Evaluation study on Soil Conservation in Kerala 2011-12

Government of Kerala  	
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 	
Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation in 
Kerala 2011-12 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Department of Economics & Statistics 
Thiruvananthapuram 
2014

Government of Kerala 	
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 	
Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation in Kerala  
2011-12 	
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
D	
EPARTMENT OF 	ECONOMICS 	&	 STATISTICS	 	
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM	 
2014

PREFACE 
 
 
 	
  One of the most valuable gifts of nature to mankind is soil .For the maintenance of soil, 
adequate protection and conservation is necessary. Due to the peculiarity of the rainfall and 
topography of the state, soil conservation assumes importance in our planning process. Heavy soil 
erosion results in the loss of fertility and moisture content of the earth’s surface and diminishing rate 
of agricultural production. Hence Government is implementing various soil conservation measures 
through the soil conservation department, local bodies etc ,for maintaining the fertility and moisture 
content of the surface soil. 
  The Evaluation study of these schemes has been done by the Directorate of Economics and Statistics 
for all districts except Wayanad where the direct implementation and evaluation of the schemes are 
done by the Central Agency.   
  This report relates to the survey results of 51 schemes completed by the Soil Conservation 
Department and various agencies.  The field survey was conducted during the agricultural year 2011-
12.  The schemes implemented and completed before five years are taken up for study so that full 
benefit of the scheme could be evaluated and assessed.  This evaluation study results may be much of 
use to Administrators, Statisticians, Research Scholars and Agricultural Geologists and others  
interested in the subject. 
  The tabulation was done in the Evaluation Division of this Directorate.  The Report of the 
survey has been prepared by Sri. Suresh Kumar N, Deputy Director , Sri. Gopa kumar R, Research 
Officer, Smt. Nazeema Begum.Z, Research Assistant , Smt. Minimol S, Statistical Assistant Gr I , Smt 
Gracy K K ,Statistical Assistant GrI, and Smt.Sreekala.U Statistical Assistant Gr I, under the guidance 
of Smt. K. Sathiabhama, Additional Director.  In this context I acknowledge my thanks to the staff of 
Soil Conservation Department and other local bodies for their valuable suggestion and whole hearted 
co-operation in the successful conduct of the survey.  	
 
 
 
V RAMACHANDRAN 
Thiruvananthapuram,                     DIRECTOR

CONTENTS 
 
 
 
Chapter – I Pages 
1.1 Introduction  1 
1.2  Objectives and Methodology  1 
1.3  Problems of Soil Erosion  4 
1.4 Methods	
 of Soil Conservation Programmes 	5 
1.5  Land Use Pattern of the State  5 
 
Chapter – II  
2.1  Impact of Soil Conservation Programmes on Land 
use and crop pattern 6 
2.2  Cost Benefit Analysis o f the Soil Conservat ion 
Programmes 31 
 
Chapter – III  
3.1 General Observations  36 
3.2 Occupational Profile 39 
3.3  Summary of Findings  40

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2011-12 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	1	
Chapter – I 	
 	
1.1 Introduction  	
 
 
Land is one of the basic resources of a nation.  Productive land is the source of human 
sustenance and security.  The future of the country and its teeming millions depend to a large 
extent, the conservation of its fertile soil through the proper land use and scientific 
agricultural practices. 	
 
  Soil conservation means applying of all necessary practices to maintain the capabilit y 
of land for which it is suited and to improve the productivity of agricultural land.  Considering 
the importance of soil conservation our plan provisions enhanced for optimizing the use of 
land resources.  An evaluation study in this front can be helpful for developing much more 
suitable conservation measures for the State 
 
1.2 Objectives and Methodology of the Survey:- 
 
The main objectives of the evaluation study are:  	
 
1. To assess the benefit o f the programme part icularly in relat ion to the cult ivat ion o f 
seasonal and perennial crops. 
2. To throw light on various aspects like cost benefit analysis, production potential etc 
3. To estimate the extent of additional area brought under cultivation consequent on the 
implementation of the programme. 
4. To study the effects of the work carried out by the Soil Conservation Department in 
t his d ire ct io n 
 
For this schemes were selected which were executed five years before ie during   
2006-07 in the State by the Soil Conservation Department and other local bodies.  The study 
covered all the districts of the State except Wayanad where the same is directly done by the 
Central Government.  The list of beneficiaries under each scheme is obtained fro m the So il 
Conservation Department and other local bodies. The beneficiaries are selected by stratified 
random sampling method on the basis of the area of the holding.  The holdings are stratified 
in to four viz. 
Holdings with less than 1 acre  - Stratum I 
Holdings with 1 acre or more but less than 3 acres  - Stratum II 
Holdings with 3 acre or more but less than 5 acres  - Stratum III 
Holdings with 5 acres and above  - Stratum IV

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2011-12 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	2	
 
Selection of Beneficiaries  
 
  Selection of beneficiaries is done by the District Level Officers from the list of 
beneficiaries collected from Soil Conservation Department and from other local bodies.  A 
total number of 25 beneficiaries are selected from each scheme by simple random sampling 
covering all the above 4 stratum with at least 6 from each stratum.  If in any stratum, the total 
number of beneficiaries in the frame is less than the number to be selected the shortfall is 
compensated from another stratum with the nearest area of the holding.  If the beneficiaries in 
a scheme are less than 25, all of them are selected.  For the purpose of comparison 5 control 
plots are also selected from the scheme area, where the soil conservation works are not carried 
out under any scheme.  The district wise select ion details o f beneficiary plots and control 
plots are given in the table 1 & 1 (a).	
 	
Table – 1 
Statement showing stratum wise distribution of selected beneficiaries 
(Area in Acres)	
  
  
Districts No. of 
schemes 
selected Stratum – I  Stratum – II  Stratum – III  Stratum – IV  Total 	
Sl. 
No No. Area 
in 
acre No. Area 
in 
acre No. Area 
in 
acre No. Area 
in 
acre No. Area 
in 
acre 
1  2  3  4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 
1 	Thiruvananthapuram  5  108 23.23  15 20.28  2  6.00  0  0  125 49.51 	
2 	Kollam  5 125 19.37 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 19.37 	
3 	Pathanamthitta  3 125 43.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 43.03 	
4 	Alappuzha  5  123 8.38  2 3.50  0  0  0  0  125 11.88 	
5 	Kottayam  2 51 29.81 72 128.01  1 3.00  1 7.50 125 168.32 	
6 	Idukki  5 36 17.24 88 155.58  1 4.50  0  0 125 177.32 	
7 	Eranakulam  4  97 30.96  20 35.25  6 21.20  2 12.44  125 99.85 	
8 	Thrissur  5 29 22.28 36 71.35 29 115.04 31 258.10 125 466.77 	
9 	Palakkad  5  49 22.67  52 89.56  16 59.77  8 56.73  125 228.73 	
10 	Malappuram  5 51 22.50 59 112.05 15 59.28  0  0 125 193.83 	
11 	Kozhikkode  5  66 28.39  54 77.45  5 19.67  0  0  125 125.51 	
12 	Kasaragod  2  23 16.13  67 117.74  24 90.95  11 66.13  125 290.95 	
Total 	51 883 284 465 811  99 379  53 401 1500 1875

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2011-12 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	3
 
 
 
Table –I (a) 
Statement showing stratum wise distribution of selected Control Plots 
(Area in acres)  	
  
Districts No. of 
schemes 
selected Stratum – I  Stratum – II  Stratum – III  Stratum – IV  Total 
Sl. 
No No. Area 
in acre  No. Area 
in acre  No. Area 
in acre  No. Area 
in acre  No. Area 
in acre 
1  2  3  4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 12 13 
1 	Thiruvananthapuram  5 21 7.11 4 6.10 0  0 0  0 25 13.21 	
2 	Kollam  5 25 2.61 0  0 0  0 0  0 25 2.61 	
3 	Pathanamthitta  3 22 12.64 3 3.70 0  0 0  0 25 16.34 	
4 	Alappuzha  5 25 4.51 0  0 0  0 0  0 25 4.51 	
5 	Kottayam  2 6 3.45 3 6.25 1 3.05 0  0 10 12.75 	
6 	Idukki  5 15 3.62 9 13.75 0  0 1 5.00 25 22.37 	
7 	Eranakulam  4 18 6.91 2 2.19 0  0 0  0 20 9.1 	
8 	Thrissur  5 5 3.30 11 21.17 6 22.55 3 17.60 25 64.62 	
9 	Palakkad  5 9 6.10 11 18.35 4 12.10 1 5.00 25 41.55 	
10 	Malappuram  5 17 6.20 8 12.35 0  0 0  0 25 18.55 	
11 	Kozhikkode  5 7 3.36 10 17.30 7 25.29 1 5.30 25 51.25 	
12 	Kasaragod  2 2 1.25 5 9.00 2 7.20 1 6.40 10 23.85 	
Total  51  172 61.06 66 110.16 20 70.19  7  39.3 265 280.71 	
The total number of beneficiaries comes to 1500  About 58.87% of the beneficiaries are 
having holding less than one acre, 31% are having holdings one acre or more but less than 3 
acres, 6.6% are having holding 3 acre or more but less than 5 acres and only 3.53% of the 
beneficiaries are having holdings of more than 5 acres.  In order to compare the benefits of the 
implementation of Soil Conservation Programmes, control plots were also selected.  Its 
distribution is 64.91%, 24.9%, 7.55% and 2.64                        
% respectively under stratum I, II, III and IV. 
                                                                                                                                                                   
  Fo llowing schedules were used for collecting the details fro m beneficiary plots 
and control plots. 
 
Schedule I  -  List of selected beneficiaries 
Schedule II  -  Detailed study of the selected beneficiaries 
Schedule III  -  List of control plots 
Schedule IV  -  Detailed enumeration of the control plots

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2011-12 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	4	
 
1.3 Problems of Soil Erosion 
  
Soil erosion means the disappearance of the topsoil by the action of wind and water.  
Ult imately so il erosion leads the desert ification of land.  Degradat ion o f natural resources has 
led to many indirect damages, such as increasing extent of wasteland, soil erosion, land 
sliding, etc. all these cumulatively or independently has affected agricultural or independently 
has affected agricultural productivity.  Unlike other parts of the country, Kerala has some 
unique land form related aspects such as over 90% of the geographical area is either in 
midland or high land category.  The average rate of soil erosion in the country, to the tune of 
16.3 t/ha/yr – has been alarming and has to be checked.  In hilly areas, the rate is much higher, 
i.e. about 30 to 50 t/ha/yr/, considering that about 5 to 10 cm of the top soil (ranging from 0.3 
to 1.0 m depth) is being lost every year due to lead management practices.  It has been 
estimated 9-5 lakh hectares of cultivated land in the State is having soil erosion problems. 
 
 
Responsibility for prevention of erosion    
 
  Land which is one of the precious gift of the nature embodies soil, water and 
associated flora and fauna involving the total ecosystem.  The topography of the land plays 
the most important role in so il erosion.  Kerala is a narrow strip of land (width varies from 15 
to 120 Km) situated on the Western Slopes of the Western Ghats ( the Sahyadri).  The very 
steep slopes facilitate quick run o ff o f the rainfall result ing in low t ime of concentration poor 
ground water recharge.  This high velocity of the surface flow causes soil displacement and 
movement.  The surface soil gets washed away along with the running water.    The major 
portion of the state is laterite and as such are more prone are erosion.  The different forms of 
soil erosion causes huge damage to Kerala’s economy every year.  Many people die every 
year due to land slides.

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2011-12 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	5	
 
1.4 Methods of Soil Conservation Programme 
 
Soil Conservation practices are mainly grouped into two categories viz.  Agronomical 
and Engineering measures. Agronomic measures are comparatively low costly such as 
contour ploughing / optimal fertilizing organic farming, etc.  Engineering measures include 
contour bunding, land leveling, construction of check dams and water harvest ing structure, 
etc. At present various watershed programmes are being implemented in the state for effective 
preservation and management of the natural resources. 
 
1.5 Land Use Particulars of the State 
 
 There has been a significant change in the land use of the state over the years.  On 
many occasions the change is adversely affecting the environment by way of intensified soil 
erosion, water logging, convertion of paddy lands, etc. are some of the examples.  Cultivation 
of very steep lands without adopting scientific conservation practices lead to heavy soil 
erosion.  Use of chemicals on a large scale for agricultural productions leave dangerous 
quantities of the residues in the soil and the water sources.

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2011-12 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	6	
Chapter -  II 
2.1  Impact of Soil Conservation Programme on Land use and Crop Pattern   
 
    Before 1994-95, soil conservation programme was executed by 
Department of Agriculture/Soil and Water conservation, etc.  There was increased 
employment to rural people due to soil and water conservation works and this improved 
income of people and reduced migration of labour from these places to outside.  Soil and 
water conservation structures in arable and non arable lands reduced soil erosion, soil loss, 
run-off water, etc. and increased rainwater infiltration, ground water table, surface storage, 
cropping intensity, productivity of crops, etc.  As long as works were carried out based on 
funding by Government and subsides provided for supporting income generating enterprises, 
there was positive impact. 
After 1994-95, there was a proposal from the Government that people should 
contribute 5-10% or more  towards soil and water conservation works.  Farmers contributed 
in so me of the watersheds based on the direct benefits derived fro m such act ivit ies; 
Soil can be well maintained through bunding  (mechanical and mechanical-cum-
vegetative barriers), deep ploughing, leveling, smoothening, etc.  Bunding was accepted by 
farmers to strengthen exist ing bunds wit hout any obstruction in their plot   Moisture 
conservation on measures increased yield magically. 
Farmers in different parts reported that the fact that the sustainability of agriculture is 
only possible by so il and water conservat ion measures.  They also reported that soil erosio n 
can be minimized and irrigation potentials can be improved through soil and water 
conservation measures.  In addition, vegetation covering the soil is a must for minimizing soil 
loss even further. 
Land Use particulars of Beneficiary plots 
  Table Nos. 3 and 3(a) reveals the land use particulars of beneficiary plots and control 
plots respectively.  It gives us certain positive trends while comparing with the area before 
and after soil conservation programme.  Area increased from. 1664.19 acres to 1698.85 acre 
after the implementation of soil conservation programme.  An additional area of 34.66 acre of

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2011-12 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	7	
land has brought under cultivation which was not cultivated earlier.  Hence it can be stated 
that 2.08% of area over the area cultivated before soil conservation programme is due to the 
implementation of soil conservation measures.  In other words area under cultivation has 
increased from 88.75% to 90.60% by decreasing the current fallow. 
          On examining the district wise data a marginal  increase is noted in the area additionally 
brought under cultivation in Malappuram, Kasaragod,Kottayam, ,. 
      In   control plots also the land use is more or less same as in the area of beneficiary plots, 
before soil conservation programme.  Hence it is suited for a comparison with the beneficiar y 
plots.  
In Kannur district the list of schemes was not available for the survey.

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
8	
 	
Table  - 2 	
District wise details of area, cost and number of beneficiaries 	
Sl 
District  Area (Acres)  Cost (Rs.) Number of beneficiaries 	No. Total Selected 	1 2  3 4  5 6 	1 
Thiruvananthapuram 49.52 330318 187 125 	
2 
Kollam 19.37 1673567 125 125 	
3 
Pathanamthitta 43.03 16314104 829 125 	
4 
Alappuzha 11.88 3833823 125 125 	
5 
Kottayam 168.32 17542000 125 125 	
6 
Idukki 177.32 3683543 125 125 	
7 
Eranakulam 99.85 2810723 125 125 	
8 
Thrissur 466.77 13001268 330 125 	
9 
Palakkad 228.73 2882057 125 125 	
10 
Malappuram 193.83 5558236 125 125 	
11 
Kozhikkode 125.51 100004 125 125 	
12 
Kasaragod 290.95 1272470 125 125 	
Total 
1875.086900211324711500 	
 	
 
 
 	
 
Table – 3    Land use particulars of Beneficiary Plots 
              (Area in Acres)

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
9 Sl. No  Districts Area cultivate	
d
Current fallow	
Before SC Wor
k
After SC Wor
k
Before SC Wor
k
After SC Wor
k 	
Area % Area % Area % Area % 	
1  2 3 4 5 6 7 8   	1 
Thiruvananthapuram 45.16 91.20 45.3 
91.48
1.73 
3.49
1.61 
3.25 	
2 
Kollam 15.34 
79.19
15.34 
79.19
0 
0.00
0 
0.00 	
3 
Pathanamthitta 36.06 
83.80
36.29 
84.34
0.45 
1.05
0.25 
0.58 	
4 
Alappuzha 7.39 
62.21
6.98 
58.75
2.10 
17.68
1.90 
15.99 	
5 
Kottayam 143.2 
85.08
149.45 
88.79
10.21 
6.07
4.56 
2.71 	
6 
Idukki 167.03 
94.20
167.88 
94.68
1.26 
0.71
0.30 
0.17 	
7 
Eranakulam 93.38 
93.52
93.38 
93.52
0 
0
0 
0 	
8 
Thrissur 455.64 
97.62
455.64 
97.62
0 
0.00
0 
0.00 	
9 
Palakkad 219.24 
95.85
219.24 
95.85
1.38 
0.60
1.38 
0.60 	
10 
Malappuram 147.29 
75.99
168.51 
86.94
38.47 
19.85
20.54 
10.60 	
11 
Kozhikkode 118.95 
94.77
118.88 
94.72
1.19 
0.95
1.05 
0.84 	
12 
Kasaragod 215.51 
74.07
221.96 
76.29
26.50 
9.11
20.05 
6.89 	
Total 1664.19 88.75 1698.85 90.60 83.29 4.44 51.64 2.75 	
 
 
 
 
Table – 3   Contd..  	
Sl. No  Districts Other use  Area not cultivated  Total 	
Before SC Work  After SC Work  Before SC Work  After SC Work  Before SC Work  After SC Work 	Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % 	
1  2  11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 	1 
Thiruvananthapuram 2.60 
5.25 
2.60 
5.25 
0.03 
0.06 
0.01 
0.02 49.52 100 49.52 100 	
2 
Kollam 3.93 
20.29 
3.93 
20.29 
0.10 
0.52 
0.10 
0.52 19.37 100 19.37 100 	
3 
Pathanamthitta 6.32 
14.69 
6.29 
14.62 
0.20 
0.46 
0.20 
0.46 43.03 100 43.03 100

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
10 4 	
Alappuzha 2.29 
19.28 
2.90 
24.41 
0.10 
0.84 
0.10 
0.84 11.88 100 11.88 100 	
5 
Kottayam 9.72 
5.77 
9.12 
5.42 
5.19 
3.08 
5.19 
3.08 168.32 100 168.32 100 	
6 
Idukki 8.73 
4.92 
8.84 
4.99 
0.30 
0.17 
0.30 
0.17 177.32 100 177.32 100 	
7 
Eranakul am 6.47 
6.48  
6.47 
6.48  
0 
0  
0 
0   99.85   100  99.85  100 	
8 
Thrissur 11.13 
2.38 
11.13 
2.38 
0 
0.00 
0 
0.00 466.77 100 466.77 100 	
9 
Palakkad 8.07 
3.53 
8.07 
3.53 
0.04 
0.02 
0.04 
0.02 228.73 100 228.73 100 	
10 
Malappuram 7.87 
4.06 
4.58 
2.36 
0.20 
0.10 
0.20 
0.10 193.83 100 193.83 100 	
11 
Kozhikkode 2.85 
2.27 
3.06 
2.44 
2.52 
2.01 
2.52 
2.01 125.51 100 125.51 100 	
12 
Kasaragod 21.33 
7.33 
21.23 
7.30 
27.61 
9.49 
27.71 
9.52 290.95 100 290.95 100 	
Total 91.31
4.87 88.22
4.70 36.29 
1.94 36.37
1.94 1875.08
100 1875.08 100 	
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 3(a) Land Use particulars (Control Plots)  	
Sl. No  Districts Area cultivated  Current follow  Other use  Area not cultivated  Total 
Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % 	
1 2  34567 89101112 	1 
Thiruvananthapuram 12.69 
96.06 
0.08 
0.61 
0.44 
3.33 
0.00 
0.00 
13.21 100 	
2 
Kollam 1.6 
61.30 
0.03 
1.15 
0.75 
28.74 
0.23 
8.81 
2.61 100 	
3 
Pathanamthitta 12.81 
78.40 
0.47 
2.88 
2.96 
18.12 
0.10 
0.61 
16.34 100

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
11 4 	
Alappuzha 3.5 
77.61 
0.22 
4.88 
0.77 
17.07 
0.02 
0.44 
4.51 100 	
5 
Kottayam 8.95 
70.20 
0.45 
3.53 
3.35 
26.27 
0.00 
0.00 
12.75 100 	
6 
Idukki 21.11 
94.37 
0.00 
0.00 
1.16 
5.19 
0.10 
0.45 
22.37 100 	
7 
Eranakul am 8.44 
92.75  
0.00 
0.00  
0.66 
7.25  
0.00 
0.00  
9.10 100  	
8 
Thrissur 63.47 
98.22 
0.00 
0.00 
1.15 
1.78 
0.00 
0.00 
64.62 100 	
9 
Palakkad 38.44 
92.52 
0.00 
0.00 
3.11 
7.48 
0.00 
0.00 
41.55 100 	
10 
Malappuram 15.95 
85.98 
2.45 
13.21 
0.15 
0.81 
0.00 
0.00 
18.55 100 	
11 
Kozhikkode 48.32 
94.28 
0.55 
1.07 
2.18 
4.25 
0.20 
0.39 
51.25 100 	
12 
Kasaragod 14.7 
61.64 
3.50 
14.68 
2.25 
9.43 
3.40 
14.26 
23.85 100 	
13 
Total 
249.98 89.05 7.75 2.76 18.93 6.74 4.05 1.44 
280.71 100

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	12	
 
Crop Pattern 
 
  In order to reduce  the soil loss an appropriate cropping pattern is essential.  The 
selection of suitable vegetation that form good canopy can reduce erosion since soil loss is 
governed by the extent of exposed land surface.  The binding force of the roots also offers 
good resistance to erosion.  Grass roots have excellent soil binding property.  Legumes are 
also good soil binders.  The grasses, legumes and tree crops are classified as erosion 
preventing or soil conserving crops while cereals, tapioca, ginger, etc. are erosion 
permitting/erosion favouring crops. 
  
Depending upon the capability class to which a land belongs and the socio-economic 
needs of the people, the appropriate crops can be selected to achieve maximum conservation 
of soil and water. 
 
Contour Farming 
  
Contour farming refers to village practices of applying all treatments along contour; 
i.e. across the direction of the slope.  The crops are cultivated along contour ridges and 
furrows.  In regions of low rainfall contour farming helps in the conservation of rainwater and 
in human areas it reduces soil loss and increases recharge of aquifers.  This practice can 
minimize the effects of flash floods and droughts. 
  
Mixed farming, intercropping, mixed cropping; multistoried cropping, etc. are also 
beneficial in controlling so il erosion. 
  
The growing of perennial horticultural crops, including plantation crops will give a 
permanent protective cover for the soil. In high rainfall areas of the humid tropics this higher 
level tree cover for the soil helps in reducing the erosive action of highly intensive rainfa ll. 
  
Consequent in the introduction of the so il conservat ion programmes significant  
changes in the cropping pattern occurred which favours perennial crops.  The area under 
perennial crops has increased from 1378.31 acre to 1465.50 acre.  It showed an increase of

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	13	
6.32%.  At the same time the percentage change occurred in the cultivation of seasonal crops 
recorded as 14.20 %.  From this we can arrive at the conclusion that the farmers have shown a 
tendency to cultivate perennial crops in sloppy regions where the soil conservation measures 
are carried out.  The cultivation of seasonal crops in such regions is likely to increase soil 
erosion.  In seasonal crops the cultivation of Plantain,Tapioca, Banana are exhibited increases.  
The respective percentage changes recorded as 31.44%.12.51%,6.61%   
  
Table No. 5 reveals that after the introduction of soil conservation programmes, 
Rubber has occupied the largest area under perennial crops; the percentage increase is 10.7 %.  
coconut comes next with an increase of  1.95%. The area under Arecanut has decreased to 
15.92% after the Soil Conservation Programme. 
  
On going through the district wise data, it is noted that the cropping area under 
different crops are interchanged according to the suitability of land.

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
14	
 
Table – 4 
Crop Pattern (Area wise)  	
Sl. No.  Districts Perennial crops
Seasonal Crops 	
Before SC 
work % After SC 
work % Before SC 
work % After SC 
work % 	
1  2  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 	1 
Thiruvananthapuram 33.49 
87.03 
36.84 
83.01 
4.99 
12.97 
7.54 
16.99 	
2 
Kollam 11.90 
87.37 
20.82 
95.16 
1.72 
12.63 
1.06 
4.84 	
3 
Pathanamthitta 31.78 
97.1 
32.40 
96.57 
0.95 
2.9 
1.15 
3.43 	
4 
Alappuzha 8.54 
87.41 
10.38 
92.6 
1.23 
12.59 
0.83 
7.4 	
5 
Kottayam 124.70 
96.66 
129.96 
96.7 
4.31 
3.34 
4.44 
3.3 	
6 
Idukki 137.63 
98.54 
154.90 
94.55 
2.04 
1.46 
8.93 
5.45 	
7 
Eranakulam 81.51 
98.74  
81.51 
98.80  
1.04 
1.26  
0.99 
1.20  	
8 
Thrissur 389.26 
99.99 
390.58 
99.99 
0.03 
0.01 
0.05 
0.01 	
9 
Palakkad 165.55 
99.08 
168.50 
98.9 
1.54 
0.92 
1.88 
1.1 	
10 
Malappuram 142.06 
99.92 
165.84 
99.63 
0.12 
0.08 
0.62 
0.37 	
11 
Kozhikkode 91.61 
86.57 
99.87 
91.46 
14.21 
13.43 
9.32 
8.54 	
12 
Kasaragod 160.28 
92.48 
173.90 
92.14 
13.04 
7.52 
14.83 
7.86 	
Total 1378.31 96.82 1465.5  96.6 45.22  3.18 51.64  3.4

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
15	
Table – 4  Contd.. 
 
Sl. 
Districts Total Gross area cropped 	
No  Before SC work  %  After SC work %	1 2     12  13 14	1 Thiruvananthapuram 38.48100 
44.38100 	2 Kollam 13.62100 
21.88100 	3 Pathanamthitta 32.73100 
33.55100 	4 Alappuzha 9.77100 
11.21100 	5 Kottayam 129.01100 
134.40100 	6 Idukki 139.67100 
163.83100 	7 Eranakulam 82.55 100  
82.50 100  	8 Thrissur 389.29100 
390.63100 	9 Palakkad 167.09100 
170.38100 	10 Malappuram 142.18100 
166.46100 	11 Kozhikode 105.82100 
109.19100 	12 Kasaragod 173.32100 
188.73100 	
Total 1423.53
100 1517.14
100

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
16	
Table 5 – Area under selected perennial crops 	
Sl. 
No Districts Coconut Arecanut Cashew
Before SC 
work After SC 
work % increase Before SC 
work After SC 
work % increase Before SC 
work After SC 
work % increase 	
1  2  3 4 5 6 7 89
10 11 	1 Thiruvananthapuram 
14.22 15.16 6.61 .06 .11 83.33 .08 .08 0 	
2 Kollam 
3.83 6.34 65.54 .19 .41 115.79 0.17 0.25 47.06 	
3 Pathanamthitta 
3.38 3.57 5.62 .09 .09 0 0.4 0.4 0 	
4 Alappuzha 
7.21 8.29 14.98 .17 .34 100 0.27 0.33 22.22 	
5 Kottayam 
16.74 17.08 2.03 .54 .55 1.85 1.16 1.16 0 	
6 Idukki 
5.54 7.5 35.38 8.82 7.73 -12.36 0 0 0 	
7 Ernakulam 
14.18 14.18 0. 1.2 1.2 0 0 0 0 	
8 Trissur 
109.41 108.8 -0.56 4.84 5.46 12.81 0 0 0 	
09 Palakkad 
106.27 109.22 2.78 3.04 3.04 0 0.22 0.22 0 	
10 Malappuram 
58.88 59.47 1.00 .18 .18 0 17.28 13.86 -19.79 	
11 Kozhikode 
46.64 44.79 -3.97 15.57 8.59 -44.83 1.4 2.36 68.57 	
12 Kasaragod 
29.02 29.02 0 9.15 9.17 0.22 7.57 7.07 -6.61 	
Total 
415.32 423.42 1.9543.85
36.87 -15.92 28.55 25.73 -9.88 	
 	
 
 
 
Table – 5   Contd..  	
 
Sl. Districts  Rubber Pepper
Jack Mango

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
17 No Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase 	
1  2  12  13  14 15 16 17 16 17 18 19 20 21 	1 Thiruvananthapuram 
17.01 19.05 11.99 0.91 1.21 32.97 1.12 1.06 -5.36 0.09 0.17 88.89 	
2 Kollam 
4.06 8.49 109.11 1.46 1.7 16.44 1.47 2.37 61.22 0.48 0.9  87.5 	
3 Pathanamthitta 
27.06 27.47 1.52 0.61 0.63 3.28 0.02 0.02 0 0 0  0 	
4 Alappuzha 
0 0 0 0.07 0.1 42.86 0.16 0.31 93.75 0.57 0.79  38.6 	
5 Kottayam 
97.51 102.51 5.13 4.02 4.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 	
6 Idukki 
18.49 24.78 34.02 71.04 58.46 -17.71 2.54 2.92 14.96 0 0  0 	
007 Ernakulam 
63.93 63.93 0 0.62 0.62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 	
8 Thrissur 
274.58 275.85 .46 0.22 0.26 18.18 0 0 0 0 0  0 	
9 Palakkad 
39.08 39.08 0. 1.85 1.85 0 0.09 0.09 0 15 15 0 	
10 Malappuram 
64.7 91.43 41.31 0.12 0.12 0 0.90 0.78 -13.33 0 0 0 	
11 Kozhikkode 
14.48 32.99 127.83 8.19 2.69 -67.16 1.57 1.61 2.55 0.42 0.39  -7.14 	
12 Kasaragod 
110.27 123.92 12.38 0.8 1.33 66.25 2.87 2.77 -3.48 0.41 0.41  0 	
Total 
731.17 809.5 10.71 89.91 72.99 -18.82 10.74 11.93 11.08 16.97 17.66  4.07 	
 
 
 	
 
Table – 5   Contd..  
 	
 
Sl No  Districts Coco Coffee 
Others Total 	
Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
18 1  2  12 13 14 15 16 17        20 21 22 23 	
1 Thiruvananthapuram 
0.2 0.2 0 0 0  0  0 0 0 33.49 36.84 10.00 	
2 Kollam 
0 0 0 0.01 0.01 0 .23 .35 52.17 11.90 20.82 74.9 	
3 Pathanamthitta 
0 0 0 .02 .02 0 0.00 0.00 0 31.78 32.4 1.95 	
4 Alappuzha 
00000 0 .09.22144.4 8.54 10.38 21.54 	
5 Kottayam 
4.73 4.64 -190 0 0  0 0 0  0 124.7 129.96 4.2 	
6 Idukki 
7.56 15.5 105.03 15.84 18.46 16.54 7.8 19.55 150.64 137.63 154.9 12.55 	
7 Ernakulam 
0.31 0.31 0 0 0 0 1.27 1.27 0 81.51 81.51 0 	
7 Thrissur 
00000 00.210.210389.26 390.58 0.34 	
08 Palakkad 
00000 00.000.000165.55 168.5 1.78 	
9 Malappuram 
00000 0000142.06 165.84 16.74 	
10 Kozhikkode 
1.91 4.56 138.74 0.64 0.65 1.56 0.79 1.24 22.00 91.61 99.87 9.02 	
12 Kasaragod 
0.16 0.16 0 0.03 0.05 66.67 0.00 0.00 0 173.9 160.28  -7.83 	
0Total 
14.87 25.37 70.61 16.54 19.19 16.02 10.39 22.84 119.82 1378.31 1465.5  6.33 	
 	
 
 
Table 6 – Area under selected seasonal crops 
 
(Area in Acres)  
 	
Sl No  Districts  Paddy Tapioca 
Plantain

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
19 Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase 	
1  2  3 4 5  6  7  8  9  10 11 	1 Thiruvananthapuram 
0 0 0 1.96 1.81 -7.65  2.83 5.35 89.05	
2 Kollam 
0 0 0 0.65 0.13 -
80.000.52 0.60 15.38	
3 Pathanamthitta 
0 0 0 0.75 0.85 13.33 0.17 0.25 47.06 	
4 Alappuzha 
0.63 0 -100 0.07 0.10 42.86  0.31 0.43 38.71	
5 Kottayam 
0 0 0 3.45 3.05 -
11.590.46. 0.59 28.26	
6 Idukki 
0000.64..45 641.6
71.19 3.19168.0
7	
7 Ernakulam 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.91 0.86 -5.49	
8 Trissur 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.05 66.67	
9 Palakkad 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.97 1.31 35.05	
10 Malappuram 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.06 100	
11 Kozhikkode 
0.11 0.08-
27.272.97 1.61 -
45.794.33 2.66 -38.57	
12 Kasaragod 
0.05 0.05 0 3.7 3.92 5.95 3.2 4.3 3.4.37	
Total 
0.79 0.13-
83.5414.15 15.92 12.51 14.95 19.65 31.44	
 
 
 
 
 
Table – 6 Contd.. 
 	
Sl. Districts  Ginger  Banana Vegitables
Pineapple

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
20	
No 
Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase 	1  2  12 13 14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23 	1 Thiruvananthapuram 
0.05 0.07 40.00 0 0.01 0 0.14 0.28 100 0.01 0.02 100 	
2 Kollam 
0.05 0.02-
60.000.05 0.05 0 0 0 0 0.06 0.07 16.67 	
3 Pathanamthitta 
0 0 0 0.02 0.02 0 0.01 0.03 200 0 0 0 	
4 Alappuzha 0.01 0.01 0
0 0 0 0.2 0.25 25.00 0 0 0 	
5 Kottayam 0.03 0.19 533.33
0 0.13 0 0.10 0.10 0 0.27 0.28 3.70 	
6 Idukki 
0 0.2 0 0.25 0.44 0 0 0 0 0 0.65 0 	
7 Ernakulam 
0 0 0 0.13 0.13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 	
7 Thrissur 
00 0 0 0 0 0 000 
 	
8 Palakkad 
0 0 0 0.57 0.57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 	
9 Malappuram 
0 0.05 0 0 0 0 0.05 0.15 200.00 0.04 0.36 800 	
10 Kozhikode 
1.84 0.6 -67.39 1.23 1.02 -17.07 0.27 0.22 -18.52 0.56 0.39 -
30.36 	
11 Kasaragod 
2.69 2.80 4.09 1.53 1.66 8.55 1.37 1.55 13.13 0.16 0.19 18.75 	
Total 
4.67 3.94 -15.63 3.78 4.03 6.61 2.14 2.58 20.56 1.1 1.96 78.18 	
 
 
 
 
 
Table – 6 Contd.. 
 	
Sl. Districts  Chenai  Kolacasia Others
Total

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 
21	
No 
Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase Before 
SC work After SC 
work % 
increase 	1  2  12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 	1 Thiruvananthapuram 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.99 7.54 51.10 	
2 Kollam 
0.02 0.08 300 0.2 0.07 -65.00 .17 .04 -76.5 1.72 1.06  58.5 	
3 Pathanamthitta 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.95 1.15 21.05 	
4 Alappuzha 
0 0.01 0 0.01 0.03 200.0
01.23 .83 -32.5 	
5 Kottayam 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .10 0 4.31 4.44 56.03 	
6 Idukki 
0 0 0 0 0 0 2.04 8.93 337 	
7 Ernakulam 
 1.04 .99 -4.81 	
8 Thrissur 
0 0 0 0 0 0 .03 .05 66.67 	
9 Palakkad 
0 0 0 0 0 0 1.54 1.88 22.08 	
10 Malappuram 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.12 .62 416.67 	
11 Kozhikode 
0.87 0.83 -4.60 1.58 1.55 -1.90 .45 .36 -.20. 14.21 9.32 -34.41 	
12 Kasaragod 
0 0 0 0 0 0 .34 .36 5.88 13.04 14.83 13.73 	
Total 
0.89 0.92 3.37 1.61 1.65 2.48 .96 .86 -10.42 45.22 51.64 14.20 	
 
 	
-58.5.96

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	22	
Impact of Soil Conservation Treatment on the Yield of Crops 
 For studying the impact of soil conservation treatment on the yield of crops a detailed 
survey was conducted following the “Before” and “After” method.  Details regarding the 
yield and value of crops are collected from the beneficiaries in the scheme area.  District wise 
details are presented in table No. 7 and 8 Survey results reveals that in most cases, the crop 
yields after the implementation of the programme were higher than that of before.  Therefore 
the total output from crops represented a big increase.  As much as major portion of this 
output came from perennial crops indicating improved stability in output.  Almost all 
perennial crops have also shown a marked improvement. 
  For example in Malappuram district total cropped area before soil conservation works 
was 142.18 acres.  It increases to 166.46 acres after the implementation of  soil conservation 
measures.  The increase in area is accounted as 24.28 acres.  The percentage increase recorded 
as 17.08  When we analyse the yield of perennial crops in this district it can be seen that 
production of Coconut,Rubber Cocco,Cardamom Nutmug,etc. increased.  . 
  In Idukki,Kasaragod,Kollam, and Thiruvananthapuram districts before soil 
conservation work the area were 139.67 acres, 173.32 acres, 13.62 acres and 38.48 acres 
respectively.  It increased 163.83, 188.73, 21.88, 44.38 acres after the implementation of soil 
conservation work.  Increase in area accounted as 24.28, 15.41, 8.26, 5.90 acres respectivily.   
 . 
  Production impact is also commendable.  Output of all perennial crops increased after 
soil conservation works. 
The production details of seasonal crops of these districts shows that plaintain area and 
production increased and in the case of  banana, vegitables and tapioca also the  area and 
production increased.

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	23
 
Table 7 
Crop wise yield and value of perennial crops in scheme area. 	
 
 
District Name of 
Crop Un it Before SC wor	
k	After SC wor	k 	
Quantity Value Quantity  Value Value at 
constant 
price  	
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8	
Thiruvananthapuram 
Coconut Nos  19425 96348  27880 214682 149577 
 
Arecanut Nos.  700.00 343 1500.00 810 378 
 
Pepper  Qtl.  0.42 2349  0.90 17543  8187 
 
Cashew Qtl. 0.51 1496 0.51 2805 2805 
 
Rubber  Qtl.  185.50 1283475  409.75 7815166 3538043 
 
Jack Qtl 43.18 11227 71.84 8621 5182 
 Total  	1395238   8059627 3704172 	
Kollam Pappaya  2.30	690 3.25 1950 1360 	
 
Coconut Nos 3318.00 19977 4409.00 41441 31186 
 
Arecanut Nos.  3455.00 1868 5422.00 3144 2003 
 
Pepper Qtl. 0.95 5800  1.16 224647 18400 
 
Cashew QTL 0.40 1184 0.75 5250 2800 
 
Rubber Qtl. 50.47 360155  42.62  846347 1002232 
 
Jack Qtl 15.31 5372 20.95 11821  8639 
 
Mango Qtl 1.81 1086 2.87 3496 2205 
 	Total    396132   935916 1058845 	
Pathanamthitta 
Coconut Nos 2945.00 16642 3076.00 28547 27331 
 
Arecanut Nos.  2345.00 1173 2672.00 1309 1149 
 
Pepper Qtl. 2.96 17685  3.49 72638 61607 
 
Rubber Qtl. 142.07 1012107  158.21 3191579 2865986 
 
Jack Qtl 1.00 150 1.15  490  426 
 
Coco Qtl 2.00 3520 2.35 7040 5991 
 	Total  1051277 3301603 2962490

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	24	
(Table 7 Contd..) 
 
 
 	
1  2 3 4 5 6 7  8 	
Alappuzha 
Coconut Nos 17787.00 94817 20972.00 187295 158851 
 
Arecanut Nos.  3020.00 1150 3625.00 1739 1449 
 
Cashew Qtl. 0.81 2316 0.91 4598 4093 
 
Mango Qtl 10.27 6990 11.44 17392 15613 
 
Kudampuli Qtl 0.20 808 0.25 6250 5000 
 	Total  106081 217274 185006	
Kottayam 
Coconut Nos 67766.00 387620 123710.00 1113390 609894 
 
Arecanut Nos 20430.00 9398 25835.00 25835 20430 
 
Pepper Qtl. 4.42 26989 5.46 117686 95270 
 
Cashew Qtl 10.00 29730 12.00 71664 59720 
 
Rubber Qtl. 1683.00 12452520 1725.00 34838100 33989868 
 
Coco Qtl 300.60 519436 293.75 1032239 1056310 
 	Total  13425693 37198914 35831492 	
Idukki 
Coconut Nos 20735.0
0131256 27945.00  243120  180393 
 
Arecanut Nos 702250.
00294945 382900.00  191450  351125 
 
Pepper Qtl. 164.10 1008407  93.65 2022756 3544413 
 
Rubber Qtl. 80.90 581348 73.70 1486970 1632237 
 
Coffee Qtl 149.90 657621 133.25 489564  55037 
 
Coco Qtl 66.80 143087 128.60 608537 316099 
 	
Cardamum 	Qtl 	11.70 244530 42.61 4277269 1166256 	
 	
Nutmeg 	 	0 0 99.50 28358 0 	
 	Total  	3061194 9348024 7741260 	
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(Table 7 Contd..)

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	25 
1 2 3 4 5 6  7  8 	
Ernakulam 
Coconut Nos 40024.00 219336 41838.00 359806 344206 
 
 Arecanut Nos.  177500.00 88750 193900.00 116340 106500 
 
Pepper Qtl. 0.59 3599  0.71 15004 12468 
 
Rubber Qtl. 438.45 3198931  447.70 8933859 8749275 
 
Coco Qtl 0.98 1705  1.18 3751 3115 
 
Nutmeg Qtl 28.06 5612 31.84 8758 7718 
 	
Total  3517933 9437518 9223282	
Trissur 
Coconut Nos 780400.00 3199640  948183.00 6258008  5150640 
 
Arecanut Nos.  605000.00 290400 765000.00 535500 423500 
 
Pepper Qtl. 15.00 88350  28.50 575928 303120 	
 
Rubber Qtl. 3685.80 26998491  4163.00 79159449 70085491 	
 	Total  30576881 86528885 75962751 	
Palakkad 
Coconut Nos 739356.00 2787381 860961.00 2768443 4953689 
 
Arecanut Nos.  392500.00 129525 499600.00 249800 196250 
 
Pepper Qtl. 5.19 30595  6.40 132914 107785 
 
Cashew Qtl. 1.45 3545  1.75 9993 8280 
 
Rubber Qtl. 337.67 2455537  425.55 8479509 6728412 
 
Jack Qtl 10.10 2980 11.08 4210 3838 
 
Mango Qtl 1127.30 647464  1283.60 1586529 1393342 
 	Total  60570271623139	8	
1339159	
6	
Malappuram 
Coconut Nos 137610.00 550440 188596.00 1074998  487378 
 
Pepper Qtl. 0.10 547 13.75 283827 2064 
 
Cashew Qtl. 23.76 68716  31.35 199134 150923 
 
Rubber Qtl. 65.70 474157  276.05 5582561 1328652 
 	Total  1093860 7140520 2266017	
Kozhikkode 	Coconut Nos 196284 818508 219979 1407864 1256216	
 	Aracanut Nos 2073420 767166 1252700 626350 1036710	
 	Pepper Qtl 9.34 53050 2.79 58585 196123	
 	Cashew Qtl 6.41 18239 5.43 35621 42050	
 	Rubber Qtl 78.45 548522 53 998573 1478076	
 	Coffee   Qtl 2.85 7238 2.95 13087 12643

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	26  Ccco 	
Qtl 5.70 8472 15.16 52501 19740	
 Nutmeg 	Qtl 0 0 37.03 10924 0	
Total  	  222119	5	3203505 4041558	
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
(Table 7 Contd..) 
 	
 
1 2 3 
4 5 6 7 8 
Kasargod 
Coconut Nos 221683.00 1028609 250075.00 1605481 1423204 
 
Arecanut Qtl. 1813200.0	0	689016 1940100.0	0	1784892 166814 	
 
Pepper Qtl. 4.70 27730  6.70 138662 97270 
 
Cashew  206.50 728945  213.05 1525438 1478540 
 
Rubber  1031.65 7085373  1139.90 22239449 20127492 
 	Total  95596732729392	2	
2479465	
0	STATE 
Pappaya Qtl 	2.30 690 3.25 1950 1380	
 
Coconut Nos 2247333.0	0	9350574 2717624.00  18303075  15069565 	
 
Arecanut Nos.  5793820.00 2273734 5073254.00 3537169 3807638 
 
Pepper Qtl. 207.77 1265101  163.51 3458010 4446707 
 
Cashew Qtl. 249.84 854171  265.75 1854503 1749211 
 
Rubber Qtl. 7779.66 56450616  8914.48 13357156	2	
15152576	
4	 
Jack Qtl 69.59 19729 105.02 25142 18085 
 
Mango Qtl 1139.38 655540 1297.91 1607417 1411160 
 
Coffee Qtl 152.75 664859  136.20 502651 563380 
 
Coco Qtl 376.08 676220  441.04 1704068 1401255 
 	Cardamum 	Qtl	 
11.70 244530  42.91 4277269 1166256 	
 	Nutmeg 	Qtl 	28.06  5612 168.37 48040  7718 	
 	Kudampuli 	Qtl 	0.20 808  2.25 6250 5000 	
 	Total 	 	 	72462184  208897106 181173119

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	27  
 
 
Table – 8 – Crop wise yield and value of seasonal crops in scheme area. 	
 
District Name of 
Crop Un it Before SC work  After SC work 	
Quantity Value Quantity  Value Value at 
constant 
price  	
1  2 3 4 5 6  7 8 	
Thiruvananthapuram 
Tapioca Qtl 26.00 10400 28.50 26935 24572 
 
Ginger Qtl 0.10 236 0.11  381 346 
 
Plantain Qtl 126.81 93839 152.86 157905 130995 
 
Banana Qtl 0.00 0 0.01 22 0 
 
Vegetabies Qtl 0.24 96 0.42  618 353 
 
Total   104571  185861 156266 
Kollam 
Tapioca Qtl 17.61 6748 16.89 16049 16733 
 
Ginger Qtl 0.97 988 1.28 4470 3387 
 
Plantain Qtl 4.56 3119 5.21 5484 4800 
 
Banana Qtl 0.44 555 0.50 1093 962 
 
Pineapple Qtl 5.22 2986 5.46 6377 6097 
 
Chenai Qtl 1.40 840 1.81 3020 2336 
 
Kolacasia Qtl 4.74 2844 4.71 12742 12833 
 
Total   18080  49235 47138

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	28 
 
 
Table – 8 Contd. 
 
 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8	
Pathanamthitta 	Tapioca Qtl 16.95 7238 23.05 27267 20051 	
 	Plantain Qtl 16.47 10905 18.50 17744 15797 	
 	Banana Qtl 1.85 2522 1.95 4216 4000 	
 	Total 20665 49227 39848 	
Alappuzha 	Paddy Qtl 9.00 5733 0.00 0 11979 	
 	Tapiioca Otl 1.26 542 1.97 2055 1314 	
 	Plantain Qtl 20.85 12447 31.59 32982 21769 	
 	Banana Qtl 0.00 0 2.04 4580 0 	
 	Total 18722 39617 35062 	
Kottayam 	Tapioca Qtl	 	366.50 199376 356.00  376294 387393 	
 	Ginger Qtl	 	0.25 1260 1.80  5774  802 	
 	Plantain Qtl	 	53.00 33551 85.50  78404 48601 	
 	Banana Qtl	 	1.50 2016 43.00 96578 3369 	
 	Pineapple Qtl 11.10 6251 12.80 13786 11955 	
 	Total 242454 570836 452120 	
Idukki 	Tapioca	 	Qtl 26.50 12111 119.00 122453 27269 	
 	Plantain Qtl	 	28.25 15707 157.20 149969 26951 	
 	Banana Qtl	 	37.75 43488 52.75 104551 74821 	
 	Pineapple  0.00 0 3.20 3395 0 	
 	Total 71306 380368 129041 	
Ernakulam 	Plantain Qtl	 	37.12	20716 	36.82	32402 32666 	
 	Banana Qtl	 	2.69	3360 	2.59	5395 5603 	
 	Total 24076 37797 38269 	
Trissur 	Plantain Qtl	 	1.80 941 5.00 3940 1418 	
 	Total 941 3940 1418 	
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table – 8 Contd.. 	
1  2  3 4  5  6 7  8

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	29 Palakkad 	
Plantain 	Qtl 	123.92 65314 165.48 131557  98517 	
 	Banana 	Qtl 	32.50 34060 42.00 80724  62465 	
 	Total 99374 212281 160982 	
Malappuram 	Plantain 	Qtl	 0.20  146 0.40  398  199 	
 	Total 146 398 199 	
Kozhikode 	Paddy 	Qtl 	0.03 20 0.05 56  34 	
 	Tapioca 	Qtl 	63.72 30204 50.33 52445  66398 	
 	Ginger 	Qtl 	16.86 21918 12.10 31909  44462 	
 	Plantain 	Qtl 	190.43 152922 111.23 117133  200536 	
 	Banana 	Qtl 	45.45 57085 47.05 102569  99081 	
 	Vegetabl es 	Qtl 	2.40 2880 0.50 646  3101 	
 	Pineappl e 	Qtl 	1.44 702 1.16 1788 2220 	
 	Chenai 	Qtl 	32.80 26011 25.80 47399  60259 	
 	Kolacasia 	Qtl 	26.80 26800 17.95 31592  47168 	
 	Turmeric 	Qtl 	2.56 246 1.93 19723 26161 	
 	Total 318788 405260 549420 	
Kasaragod 	Paddy 	Qtl 	0.00	0 	0.00	0 0 	
 	Tapioca 	Qtl 	222.50	113698 	235.00	221605 209818 	
 	Ginger 	Qtl 	27.00	29241 	28.00	75600 72900 	
 	Plantain 	Qtl 	138.80	106876 	204.00	201144 136857 	
 	Banana 	Qtl 	60.50	75686 	71.00	109269 93110 	
 	Total 325501 607618 512685 	
STATE 	Paddy 	Qtl 	9.03 5753 0.05 56 12013 	
 	Tapioca 	Qtl 	741.04 380317 830.74 845103  753548 	
 	Ginger 	Qtl 	45.18 53643 43.29 118134 121897 	
 	Plantain 	Qtl 	742.21 516483 973.79 929062  719106 	
 	Banana 	Qtl 	182.68 218772 262.89 508997  343411 	
 	Vegitables 	Qtl 	2.64 2976 0.92 1264  3454 	
 	Pineappl e 	Qtl 	17.76 9939 22.62 25346 20272 	
 	Chenai 	Qtl 	34.20 26851 27.61 50419  62595 	
 	Kolacasia 	Qtl 	31.54 29644 22.66 44334  59991 	
 	Turmeric 	Qtl 	2.56 246 1.93 19733 26161 	
 	Total 1244624 2542438 2122448

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	30	
Table 9 
Quantity and Value of Selected perennial and seasonal crops for the years 2011-12 	
 
 
Name of 
Crops Units Before SC Wor	k	Aft er SC Wor	k 
Valu e at 
constant 
Price 	
Quantity Valu es
(Rs) Quantity Value 
(Rs) 	
1 2  3  4  5  6  7  8 	
A. Perennial Crops 	
Coconut Nos 2247333 9350574 2717624 18303075 15069565 
Arecanut Nos.  5793820 2273734  5073254 3537169 3807638 
Cashew Qtl. 249.84 854171 265.75 1854503 1749211 
Pepper Qtl.  207.77 1265101  163.51 3458010 4446707 
Rubber Qtl. 7779.66 56450616 8914.48 17357156	2	
15152576	
4	
Pappaya Qtl 2.30 690 3.25 1950 1380 
Jack Qtl  69.59 19729 105.02 25142 18085 
Mango Qtl 1539.38 655540 1297.91 1607417 1411160 
Coffee Qtl  152.75 664859  136.20 502651 563380 
Coco Qtl 376.08 676220 441.04 1704068 1401255 
Kudampuli Qtl .20 808 .25 6250 5000 
Nutmug 	Qtl	  28.06 5612 168.37 48040 7718 	
Cardamum 	Qtl	 11.70 244530 42.91 4277269 1166256 	
Total(A) 	 	 	72462184 208897106 181173119	
B. Seasonal Crops 	
Paddy 	Qtl 	9.03 5753  0.05  56 12013 	
Tapioca 	Qtl 	741.04 380317  830.74 845103 753548 	
Ginger 	Qtl 	45.18 53643  43.29 118134 121897 	
Plantain 	Qtl 	742.21 516483  973.79 929062 719106 	
Banana 	Qtl 	182.68 218772  262.89 508997 343411 	
Vegitables 	Qtl 	2.64 2976  0.92 1264 3454 	
Pineappl e 	Qtl 	17.76 9939 22.62 25346 20272 	
Chenai 	Qtl 	34.20 26851  27.61 50419 62595 	
Kolacasia 	Qtl 	31.54 29644  22.66 44334 59991 	
Turmeric 	Qtl 	2.56 246 1.93 19723 26161 	
Total 	 	1244624 2542438 2122448 	
All Crops 
(A+B)  	73706808 211439544 123295567

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	31	
 
2.2. Cost Benefit Analysis of the Soil Conservation Programmes 
 An important objective of a project evaluation is to estimate the various impacts of its 
operation such as income, employment, demographic change, regional development and so 
on.  Hence an analysis to appraise the performance of operating investment projects is 
essential for improved planning process.  Degradation of land due to soil erosion leads to 
destruction of agricultural land.  If it continue over a period, the entire soil will be lost and the 
land will become barren and unproductive.  In the case of sloppy regions, soil erosion deplete 
the fertility of the soil and production and degradation of the area under agriculture is to be 
assessed in terms of production and protection benefits accrued from these areas.  These 
benefits are to be further compared with the investments to arrive at benefit cost ratio which 
gives an indication of viability of the programme implemented. 
Productive benefits are the direct returns from the programmes implemented.  In 
regular agricultural lands, increase in the yield provides the productive benefits.  In addition., 
production  from degraded land, which are cultivated after the soil conservation measures are 
also taken into consideration.  
Protective benefit s are the intangible benefits derived fro m implementation of soil 
conservation programme.  These benefits are more stable and provide base for the continued 
prosperity in the area.  In the case of agricultural land, protective benefits are assessed in 
terms of these increased values because of the prevention of further soil erosion and it’s 
increased productive potentialities. 
In the light of the present study an attempt is made for cost benefit analysis with the 
collected data.  Total cost incurred for the soil conservation works, including maintenance 
work  for the 51schemes is Rs.69002113/- 
The total area under cultivation after soil conservation work was 1698.85 acres.  The 
value of crops before the soil conservation programme comes to Rs.73706808  The value of 
crops after the implementation of soil conservation programme has also been calculated as Rs. 
211439544/-  Thus the additional benefits due to the implementation of soil conservation 
programme is worked out to be Rs.137732736  /-.  It is estimated that the value at constant 
price as Rs. 183295567/- .

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	32	
 
Several benefits flo w fro m the so il conservat ion programme implementation.  Three o f 
them, which derive special attention, are taken up for consideration.   
 
 
They are: 
  
(i) Extension of area under cultivation 
(ii) Increase in productivity 
(iii) Diversificat ion of cropping pattern 
 
(i) Extension of area under cultivation 
  
  The study revealed that 34.66 acre of land has been additionally brought under 
cultivation by cultivating areas which were not cultivated before soil conservation 
programme.  This benefit is achieved only due to the implementation of so il conservat ion 
programme. 
 
(ii) Increase in Productivity 
 
Productivity also increased due to the implementation of soil conservation programme.  In  the case of 
coconut it is recorded 20.93%, cardamom 258.33%, Rubber 14.60%, Plantain 31.44%..  	
 
(iii) Diversification of cropping pattern 
 
 Soil Conservation Programmes increase the soil capacity and which facilitates the 
cultivation  of more remunerative crops.  This advantage can be reaped in full, only if the 
conservation programmes are followed properly, i.e. the dissimination of new techniques of 
production, adequate provision of inputs and service which will promote the land to improve 
production. 
 
 	In the scheme area, cultivation of perennial crops have shown encouraging 
performance.  The increase in area of perennial crops is higher over the area under same 
before soil conservation programme (6.78%).  Growing of perennial crops will accelerate 
conservation of soil more affectively. 
 
 
Occupational Profile

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	33	
 The occupational profile of the selected beneficiaries reveals that 40.38% included 
agriculture  job,  27.89%  are  accounted  as  non-agriculture;  15.47%  agricultural  labourers  and                        
16.26% are categorized as non-agricultural labourers.  Details are presented in Table No. 14 
and 14 (a) 	
 	
Table 10 - Total Income, expenditure and Net Income of Scheme area  (Rs) 	
Sl No  Name of District Income (Rs)  Expenditure (Rs) Net Income (Rs) 	
Before 
SC work Aft er SC 
work Before 
SC work Aft er SC 
work Before SC 
work Aft er SC 
work 	
1  2  3 4 5 6 7  8 
1 	Thiruvananthapuram  1499809  8245488 1006870 2425195  492939  5820293 	
2 	Kollam  414212  985151 120077 219843  294135  765308 	
3 	Pathanamthitta 1071942 3350830 416460 1104389 655482 2246441 	
4 	Alappuzha 124803 256891 80786 156101 44017 100790 	
5 	Kottayam  13668147  37769750 3823426 6526090  9844721  31243660 	
6 	Idukki  3132500  9728392 1536210 3216471  1596290  6511921 	
7 	Eranakulam  3542009  9475315 1094075 3102785  2447934  6372530 	
8 	Thrissur  30577822  86532825 17684040 33549275  12893782  52983550 	
9 	Palakkad  6156401  16443679 1358265 2608170  4798136  13835509 	
10 	Malappuram  1094006  7140918 1251850 3404580  -157844  3736338 	
11 	Kozhikkode  2539983  3608765 1199305 1882165  1340678  1726600 	
12 	Kasaragod  9885174  27901540 2897465 4643530  6987709  23258010 
State 73706808 211439544 32468829 62838594 41237979 148600950	
 	
 
 
 
 
 
 	
Table 10 (a) - Income, Expenditure and Net Income of Control Plots (Rs) 	
Sl No  Name of District  Income  ExpenditureNet 
Income 	
1  2          
1 	Thiruvananthapuram 1183685  745865 	437820	
2 	Kollam 32137 19146 	12991	
3 	Pathanamthitta 800484 298960 	501524	
4 	Alappuzha 105666 55900 	49766	
5 	Kottayam 1835349 206370 	
162897
9	
6 	Idukki 983487 379980 	603507	
7 	Eranakulam 878324 288745 	589579	
8 	Thrissur 9467009 4020900 	
544610
9

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	34	
9 	Palakkad 1381871 424850 	957021	
10 	Malappuram 274209 275850 	-1641	
11 	Kozhikkode 1735110 928400 	806710	
12 	Kasaragod 1130398 341000 	789398	
State 19807729 7985966 11821763	
Table 11 – Income per Acre before and after soil conservation programme 
(Income in Rs) 	
Sl No  Name of District Before SC wor	
k	Aft er SC work 	
Ar ea in 
acre 
Net 
Income Net 
Income 
per acre 
(Rs) Ar ea in 
acre Net 
Income Net 
Income per 
acre 	
(Rs) (Rs) 
(Rs) 	
1  2  3 4 5 6 7 
8 
1 	Thiruvananthapuram 45.16 492939 	10915	45.30 5820293 	128483	
2 	Kollam 15.34 294135 	19174	15.34 765308 	49890	
3 	Pathanamthitta 36.06 655482 	18178	36.29 2246441 	61902	
4 	Alappuzha 7.39 44017 	5956	6.98 100790 	14440	
5 	Kottayam 143.20 9844721 	68748	149.45 31243660 	209058	
6 	Idukki 167.03 1596290 	9557	167.88 6511921 	38789	
7 	Eranakulam 93.38 2447934 	26215	93.38 6372530 	68243	
8 	Thrissur 455.64 12893782 	28298	455.64 52983550 	116284	
9 	Palakkad 219.24 4798136 	21885	219.24 13835509 	63107	
10 	Malappuram 147.29 -157844 	-1072	168.51 3736338 	22173	
11 	Kozhikkode 118.95 1340678 	11271	118.88 1726600 	14524	
12 	Kasaragod 215.51 6987709 	32424	221.96 23258010 	104785	
State 	1664.19 	41237979 24780	1698.85 	148600950 87471	
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 11 (a) - Income per acre in the Control Plots 	
Sl No  Name of District Ar ea in 
acre Net Income (Rs) Net Income per 
acre 	
1 2  3 4 5 
1 	Thiruvananthapuram 	12.69 437820	34501

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	35	
2 	Kollam 	1.60 12991	8119 	
3 	Pathanamthitta 	12.81 501524	39151 	
4 	Alappuzha 	3.50 49766	14219 	
5 	Kottayam 	8.95 1628979	182009 	
6 	Idukki 	21.11 603507	28589 	
7 	Eranakul am 	8.44 589579	69855 	
8 	Thrissur 	63.47 5446109	85806 	
9 	Palakkad 	38.44 957021	24896 	
10 	Malappuram 	15.95 -1641	103 	
11 	Kozhikkode 	48.32 806710	16695 	
12 	Kasaragod 	14.70 789398	53701 	
State 249.98 11821763	47291 	
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chapter III 
 
3.1 General Observations 	
 
  
During the survey period the staff of this department have visited all the beneficiary 
plots.   
  
The distribution of holdings of the selected beneficiaries of the soil conservation 
programmes reveals that 58.87% of the beneficiary holding belongs to  less than one acre, 
31% have holding area between one acre to 3 acre.   And above 3 acre were 6.6%, up to 5 
acres were 3.53% respectively.  
  
The opinion of selected beneficiaries are collected.  Out of that 17.87% of the 
beneficiaries reported that contour bunds effectively  control soil erosion while about 73.47

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	36	
percent opinioned that it moderately controls soil erosion.  The rest 8.66% are of opinion that 
it has no effect. 
  
About the fertility of the soil 11.93% are of the view that the conservation measures 
have improved  the fertility of the soil  remarkably.  While 87.27% reported that the fertilit y 
of the soil has improved moderately and 0.8% opinioned that it has no effect on the fertility of 
the soil. 
  
Similarly regarding the moisture retention 10.6% reported that the scheme has 
substantially increased moisture retention while 88.67% reported that the scheme has caused 
moisture retention moderately only.  0.73% are of no effect. Details are presented in table No. 
12

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	37
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 12  
Opinion of cultivators about of effectiveness of bunds, Fertility of the soil and moisture 
retention of scheme area  
 	
Sl 
No Name of 
District Effectiveness of contour 
bundsFertility of soil  Moisture retention 	
Effectively 
controlled 
Moderately 
controlled 
No effect 
Remarkably 
controlled 
Moderately 
controlled 
No effect 
Substantially 
controlled 
Moderately 
controlled 
No effect 
Total 	
1 2  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1 Thiruvanantha-
puram 	2  123 0  2 124 1  2 123  0 125 	
2 Kolla m 	0 3 122 1 124 0 0 125 0 125 	
3 Pathanamthitta 	2  123 0  1 124 0  0 124  1 125 	
4 Alappuzha 	0  120 5  1 118 6  0 119  6 125 	
5 Kottayam 	18  107 0 10 115 0  7 118  0 125 	
6 Idukki 	20  104 1  4 121 0  2 123  0 125 	
7 Ernakula m 	6  119 0  0 125 0  0 125  0 125 	
8 Thrissur 	23  102 0 21 104 0  21 104  0 125 	
9 Palakkad 	118  7 0 117  8 0 118  7  0 125 	
10 Malappuram 	32  93 0 13 112 0  6 119  0 125 	
11 Kozhikkode 	35  88 2  6 116 3  2 123  0 125 	
12 Kasaragod 	12  113 0  3 120 2  1 120  4 125 	
State 	268 1102 130 179 1309 12 159 1330 11 1500

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	38	
Table 13  
Conditions of Bund 
(Scheme Area) 	
Sl Name of District  Good 
Partially Seriously Total 
1 2  3  4  5  6 
1 Thiruvananthapuram  	67 58  0 125 	
2 Kolla m 	105 20  0 125 	
3 Pathanamthitta 	123 2 0 125 	
4 Alappuzha 	118 6 1 125 	
5 Kottayam 	104 21  0 125 	
6 Idukki 	114 11  0 125 	
7 Ernakula m 	111 14  0 125 	
8 Thrissur 	120 5 0 125 	
9 Palakkad 	121 4 0 125 	
10 Malappuram 	62 62  1 125 	
11 Kozhikkode 	87 33  5 125 	
12 Kasaragod 	111 13  1 125 	
State 	1243 249  8 1500 	
Table 14  
Occupational profile 
(Scheme Area) 	
Sl 
No Name of District Occupation 	
Agriculture Non-
agriculture Agricultural 
Labours No	n-
agriculture Total 	
1  2  3 4 5 6 7 
1 Thiruvananthapuram  	42 33 31 19 125 	
2 Kolla m 	34  4 70 17 125 	
3 Pathanamthitta 	85 34 6 0 125 	
4 Alappuzha 	1 18 21 85 125 	
5 Kottayam 	44 77 3 1 125 	
6 Idukki 	87 9 26 3 125 	
7 Ernakula m 	24 67 13 21 125 	
7 Thrissur 	54 70 0 1 125 	
8 Palakkad 	99 1 25 0 125 	
9 Malappuram 	42 75 7 1 125 	
10 Kozhikkode 	76 42 4 3 125 	
12 Kasaragod 	64 36  7 18 125 	
State 	652 466 213 169 1500

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	39	
Table 14 (a) 
Occupational profile (Control Plots) 	
Sl No  Name of District Occupation	Agriculture Non-
agriculture Agriculture 
labours No	
n-
agriculture 
labours Total 	
1 2  3 4 5 6 7
1 Thiruvananthapuram  	9 6 9 1 25 	
2 Kolla m 	6 2 11 6 25 	
3 Pathanamthitta 	14 11  0  0 25 	
4 Alappuzha 	1 8 2 14 25 	
5 Kottayam 	5 5 0 0 10 	
6 Idukki 	10 8 6 1 25 	
7 Ernakula m 	5 12  1  2 20 	
7 Thrissur 	0 25  0  0 25 	
8 Palakkad 	22 0 2 1 25 	
9 Malappuram 	4 20  1  0 25 	
10 Kozhikkode 	18 7 0 0 25 	
11 Kasaragod 	6 3 1 0 10 	
Total 	100 107  33  25 265 	
 
 
  One important finding of this study is that the concept of watershed management has 
been well recognized in the scheme area. Watershed management implies the wise use of  
soil, water and bio-resources in a watershed to obtain optimum production wit h minimu m 
disturbance to the environment.  Through this water and soil can be conserved.  Since both of 
them are interdependent.  The overall objective of watershed programme include, recognition 
of watershed as a basic unit for judicious ut ilizat ion and development of all lands.  The land is 
to be treated according to the capability and requirement by adopting suitable methods that 
will control soil erosion, conserve water, improve farm income control flood and droughts, 
etc. 
  
There are a number of direct and indirect outcome of the project  that can be 
associated  with the impact of watershed development project.  These include raising rain fed 
agricultural productivity changes in land use pattern, etc.

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	40	
Conditions of Bund 
 
  While examining the condition of bund the study revealed that 82.87% are in 
good condition 16.6% are partially damaged and 0.53% is seriously damaged.  District wise 
statement is given in Table No. 13. 
 
Summary of Findings 
 
  The data furnished in this report are collected through the Evaluation study on 
soil conservation programmes conducted during 2011-12.  All the district except Wayanad 
were covered in this study.  In Wayanad the study is directly done by the Central Government.  
The methodology of this study was stratified sampling method on the basis of the area of the 
holding.  For the study purpose schemes implemented by the Soil Conservation Department 
and other Local \Self Government were included.  For the purpose of comparison control plots 
are also selected from the scheme area where the soil conservation works are not carried out 
under any scheme.   In the light of the present study an attempt is made for the cost benefit 
analysis with the collected data.  Several benefits flow from the soil conservation programme 
implementation.  Some of the findings of the study are given below: 
  For the study purpose 51 schemes were selected.  The total number of 
beneficiaries comes to 2471.  Out of this 1500 number of beneficiaries were selected for the 
detailed study.   Land use particulars of beneficiary plots gives us certain positive trends while 
comparing with the area before and after the soil conservation  programme.  The study 
revealed that 34.66 acre of land has been additionally brought under cultivation by cultivating 
area which are under the fallow land. 
There is an increasing awareness of the importance of the soil conservation 
programme especially watershed management programme among the people in the scheme 
area.  Besides Soil Conservation Department, Local Self Government also activated various 
programmes in this direct ions.  WGDP, RIDF, TSP programmes are included under study.  
Tribal colonies also enjoyed benefits. 
Income and Expenditure 
 
  The particulars relating to income and expenditure of beneficiary plots reveals 
that after implementation of SC programme net income of the beneficiaries of the scheme area 
increased to 260.35%.  It is estimated that the percentage increase of net income per acre in 
beneficiary plots of the scheme area as 252.99%

Evaluation Study on Soil Conservation 2012-13 	
Department of Economics & Statistics, Kerala 	41	
  Analysis of data collected from the beneficiary and control plots reveals that 
the net income per acre, received from the beneficiary plot is Rs.87471/- and from the control 
plot is Rs47291/-  The district wise details are presented in Table No. 11 and 11 (a).  The 
higher rate of income from the scheme area is due to the positive impact of soil conservation 
programme. 	
 	
While analysing the production details of various crops it is revealed that an increase 
10.71% recorded in the case of Rubber. Production of coconut also increased 1.95%.  
Whereas the increase of area was 8.1 acers.  Likewise in coffee production area increase is 
recorded as 2.65 acers.,  the area of cardamom increases 11.67 acers. 
 
Cost benefit analysis of the collected data reveals that 199% of the cost of soil 
conservation programme has benefited in the year under study itself. 
Table  15 
Cropping Intensity in Scheme area 	
Sl.No District Net area cultivated Total Gross Area 
Cropped  Intensity of Cropping 
(%) 	Before 
SC Work After
SC work Before
SC work After
SC work Before 
SC work After
work 	
1  2  3 4 5 6 7 8
1 Thiruvananthapuram 	45.16 45.30 	38.48	44.36 	85.21 97.62 	
2 Kollam 	15.34 15.34 	13.62	21.89 	88.79 142.70 	
3 Pathanamthitta  	36.06 36.29 	32.72	33.54 	90.74 92.42 	
4 Alappuzha 	7.39 6.98 	9.80	11.21 	132.61 160.60 	
5 Kottayam 	143.20 149.45 	129.02	134.41 	90.10 89.44 	
6 Idukki 	167.03 167.88 	139.67	163.83 	83.62 97.59 	
7 Ernakulam 	93.38 93.38 	82.54	82.49 	88.39 88.34 	
7 Thrissur 	455.64 455.64 	389.30	390.62 	85.44 85.73 	
8 Palakkad 	219.24 219.24 	167.11	170.40 	76.22 77.72 	
9 Malappuram 	147.29 168.51 	142.20	166.47 	96.54 98.79 	
10 Kozhikkode  	118.95 118.88 	105.85	109.19 	88.99 91.85 	
12 Kasaragod 	215.51 221.96 	173.35	188.74 	80.44 85.03 	
State 	1664.91 1698.85 1423.66 1517.14 	85.55 89.30 	
 
Cropping Intensity 
 
                 Productivity of the land to a certain extent influenced the cropping  pattern of a locality. Through this 
study it is seen that the cropping intensity of the scheme are increased from 85.55% 89.30%.Districtwise details 
are presented in Table No.15.
Population & Demographics

Agriculture

Industries

Socio-economic

Other data & insights

Price trends

RESEARCH IN STATISTICS

Population & Demographics

Agriculture

Industries

Socio-economic

Other Schemes

RECENT SURVEYS

Department Info

Contact

Directory

History

Organization

Announcements & Orders

Related Organisations

Acts and Rules

Public Portals

Official Login 1

Official Login 2

External Links

Latest Events

Miscellaneous

Employees' Portals

Site Administration

Publications

Category: Agriculture
