Economic analysis of farming and wild collection of seaweeds in Ramanathapuram District, Tamil Nadu
CMFRI Repository
View Archive InfoField | Value | |
Relation |
http://eprints.cmfri.org.in/12458/
|
|
Title |
Economic analysis of farming and wild collection of seaweeds in Ramanathapuram District, Tamil Nadu
|
|
Creator |
Johnson, B
Narayanakumar, R Nazar, A K A Kaladharan, P Gopakumar, G |
|
Subject |
Seaweed
Fisheries Economics |
|
Description |
The commercially important red alga Kappaphycus alvarezii is widely cultivated along Tamil Nadu coast. Apart from farming, wild collection of seaweed is also being practiced by fishers for their livelihoods. The present study on economics and constraints of farming and wild collection of seaweeds was undertaken in the Ramanathapuram District of Tamil Nadu, employing an expost-facto research design. The study found that the total cost of production for fabricating one bamboo raft (12 x 12 feet) was `1,050/-. The crop duration was 45 days and four to six crops were harvested in a year. The average yield was 200-260 kg per raft per crop. The price of harvested kappaphycus on wet and dry weight basis were `4 and `37.50 per kg respectively. Majority of seaweed farmers earned around `50,000/- to 1,00,000/- annually and the profit margin was 60%. The average gross revenue per trip per group of five members for wild collection of seaweed worked out to `6,700/- and the capital productivity was 0.30. It is interesting to note that about 20% of the respondents were those who left fishing and switched to farming and wild collection of seaweeds.
|
|
Date |
2017
|
|
Type |
Article
PeerReviewed |
|
Format |
text
|
|
Language |
en
|
|
Identifier |
http://eprints.cmfri.org.in/12458/1/IJF_64.4_Johnson%20B_Economic%20analysis%20of%20farming%20and%20wild%20collection%20of%20seaweeds.pdf
Johnson, B and Narayanakumar, R and Nazar, A K A and Kaladharan, P and Gopakumar, G (2017) Economic analysis of farming and wild collection of seaweeds in Ramanathapuram District, Tamil Nadu. Indian Journal of Fisheries, 64 (4). pp. 94-99. |
|