been
achieved through modern agricultural practices and specialisation in cash
crops. The high agricultural growth rate and modernisation of agricultural
practices has led to the deterioration of soil quality and depletion of water
resources. These practices being unsustainable, efforts must be made to
highlight and avoid unsustainable practices. Gujarat has been divided along
seven agro-climatic regions based on soil type, climate, and water resources‘
availability. The delineation of agro-climatic region has been put in place for
planning improved scientific utilisation of natural and man-made resources.
6
Table 1 shows the climate and soil types of these agro-climatic regions. Figure
1 shows the various districts that comprise different agro-climatic regions of
Gujarat.
Table 1: Climate and Soil Types of the Agro-climatic regions of Gujarat
Sub-Region
Climate
Soil
Kutch
Arid to semi-arid
Sandy, saline
North Gujarat
Arid to semi-arid
Loamy, alluvium
Central Gujarat
Semi-arid
Medium black
South Gujarat
Semi-arid to dry sub-
humid
Deep black, alluvium
Southern Hills
Semi-arid to dry sub-
humid
Deep black, clayey
alluvium
North Saurashtra
Dry sub-humid
Shallow, medium black
South Saurashtra
Dry sub-humid
Shallow, medium black,
calcareous
Source: Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (2012)
The paper examines environmental sustainability of the current and emerging
cropping patterns in the different agro-climatic regions of the state. It further
gives recommendations on crops suitable to soil, climate and water regimes
and sustainable agricultural practices. Economic and social dimensions are
beyond the scope of this paper.
7
Figure 1: Agro-climatic Regions of Gujarat
8
2. RESEARCH METHODS AND TOOLS
Analysis of Gujarat‘s environmental sustainability of cropping patterns entails
identifying the changes in cropping patterns over a period of time. Traditional
crops cultivated during 1960–1980 in Gujarat were appropriate to soil and
climate regimes. The different types of soil have been classified and mapped
based on data provided by the state‘s Department of Agriculture. Data
acquired from the India Water Portal has undergone significance test and
regression to comprehend rainfall trends of the past five decades. The analysis
of annual average rainfall has been classified into two periods: 1960–1990 and
1991–2008.
The drivers responsible for contributing to the shift in cropping patterns
include increased water availability due to increased irrigation (Singh, Tiwari
& Nair 2012). Here, we have collected data pertaining to different sources of
irrigation; the percentage of GCA (gross cropped area) irrigated too, has been
computed. Changes in cropping patterns have been analysed district-wise,
since the formation of the state, i.e. 1960 onwards. The cropping pattern of a
particular region has been calculated by analysing the area of a particular crop
to the GCA of a district. In order to represent major crops in regionalisation of
cropping pattern, only crops with over 8% of the total GCA have been taken
into consideration for delineating crop regions.
Groundwater depletion maps have been generated by the inverse distance
weighted (IDW) method of spatial interpolation of piezometer level point data
provided by the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) and Gujarat Water
Resources Development Corporation (GWRDC). Groundwater fluctuation has
been analysed by raster algebra based comparison in the ArcGIS software.
To better understand and recommend the crops best suited for a particular soil
type the climate regime and soil types were considered. Results were also
derived after discussions with experts of Agricultural Universities.
The paper provides drivers of and the shift in cropping patterns and examines
its environmental sustainability by exploring relevant environmental
9
indicators. It does not look at building an index for identifying environmental
problems caused due to changes in cropping patterns.
3. SOIL, RAINFALL, AND CROPPING PATTERN
In this section we discuss crops that have been traditionally cultivated in
Gujarat. In order to do this, it is essential to understand the types of soil
present and the rainfall patterns in state. Climate change is a global
phenomenon today and its impacts are being felt. Rise in temperatures and
increased rainfall have been predicted for this region. The analysis of annual
average rainfall for two time periods, 1960–1990 and 1991–2008, are
presented in figures 2 and 3 respectively. This decadal analysis shows that
rainfall intensity is increasing in Gujarat as predicted by the PRECIS Regional
Climate Model for India (Ministry of Environment and Forests, 2012). Gujarat
received less rainfall during the period 1960–1990 compared to 1991–2008.
Considering the climatic and edaphaic factors, crops traditionally cultivated in
Gujarat were highly appropriate. Figure 4 and Table 1 depicts Gujarat‘s soils
ranging from sandy and saline to deep black clayey. Sand to sandy loam and
saline soils are confined to the Kutch agro-climatic region and North Gujarat
and partly to North Saurashtra. The soils predominantly found in Kutch are
sandy and saline and receives the lowest rainfall in the state (346 mm per
annum). The crops that have been traditionally cultivated in Kutch include
pearl millet and sorghum. North Saurashtra has two dominant soil types:
shallow to medium black and shallow to medium black calcareous.
10
Figure 2: District-wise annual average rainfall during 1960–1990
11
Figure 3: District-wise annual average rainfall during 1990–2008
12
Figure 4: Soils of Gujarat
13
These soils have a thin crust ranging in thickness from a few centimetres to a
maximum of 60 centimetres. The average rainfall is about 633 mm per annum.
While parts of North Saurashtra have medium black and poorly drained soils,
South Saurashtra is completely covered with shallow to medium black
calcareous soils. The average rainfall here is 877 mm per annum. Groundnut,
sorghum, and pearl millet are the crops traditionally grown here. Central
Gujarat is covered with deep, medium black to loamy sand and sandy loam to
sandy soil and average rainfall has been recorded at 822 mm per annum. The
traditionally cultivated crops here are rice and cotton. South Gujarat, along
with Southern Hills, characteristically comprises deep black clayey and deep
black with coastal alluvial to medium black soils while the northern most
region of South Gujarat is home to deep black to medium black poorly drained
to loamy soils. The average rainfall in South Gujarat and the Southern Hills is
1207 mm per annum and 1819 mm per annum respectively. The crops
traditionally grown here include cotton, rice and sorghum.
4. DRIVERS OF SHIFT IN CROPPING PATTERN
Irrigation, more importantly, irrigation by groundwater (see table 2) has been
the key driver of the shift in the cropping patterns of Gujarat. Gujarat
witnessed an increase in groundwater extraction for irrigation purposes over
the past two decades. This has been mainly caused by the shift in cropping
patterns towards water intensive crops such as wheat, sugarcane, rice, and
cotton. Table 2 shows different sources of irrigation and their contribution to
Gujarat‘s net irrigated area over the last two decades.
Table 2: Net irrigated area by source (Area in ‘00 hectares)
Year
Govt. Canals (Incl.
Panchayat Canals)
Tube wells &
other wells
Tanks
Other
Sources
Total
1990–91
4731
19301
314
30
24376
2000–01
3476
24347
153
84
28060
2006–07
7892
33070
398
1016
42376
Source: Directorate of Agriculture, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar
14
Water intensive non-traditional crops like rice is now cultivated mostly in the
Southern Hills and Central Gujarat. Cotton has been grown extensively in
Kutch, North and South Gujarat over the last decade. Wheat, another water
intensive food crop, has gained prominence in North Gujarat, South and North
Saurashtra. Sugarcane, which is a non-traditional crop, has also made inroads
in South Gujarat.
Irrigation continues to expand along with groundwater irrigation. Saurashtra
receives low rainfall only with a portion of its GCA irrigated. This region is
dependent on groundwater for irrigation purposes. Similarly Kutch, North and
Central Gujarat are heavily dependent on groundwater for irrigation and
cultivate water intensive crops like cotton, rice and wheat. Figures 5, 6 and
table 3 show a rising trend in the number of tube wells and dug wells for
irrigation purposes in Gujarat and a rising trend in groundwater irrigation over
the past 15 years.
Figure 5: Gross Irrigated Area by Tube Wells
Source: Based on data from Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Gujarat
15
Figure 6: Gross Irrigated Area by Dug Wells
Source: Based on data from Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Gujarat
Table 3: Decadal increase in tube and dug wells for irrigation purposes in
Gujarat
Year
No. of Tube
wells
No. of dug wells for irrigation purpose
Public
Private
Masonry
Non-masonry
Total
1960–61
589
21
284077
135418
419495
1970–71
968
2010
432560
148554
581114
1980–81
1840
6097
523919
184750
708669
1990–91
3528
15365
574354
214487
788841
2000–01
4140
53695
586888
199997
786885
2003–04
4189
58549
597405
192022
789427
Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Gujarat
16
To understand the increase in irrigation, the percent of gross cropped area
(GCA) irrigated has been analysed agro-climatic region wise. Increased
irrigation has allowed the cultivation of water-intensive cash crops, which has
been mainly responsible for groundwater depletion. Nearly 79% of net
irrigated area is dependent on groundwater (see table 2). The shift towards
water intensive crops in a largely groundwater dependent region undoubtedly
gives rise to unsustainable practices. South Gujarat has seen a constant rise in
the percentage of irrigated GCA (see table 4).
Being part of Gujarat‘s arid region agriculture was not promoted in Kutch.
However, over the past decades, with increased ground water extraction, the
traditional cropping pattern shifted towards cotton, a water intensive crop. As
can be seen from Table 4, the increased irrigation is due to groundwater
mining. Rainfall in Kutch happens to be the lowest in the state with continued
extraction of groundwater causing water tables to fall drastically in most
regions (described in a subsequent section of the paper) even with better
rainfall in the region over the last decade and with groundwater recharge
mechanisms in place. Extraction of groundwater in water scarce regions not
only increases water insecurity during low rainfall but also amplifies salinity
including salinity ingress along coastal areas. This has rendered the region
unsuitable for future crop cultivation.
North Gujarat has also undergone increased irrigation with Gandhinagar
registering maximum cropping intensity (Singh, Tiwari & Nair 2012). This
drastic increase has led to the lowering of groundwater tables. Groundwater
extraction for agricultural purposes is the highest in this region. Central
Gujarat, a productive agricultural zone, has recorded high agricultural
productivity since the early 1960s owing to an expanding GCA under
irrigation, with highest in Anand district at close to 80%. Irrigation in the
Southern Hills is concentrated along two districts, Valsad and Navsari.
Navsari has a high, nearly 60% of its gross cropped area irrigated. Table 4
reflects the percentage difference in the GCA irrigated. The gross cropped area
irrigated in highly forested district of The Dangs, is low. South Gujarat with
its productive agricultural lands has also seen an increase in irrigation.
17
Table 4: Percentage of Gross Cropped Area irrigated in different regions
of Gujarat
Region/Year
1961–63#
1981–83#
1990–91
2000–01
2005
Kutch
6.9
10.7
16.3
27.0
24.8
North Gujarat
Ahmadabad*
9.3
19.6
28.4
32.5
41.6
Gandhinagar*
64.8
67.2
64.0
Banaskantha
7.8
22.8
33.8
45.3
48.5
Mahesana
19.3
40.4
49.4
59.3
57.0
Patan*
32.7
27.0
Sabarkantha
11.2
34.3
34.8
36.3
39.0
Central Gujarat
Anand*
75.1
80.2
Vadodara
3.9
23.2
31.0
41.3
44.1
Kheda
9.4
46.3
53.6
50.6
69.8
Panchmahals
6.5
22.6
18.0
14.3
22.3
Dahod*
4.8
26.8
South Gujarat
Bharuch
2.8
10.3
14.5
26.2
36.7
Narmada*
16.7
33.9
Surat + Tapi
6.4
29.6
42.0
53.8
59.2
Southern Hills
The Dangs
0.1
0.2
0.6
0.9
1.0
Valsad
4.4
17.8
31.2
25.4
28.7
Navsari*
57.2
60.6
North Saurashtra
Amreli
6.3
13.9
12.5
14.0
23.8
Bhavnagar
8.3
21.2
20.3
20.8
33.4
Jamnagar
5.4
24.0
16.8
10.3
20.8
Rajkot
6.5
22.6
21.1
23.8
32.5
Surendranagar
4.0
13.1
13.6
19.3
20.8
South Saurashtra
Junagadh
14.3
20.5
18.7
19.3
36.7
Porbandar*
13.9
19.6
*New districts; were previously part of other districts boundaries and contributed to the overall GCA
irrigated.
Source: Based on data from # Mathur & Kashyap (2000); Directorate of Agriculture and Co-
operation (2012)
18
North Gujarat has also undergone increased irrigation with Gandhinagar
registering maximum cropping intensity (Singh, Tiwari & Nair 2012). This
drastic increase has led to the lowering of groundwater tables. Groundwater
extraction for agricultural purposes is the highest in this region. Central
Gujarat, a productive agricultural zone, has recorded high agricultural
productivity since the early 1960s owing to an expanding GCA under
irrigation, with highest in Anand district at close to 80%. Irrigation in the
Southern Hills is concentrated along two districts, Valsad and Navsari.
Navsari has a high, nearly 60% of its gross cropped area irrigated. Table 4
reflects the percentage difference in the GCA irrigated. The gross cropped area
irrigated in highly forested district of The Dangs, is low. South Gujarat with
its productive agricultural lands has also seen an increase in irrigation.
Saurashtra, once a favoured agricultural zone for water efficient crop
cultivation, has stepped up its groundnut production due to increased
availability of water due to watershed and other recharge activities. North
Saurashtra has seen a rising percentage of irrigated GCA, which is still lower
compared to other regions of the state. The long-term sustainability of cotton
cultivation in North Saurashtra needs to be questioned as its soils are shallow
and medium black. South Saurashtra‘s irrigation patterns are similar to North
Saurashtra‘s. Further, Saurashtra being a hard rock area, the recharge potential
is limited (Mudrakartha 2011). Prolonged cultivation of water intensive crops
over South Saurashtra‘s shallow, black calcareous soils could potentially lead
to salinity.
During the 1960–1970s nearly 75% of cultivated land in Gujarat was without
irrigation. Watershed development was introduced during the mid-80s. Special
efforts to enhance water availability from 2009 onwards led to the completion
of 1,918 watershed projects covering 1.96 million hectares. Check dams,
recharge wells, and ponds were constructed to harvest rainwater that increased
soil moisture and helped support agricultural crops. The end of 2008, about
113,000 check dams, 56,000 boribandhs, and 240,000 farm ponds were
constructed by farmers, civil society organisations, government and non-
19
governmental organisations (Singh and Rajput 2012). The Water Resources
Department of Gujarat backed the efforts of the farmers and constructed over
62,000 small and large check dams in Gujarat. Water insecurity diminished in
the water-starved regions of North Gujarat, Saurashtra, and Kutch owing to
these initiatives.
The Sujlam Suflam Yojana canal project diverted surplus water from the
Narmada and Kadana dams to water scarce regions of Gujarat. The Gujarat
Green Revolution Company has been looking at the state‘s micro irrigation
expansion potential. Over 181,000 hectares were brought under micro
irrigation by 2010. Farmers in Central and South Gujarat adopted micro
irrigation to enhance farm yield and productivity. The shift towards non-
traditional, non-food crops is due to increased irrigation.
5. SHIFT IN CROPPING PATTERN
Gujarat has followed modern agricultural practices since the 1980s. Gujarat‘s
agricultural growth stood at 9.5% in the last decade. Its growth trajectory
compared to the rest of India is very high. According to Dholakia & Datta
(2010), the average annual growth rate of agriculture increased from 3.6% in
the 1960s to 7% in the 1970s to 12.4% in the 1980s; it fell to only 4.9% in the
1990s, and in the current decade it has averaged at 9.5%. High yielding
varieties in the short-term increased productivity with nitrogen fertilisers, as
the soils provided the other nutrients (Singh, Patel & Maji 2008). The
availability of fertilisers to sustain the increasing application of high yielding
crop varieties like cotton, rice, wheat has gone up. Fertiliser consumption
increased from 11,701 tonnes in the 1960–61 to 12,79,924 tonnes by 2005–06
(Agriculture and Co-operation Department, 2012). With the modern
agricultural practices becoming more widespread the level of cropping
intensity increased from 103.9% in 1960–61 to 115.4% in 2004–05 and
decreased during the drought period of 2000–01 to 110.6%.Cropping patterns
have been analysed from 1960s to 2008–09 on a decadal basis to indicate the
crops that have been specialised. Analysis of cropping patterns at the sub agro-
20
climatic regional level has been conducted for five decades reflecting their
variations. A summary of the dominant crops grown in the region can be seen
in the annexure (table A1 to A6).
Kutch region
The cropping pattern in Kutch saw a shift towards water intensive crops
during 1960 to 1990. The dominant crops were pearl millet, sorghum, and
green gram followed by cotton. During the drought of 2001 crops that were
less water intensive including pearl millet, groundnut, and green gram were
sown prominently in this region. Cotton lost favour during this spell. The
current decade is seen as a blessing owing to increased rainfall in Kutch where
cotton has become the favoured crop followed by groundnut and green gram.
Low water consuming pearl millet has given way to other more water
intensive crops.
North Gujarat region
North Gujarat too witnessed a shift in cropping patterns. The dominant crops
between 1960 and 1980 were pearl millet, sorghum and cotton. During the
1980s, increased irrigation allowed the cultivation of other crops including
wheat, maize, castor and mustard. The1980s, while witnessing an increase in
irrigation and fertilisers, also saw a shift towards non-traditional food crops.
Through the 1980s and 1990s, the dominant crops were pearl millet, wheat
and cotton. Since 2001, due to increased irrigation availability, an increase in
water intensive crops had begun to show. Cotton became the dominant crop
and pearl millet was the second most preferred crop followed by castor.
Increased irrigation stimulated the cultivation of other water intensive crops
like wheat, rice, and mustard. In 2008–09 the move was towards cash crops
and water intensive crops like cotton and wheat. Mustard, castor, and rice also
found their way into North Gujarat.
Central Gujarat region
Rice and cotton remained the dominant crops from 1960 until 1980 in Central
Gujarat. The other crops cultivated during this period included groundnut,
maize, and pearl millet. A shift in cropping patterns was observed over the
21
next two decades when cotton lost its dominance to maize and pearl millet
although rice was still the preferred crop for cultivation. This was due to
decreased irrigation in Kheda. Cotton was not grown in any district of the
region except Vadodara. Other crops like tobacco were preferred over cotton.
In 2008–09, rice remained the favoured crop with wheat cultivation gaining
ground. Maize followed by pearl millet is also a preferred crop of cultivation
in this region.
South Gujarat region
During the first two decades (1961–1971) the cropping pattern was consistent
with cotton and sorghum as the dominant crops followed by rice. Various non-
traditional crops were introduced in 1981. During this period sorghum and
cotton remained the dominant crops along with lentils followed by rice and
sugarcane. In 1991 lentils, sorghum, and sugarcane became the preferred crops
of cultivation while rice and cotton lost their dominance. In 2001 sugarcane
remained the preferred crop while cotton had regained favour along with
lentils. Sorghum, during this period, lost its dominance as the preferred crop
for cultivation. In 2008–09 cotton, sugarcane, and lentils remained dominant
with sorghum and rice losing ground.
Southern Hills region
Cropping patterns have seen a significant shift in this region with rice
remaining the dominant crop over five decades. In 1961 sorghum was the
preferred crop along with cotton which lost favour in 1971 to black gram.
Non-traditional crops had emerged strongly by 1981 when sorghum too lost
preference to lentils. Lentils and sugarcane were the dominant crops while the
traditionally cultivated black gram lost out in 1991. In the last decade woody
crops took dominance with sugarcane and mango emerging as favourites along
with rice which has dominated this region for five decades. Horticulture crops
too made inroads with mango and sapodilla contributing to crop
diversification and adding their agricultural inputs to the state gross domestic
product. This region is conducive to rice, cotton, and sugarcane given the soil
type and rainfall patterns.
22
North Saurashtra region
This region has seen a shift towards water intensive crops over the past five
decades with groundnut as the dominant crop. The first decade witnessed
sorghum and pearl millet as favourites along with cotton. Post 1981, the trend
in cropping patterns showed a shift towards water intensive crops with
sorghum losing out and cotton prevailing. From 1991 to 2001 sorghum, was
replaced by pearl millet and was followed by sesamum. In the following
period, 2008–09, the same trend was seen but pearl millet and sesamum lost
ground to wheat which became the preferred crop for cultivation.
South Saurashtra region
Cropping patterns have shifted towards water intensive crops in South
Saurashtra where groundnut was the dominant crop over five decades.
Between 1961 and 1971 pearl millet and sorghum were the other preferred
crops. Wheat gained preference in 1981 to replace the third most dominant
crop, sorghum, and went on to replace the second most preferred crop, pearl
millet, in 1991. Cotton, which became popular in the past two decades, was
not considered a major crop for cultivation. A shift in cropping pattern was
observed in 2001 when cotton became a dominant crop and pearl millet re-
emerged as a preferred crop for cultivation with wheat losing ground. The
period 2008–09 witnessed another shift in cropping pattern as wheat and
cumin replaced cotton in terms of preference.
Figures 7–12 show the district-wise spatial distribution of cropping patterns.
These figures depict a detailed analysis of the shift in cropping patterns over
the last five decades.
23
Figure 7: District wise cropping pattern in Gujarat during 1960–61
24
Figure 8: District wise cropping pattern in Gujarat during 1970–71
25
Figure 9: District wise cropping pattern in Gujarat during 1980–81
26
Figure 10: District wise cropping pattern in Gujarat during 1990–91
27
Figure 11: District wise cropping pattern in Gujarat during 2000–01
28
Figure 12: District wise cropping pattern in Gujarat during 2008–09
29
6. AGRICULTURE INDUCED ENVIRONMENTAL PERTURBATIONS
Environmental perturbations have been analysed from the standpoint of
groundwater levels, salinisation of soils and micronutrient deficiency:
6.1. Decline in Groundwater
Groundwater fluctuation data has been analysed for the period 1990–2010.
Figure 13 and table 5 depict fluctuations in groundwater tables. As mentioned
earlier, groundwater is a major source of irrigation in Gujarat. The increasing
number of tube wells and dug wells for irrigation has led to the
unsustainability of water resources vis-à-vis agricultural practices(see table 5).
In most places groundwater has fallen by1–6 metres while only in South
Gujarat did it rise during 1990–2010. North Gujarat and Kutch are the worst
affected regions having lost over 6 metres of groundwater in large areas.
Groundwater tables have decreased dramatically in Kutch compared to the
previous decades although certain regions have registered a rise (see table 5).
North Gujarat has been the worst affected region in the state having witnessed
a large fall of over 6 metres with a negligible rise in some areas. Central
Gujarat too has been showing signs of an overall decline in water tables. A
large portion of the region has witnessed groundwater decrease of 1–6 metres
with some regions showing a rise (see table 5). Initiatives to recharge
groundwater floated over the last two decades haven not created substantial
ripples in the groundwater situation in some parts of the state because of over
withdrawal.
South Gujarat continues to receive good rainfall with a significant increase in
groundwater (1–6 metres) in most parts. Some parts of South Gujarat, though,
have experienced groundwater depletion of up to 6 metres, which is
negligible. Southern Hills too, has evinced a fall in the past two decades; the
overall decrease has been1–6 metres in most parts of this region. A rise and
decline in water tables of 6 metres is negligible in this region.
30
Figure 13: Groundwater fluctuation (May 1990 to May 2010)
31
Table 5: Percent of area with groundwater rise and fall to the total
geographical area of the region (1990–2010)
Region
1–6 metre
fall
>6 metre
fall
1–6 metre
rise
>6 metre
rise
Kutch
28.19
11.01
23.37
5.10
North Gujarat
24.63
39.72
13.39
4.06
Central Gujarat
30.77
3.71
26.01
1.45
South Gujarat
9.61
0.29
19.24
1.44
Southern Hills
18.67
1.22
10.19
0.51
North Saurastra
32.85
4.26
21.85
3.55
South Saurastra
28.27
4.61
20.10
4.07
Gujarat State
27.09
12.60
20.20
3.48
Source: Based on spatially interpolated surface of groundwater fluctuation (Figure 13)
Even with recharge systems in place North Saurashtra has registered an
overall decrease in its groundwater table. A similar trend in groundwater
decline has been observed in South Saurashtra but not to the extent seen in
North Saurashtra. Declining water tables in most of Saurashtra
notwithstanding, there has been no drastic decline in groundwater levels of
over 6 metres. It may be noted from table 5 that massive groundwater
extraction between 1990 and 2010 caused a tremendous fall in water tables in
North Gujarat, Kutch, and North Saurashtra.
6.2. Salinisation of Soils and Groundwater
Soil salinity is due to two major reasons—inherent salinity and man-made
salinity. Based on table 6 the total saline land of Gujarat stands at around
20.19% of the total geographical area. Salinity in coastal areas is a widespread
problem caused by the combined effects of inherent salinity, tidal effect,
irrigation by saltwater, and seawater intrusion due to extensive groundwater
withdrawal. Human actions play a strong contributory role owing to
groundwater exploitation for agricultural purposes and rapid industrialisation.
The salinity problem is starting to occur in the mainland as well, away from
the coastal belt, which is not attributable to seawater intrusion but occurs
32
mainly due to over irrigation. The Coastal Salinity Prevention Cell (2012)
states that inland salinity may be ascribed to poor drainage, over irrigation,
irrigation with saline water, salt making, etc. Table 6 depicts the overall extent
of salinity-affected areas across various agro-climatic zones. Figure 14 shows
the extent of salinity in Gujarat. As can be seen from the table 6, about 32% of
the Kutch region is affected by salinity followed by Saurashtra, South and
North Gujarat.
Table 6: Percentage of saline land to the geographical area of the agro-
climatic region
Agro-climatic
regions
Saline
Alkaline
Dry
Saline
Saline
Saline
Marshy
Kutch
3.1
13.7
2.4
12.9
North Gujarat
7.6
8.1
0.5
1.2
Central Gujarat
0.0
0.0
2.2
0.7
North Saurastra
12.8
3.5
4.8
2.1
South Saurastra
5.8
0.0
11.6
0.9
South Gujarat
0.0
0.0
2.2
16.3
Southern Hills
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.5
Source: Based on data from Salinity Ingress Prevention Cell; Desertification and Land
Degradation Atlas of India, Space Application Centre (2007)
The quality of available groundwater is not fit for consumption in many
regions owing to excessive salinity. The state has the longest coastline (1600
km) in the country. Excessive withdrawal of groundwater from coastal
aquifers has caused the ingress of seawater in coastal aquifers rendering
thousands of irrigation wells useless in the coastal areas of Kutch and
Saurashtra (Bhatia 1992). According to the Central Ground Water Board
(n.d.), groundwater in 20 out of 26 districts in the state is partly affected by
salinity (EC > 3000 µS/cm at 25 ° C). These districts include Ahmadabad,
Amreli, Anand, Bharuch, Bhavnagar, Banaskantha, Dohad, Porbandar,
Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kutch, Meshing, Navsari, Patan, Panchmahals, Rajkot,
Sabarkantha, Surendranagar, Surat, and Vadodara.
33
Figure 14: Lands Affected by Salinity and Alkalinity
34
6.3. Deficiency of Micronutrients
Deficiency of micronutrients in soils may be attributed to modern agricultural
practices and salinisation of soils triggered by increased groundwater mining
and salinity ingress (Singh, Patel & Maji 2008). Intensification (increased use
of fertilisers) and specialisation (high yielding - water intensive crops) in crops
have reduced the status of micronutrients. High yielding crops have, within a
few years, depleted nutrient reserves in soils. Consequently, areas with a high
cropping intensity have recorded deficiencies of micronutrients and secondary
nutrients where cereals, oilseeds and pulses are cultivated (Singh, Patel &
Maji (2008)). Such practices will further accentuate the deficiencies in
micronutrients in soils and pose a threat to the environmental safety of the
region (Singh, Patel & Maji 2008). Widespread coastal and inland salinity has
been observed in Gujarat. Further the effects of soil salinity in Saurashtra have
degraded micronutrients in the soil (Ramoliya, Patel and Pandey 2003). Singh,
Patel & Maji (2008) have indicated the micronutrient status in Gujarat soils.
High copper deficiency is prevalent in the entire state. Iron deficiency is high
in Kutch, North, Central, South Gujarat and Southern Hills region and a
portion of South Saurashtra. North Saurashtra, on the other hand, faces low
deficiency in iron. Manganese deficiency is high in the entire state except
parts of North Saurashtra and Kutch where the micronutrients are adequate.
Zinc deficiency is low is most of the state except some parts of Central and
South Gujarat (ibid).
7. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY OF CROPPING PATTERNS
This section deals with understanding environmental problems vis-à-vis shifts
in cropping patterns and consequent trends towards unsustainable agricultural
practices in Gujarat. Water efficient and traditional crops like pearl millet,
sorghum, and groundnut were grown in Kutch and North Gujarat region in the
past. An incremental rise in GCA ranging between 25% and 70%, concomitant
with rising rainfall in the last decade and increased groundwater irrigation
measures has led to a shift towards water intensive crops like cotton and
wheat. Groundwater extraction, which increased dramatically over the past
35
two decades owing to irrigation, has caused a drastic decline of the
groundwater table in a large part of the region. Soil salinity is a problem
because of irrigation with saline water in this region. The western portion of
North Gujarat and Kutch is highest afflicted in the state with soil salinity.
Modern agricultural practice has lessened micronutrients in the soil while
escalating land degradation in the region along with excess use of chemical
fertilisers, has rendered the soil unfit for cultivation (Singh, Tiwari & Nair
2012). Moreover, the soils in this region are unfit for the cultivation of crops
like cotton and wheat although these happen to be the most dominant crops in
this region.
Central, South and the Southern Hills region of Gujarat are fertile and can
support most varieties of crop cultivation. The GCA irrigated area ranges
between 25% and 60% except for the Dangs where cultivation is largely rain-
fed. Increase in rainfall trends has been observed in Central, South and
Southern Hills regions of Gujarat. Water intensive crops are cultivated in these
regions and have shifted from traditional food crops to non-traditional food
and cash crops such as rice, wheat, cotton, and sugarcane. Groundwater
depletion has been observed in Central Gujarat and Southern Hills region
while South Gujarat shows an increase in groundwater levels. South Gujarat
and Southern Hills face salinity along the coastal regions while soil salinity is
the lowest in Central Gujarat. Micronutrient deficiency is observed in these
regions as well and the use of chemical fertilisers continues to rise, riding on
the hope of improving yields (Singh, Patel & Maji 2008).
Rainfall has increased from North to South Saurashtra, yet North Saurashtra
receives lower rainfall in comparison. Irrigation in North and South Saurashtra
is relatively low (about 20–35% of the GCA) as compared to the State; though
it has increased considerably over time. Increased irrigation has shifted
cultivation towards water-intensive crops like wheat, cotton and cumin. About
50% of the agricultural area has been continuously degrading owing to water
erosion (Singh, Tiwari & Nair 2012). Groundwater extraction is high and
depletion has also been observed in this region. Soil salinity along the coastal
region is also predominant and micronutrient deficiency is also observed in
36
this region (Singh, Patel & Maji 2008). Unchecked ingress will cause
enhanced land degradation and salinity threatening the productivity of cash
crops.
Cropping patterns in Gujarat have shifted to unsustainable agricultural
practices. Growing crops unsuitable for rainfall, soil type, and reliance on
groundwater have caused serious environmental perturbation calling for
immediate sustainable agricultural interventions. There is an urgent need to
return to water efficient crops and help prevent further degradation of
agricultural land. There needs to be a shift towards sustainable cropping
patterns like system of rice intensification (SRI) and system of wheat
intensification (SWI) to reduce groundwater depletion while integrated
nutrient management needs to be adopted for maintaining sustainability. Water
efficient practices including SRI, SWI, micro irrigation, water and soil
conservation could lead to a significant contribution to the SGDP since
Central, South and Southern Hills of Gujarat produces a variety of cash crops.
To ensure long-term land productivity immediate steps need to be taken
towards sustainable agricultural practices. Also, groundwater recharge
movements need to be scaled up while groundwater mining in the saline
coastal belt needs to be curbed. Agricultural practices should become
sustainable instead of exploitative leading to an environmentally sustainable
growth.
Gujarat‘s agricultural growth has been encouraging with the increased
cultivation of cash crops and non-traditional food crops facilitated by
increased irrigation and by contributing positively to the SGDP. Increased
irrigation has, however, also led to unsustainable practices which have been
manifested through environmental tribulations. Soils are being degraded while
groundwater utilisation has rendered most parts of Gujarat water insecure
despite good rainfall of the past decade. Should the current cropping patterns
persist they will destroy the ecological soundness of the state‘s agricultural
ecosystem and further destroy the soil and water resources. There is an
immediate need to shift to sustainable cropping patterns that would facilitate
37
soil and water conservation and increase yield, without hindering the high
agricultural growth witnessed in the last decade.
8. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: TOWARDS
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES
Gujarat‘s high agricultural growth rate in the last decade shows that the
agricultural sector can contribute significantly to the SGDP yet the measures
adopted for achieving this growth appear unsustainable. Gujarat‘s primary
focus has been on increasing productivity and emphasising the monoculture of
cash crops. Modern agricultural practices and increased irrigated area have
been the major drivers behind the cultivation of cash crops leading to high
growth in the agricultural sector. A high agricultural growth rate, however,
cannot rule out the issue of sustainability. The introduction of non-traditional
crops to certain incompatible soil types has degraded soil quality. Dependency
on groundwater as the major source of irrigation has depleted groundwater
resources, especially in Kutch, North Gujarat, and the North Saurashtra region.
Intensification and specialisation in water intensive crops and dependence on
groundwater have been rendering agricultural practices in several regions of
Gujarat unsustainable. Increased groundwater mining and saline groundwater
irrigation has also affected soil quality and reduced the productivity of
agricultural lands. There is a need to shift towards sustainable agricultural
practices. The adoption of integrated nutrient management and water efficient
agricultural practices coupled with the promotion of multiple cropping will not
only protect the environment but also ensure high agricultural growth in
Gujarat. Sustainable agricultural practices will also help mitigate climate
change, build resilience against climate vagaries, and reduce environmental
burden. These practices have proved beneficial and have worked in many parts
of the world. There is a need to improve the groundwater regime through
recharge movements and arrest groundwater mining, groundwater having
fallen in most parts of Gujarat in the last two decades. With efforts in the right
direction Central, South Gujarat, and Southern Hills can become regions of
38
sustainable agricultural practices the model of which may be replicated in
different parts of India.
8.1 Water management
To ensure agricultural productivity and its contribution to economic growth it
is crucial that efforts be made to manage water resources. Immediate
intervention is required for recharging groundwater including deeper aquifers
to ensure productive agriculture. Some technological interventions and water
management practices with proven effectiveness include recharge wells, check
dams, and concentrated attention to rainwater management. Water harvesting
technologies provide farmers the opportunity to plant early and reduce reliance
on unpredictable rains. Supply side sustainable groundwater management
practices that may be explored include artificial recharge, aquifer recovery,
and inter-basin transfers. The demand side measures could include proper
groundwater pricing, regulatory control, water rights and withdrawal permits,
water-saving crops, and technologies. Strong institutional support is also
required for community-led water management. There is a need to improve
knowledge, science, and monitoring of water resources in agriculture. To
achieve this The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
(2009) suggests improved water management practices along five dimensions:
i) improving traditional knowledge and science; ii) establishing robust
databases on trends; iii) increasing the quantity and quality of information on
cost recovery rates for water supplied to agriculture; iv) developing
information systems and tools to better inform water management allocation
decisions; and v) greater evaluation of the impact of policies on environmental
and economic outcomes in the context of agricultural water resource
management.
8.2 Soil Conservation
Monoculture, intensive cropping patterns, and cultivation of crops unsuitable
for soil have degraded micronutrients and caused serious loss of organic
matter to the soil of Gujarat. Soil salinisation continues to plague Gujarat, the
39
soil in much of the coastal belt, Kutch, North, and Central Gujarat being
saline. Some technological and management interventions that could improve
soil quality include structural methods for soil conservation like soil and stone
bunding and terracing in undulating areas, agronomic practices for soil and
water conservation and management such as minimum tillage, organic and
inorganic fertilisers, grass strips, and agro-forestry techniques. Agronomic
methods and agro-forestry technologies, particularly alley cropping, are aimed
at reducing soil erosion. Enhancing soil organic matter, at the same time, has
shown to replenish soil nitrogen through nitrogen exaction (Shiferaw et al.
2009). Soil conservation measures have, however, been put in place through
capacity building programmes like Krushi Mohatsav in Gujarat. Another
programme initiated by the government is the soil health card programme that
informs farmers about the quality of soil and interventions that may be carried
out to improve soil quality. These initiatives are unlikely to pay enough
dividends, unless proper soil conservation measures and appropriate cropping
patterns are adopted.
8.3 Crops for sustainable agriculture
To ensure the sustainability of cropping patterns in Gujarat, crop cultivation
compatible to soil type needs to be promoted along with climate and
availability of water for irrigation. Suggestions regarding cropping patterns for
ensuring environmental sustainability are shown in Table 7. Expert comments
from agronomists have also been considered while deciding the list of crops
suited to the various agro-climatic zones, soil types, and water requirements to
enable sustainable agriculture.
40
Table 7: Agro-climate region wise crops for sustainable agricultural
Practices
Agro-climatic region
Crops for sustainable agricultural practices
Kutch
Pearl millet, cluster bean, sorghum, groundnut,
short duration legumes
North Gujarat
Pearl millet, castor, cluster bean
Central Gujarat
Rice, wheat, maize, tobacco
South Gujarat
Cotton, sugarcane, rice, wheat
Southern Hills
Finger millet, kodo millet, drilled rice
North Saurashtra
Groundnut, cotton
South Saurashtra
Groundnut, cotton, sesamum
Acknowledgements
We gratefully acknowledge the Directorate of Economics and Statistics -
Gujarat, Central Ground Water Board, and Gujarat Water Resources
Development Corporation for providing valuable data. We sincerely thank Mr
Lakshmikant Tiwari for assistance in creating maps and Dr Srinivas
Mudrakartha for providing his valuable comments on draft version of this
paper. We are thankful to Ms. Indrani Talukdar for editing the document.
References
Agriculture and Co-operation Department (2012) Statistics, Available at:
<http://agri.gujarat.gov.in/informations/statistics.htm> [Accessed 18
April 2012]
Bhatia, B. (1992) ―Lush Fields and Parched Throats: Political Economy of
Groundwater in Gujarat,‖ Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 27,
No. 51/52, pp. A142–A170.
41
Bowler, I. (2002) ―Developing Sustainable Agriculture,‖ Geographical
Association, Vol. 87, No. 3, July, pp. 205–212, viewed on 18 August
2012.
Central Ground Water Board n.d., State Profile Groundwater Scenario of
Gujarat, viewed on 4 September 2012,
http://cgwb.gov.in/gw_profiles/st_Gujarat.htm.
Coastal Salinity Prevention Cell (2012) Progress Report 2008–2010:
Assessment of Farm Pond Model & Identification of Institutional
Structure for Upscaling, CSPC: Ahmedabad.
Dholakia, H. and S. Datta (2010) High Growth Trajectory and Structural
Changes in Gujarat Agriculture, New Delhi: Macmillan Publishers
India Ltd.
Douglass, G.K. (1984) ―The Meanings of Agricultural Sustainability,‖ in G.
K. Douglass (ed.) Agricultural Sustainability in a Changing World
Order. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, pp. 3–30.
Food and Agriculture Organisation (1992) Chapter 2: Concepts, Definitions
and Links, viewed on 15 August 2012,
http://www.fao.org/docrep/V8047E/v8047e04.htm.
Gold, M.V. (1999) Sustainable Agriculture: Definition and Terms, United
State Department of Agriculture, Special Reference Briefs Series no.
SRB 99-02, viewed on29August 2012,
http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/pubs/terms/srb9902.shtml
Hill, S.B.(1992) Environmental Sustainability and the Redesign of
Agroecosystems, Ecological Agricultural Projects, Publication 34,
viewed on 29 August 2012,
http://eap.mcgill.ca/publications/EAP34.htm
Le Heron, R.B. (1993) Globalized Agriculture: Political Choice. Oxford:
Pereamon Press.
42
Mathur, N. and S.P Kashyap (2000) ―Agriculture in Gujarat- Problems and
Prospects,‖ Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 35, No. 35/36, pp.
3137–3146.
Ministry of Environment and Forests (2012) India: Second National
Communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change, viewed on 11 September.
Morelli, J (2011) ―Environmental Sustainability: A Definition for
Environmental Professionals,‖ Journal of Environmental
Sustainability, Vol. 1, pp. 19–27.
Mudrakartha, S (2012) ―Adaptation, groundwater recharge and livelihood
enhancement: Experiences from Saurashtra groundwater recharging
movement,‖International Journal of Rural Management, 7 (1& 2), pp.
43–82.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2009)
―Managing Water for all an OECD Perspective on Pricing and
Financing,‖ OECD Publications, viewed on 27 August 2012,
http://www.oecd.org/env/42350563.pdf.
Ramoliya, Patel and Pandey (2003) ―Soil salinity and water status affect
growth of seedlings of Buteamonosperma‘, Tropical Ecology, 45(2),
pp. 333–336.
Sands, G.R. and T.H. Podmore (2000) ―A Generalized Environmental
Sustainability Index for Agricultural Systems,‖ Agriculture,
Ecosystem & Environment, Vol. 79, pp. 29–41.
Shiferaw, B.A, Okello, J and R.V. Reddy (2009) ―Adoption and Adaptation
of Natural Resource Management Innovations in Smallholder
Agriculture: Reflections on Key Lessons and Best Practices,‖ Environ
Dev Sustain, Vol. 11, pp. 601–619.
43
Singh, P.K, Tiwari, L and A. Nair (201) ―State of Land Resources in Gujarat
2012,‖ Unpublished Report, Institute of Rural Management Anand, pp.
1–175.
Singh, P.K. and S. Rajput (2012) ―State of Water Resources in Gujarat
2012,‖ Unpublished Report, Institute of Rural Management Anand, pp.
1–190.
Singh, M.V, Patel, K.P and A.K. Maji (2008) ―Copper Fertility Status in Soils
of Gujarat. Micronutrient Fertility Mapping for Indian soils,‖ Tech.
Bulletin AICRP, Micronutrients, Indian Institute of Soil Science,
Bhopal 7, 1-60.
Smith, B and J. Smothers(1993) ―Sustainable Agriculture: Interpretations,
Analyses and Prospects,‖ Department of Geography and Land
Evaluation Group, University of Guelph, pp.400–524, viewed on 19
August 2012, http://cjrs-rcsr.org/archives/16-3/Smit-Smithers.pdf.
Smith, C.S. and G.T. McDonald (1988) ―Assessing the Sustainability of
Agriculture at the Planning Stage,‖ Journal of Environmental
Management, vol. 52, pp. 15–37.
`
44
Annexure
Table A1: District wise Cropping Pattern for the year 1960–1961
District
Crop 1
Crop 2
Crop 3
Crop 4
Crop 5
Crop 6
Kutch
Pearl Millet
(34%)
Sorghum (28%)
Cotton (24%)
Groundnut
(8%)
Banaskantha
Pearl Millet
(49%)
Cotton (23%)
Sorghum
(16%)
Patan
Pearl Millet
(41%)
Sorghum (20%)
Cotton (19%)
Mahesana
Pearl Millet
(33%)
Sorghum (23%)
Cotton (15%)
Wheat (8%)
Groundnut
(6%)
Sabarkantha
Groundnut (29%)
Cotton (26%)
Maize (9%)
Rice (8%)
Sorghum
(6%)
Wheat
(5.5%)
Gandhinagar
Pearl Millet
(33%)
Sorghum (18%)
Ahmadabad
Cotton (47%)
Sorghum (12%)
Wheat (12%)
Groundnut
(11%)
Pearl Millet
(9%)
Surendranagar
Cotton (47%)
Sorghum (20%)
Pearl Millet
(17%)
Groundnut
(11%)
Rajkot
Groundnut (51%)
Sorghum (17%)
Cotton (14%)
Pearl Millet
(12%)
Jamnagar
Groundnut (57%)
Sorghum (19%)
Pearl Millet
(14%)
Amreli
Groundnut (53%)
Pearl Millet
(21%)
Sorghum
(16%)
Bhavnagar
Groundnut (42%)
Pearl Millet
(21%)
Sorghum
(21%)
Wheat (6%)
Cotton (5%)
`
45
Kheda
Pearl Millet
(22%)
Rice (17.2%)
Cotton
(16.9%)
Tobacco
(16%)
Groundnut
(12%)
Wheat (7%)
Panchmahals
Maize (30%)
Rice (28%)
Groundnut
(17%)
Gram (7%)
Cotton (5%)
Dahod
Maize (30%)
Rice (28%)
Groundnut
(17%)
Gram (7%)
Cotton (5%)
Vadodara
Cotton (50%)
Rice (15%)
Sorghum
(13%)
Groundnut
(7%)
Narmada
Cotton (61%)
Sorghum (18%)
Rice (7%)
Bharuch
Cotton (61%)
Sorghum (18%)
Rice (7%)
Surat
Cotton (34%)
Rice (28%)
Sorghum
(21%)
Groundnut
(7%)
Tapi
Cotton (34%)
Rice (28%)
Sorghum
(21%)
Groundnut
(7%)
The Dangs
Rice (74%)
Lentil (16%)
Navsari
Cotton (34%)
Rice (28%)
Sorghum
(21%)
Groundnut
(7%)
Valsad
Cotton (34%)
Rice (28%)
Sorghum
(21%)
Groundnut
(7%)
Porbandar
Groundnut (51%)
Pearl Millet
(17%)
Sorghum
(13%)
Cotton (12%)
Junagadh
Groundnut (51%)
Pearl Millet
(17%)
Sorghum
(13%)
Cotton (12%)
`
46
Table A2: District wise Cropping Pattern for the year 1970–1971
District
Crop 1
Crop 2
Crop 3
Crop 4
Crop 5
Crop 6
Kutch
Pearl Millet
(28%)
Sorghum (23%)
Mung Bean
(15%)
Cotton (11%)
Moth Bean
(10%)
Groundnut
(9%)
Banaskantha
Pearl Millet
(54%)
Sorghum (19%)
Wheat (9%)
Patan
Pearl Millet
(44%)
Mahesana
Pearl Millet
(34%)
Sorghum (24%)
Wheat (13%)
Cotton (12%)
Sabarkantha
Cotton (23%)
Groundnut
(21%)
Maize (18%)
Pearl Millet
(15%)
Wheat (6%)
Gandhinagar
Pearl Millet
(41%)
Sorghum (17%)
Cotton (17%)
Wheat (8%)
Ahmadabad
Cotton (39%)
Sorghum (17%)
Wheat (16%)
Pearl Millet
(15.9%)
Rice (7%)
Surendranagar
Cotton (43%)
Pearl Millet
(22%)
Sorghum
21%)
Groundnut
(7%)
Rajkot
Groundnut (50%)
Pearl Millet
(15%)
Sorghum
(14%)
Cotton (12%)
Wheat (7%)
Jamnagar
Groundnut (51%)
Sorghum (21%)
Pearl Millet
(18%)
Amreli
Groundnut (46%)
Pearl Millet
(26%)
Sorghum
(13%)
Wheat (5%)
Bhavnagar
Pearl Millet
(35%)
Groundnut
(30%)
Sorghum
(18%)
Cotton (7%)
Wheat (6%)
`
47
Anand
Pearl Millet
(26%)
Rice (18%)
Cotton (14%)
Wheat (12%)
Tobacco
(11.5%)
Groundnut
(6%)
Panchmahals
Maize (32%)
Rice (22%)
Groundnut
(12%)
Pearl Millet
(7%)
Gram (6.4%)
Cotton (6%)
Dahod
Maize (32%)
Rice (22%)
Groundnut
(12%)
Pearl Millet
(7%)
Gram (6.4%)
Cotton (6%)
Vadodara
Cotton (53%)
Sorghum
(11.2%)
Rice (10.9%)
Narmada
Cotton (57%)
Sorghum (22%)
Rice (6%)
Bharuch
Cotton (57%)
Sorghum (22%)
Rice (6%)
Surat
Sorghum (33%)
Cotton (25%)
Rice (16%)
Groundnut
(11%)
Tapi
Sorghum (33%)
Cotton (25%)
Rice (16%)
Groundnut
(11%)
The Dangs
Black gram
(49%)
Rice (28%)
Lentil (13%)
Navsari
Rice (62%)
Sorghum (11%)
Cotton (10%)
Valsad
Rice (62%)
Sorghum (11%)
Cotton (10%)
Porbandar
Groundnut (59%)
Pearl Millet
(13%)
Sorghum
(10%)
Wheat (7%)
Cotton (6.7%)
Junagadh
Groundnut (59%)
Pearl Millet
(13%)
Sorghum
(10%)
Wheat (7%)
Cotton (6.7%)
`
48
Table A3: District wise Cropping Pattern for the year 1980–1981
District
Crop 1
Crop 2
Crop 3
Crop 4
Crop 5
Crop 6
Kutch
Pearl Millet (22%)
Mung Bean
(20%)
Sorghum
(15%)
Groundnut
(13%)
Cotton (12%)
Moth Bean
(8%)
Banaskantha
Pearl Millet (48%)
Sorghum (13%)
Mustard (9%)
Castor (7%)
Wheat (6%)
Patan
Pearl Millet (39%)
Mahesana
Pearl Millet (30%)
Sorghum (16%)
Cotton (14%)
Wheat (12%)
Mustard
(11%)
Castor (8%)
Sabarkantha
Cotton (27%)
Maize (18%)
Groundnut
(13%)
Pearl Millet
(12%)
Wheat (9%)
Gandhinagar
Pearl Millet (36%)
Castor (17%)
Wheat (11%)
Sorghum
(10%)
Rice (6%)
Cotton (5%)
Ahmadabad
Cotton (16%)
Wheat (15.5%)
Sorghum
(13%)
Pearl Millet
(11%)
Surendranagar
Cotton (60%)
Sorghum (16%)
Pearl Millet
(15%)
Rajkot
Groundnut (57%)
Cotton (16%)
Pearl Millet
(9%)
Wheat (8%)
Sorghum
(7%)
Jamnagar
Groundnut (69%)
Pearl Millet
(9.3%)
Sorghum
(9.2%)
Wheat (5%)
Amreli
Groundnut (61%)
Pearl Millet
(13%)
Sorghum
(9%)
Wheat (5%)
Cotton (5%)
Bhavnagar
Groundnut (40%)
Pearl Millet
(21%)
Sorghum
(16%)
Cotton (14%)
`
49
Anand
Pearl Millet (26%)
Rice (22%)
Tobacco
(18%)
Wheat (11%)
Cotton (9%)
Panchmahals
Maize (37%)
Rice (24%)
Cotton (8%)
Groundnut
(6%)
Dahod
Maize (37%)
Rice (24%)
Cotton (8%)
Groundnut
(6%)
Vadodara
Cotton (35%)
Lentil (15%)
Sorghum
(13%)
Rice (12%)
Tobacco (6%)
Maize (5%)
Narmada
Cotton (27%)
Sorghum (26%)
Lentil (25%)
Rice (5.4%)
Wheat (5.2%)
Bharuch
Cotton (27%)
Sorghum (26%)
Lentil (25%)
Rice (5.4%)
Wheat (5.2%)
Surat
Sorghum (31%)
Rice (18%)
Sugarcane
(14%)
Lentil (12%)
Cotton (10%)
Groundnut
(7%)
Tapi
Sorghum (31%)
Rice (18%)
Sugarcane
(14%)
Lentil (12%)
Cotton (10%)
Groundnut
(7%)
The Dangs
Rice (40%)
Black gram
(26%)
Lentil (19%)
Groundnut
(9%)
Navsari
Rice (66%)
Sorghum (11%)
Lentil (7%)
Sugarcane
(6%)
Valsad
Rice (66%)
Sorghum (11%)
Lentil (7%)
Sugarcane
(6%)
Porbandar
Groundnut (71%)
Pearl Millet
(8%)
Wheat (7%)
Cotton (6%)
Junagadh
Groundnut (71%)
Pearl Millet
(8%)
Wheat (7%)
Cotton (6%)
`
50
Table A4: District wise Cropping Pattern for the year 1990–1991
District
Crop 1
Crop 2
Crop 3
Crop 4
Crop 5
Crop 6
Kutch
Pearl Millet
(12%)
Mung Bean
(10%)
Cotton (9%)
Groundnut
(8.6%)
Castor (7%)
Banaskantha
Pearl Millet
(32%)
Mustard (14%)
Sorghum
(10%)
Castor (8%)
Patan
Pearl Millet
(27%)
Mahesana
Pearl Millet
(22%)
Mustard (14%)
Cotton (10%)
Sorghum
(9.6%)
Wheat (8.8%)
Castor
(8.6%)
Sabarkantha
Maize (20%)
Castor (12%)
Pearl Millet
(11.5%)
Wheat (10%)
Lentil (8%)
Black gram
(7%)
Gandhinagar
Pearl Millet
(24%)
Castor (16%)
Wheat (13%)
Mustard
(10%)
Rice (9%)
Ahmadabad
Cotton (21%)
Pearl Millet
(14%)
Wheat (13%)
Rice (11%)
Sorghum
(7%)
Surendranagar
Cotton (43%)
Pearl Millet
(12%)
Sorghum
(8%)
Sesamum
(6%)
Rajkot
Groundnut (47%)
Cotton (10%)
Pearl Millet
(10%)
Wheat (6%)
Jamnagar
Groundnut (50%)
Pearl Millet
(8%)
Amreli
Groundnut (56%)
Pearl Millet
(11%)
Sorghum
(8%)
Sesamum
(7%)
Bhavnagar
Groundnut (32%)
Pearl Millet
(20%)
Sorghum
(16%)
Cotton (12%)
Sesamum
(6%)
`
51
Anand
Pearl Millet
(24%)
Rice (23%)
Tobacco
(15%)
Wheat (10%)
Panchmahals
Maize (33%)
Rice (22%)
Wheat (7%)
Lentil (6%)
Gram (5.3%)
Pearl Millet
(5.1%)
Dahod
Maize (33%)
Rice (22%)
Wheat (7%)
Lentil (6%)
Gram (5.3%)
Pearl Millet
(5.1%)
Vadodara
Cotton (25%)
Lentil (18%)
Sorghum
(10%)
Rice (9%)
Maize (7%)
Tobacco
(6%)
Narmada
Lentil (37%)
Cotton (13.8%)
Sorghum
(13.7%)
Wheat (6%)
Bharuch
Lentil (37%)
Cotton (13.8%)
Sorghum
(13.7%)
Wheat (6%)
Surat
Sugarcane (23%)
Sorghum (19%)
Rice (16%)
Lentil (11%)
Groundnut
(6%)
Tapi
Sugarcane (23%)
Sorghum (19%)
Rice (16%)
Lentil (11%)
Groundnut
(6%)
The Dangs
Rice (15%)
Lentil (8.3%)
Black gram
(7.9%)
Navsari
Rice (32%)
Sugarcane (8%)
Valsad
Rice (32%)
Sugarcane (8%)
Porbandar
Groundnut (61%)
Wheat (7%)
Pearl Millet
(6%)
Junagadh
Groundnut (61%)
Wheat (7%)
Pearl Millet
(6%)
`
52
Table A5: District wise Cropping Pattern for the year 2000–2001
District
Crop 1
Crop 2
Crop 3
Crop 4
Crop 5
Crop 6
Kutch
Pearl Millet
(15%)
Groundnut
(11%)
Mung Bean
(9%)
Castor (9%)
Cotton (7%)
Banaskantha
Pearl Millet
(23%)
Mustard (12%)
Castor (11%)
Patan
Pearl Millet
(19%)
Cotton (18%)
Castor (9%)
Mustard
(7%)
Mahesana
Pearl Millet
(14%)
Castor (11%)
Mustard
(11%)
Wheat (10%)
Cotton (8%)
Cumin
(7.7%)
Sabarkantha
Maize (26%)
Wheat (8.9%)
Lentil (8.5%)
Castor (8%)
Cotton (6%)
Groundnut
(5.6%)
Gandhinagar
Pearl Millet
(13.3%)
Castor (13%)
Wheat (12%)
Rice (9%)
Cotton (7%)
Ahmadabad
Cotton (39%)
Rice (15%)
Wheat (8%)
Pearl Millet
(5%)
Surendranagar
Cotton (56%)
Sesamum
(11%)
Pearl Millet
(10%)
Rajkot
Groundnut (52%)
Cotton (24%)
Pearl Millet
(6%)
Sesamum
(6%)
Jamnagar
Groundnut (66%)
Sesamum (7%)
Pearl Millet
(6.6%)
Cotton (5%)
Amreli
Groundnut (53%)
Cotton (18%)
Sesamum
(8%)
Pearl Millet
(7.8%)
Bhavnagar
Cotton (32%)
Groundnut
(28%)
Pearl Millet
(16%)
Sesamum
(6%)
`
53
Anand
Rice (26%)
Pearl Millet
(18%)
Tobacco
(18%)
Wheat (12%)
Panchmahals
Maize (39%)
Rice (26%)
Lentil (9%)
Pearl Millet
(5%)
Dahod
Maize (58%)
Rice (23%)
Lentil (6%)
Black gram
(5%)
Vadodara
Cotton (27%)
Lentil (17%)
Rice (10%)
Maize (9%)
Sorghum
(6%)
Narmada
Cotton (22%)
Sorghum (18%)
Lentil (17%)
Rice (13%)
Maize (5%)
Bharuch
Cotton (37%)
Lentil (23%)
Sugarcane
(10%)
Sorghum
(9%)
Surat
Sugarcane (32%)
Rice (21%)
Sorghum
(13%)
Lentil (7%)
Tapi
Sugarcane (32%)
Rice (21%)
Sorghum
(13%)
Lentil (7%)
The Dangs
Rice (22%)
Black gram
(7%)
Sorghum
(6%)
Lentil (5%)
Navsari
Rice (29%)
Sugarcane
(18%)
Mango (6%)
Valsad
Rice (31%)
Sugarcane (9%)
Mango (9%)
Porbandar
Groundnut (57%)
Cotton (14%)
Sorghum
(5%)
Pearl Millet
(5%)
Junagadh
Groundnut (69%)
Cotton (6%)
Pearl Millet
(5%)
`
54
Table A6: District wise Cropping Pattern for the year 2008–2009
District
Crop 1
Crop 2
Crop 3
Crop 4
Crop 5
Crop 6
Kutch
Cotton (17.4%)
Mung Bean
(17%)
Groundnut
(16.5%)
Castor
(16.5%)
Pearl Millet
(12%)
Sesamum
(6.4%)
Banaskantha
Pearl Millet
(33%)
Mustard (24%)
Castor (13%)
Wheat (9%)
Patan
Cotton (24%)
Pearl Millet
(21%)
Mustard (16%)
Castor (14%)
Cumin (6%)
Mahesana
Wheat (19%)
Pearl Millet
(18%)
Castor (17.8%)
Mustard
(16%)
Cotton (13%)
Sabarkantha
Cotton (23%)
Maize (19%)
Wheat (18.9%)
Groundnut
(13%)
Castor (10%)
Gandhinagar
Cotton (22%)
Wheat (21%)
Castor (19%)
Pearl Millet
(16%)
Rice (8%)
Mustard
(7%)
Ahmadabad
Cotton (38%)
Wheat (27%)
Rice (19%)
Cumin (5%)
Surendranagar
Cotton (65%)
Sesamum
(11%)
Cumin (9%)
Pearl Millet
(6%)
Wheat (5%)
Rajkot
Groundnut
(49%)
Cotton (31%)
Wheat (12%)
Jamnagar
Groundnut
(62%)
Cotton (22%)
Wheat (5%)
Amreli
Groundnut
(44%)
Cotton (40%)
Wheat (7%)
Bhavnagar
Cotton (53%)
Groundnut
(22%)
Pearl Millet
(8%)
Wheat (6%)
Onion (5%)
`
55
Anand
Rice (40%)
Wheat (24%)
Pearl Millet
(22%)
Tobacco
(7%)
Dahod
Maize (48%)
Gram (16%)
Rice (15%)
Wheat (10%)
Vadodara
Cotton (36%)
Lentil (16%)
Rice (13%)
Maize (11%)
Wheat (5%)
Narmada
Cotton (38%)
Lentil (20%)
Rice (14%)
Sorghum
(9%)
Maize (5%)
Bharuch
Cotton (44%)
Lentil (19%)
Sorghum
(10%)
Wheat (7%)
Sugarcane
(6.9%)
Surat
Sugarcane (49%)
Rice (26%)
Sorghum (9%)
Lentil (7%)
Tapi
Rice (23%)
Sorghum (22%)
Sugarcane
(18%)
Lentil (13%)
Groundnut
(8%)
The Dangs
Rice (44.75%)
Groundnut
(13%)
Black gram
(11%)
Lentil (10%)
Sorghum
(9%)
Maize (8%)
Navsari
Rice (54%)
Sugarcane
(37%)
Mango (20%)
Manilkara
zapota (6%)
Valsad
Rice (75%)
Mango (29%)
Sugarcane
(12%)
Black gram
(7%)
Lentil (5%)
Porbandar
Groundnut
(72%)
Cumin (23%)
Gram (12%)
Cotton
(5.1%)
Sorghum
(5%)
Junagadh
Groundnut
(60%)
Wheat (27%)
Cotton (6%)
