Banner
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive

volume 36 issue 5 (october 2013) : 429-435

WHOLESALE PRICE VARIABILITY OF RAW AND PROCESSED PULSES - A CASE STUDY

P
Purushottam*
P
Prasoon Verma
C
C.S. Praharaj
V
V.K. Kanaujia
1Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur – 208 024, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Purushottam*, Verma Prasoon, Praharaj C.S., Kanaujia V.K. (2025). WHOLESALE PRICE VARIABILITY OF RAW AND PROCESSED PULSES - A CASE STUDY. Legume Research. 36(5): 429-435. doi: .

ABSTRACT

A case study was undertaken for Kanpur mandi during 2006-2007 to ascertain the extent of wholesale price fluctuation of various types of raw and processed pulses. Inter-seasonal price variations in wholesale market were analyzed. The results showed maximum price variability in chickpea (14.49%) followed by fieldpea (12.49%) and mungbean (8.56%). Further, the seasonal pattern depicted that the prices of rabi pulses fall during March- June due to arrival of fresh stocks following crop harvest. To the contrary, the price of kharif pulses collapse during July-August and improve during December-January. Similar to raw pulses, the wholesale price variability of processed pulses as dal was at its highest in chickpea (14.36%), followed by fieldpea (12.12%) and mungbean (8.46%). The price of raw pulses and dal almost goes together as these were positively correlated in case of pigeonpea, lentil and fieldpea except for mungbean. The average market price was the higher for urdbean and mungbean followed chickpea, pigeonpea, lentil and fieldpea.  It was also found that average price difference between raw pulses and processed dal was 27.15%, ranging 10.24 to 41.66%. The average price (/kg) differences among various dal grades were the highest in pigeonpea (7.28%), followed by urdbean, mungbean and lentil 4.65, 4.44 and 0.17%, respectively. The study revealed maximum price variability in chickpea, followed by fieldpea and mungbean for both raw and processed pulses.  Considerable price difference was also observed between raw and processed pulses as well as among dal grades.

REFERENCES

  1. Acharya, S.S. (1998). Agriculture marketing in India: Some facts and emerging issues. Keynote paper, Indian J. Agric. Econ., 53: 311-32
  2. Ali, N. (2003). Pulses research and development in India: An overview. Proc. summer school on post harvest technology & value addition in Pulses, IIPR, Kanpur June 12-21, Pp.1.
  3. Anonymous (2007). Prices and food management, the economic survey 2006-2007. Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India.
  4. FAO and OECD (2011). Price volatility in food and agricultural markets: policy responses. (https://www.wto.org/english/ tratope/agrice/reportg).
  5. Brouwer, J.B. Sharma, B. Malic, B.A. and Hill, G.D. (2000). Asia -Pacific: Meeting the challenges (R. Knight) eds. In. Linking research and marketing opportunities for Pulses in 21 Centuries. Pp. 116-130.
  6. Gregory, K., Price Rip, Landes and Govindan, A. (2003). India’s pulse sector: results of field research, WRS -03-01, USDA. Pp. 1-23.
  7. Joshi, P. and Saxena, R. (2002). A profile of pulses production in India: Facts, trends and opportunities, Indian J. Agric. Econ., 57: 326-339.
  8. Joshi, P.O. Askan, P.K. Datta, R. and Kumar, P. (2000). Socio-economic constraints to legumes production in rice – wheat cropping system of India, In –Eds. C. Johansen, S.M. Duxbury, S.M. Virmani, CLI Gowdra, S. Pande and P.K. Joshi.
  9. Lal, R.R. and Verma, Prasoon (2007). Post harvest management of pulses, Technical bulletin, Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur. Pp. 46.
  10. Maji, C.C. and Sulaiman, R. (1995). Policy paper based on production prospects and constraints to raising productivity of pulses in Madhya Pradesh. (http://www.ncap.res.in/upload_files /policy_paper/pp2.pdf).
  11. Patel, S. Anita, B. and Rao, S.K. (2006). Milling quality in desi chickpea. Indian J. Pulses Res. 19: 145.
  12. Ramesh Chand (1999). Liberalization of agricultural trade prices and net social welfare- a study of selected crops. Economic and political weekly 34 (52) Pp. A 151
  13. Sharma, Anil and Kumar, Parmod (2001). An analysis of the price behaviour of selected commodities. National Council of Applied Economic Research, New Delhi. Pp. xv (http://planningcommission.nic.in/reports/sereport/ser)
Published In
Legume Research
Article Metrics
Metrics Icon
0
Views
0
Citations
Reviewed By
Share Article
Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    volume 36 issue 5 (october 2013) : 429-435

    WHOLESALE PRICE VARIABILITY OF RAW AND PROCESSED PULSES - A CASE STUDY

    P
    Purushottam*
    P
    Prasoon Verma
    C
    C.S. Praharaj
    V
    V.K. Kanaujia
    1Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur – 208 024, India

    • Submitted|

    • First Online |

    • doi

    Cite article:- Purushottam*, Verma Prasoon, Praharaj C.S., Kanaujia V.K. (2025). WHOLESALE PRICE VARIABILITY OF RAW AND PROCESSED PULSES - A CASE STUDY. Legume Research. 36(5): 429-435. doi: .

    ABSTRACT

    A case study was undertaken for Kanpur mandi during 2006-2007 to ascertain the extent of wholesale price fluctuation of various types of raw and processed pulses. Inter-seasonal price variations in wholesale market were analyzed. The results showed maximum price variability in chickpea (14.49%) followed by fieldpea (12.49%) and mungbean (8.56%). Further, the seasonal pattern depicted that the prices of rabi pulses fall during March- June due to arrival of fresh stocks following crop harvest. To the contrary, the price of kharif pulses collapse during July-August and improve during December-January. Similar to raw pulses, the wholesale price variability of processed pulses as dal was at its highest in chickpea (14.36%), followed by fieldpea (12.12%) and mungbean (8.46%). The price of raw pulses and dal almost goes together as these were positively correlated in case of pigeonpea, lentil and fieldpea except for mungbean. The average market price was the higher for urdbean and mungbean followed chickpea, pigeonpea, lentil and fieldpea.  It was also found that average price difference between raw pulses and processed dal was 27.15%, ranging 10.24 to 41.66%. The average price (/kg) differences among various dal grades were the highest in pigeonpea (7.28%), followed by urdbean, mungbean and lentil 4.65, 4.44 and 0.17%, respectively. The study revealed maximum price variability in chickpea, followed by fieldpea and mungbean for both raw and processed pulses.  Considerable price difference was also observed between raw and processed pulses as well as among dal grades.

    REFERENCES

    1. Acharya, S.S. (1998). Agriculture marketing in India: Some facts and emerging issues. Keynote paper, Indian J. Agric. Econ., 53: 311-32
    2. Ali, N. (2003). Pulses research and development in India: An overview. Proc. summer school on post harvest technology & value addition in Pulses, IIPR, Kanpur June 12-21, Pp.1.
    3. Anonymous (2007). Prices and food management, the economic survey 2006-2007. Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India.
    4. FAO and OECD (2011). Price volatility in food and agricultural markets: policy responses. (https://www.wto.org/english/ tratope/agrice/reportg).
    5. Brouwer, J.B. Sharma, B. Malic, B.A. and Hill, G.D. (2000). Asia -Pacific: Meeting the challenges (R. Knight) eds. In. Linking research and marketing opportunities for Pulses in 21 Centuries. Pp. 116-130.
    6. Gregory, K., Price Rip, Landes and Govindan, A. (2003). India’s pulse sector: results of field research, WRS -03-01, USDA. Pp. 1-23.
    7. Joshi, P. and Saxena, R. (2002). A profile of pulses production in India: Facts, trends and opportunities, Indian J. Agric. Econ., 57: 326-339.
    8. Joshi, P.O. Askan, P.K. Datta, R. and Kumar, P. (2000). Socio-economic constraints to legumes production in rice – wheat cropping system of India, In –Eds. C. Johansen, S.M. Duxbury, S.M. Virmani, CLI Gowdra, S. Pande and P.K. Joshi.
    9. Lal, R.R. and Verma, Prasoon (2007). Post harvest management of pulses, Technical bulletin, Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur. Pp. 46.
    10. Maji, C.C. and Sulaiman, R. (1995). Policy paper based on production prospects and constraints to raising productivity of pulses in Madhya Pradesh. (http://www.ncap.res.in/upload_files /policy_paper/pp2.pdf).
    11. Patel, S. Anita, B. and Rao, S.K. (2006). Milling quality in desi chickpea. Indian J. Pulses Res. 19: 145.
    12. Ramesh Chand (1999). Liberalization of agricultural trade prices and net social welfare- a study of selected crops. Economic and political weekly 34 (52) Pp. A 151
    13. Sharma, Anil and Kumar, Parmod (2001). An analysis of the price behaviour of selected commodities. National Council of Applied Economic Research, New Delhi. Pp. xv (http://planningcommission.nic.in/reports/sereport/ser)
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us
      Published In
      Legume Research

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)