Translate

Monday, July 14, 2014


The agricultural policy objective of the Indian government, as in most developing countries, has evolved from one of concentrating on achieving self-sufficiency and food security concerns into one of enhancing the sustainable development of a competitive agriculture. Increasing attention has been directed toward the allied sectors such as livestock and fisheries. Livestock in general and dairying in particular play a vital role in the Indian economy. The contribution of the livestock sector to total national gross domestic product (GDP) was 5.9 percent in 2000-01, with the milk group making the highest contribution to the total value of the agriculture and allied sector (Rs. 1,44,088 crore). An estimated 20 million people are employed in the livestock sector in principal (11 million) and subsidiary (9 million) status (GOI, 2003). Women constitute about 70 percent of the labor force in livestock farming. As the ownership of livestock is more evenly distributed among landless laborers and marginal farmers the progress of this sector results in a more balanced development of the rural economy.


Milk production in India increased from 17 million tons in 1950-51 to 84.6 million tons in 2001-02 and is expected to reach 88 million tons during 2002-03 (GOI, 2003). Therefore, from being a recipient of massive material support from the World Food Program and European Community in the 1960s, India has rapidly positioned itself as the world's largest producer of milk. Milk production in India during the last five decades is shown in Figure 2.1 and Tables 2.1 and 2.2.

Figure 2.1 Milk production and consumption trends in India: 1950-51 to 2001-02

Source: GOI, 2003.

Table 2.1 Annual growth rate (%) of production of major livestock products in India.

       Period         Milk        Eggs       Wool
1950-51 to 196-61         1.64         4.63        0.38
1960-61 to 1973-74         1.15         7.91        0.34
1973-74 to 1980-81         4.51         3.79        0.77
1980-81 to 1990-91         5.68         7.80        2.32
1990-91 to 2000-01         4.21         4.46        2.01



Source: GOI, 2003.

The performance of the Indian dairy sector during the past three decades has been very impressive. Milk production grew at an average annual rate of 4.57 percent during the 1970s, 5.68 percent during the 1980s, and 4.21 percent during the 1990s. The country's milk production is expected to reach 84.6 million tons in 2001-02.

Table 2.2 Annual growth rate (%) of milk, eggs, and wool in India: 1975-76 through 2001-02, by plan

Plan Year Milk Eggs Wool
5th Five Year Plan 1975-76 to 1979-80 2.91 3.5 1.49
6th Five Year Plan 1980-81 to 1984-85 6.42 8.4 2.67
7th Five Year Plan 1985-86 to 1989-90 4.37 7.23 1.88
8th Five Year Plan 1992-93 to 1996-97 4.41 4.58 0.80
9th Five Year Plan 1997-98 to 2001-02 4.13 4.34 2.14
Source: GOI, Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics 2002, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Ministry of Agriculture.

This growth was achieved through extensive intervention by the Indian government, as well as through increased demand driven by population growth, higher incomes, and urbanization (Candler and Kumar, 1998). Until 1991, the Indian dairy industry was highly regulated and protected. Milk processing and product manufacturing were mainly restricted to small firms and cooperatives. High import duties, non-tariff barriers, restrictions on imports and exports, and stringent licensing provisions provided incentives to Indian-owned small enterprises and cooperatives to expand production in a protected market. Indian policy makers saw the development of the dairy sector as a measure to create supplementary employment and income among the small and marginal farming households and landless wage earners, as milk production takes place in millions of rural households scattered across the country.
Despite its being the largest milk producer in the world, India's per capita availability of milk is one of the lowest in the world, although it is high by developing country standards. The per capita availability of milk, which declined during the 1950s and 1960s (from 124 gm per day in 1950-51 to 121 gm in 1973-74) expanded substantially during the 1980s and 1990s and reached about 226 gm per day in 2001-02 (Figure 2.1). The per capita consumption of milk and milk products in India is among the highest in Asia. However, it is still below the world average of 285 gm per day and the minimum nutritional requirement of 280 gm per day as recommended by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR).
Several factors have contributed to the increased milk production in the country. First, milk and dairy products have cultural significance in the Indian diet. A large portion of the population is lacto-vegetarian, so milk and dairy products are an important source of protein in the diet. The demand for milk and dairy products is income elastic, and growth in per capita income is expected to increase demand for milk and milk products. Empirical evidence has shown that the composition of an average Indian's food basket is gradually shifting toward value-added products, including milk and dairy products. The proportion of income spent on milk and milk products increased from 11.7 percent in rural areas and 14.7 percent in urban areas in 1970-71 to 21.6 and 16.7 percent in 1999-00, respectively (Annex Table 2.1). Other socioeconomic and demographic factors, such as urbanization and changing food habits and lifestyles, have also reinforced growth in demand for dairy products. On the supply side, technological progress in the production and processing sectors, institutional factors, and infrastructure play an equally important role. The linking of rural small producers with urban consumers through producers' cooperatives was a true institutional innovation in the Indian dairy sector.
Given its high income elasticity, the demand for milk and dairy products is expected to grow rapidly. A study conducted by Saxena (2000) using National Sample Survey (NSS) data for 1993--94 showed that income elasticity of demand for milk and milk products is higher (1.96 national level) in rural areas (ranging from 1.24 in Punjab to 2.92 in Orissa) than in urban areas (ranging from 0.99 in Punjab to 1.78 in Bihar). The northern region in general and Gujarat in the western region show low income elasticity of demand for milk and milk products. The high values of income elasticity for different states in the eastern region-varying from 2.5 to 2.9 in rural areas and from 1.5 to 1.8 in urban areas-show a very strong preference for milk and milk products with an increase in income. Further increases in per capita income and changing consumption patterns would lead to acceleration in demand for milk and other livestock products in India and thus would give a boost to this sector. Radhakrishna and Ravi (1994), Gandhi and Mani (1995), Kumar (1998), Dastagiri (2001), and others have estimated demand and income elasticity of demand for milk and milk products, and show similar trends (Table 2.3).

Delgado et al. (2001) have estimated per capita consumption of milk products in developing countries to be about one-third that of developed countries in 2020; however, in aggregate terms, 60 percent of world milk consumption will take place in developing countries, which is a major shift from the early 1990s, when the developed countries consumed 59 percent of world milk production. The projected growth rate for milk is expected to be around 4.3 percent during 1993-2020. Kumar (1998) projected demand for milk at 142.7 million tons by 2020 at 5 percent growth in GDP (182.8 million tons at 7 percent growth in GDP). The estimates given by Saxena (2000) are different than other estimates and project demand for milk to reach its peak at 85.7 million tons in 2007-08 and decline thereafter. Saxena argued that the domestic market may expand if a rise in per capita income is more in favor of lower income groups and regions, as the income elasticity of demand for such groups and regions (eastern) is much higher. The wide variations in demand estimates are mainly due to different assumptions of elasticity, population projections, and other parameters.

Table 2.3 Income/expenditure elasticity of demand and estimates of demand for milk in India

Rural Urban Demand for milk by 2020 (million tons)
Radhakrishna and Ravi (1992) 1.15  0.99 -
Gandhi and Mani (1995) 1.70  1.06 -
Kumar (1998) -  - 126.0-182.8@
Saxena (2000) 1.96  1.32 85.7#
Delgado, et al. (2001) -  - 132.0
Dastagiri (2001) 1.36  1.07 147.21

Notes: @:estimates based on 4% growth in GDP (126.0), 5% growth (142.7), and 7% growth (182.8); #: estimates for 2007-08.

2.1.1 Regional Patterns of Growth

There are large interregional and interstate variations in milk production as well as in per capita availability in India. About two-thirds of national milk production comes from Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, and Haryana. However, there have been some shifts in milk production shares of different states. In 2001-02, Uttar Pradesh was the largest milk producer in the country with about 16.5 million tons of milk, followed by Punjab (8.4 million tons), Rajasthan (6.3 million tons), Madhya Pradesh (6.1 million tones), Maharashtra (6 million tons), and Gujarat (5.6 million tons) (Annex Table 2.2). During 1982-83 triennium ending (TE), the top five milk-producing states were Uttar Pradesh (18.5%), Punjab (10.1%), Rajasthan (9.8%), Gujarat (6.8%), and Haryana (6.6%). During TE 2001-02, Uttar Pradesh (19.5%), Punjab (9.9%), Rajasthan (7.5%), Maharashtra (7.3%), Madhya Pradesh (7.2%), and Gujarat (6.6%) were the largest producers. The share of Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, and Orissa increased between 1991 and 1999-01, while the share of Bihar, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal declined. The regional shares of milk production are presented in Figure 2.2. Major milk-producing regions in the country have good resource endowment and infrastructure. The eastern region is lagging behind in terms of dairy development. The government has initiated various dairy development programs, especially for the eastern and hilly regions.

 There are also wide variations in per capita availability of milk in the country. The per capita availability of milk in major states and union territories is given in Annex Table 2.3. The average per capita availability is lowest in the eastern region and highest in the northern region (see Figure 2.3). The average per capita availability of milk during 2000-01 was highest in Punjab (997 gm/day), followed by Haryana (645 gm), Himachal Pradesh (354 gm), Rajasthan (300 gm), and Gujarat (296 gram). Only 10 states had higher than the national average per capita availability of milk (220 gram/day). The per capita availability is low in the eastern and northeastern states. Milk production and per capita availability in major states during TE 1998-00 are presented in Figure 2.4. The average per capita consumption of milk and dairy products is lower in rural areas than in urban areas, even though milk is produced in rural areas.

 2.1.2 Policies Influencing the Dairy Sector
Agriculture, including the dairy sector, is state controlled, and state governments are primarily responsible for development of the sector. The central government supplements the efforts of the state governments through various schemes for achieving accelerated growth of the sector. Despite the importance of dairying in the Indian economy, especially for the livelihoods of resource-poor farmers and landless laborers, government policy toward this sector has suffered from the lack of a clear and strong thrust and focus. The first attempt to conceive a set of policies for livestock development in India was the Royal Commission on Agriculture (1928). We can divide the government policies into three distinct phases; pre-Operation Flood, post-Operation Flood, and post-reform period.

Figure 2.2 Share of milk production in India by state: 1980-82 and 1998-00


Source: NDDB, 2003a.

 Figure 2.3 Map showing the per capita availability of milk in India by state: 2000-01
Source: NDDB, 2003b.

 Figure 2.4 Total milk production and per capita availability of milk in major states in India: 
TE 2000-01
Source: GOI, 2003.
One of the indicators of a sector's importance is the budget allocation to that sector. The investment pattern in animal husbandry and dairying during various plan periods is given in Annex Table 2.4. The plan outlay (at current prices) of central and centrally sponsored schemes under animal husbandry and dairying has increased from Rs. 22 crore in the First Plan to Rs. 1,545.64 crore in the Ninth Plan and Rs. 2500 crore in the Tenth Plan. The outlay for dairying increased from Rs. 781 crore in the First Plan to Rs. 900 crore in the Eighth Plan and then declined in the Ninth Plan to Rs. 469.5 crore (all figures are at current prices). The allocation to animal husbandry and dairying as a percentage of total plan outlay varied from 0.98 percent during the Fourth Plan to about 0.18 percent during the Ninth Plan (Figure 2.5). However, in most cases the bulk of the budget is eaten up by wages and other administrative costs of the government departments. Although the dairy sector occupies a pivotal position and its contribution to the agricultural sector is the highest, the plan investment made so far does not appear commensurate with its contribution and future potential for growth and development.
The low productivity of Indian cattle has been the central concern of livestock policy throughout the last century. In the First Five Year Plan, the Key Village Scheme (KVS) was launched to improve breeding, feed and fodder availability, disease control, and milk production. To meet urban areas' need for milk, the government promoted state-owned dairy plants to handle milk procurement, processing, and marketing. In 1959, the government Delhi Milk Scheme (DMS) was set up to supply milk to the urban population of Delhi. This scheme adopted the method of departmental milk procurement from the milk-producing areas around Delhi by setting up its own milk collection and chilling centers. Though the collection was started from small milk vendors initially, it ultimately ended up creating big contractors who purchased milk from the small vendors and supplied it in bulk to the milk scheme. The same policies and strategies continued in the Second Five-Year Plan. In 1976, the National Commission on Agriculture concluded that the KVS could not meet its objectives because, due to a shortage of funds, it did not stress feed and fodder development and marketing of milk. The Third Plan emphasized the need to develop dual-purpose animals for milk as well as draft use; crossbreeding of nondescript indigenous cattle was introduced during this plan. The Intensive Cattle Development Programme (ICDP) was launched in areas with high milk potential.

Figure 2.5 Share of animal husbandry and dairying outlay in total plan outlay during different plan periods

Source: GOI, 1999.

The disappointing performance of the dairy sector during the 1950s and 1960s concerned policy makers, and the Government of India undertook a far-reaching policy initiative. Dairy development through producers' cooperatives and milk production based on milk sheds in the rural areas, modeled on the successful experience of dairy cooperatives in Gujarat, became the cornerstone of the new dairy sector policy. This policy initiative turned the Indian dairy sector around and led to all-around growth with several unarticulated spread effects.

The Government of India launched a massive dairy development program popularly known as Operation Flood (OF) from 1971 to 1996. The program was initially started with the help of the World Food Program (WFP) and later continued with dairy commodity assistance from the European Economic Community (EEC) and a soft loan/credit from the World Bank. Under this program, rural producers were organized into cooperatives so they would have an assured market, remunerative prices, and inputs and services for milk production enhancement, such as better feed and fodder, breed improvement through artificial insemination, and disease control measures. The program was unique in its approach inasmuch as the gift dairy commodities received by India under the program were not consumed by free distribution but were used to manufacture liquid milk, and funds thus generated were reinvested in rural areas in milk production enhancement activities. This coordinated and innovative effort has greatly increased milk production and ushered in a "White Revolution," making India the world's largest milk producer.

The program was implemented in three phases: OF-I (1970-1981), OF-II (1981-85) and OF-III 1987-96). Operation Flood remained the pivot of government policy in the field of dairy development in India, and the number of city milk schemes and milk colonies begun in the 1950s and 1960s declined as the regional and national milk grids started operating under OF. In metro areas, government milk schemes coexisted with the Mother Dairies run under the control of the National Dairy Development Board (NDDB); however, the former kept selling milk at subsidized rates for long time for political reasons, and Mother Dairies introduced aggressive, modern milk marketing and distribution systems.
An indicator of the success of Operation Flood is the amount of milk procured and supplied to consumers. Average milk procurement increased from 2.56 million kg per day during Phase I to 11 million kg per day during Phase III. However, there are variations in the proportion of milk procured to total milk production across states. The striking pattern that emerges is the predominance of cooperatives in Gujarat and Maharashtra. Between Phase I and III, average liquid milk marketing increased from 27.8 lakh liters per day to about 100 lakh liters per day.

In 1989, the Government of India launched a Technology Mission on Dairy Development (TMDD) to coordinate the input programs for the dairy sector, which ended in March 1999. An Integrated Dairy Development Programme (IDDP) in non-Operation Flood, hilly, and backward areas was launched as a Centrally Sponsored Plan Scheme during the Eighth Plan and continued during the Ninth and Tenth Plans.

To promote domestic production, India adopted an import-substitution strategy and protected the sector from external markets through means such as quantitative restrictions on imports and exports and canalization (restricting imports and exports through government or government designated agencies). Competition within the organized sector was regulated through licensing provisions, which prohibited new entrants into the milk-processing sector. Milk powder and butter oil were available in the international market at lower prices, which made reconstitution of milk from these products cheaper than collecting and selling fresh milk. It was therefore necessary to restrict the availability of these cheap imports to encourage the indigenous production.

The third phase of Indian dairy policy started in the early 1990s, when the Government of India introduced major trade policy reforms that favored increasing privatization and liberalization of the economy. The dairy industry was delicensed in 1991 with a view to encouraging private sector participation and investment in the sector. However, in response to sociopolitical pressures, the government introduced the Milk and Milk Products Order (MMPO) in 1992 under the Essential Commodities Act of 1955 to regulate milk and dairy product production. The order required permission from state/central registration authorities to set up units handling more than 10,000 liters of milk per day or milk solids up to 500 tons per annum (TPA), depending on the capacity of the plant. The order included sanitary and hygienic regulations to ensure product quality. The status of registrations granted under the MMPO as of March 31, 2002, is given in Annex Table 2.5.

However, concerns were raised about these government controls and licensing requirements for restricting large Indian and multinational players from making significant investments in this sector. The government has amended the MMPO from time to time; the major amendment was made in March 2002, when restrictions on setting up milk processing and milk product manufacturing plants were removed and the concept of milkshed was also abolished. This amendment is expected to facilitate the entry of large companies, which would definitely increase competition in the domestic markets.

The second major development in Indian dairy sector policy came when India signed the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture (URAA) in 1994 and became a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), which made India open up its dairy sector to world markets. The import and export of dairy products was delicensed and decanalized, and trade in dairy products was allowed freely, with certain inspection requirements. The first major step was taken in 1994-95, when the import of skim milk powder (SMP) and butter oil was decanalized; restrictions on the remaining products were removed in April 2002. Moreover, there was a significant reduction in the import tariffs on dairy products after trade liberalization. However, India had bound its import tariffs for dairy products at low levels in the Uruguay Round schedules.

2.1.3 Livestock Population Trends

India has one of the largest livestock populations in the world, accounting for about 57 percent of the world buffalo population and 16 percent of the cattle population (GOI, 2002). The growth pattern of the livestock population during 1951 and 1997 is given in Table 2.4. Between 1951 and 2002, the cattle population increased from 155.3 million to 175.1 million. The cattle population grew by less than 1 percent per year between 1951 and 1997, while the buffalo population almost doubled (2.24% per year) during the same period. The cattle and buffalo stocks witnessed a significant acceleration in growth during 1977 to 1982 compared to the previous five years. The rate of increase in the cattle (2.04%/year) and buffalo (2.66%/year) populations was highest between 1956 and 1961 among all the periods considered. The turning point in the composition of the draft animal population was 1977; male cattle population declined from 73.22 million to 61.14 million between 1977 and 1982, and the corresponding decline among male buffalo population was over 1.96 million (GOI, 1999). This declining trend, however, is not uniform across the states. Agriculturally advanced states such as Punjab, Haryana, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu witnessed a sharp decline in the male draft animal population due to farm mechanization, while the less progressive and hilly states such as Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, and West Bengal showed increasing dependence on work animals.

Table 2.4 Growth pattern of livestock population in India: 1951-1992 (millions)

Species 1951 1956 1961 1966 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997*
Cattle 155.3 158.7 175.6 176.2 178.3 180.0 192.5 199.7 204.6 175.0
Adult female cattle 54.4 47.3 51.0 51.8 53.4 54.6 59.21 62.07 64.36 -
Buffalo 43.4 44.9 51.2 53.0 57.4 62.0 69.78 75.97 84.21 84.03
Adult female buffalo 21.0 21.7 24.3 25.4 28.6 31.3 32.5 39.13 43.81 -
Total bovines 198.7 203.6 226.8 229.2 235.7 242.0 262.4 257.8 289.0 259.0
Total livestock 292.8 306.6 335.4 344.1 353.4 369.0 419.6 445.3 470.9 452.5
Annual growth rates (%) 1951-56 1956-61 1961-66 1966-72 1972-77 1977-82 1982-87 1987-92 1992-97
Cattle 0.43 2.04 0.07 0.24 0.19 1.35 0.74 0.48 -
Adult female cattle -2.76 1.52 0.31 0.61 0.45 1.63 0.95 0.73 -
Buffalo 0.68 2.66 0.69 1.61 1.55 2.39 1.71 2.08 -
Adult female buffalo 0.66 2.29 0.89 2.40 1.82 0.76 3.78 2.28 -
Total bovines 0.49 2.18 0.21 0.56 0.53 1.63 1.01 0.94 -
Total livestock 0.93 1.81 0.51 0.53 0.87 2.60 1.20 1.12 -

Note: *: Excludes the data for Bihar, Dadra Nagar, and Haveli.


Source: GOI, Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics 2002, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.

The crossbreeding program, after a slow start during the 1960s, spread very fast, and the successive rounds of livestock census clearly established the speed with which crossbreeding spread in different parts of the country. In 1992, crossbred cattle constituted about 4.5 percent of total cattle and about 9.5 percent of total cows in the country. In states such as Punjab and Kerala, the proportion of crossbred cows is substantially higher than in other states. The proportion of crossbred cows increased while that of indigenous cows declined, indicating the increasing importance of crossbred cows over indigenous cows. The proportion of female buffaloes also increased significantly, from 30.2 percent to 36 percent between 1982 and 1992.

In the global context, the performance of the Indian dairy sector appears impressive in terms of livestock population and total milk production but extremely poor in terms of productivity. The main reasons for low yields are inadequate availability of feeds and fodder in all seasons, non-availability of timely and good animal health care and breeding services, and lack of credit. The average milk productivity per year per cow increased from 731 kg in 1989-91 to about 1,014 kg in 1999. Although average annual milk production per animal has improved substantially, it is far below the world average (2,071 kg/year) and that of countries such as Israel (8,785 kg), the United States (8,043 kg), and Denmark (6,565 kg). The available data on milk yield indicate that average productivity went up substantially in the case of cows during the 1970s and 1980s. There is an increase in the yield of buffaloes also, but it is less sharp than that of cows. A key factor accounting for the sharper increase in cow milk yield is the increasing proportion of crossbred cows.


As in milk production and availability, there are wide interstate variations in milk yields (Table 2.5). In general, buffaloes have higher yields than indigenous cows, but crossbred cows are more productive than either indigenous cows or buffaloes. The average productivity of local cows is highest in Haryana (4.11 kg/day), followed by Punjab (2.88 kg/day) and Gujarat (2.84 kg/day). For crossbred cows it is highest in Punjab (8.36 kg/day), followed by Gujarat (7.96 kg/day) and West Bengal (7.82 kg/day). The average productivity of buffaloes is highest in West Bengal (6.26 kg/day), followed by Haryana (5.64 kg/day) and Punjab (5.62 kg/day).



Source: GOI, Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics 1999, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.

 2.2.1 Characteristics of the Indian Dairy Sector

 Some of the structural shifts that have taken place in the Indian dairy sector include (i) an increasing shift to milk production as a major objective of rearing bovines, (ii) replacement of animal power with mechanical power in developed regions of the country, and (iii) increasing proportions of crossbred cattle in the total cattle population.

 In states like Kerala and Punjab, crossbred cattle have virtually replaced indigenous cattle; they account for over three-quarters of the total milk cattle population in Punjab and 70 percent in Kerala (GOI, 2003). The other states with high crossbred cattle populations are Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, and West Bengal, though breedable female crossbreds account for less than 10 percent of total breedable females in Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal (Annex Table 2.6).

 No reliable macro-level data about size distribution of livestock are available, so it is extremely difficult to describe the structural changes in milk production activity. The number and species of milk animals kept by farmers varies considerably across regions/states, but the average number of dairy animals hardly exceeds three to four in most parts of the country. However, in certain parts of Punjab, Haryana, Gujarat, and Uttar Pradesh, dairy animal holdings are larger. Certain micro-level studies indicate that there has not been much change in the average size of milk animal population in most parts of the country, except in a few pockets in the northern and western region. A study by Shukla and Brahmankar (1999) showed that the scale of milk production had not changed significantly in Operation Flood areas between 1988-89 and 1995-86. The average milk animal holding size has remained more or less same in all zones (south, east, and west) during this period except for the north, where the proportion of households having four or more milk animal increased from 24 percent in 1988-89 to about 30 percent in 1995-96. On the other hand, in the eastern region, the proportion of households having at least one animal increased from 44.9 percent in 1988-89 to 60 percent in 1995-96. At the national level, the distribution remained almost the same between 1986-87 and 1991-92 (Table 2.6).
Table 2.6 Changes in average number of bovine population in India: 1986-87 and 1991-92

Cattle
Buffalo
Male
Female
Male
Female
1986-87 1991-92 1986-87 1991-92 1986-87 1991-92 1986-87 1991-92
Marginal 0.72 0.68 0.59 0.65 0.18 0.15 0.36 0.43
Small 1.49 1.58 1.07 1.29 0.30 0.30 0.71 0.90
Semi-medium 1.92 1.83 1.49 1.56 0.44 0.38 1.05 1.18
Medium 2.64 2.20 2.14 1.91 0.60 0.48 1.76 1.54
Large 3.58 2.45 3.42 2.45 0.76 0.57 2.41 1.93
All 1.20 1.16 0.95 1.03 0.28 0.25 0.65 0.74


Dairy farming has been a part of the mixed crop-livestock farming system in India for centuries. The animals feed largely on the crop residues/crop by-products and contribute in return dung for fuel, manure for fertilizer, and farm power for crop production. Livestock holding in general and milk animal holding in particular, appear to be far less inequitable than land holding. The marginal and small farmers together owned about 60 percent of female cattle and nearly 54 percent of female buffaloes in 1986-87. Their share in 1991-92 remained the same in the case of cattle, while for buffalo it increased to about 58.5 percent. In contrast, the share belonging to large farmers fell during the same period (Table 2.7). The gini coefficient representing the index of inequity in ownership of dairy stock shows a perceptible decline, from 0.43 in 1961 to 0.37 in 1971 and further to 0.28 in 1991.





Dairying has historically been an unorganized activity in India. The traditional or unorganized sector consisting of milk vendors/dudhias and sweet shops, as well as numerous other types of market factors, is still a dominant (84%) sector in the liquid milk market. Like nearly all developing countries, India exhibits coexisting "organized" and "unorganized" sectors for the marketing of milk and dairy products. Sometimes called the "informal" sector, the unorganized sector may be more usefully thought of as the traditional milk market sector, comprising the marketing of raw milk and traditional products such as locally manufactured ghee, fresh cheese, and sweets. The organized or formal sector is relatively new in historical terms, and consists of western-style dairy processing based on pasteurization, although adapted to the Indian market in terms of products. In some cases, the traditional sector is quite well organized, with a complex net of market agents. It may also be relatively formal, in that market agents may pay municipal fees and have vendor licenses, albeit not specifically for the dairy trade.

 The reasons underlying the existence of a large informal or traditional sector are the same as in other countries where it is important: consumers are unwilling to pay the additional costs of pasteurization and packaging, which can raise retail prices by over 100 percent, and consumers often regard raw milk and traditional products obtained from reliable vendors as of better quality than formally processed dairy products. It should be noted that, unlike some countries, in India the government has generally adopted a laissez-faire approach to the informal sector, which has allowed it to expand with the growth in demand and serve both small farmers and resource-poor consumers. Of the estimated milk production of about 78 million tons during 1999-2000, the organized sector, primarily through dairy cooperatives and organized private dairies, handled 10 to 12 percent of the total milk production or 15 percent of the marketed surplus, and large, complex, highly differentiated traditional private trade in milk and dairy products handled the rest.

Smallholder farmers are caught in a situation of low returns, inaccessibility of resources and markets, non-availability of adequate production inputs and services, and many other social and economic constraints. The service sector, which is mostly managed and controlled by the government, is often inadequate and sometimes insensitive to farmers' needs. In the first two decades of Indian independence, milk production was stagnant, and the only successful experience was of the Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers' Union, better known as Amul or the "Anand Pattern." Amul's experience inspired the then prime minister of India Shri. Lal Bahadur Shastri to establish the National Dairy Development Board (NDDB), which was set up in 1965 to promote the dairy industry in rural India by replicating the Anand Pattern. The Anand Pattern is a three-tiered structure in which farmers organize themselves into dairy cooperative societies at the village level; these village level cooperatives are organized into a district-level union; the district-level unions federate into a state-level cooperative organization (Figure 2.6). At the national level, the National Cooperative Dairy Federation of India (NCDFI) coordinates the efforts of all state-level cooperative dairy federations.

 The organized sector, consisting of 678 dairy plants registered under the MMPO, mainly in cooperative and private sector has grown rapidly during the last decade. The statewide number of milk-processing plants registered under the MMPO is given in Annex Table 2.5. By December 2002, about 101,000 dairy cooperative societies were organized, involving about 11.2 million farmer members. The average milk procurement during April-December 2002 was 17.24 million kg per day (3 percent higher than the previous year), and average milk marketed was about 13.7 million liters (GOI, 2003). The milk-processing capacity in the country has increased substantially: from 10,000-20,000 liters per day in the 1950s to 100,000 liters per day in the 1970s, 500,000 liters per day in the 1980s, and over 1 million liters per day in the 1990s. As discussed in the earlier part of this chapter, until the early 1990s, milk processing was mainly reserved for the cooperative sector through licensing.

 However, as a part of domestic economic reforms and commitments to the WTO, the Indian dairy sector was liberalized in a phased manner starting with partial opening-up in 1991; in March 2002, the government removed all restrictions on setting up new milk-processing capacity.


Following partial decontrol of the dairy sector in the early 1990s, many private sector players entered the market and set up milk-processing facilities, mostly in milk surplus areas. Some of the private sector plants also adopted the Amul model by creating informal contacts with local farmers and providing various inputs and services to the farmers. For example, Nestle has made large investments in its milkshed to improve productivity levels and the quality of raw milk. However, a large proportion of private dairy plants depend on contractors/subcontractors to meet their raw material requirement. Some of the arrangements between processors and producers are shown in Figure 2.7.


As the trade liberalization in agriculture and dairy products has progressed, attention has increasingly focused on technical measures such as food safety, regulations, labeling requirements, and quality and compositional standards. The WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) sets important requirements for adoption and implementation of food safety and quality and recognizes the standards, guidelines, and recommendations determined by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC). CAC standards have been formulated for a majority of dairy products, such as maximum permissible levels of contaminants/additives and hygienic requirements for production. However, there has been increased concern about these measures, particularly in the case of smallholder dairy production systems, as their application necessarily adds to the transactions cost of international trade.






Source: Personal discussions with private sector.

The chemical contaminants for which CAC standards have been set include heavy metals (lead), 85 pesticide residues, and 10 veterinary drug residues in milk and dairy products. However, the Indian national standards are lower than international/developed country standards, and infrastructure is deficient due to lack of resources and inadequate information. In the case of lead, for example, maximum levels of 0.05 ppm in butter and 0.02 ppm in milk have been recommended by the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants, whereas the Indian standard is 2.5 ppm for milk. The CAC has also set maximum residue limit (MRL) for 85 pesticide residues, compared with India's 24 pesticides. Likewise, the CAC has set MRLs for 10 veterinary drug residues, whereas India has not yet set MRLs for veterinary drugs. The 33rd Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants has recommended an MRL of 0.5 ppb for Aflatoxin M1 in milk, compared to an Indian national limit of 0.03 ppm. The CAC has incorporated several provisions in its proposed Model Certificate for Export and Import of Milk Products that would be extremely difficult for most developing countries, including India, to comply with.

The CAC is also concerned about the microbiological quality of milk and dairy products, and has recommended measures to minimize microbiological contamination. CAC guidelines stipulate that the raw material should be produced in a way that minimizes bacterial count, growth, and contamination. To achieve this, the CAC recommends the application of the Principles of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) system.

Smallholder production in India is often based on hand milking, with few or no cooling facilities and inappropriate animal housing and poor animal health protection in most parts of the country. The Indian dairy industry will have to gear up to meet international regulatory requirements and ensure that dairy plants get HACCP certification. Some steps have already been taken in this direction, but there is a long way to go. The National Dairy Development Board, under its Perspective Plan 2010, has started a Clean Milk Production Programme, and more than 12,000 village dairy cooperative societies in 16 states have been brought under it. Similar initiatives have been taken by various state milk marketing federations and other agencies. Sixty-three milk-processing plants/dairies in the cooperative sector have obtained International Standards Organization (ISO)/HACCP certification with assistance from NDDB. Private sector dairy plants have taken similar steps to ensure the quality of raw material; for example, Nestle has provided bulk coolers to farmer societies and launched awareness programs in the area. However, current levels of infrastructure and financial resources are too low to achieve the desired standards.

Animal welfare, which includes establishing norms for animal protection on the farm, during transport, and at the time of slaughter, is a growing source of concern among animal protection organizations, consumers, and decision makers. Although animal welfare is not currently covered under the WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement, these issues are coming under increasing public scrutiny. Two main types of policies relate to animal welfare: (i) to support production methods that promote animal welfare and (ii) to impose requirements on imports so that acceptable standards of animal welfare are applied during production and transportation. National authorities must seek to reduce the negative effects of commercialization of livestock farming and trade on animal welfare. The WTO recognizes the Office International des Epizooties (OIE) as the international organization responsible for the development and promotion of international animal health standards, guidelines, and recommendations affecting trade in live animals and livestock products. These OIE activities cover safety procedures for raw materials during production and first-stage processing before they enter the market.


Since the introduction of an extensive crossbreeding program, the susceptibility of these exotic breeds to various diseases has increased. In order to reduce morbidity and mortality, state governments are attempting to provide better health care facilities through polyclinics and veterinary hospitals/dispensaries/first-aid centers, including mobile veterinary dispensaries. At present, 26,717 polyclinics/hospitals/dispensaries and 28,195 veterinary aid centers supported by about 250 disease diagnostic laboratories are functioning in the states and union territories. In addition, there are about 26 veterinary vaccine production units, 19 in the public sector and 7 in the private sector. The import of vaccines by private agencies is also permitted. The statewide details of veterinary institutions in the country are given in Annex Table 2.7.

 The Government of India and the state governments have initiated various schemes to provide livestock health services and disease control. In most of the states, a large proportion of the budget is spent on salary and wages and little is left for providing services. The Government of India has proposed a comprehensive scheme, "Livestock Health and Disease Control" in three components: (i) control of animal diseases, (ii) Foot and Mouth Disease Control Programme (new), and (iii) National Project on Rinderpest Eradication, by merging various schemes during the Tenth Five Year Plan.

 The central government provides assistance to state/union territory governments for control of tuberculosis, brucellosis, and swine fever; sterility and abortions in bovines; control of emerging and exotic diseases; strengthening of state veterinary biological production centers and disease diagnostic laboratories; and creation of disease-free zones. The incidence of livestock diseases in India during 2001 is given in Annex Table 2.8.

 Since in March 1998, the country has been provisionally free from rinderpest disease; however, the government has initiated a National Project on Rinderpest Eradication to achieve the final stage of freedom from that disease and from contagious bovine pleuro pneumonia by strengthening veterinary services as per the guidelines prescribed by the OIE. Surveys have been initiated in about 1,162 villages to generate information. Eradication of rinderpest is a three-stage process: (i) provisional freedom from the disease, (ii) substantive freedom from the disease, (iii) freedom from rinderpest infection. The successful implementation of this program would benefit livestock farmers, boost export of livestock products, and pave the way for control programs against other diseases, such as foot-and-mouth disease (FMD).

 FMD is a major disease facing Indian livestock; it reduces milk yields and draft power. The disease is prevalent all over the country. Strains O, A, and Asia1 are active, while strain C has not been reported since 1996. No systematic control and vaccination program against FMD exists in the country, even though there is a massive but sporadic vaccination program. More than 25 million vaccinations are carried out every year against FMD, but this program is ineffective, as FMD protection is based on herd immunity. Over 85 percent of the individuals in an area have to be vaccinated to establish herd immunity. The population at risk in the country (all susceptible species) is about 420 million, and barely 5 percent of the animals at risk are vaccinated. The central government has proposed a new Foot and Mouth Disease Control Programme in specified areas in the country under a macro-management approach during the Tenth Plan.


Livestock and livestock waste produce ammonia, carbon dioxide, methane, ozone, nitrous oxide, and other trace gases, which affect the world's atmosphere and contribute to global warming. Of all the gases, methane is the most important in causing global climate change. It is largely a product of animal production and manure management, which contribute about 16 percent of total methane volume.

 In India, livestock is an integral part of crop farming, and resource use in mixed farming (crop + livestock) is often highly self-reliant, as nutrients and energy flow from crops to livestock and back. Such a system offers positive incentives to compensate for environmental effects ("internalize the environmental costs"), making them less damaging or more beneficial to the natural resource base. Pollution problems in rural areas are internalized, as the small amount of waste produced is used as fuel or organic manure. However, small-scale urban or peri-urban production systems (which are dependent on external supplies of feed, energy, and other inputs and are strongly market driven), if not properly controlled, may create environmental pollution. Therefore, the challenge is to identify regulations and incentives that force the polluter to internalize the environmental costs at a minimum cost to the consumer. In India, there are no environmental regulations related to milk production in rural areas; there are regulations for peri-urban and urban dairy farming, but the implementation is extremely poor.

Annex Table 2.1 Per capita monthly consumption expenditure for a period of 30 days on milk and milk products in rural and urban areas: 1970-71 to 1999-2000 (Rupees)
NSS Round
Milk and Milk Products
Meat, Egg, Fish
Total Food
Total Nonfood
Total Expenses
Avg. size of Household
25th Round (1970-71)
Rural
3.03 (11.7)
1.02
25.98
9.33
35.91
-
Urban
5.01 (14.7)
1.90
34.04
18.81
52.85
-
27th Round (1972-73)
Rural
3.22
1.09
32.16
12.01
44.17
5.22
Urban
5.91
2.07
40.84
22.49
63.33
4.72
32nd Round (1977-78)
Rural
5.29
1.84
44.33
24.56
68.89
5.22
Urban
9.16
3.33
57.67
38.48
96.15
4.89
38th Round (1982)
Rural
8.45
3.40
73.73
38.71
112.45
5.20
Urban
15.15
5.92
96.97
67.06
164.03
4.85
42nd Round (1986-87)
Rural
13.48
5.25
92.55
48.38
140.93
5.26
Urban
23.32
9.25
128.99
93.66
222.65
4.79
43rd Round (1987-88)
Rural
13.63
5.11
100.82
57.28
158.10
5.08
Urban
23.83
8.85
139.75
110.18
249.93
4.71
44th Round (1988-89)
Rural
15.65
6.12
111.80
63.30
175.10
5.17
Urban
26.74
10.59
152.49
114.36
266.85
4.87
45th Round (1989-90)
Rural
18.35
6.84
121.78
67.68
189.46
4.96
Urban
29.53
11.42
165.46
132.54
298.00
4.66
46th Round (1990-91)
Rural
19.04
7.08
133.34
68.70
202.12
4.81
Urban
32.37
12.27
185.77
140.00
326.75
4.55
47th Round (July-Dec. 1991)
Rural
21.90
8.20
153.50
89.91
243.50
5.00
Urban
37.21
13.49
207.77
162.57
370.34
4.73
48th Round (Jan. -Dec. 1992)
Rural
23.00
8.00
161.00
87.00
247.00
5.20
Urban
42.00
14.00
224.00
175.00
399.00
4.80
49th Round (Jan. -June 1993)
Rural
23.00
9.00
159.00
85.00
244.00
5.10
Urban
41.00
14.00
221.00
162.00
382.00
4.60
50th Round (July 1993-June 1994)
Rural
27.00
9.40
178.00
104.00
281.00
4.90
Urban
45.00
15.50
250.00
208.00
458.00
4.50
51st Round (July 1994-June 1995)
Rural
27.00
10.00
189.00
121.00
309.00
4.90
Urban
49.00
17.00
271.00
237.00
508.00
4.60
52nd Round (July 1995-June 1996)
Rural
32.38
10.94
207.75
136.53
344.29
5.00
Urban
56.45
19.11
299.98
299.28
599.26
4.60
53rd Round (Jan. -Dec. 1997)
Rural
39.31
11.79
231.99
163.02
395.01
5.00
Urban
62.75
19.58
320.26
325.19
645.44
4.60
54th Round (Jan. -June 1998)
Rural
36.54
12.65
232.40
149.67
382.07
5.00
Urban
64.63
21.94
339.71
344.57
684.27
4.70
55th Round (July 99-June 2000)
Rural
42.56 (21.6)
16.14
288.80
197.28
486.07
5.00
Urban
74.18 (16.7)
26.77
410.86
444.10
854.96
5.00

State 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02
Andhra Pradesh 2943 3103 3766 4221 4261 4471 4473 4842 4730 4904 5145
Arunachal Pradesh 7 21 21 22 42 44 43 45 45 45.5 55
Assam 639 658 676 698 699 714 719 725 822 852 894
Bihar 3210 3195 3215 3250 3321 3410 3420 3440 3740 3878 4068
Chandigarh 34 37 38 39 41 42 43 43 42 44 46
Dadra and Nagar Haveli 3 10 7 8 5 4 4 8 10 10 1
Daman and Diu 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 11
Delhi 227 235 252 257 261 264 267 290 295 306 321
Goa 28 30 33 36 37 37 38 41 43 45 47
Gujarat 3591 3795 3935 4459 4608 4831 4913 5059 5124 5313 5573
Haryana 3565 3715 3850 4062 4055 4204 4373 4527 4673 4845 4976
Himachal Pradesh 597 610 654 663 676 698 714 724 745 772 810
Jammu and Kashmir 515 937 780 641 869 992 979 990 1000 1037 1088
Karnataka 2475 2590 2736 3003 3190 3460 3970 4231 4925 5106 5357
Kerala 1785 1889 2001 2118 2192 2258 2343 2420 2673 2771 2907
Lakshadweep 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Madhya Pradesh 4806 4879 4975 5047 5125 5224 5377 5442 5600 5806 6091
Maharashtra 3955 4102 4250 4812 4991 5127 5193 5609 5810 5850 6024
Manipur 83 83 84 64 57 61 62 65 67 69 73
Meghalaya 50 52 53 54 57 58 59 61 65 67 71
Mizoram 8 9 9 9 9 9 17 20 10 10 11
Nagaland 43 44 45 43 44 46 46 47.5 49.5 51 54
Orissa 505 542 565 584 648 687 672 733 795 824 865
Pondichery 27 27 32 33 33 38 36 36 35 36 38
Punjab 5382 5583 5970 6215 6424 6755 7165 7394 7700 7984 8375
Rajasthan 4474 4586 4958 5103 5449 5874 6487 6923 5820 6034 6330
Sikkim 29 30 30 32 33 34 35 34.5 43 44 46
Tamil Nadu 3357 3468 3524 3695 3791 3976 4061 4273 4256 4413 4629
Tripura 32 34 35 38 39 44 57 76 49 51 53
Uttar Pradesh 10206 10649 10991 11321 11878 12387 12934 13618 15176 15735 16506
West Bengal 3019 3023 3095 3250 3341 3376 3415 3441 3750 3888 4079
India 55620 57962 60607 63804 66198 69147 71940 75182 78117 80817 84570

State
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
Andhra Pradesh
121
126
151
167
167
173
170
182
186
189
Arunachal Pradesh
22
65
64
65
121
124
119
121
118
117
Assam
78
79
80
81
80
80
79
79
88
89
Bihar
102
99
97
96
96
96
94
92
98
99
Chandigarh
145
153
152
150
153
151
150
145
137
138
Dadra and Nagar Haveli
59
189
126
138
82
63
60
114
136
130
Daman and Diu
0
26
25
24
0
22
21
20
19
18
Delhi
66
66
68
67
65
63
62
65
63
63
Goa
66
69
75
81
82
81
82
87
90
93
Gujarat
238
247
251
278
282
290
289
291
289
294
Haryana
593
603
610
628
611
618
627
634
638
645
Himachal Pradesh
316
318
335
335
336
341
343
343
347
354
Jammu and Kashmir
183
324
263
210
277
308
296
292
287
290
Karnataka
151
155
161
174
182
195
220
231
264
270
Kerala
168
176
185
194
199
203
209
214
234
241
Lakshadweep
53
52
51
51
50
49
48
47
47
46
Madhya Pradesh
199
198
198
197
196
195
197
195
197
200
Maharashtra
137
140
142
157
160
161
160
169
171
169
Manipur
124
121
119
88
77
80
79
81
81
81
Meghalaya
77
78
78
77
79
79
78
78
81
82
Mizoram
32
35
34
33
32
31
58
66
32
32
Nagaland
97
95
92
84
82
81
77
76
75
74
Orissa0
44
46
47
48
53
55
53
57
61
62
Pondichery
92
90
105
106
104
117
109
107
102
103
Punjab
727
741
778
795
807
834
869
880
900
917
Rajasthan
279
278
294
295
307
323
348
362
297
300
Sikkim
195
197
191
198
198
199
199
190
225
229
Tamil Nadu
165
168
169
176
178
185
187
195
192
197
Tripura
32
33
34
36
37
41
52
68
43
44
Uttar Pradesh
201
205
207
208
214
218
222
229
249
253
West Bengal
121
120
121
125
126
125
125
123
132
135
India
180
184
189
195
198
203
207
213
217
220

Plan/Year Total Plan Outlay
Animal Husbandry
Dairying
Total

Outlay
Exp.
Outlay
Exp.
Outlay
Exp.
First Plan (1950-55)
1960.0
14.19
8.22
7.81
7.78
22.00
16.00
Second Plan (1955-60)
4600.0
38.50
21.42
17.44
12.05
55.94
33.47
Third Plan (1960-65)
8576.5
54.44
43.40
36.08
33.60
90.52
77.00
Annual Plan (1966-67)
6625.4
41.33
34.00
26.14
25.70
67.47
59.70
Fourth Plan (1967-72)
15778.8
94.10
75.51
139.00
78.75
233.10
154.26
Fifth Plan
39426.2
-
178.43
-
-
437.54
232.46
Sixth Plan (1980-85)
97500.0
60.46
39.08
336.10
298.34
396.56
337.42
Seventh Plan (1985-90)
180000.0
165.19
102.35
302.75
374.43
467.94
476.78
Annual Plan (1990-91)
-
43.71
36.18
79.67
41.43
123.38
77.61
Annual Plan (1991-92)
-
57.97
43.28
97.49
77.99
155.46
121.27
Eighth Plan
434100.1
400.00
305.43
900.00
818.05
1300.00
1123.48
1992-93
80771.0
56.54
43.85
99.76
136.69
156.30
180.54
1993-94
100120.1
78.26
54.59
257.74
216.44
336.00
271.03
1994-95
112197.1
98.28
60.64
224.43
185.09
322.71
245.73
1995-96
128590.0
94.00
66.66
250.00
179.67
344.00
246.33
1996-97
-
103.94
81.04
155.98
100.29
259.92
181.33
Ninth Plan (1997-2002)
2345.64
1076.12
-
469.52
-
1545.64
-
1997-98
-
160.15
94.84
39.00
29.24
199.15
124.08
1998-99
-
170.40
53.03
50.60
23.97
221.00
77.00
1999-2000
-
160.08
97.26
73.90
16.45
233.98
113.71
2000-01
-
124.90
85.10
51.00
39.59
175.90
124.69
2001-02*
-
156.49
115.61
37.45
37.60
193.94
153.21



States/Union territories Cooperative Private Others Total

No.
Capacity
No.
Capacity
No.
Capacity
No.
Capacity
By Central Authority

Andhra Pradesh 13
2905
 6
855
 1
200
 20
3960
Bihar 6
485
 1
120
 0
0
 7
605
Delhi 0
0
 0
0
 8
6500
 8
6500
Goa 1
30
 0
0
 0
0
 1
30
Gujarat 14
6170
 2
300
 6
640
 22
7110
Haryana 5
400
 14
3390
 0
0
 19
3790
Himachal Pradesh 3
44
 2
345
 0
0
 5
389
Karnataka 12
1833
 5
495
 1
400
 18
2728
Kerala 4
400
 3
125
 0
0
 7
525
Madhya Pradesh 7
1200
 4
1100
 0
0
 11
2300
Maharashtra 17
3570
 18
3900
 15
2700
 50
10170
Orissa 7
182
 0
0
 0
0
 7
182
Pondicherry 1
50
 0
0
 0
0
 1
50
Punjab 12
1570
 12
3050
 0
0
 24
4620
Rajasthan 12
1290
 9
1050
 0
0
 21
2340
Sikkim 1
15
 0
0
 0
0
 1
15
Tamil Nadu 13
3880
 4
526
 0
0
 17
4406
Tripura 1
10
 0
0
 0
0
 1
10
Uttar Pradesh 7
1540
 33
6664
 0
0
 40
8204
West Bengal 2
216
 0
0
 2
820
 4
1036
Total 138
25790
 113
21920
 33
11260
 284
58970
By State Registering Authorities

Andhra Pradesh
0
0
9
588
0
0
9
588
Bihar
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Delhi
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Goa
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Gujarat
3
110
1
390
1
30
5
530
Haryana
0
0
23
1200
2
130
25
1330
Himachal Pradesh
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Karnataka
2
75
14
615
0
0
16
690
Kerala
7
365
4
113
2
35
13
513
Madhya Pradesh
3
50
0
0
2
20
5
70
Maharashtra
18
636
50
1675
23
695
91
3006
Orissa
1
30
0
0
0
0
1
30
Pondicherry
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Punjab
1
60
19
755
0
0
20
815
Rajasthan
2
47
8
547
0
0
10
594
Sikkim
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Tamil Nadu
12
485
12
345
0
0
24
830
Tripura
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Uttar Pradesh
25
746
147
4177
0
0
172
4923
West Bengal
0
0
3
90
0
0
3
90
Total
74
2604
290
10495
30
910
394
14009
Total (Central + State registration)
212
28394
403
32415
63
12170
678
72979

Source: GOI, 2002.

Annex Table 2.6 Crossbred cattle population in India by state: 200

State/Union territories
Cattle
Milk cattle
Total milk cattle
Crossbred
Indigenous
Andhra Pradesh
10602070
227559
143062
1657721
Arunachal Pradesh
452920
2330
51855
54185
Assam
8000304
84327
1264863
1349190
Bihar #
-
-
-
-
Gujarat
6748835
134840
1346015
1480855
Goa
87978
3236
11652
14888
Haryana
2399832
166773
305693
472466
Himachal Pradesh
2094511
161419
294892
456311
Jammu and Kashmir
3175473
271513
427023
698536
Karnataka
10831134
522553
1757415
2279968
Kerala##
3396335
785357
329657
1115014
Madhya Pradesh
19496874
58384
3090922
3149306
Chhatisgarh
8852544
26904
1093102
1120006
Maharashtra
18070537
732957
2181531
2914488
Manipur
508264
12865
47824
60689
Meghalaya
738262
7322
131332
138654
Mizoram
83312
2492
3999
6491
Nagaland
383308
28490
34253
62743
Orissa
13810489
234057
1705325
1939382
Punjab
2638978
631135
197287
828422
Rajasthan
12141402
75376
2408575
2483891
Sikkim
143024
13517
15031
28548
Tamil Nadu
9046538
144617
131761
276378
Tripura
1227568
18438
253841
272279
Uttar Pradesh and Uttranchal
22047295
444160
2937289
3381449
West Bengal#
17831665
296753
2740176
3036929
Andaman and Nicobar Islands
60180
1494
10866
12360
Chandigarh
7254
3773
357
4130
Delhi
95660
31816
19461
51277
Pondicherry
3399
209
339
548
Lakshadweep
122621
16850
6228
23078
Daman and Diu
5450
2
625
627
India **
175055016
5141458
24229351
29370809
Note: #: Census work not initiated in these states/union territories; ##: Based on 1996 census data; **: Total Excludes Bihar/Jharkhand and Dadra and Nagar Haveli.

Source: GOI, 2003.

 Annex Table 2.7 Veterinary institutions in India by state, as of March 31, 1999
States/Union Territories
Veterinary Hospitals/ Polyclinics
Veterinary Dispensaries
Veterinary Aid Center/Stockmen Center Mobile Dispensaries
Andhra Pradesh
285
1808
2889
Arunachal Pradesh
1
93
169
Assam
26
434
1213
Bihar*
62
1154
3832
Goa
4
26
52
Gujarat
14
453
553
Haryana
553
857
751
Himachal Pradesh
334
1520
14
Jammu and Kashmir
195
146
460
Karnataka
244
803
2191
Kerala
278
831
22
Madhya Pradesh$
772
2445
90
Maharashtra
31
1156
2134
Manipur
55
101
29
Meghalaya
4
59
79
Mizoram
5
40
101
Nagaland
4
27
133
Orissa
13
527
2937
Punjab
1261
1535
45
Rajasthan
1319
285
1276
Sikkim
12
25
58
Tamil Nadu
168
828
4649
Tripura
9
44
371
Uttar Pradesh#
2044
2973
2720
West Bengal
110
612
1360
Chandigarh
5
8
1
Delhi
48
24
1
Lakshadweep
2
7
7
Pondicherry
3
14
4
Total
7872
18845
28195

Note: *: Including Jharkhand, $: Including Chattishgarh, #: Including Uttaranchal.

Source: Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics - 2002.

Annex Table 2.8 Incidence of major livestock diseases in India, January through December 2001
Disease Name
Species Name
Outbreaks
Attack
Deaths
Foot and Mouth Disease
Bovine
2638
62499
1274
Ovine/Caprine
21
12542
208
Swine
28
163
29
NS
789
11757
28
Buffalo
14
6781
105
Subtotal
3490
93742
1644
Haemorrhagic Septicaemia
Bovine
1150
6177
2867
Ovine/Caprine
11
1439
149
Buffalo
410
2399
894
Sheep and Goat
0
21
10
NS
32
505
39
Subtotal
1603
10541
3959
Black Quarter
Bovine
840
2905
1273
Ovine
0
45
41
Buffalo
11
106
44
Subtotal
851
3056
1358
Anthrax
Bovine
157
690
417
Ovine/Caprine
128
456
388
Buffalo
3
15
13
NS
5
10
7
Subtotal
293
1171
825
Fascioliasis
Bovine
625
5165
4
Ovine/Caprine
52
1385
59
Buffalo
9
24
0
Swine
2
2
0
NS
83
9273
368
Subtotal
771
15849
431
Enterotoxaemia
Ovine/Caprine
421
4340
1694
Subtotal
421
4340
1694
Blue Tongue
Ovine/Caprine
710
17983
1884
Subtotal
710
17983
1884
Contagious Caprine Pleuro-Pneumonia
Ovine/Caprine
16
964
197
Subtotal
16
964
197
Amphistomiasis
Bovine
231
3993
14
Caprine
25
311
2
Buffalo
3
9
0
NS
8
190
0
Subtotal
267
4503
16
Schistosomiasis
Bovine
37
257
0
Subtotal
37
257
0
Salmanellosis
Swine
24
336
6
Bovine
1
100
23
Subtotal
25
436
29
Coccidiosis
Bovine
104
17840
373
Ovine/Caprine
62
3745
0
Swine
32
569
47
Avian
962
134449
7690
Buffalo
31
202
0
NS
129
1053
194
Subtotal
1320
157858
8304
Ranikhet (New Castle) Disease
Avian
1387
71478
27994
Subtotal
1387
71478
27994
Rabies
Bovine
83
384
297
Canine
20
71
70
Buffalo
6
43
41
Caprine
10
65
65
NS
11
91
75
Subtotal
130
654
548
Babesiosis
Bovine
447
9454
26
Buffalo
15
33
0
Caprine
27
196
0
Camel
1
1
0
NS
2
56
1
Subtotal
492
9740
27
Mastitis
Bovine
155
25624
9
Buffalo
20
162
0
Caprine
26
3940
0
Subtotal
201
29726
9
Brucellosis
Bovine
2
34
1
Ovine/Caprine
1
26
0
Subtotal
3
60
1
Source: Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics 2002, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)