Tamarind is of immense food value especially
in the southern districts of Orissa and other southern states
of India. Apart from being used in preparing pickles, charu,
and juice, tamarind has a number of medicinal uses like maintaining
body temperature and digestion. Besides, in some places tamarind
seed powder is used as cattle feed.
Tamarind is a major source of livelihood
for forest dwellers in the districts of Gajapati, Raygada
and Koraput. The collection from the two forest divisions
is more than half of the total tamarind production in the
state. There is a strange ecological correlation between tamarind
and paddy production. Both quantitatively and qualitatively
tamarind has three types of production, bumper, medium and
lean. Experience shows that rice production is inversely proportional
to tamarind. In a bumper year for tamarind, rice production
is relatively less than medium and lean years of tamarind.
This means during rice scarce year tamarind takes care of
subsistence.
Collection and Processing
Collection generally starts in the month
of February-March and continues till June. Tribal collect
raw tamarind and sell it to authorised agents at the rates
fixed by government. They are collected from government forests,
privately owned trees as well as from community lands. During
a high production or bumper year, one person working from
7 in the morning to 4 in the afternoon can collect 30 - 50
kg of tamarind. Collection of tamarind does not require special
skills which means even children along with women can collect.
Tamarind has a tremendous scope for value
addition at primary level. Though such local level processing
of tamarind by primary groups and community institutions is
common in tamarind-rich zones of southern Orissa, there was
hardly any incentive for these initiatives because of the
policy restrictions on storage and marketing till recently.
There have been a number of such initiatives for value addition
by cooperatives of primary groups at various levels.
Processing of tamarind normally means deseeding
and removing paru (or chera in Oriya). Normally in terms of
weight 2 kg of raw tamarind yields 1 kg of processed tamarind
that is sold to the local trader in Rs. 9-10/ per kg.
In all the tamarind
rich areas where the dependence on tamarind is heavy,
primary collectors encounter a strange problem vis-à-vis
the buyers or their agents. During the sale, if the
weather condition is cloudy or overcast they are accused
of putting water in their products to inflate the weight.
In such a situation, the agent counts every 10 kg as
8 kg and as a result, tribal lose 2 kg in every 10 kg.
The decision of the agent regarding the quality of the
tamarind is final and there is no authorized Govt. agency
to check whether the allegations are true or not. |
Tamarind production in Orissa is substantially
high, more than 10000 MT per season on an average (figure
- 15). But in the last decade (except 1994-95 and 1996-97),
tamarind production has gone down to 7500 MT per season. There
are a number of reasons for decreasing rate of production
of tamarind. For example, due to the inactivity of authorised
leaseholders, large chunk of tamarind is ciphered away in
the alternative market without getting entered in the Govt
records.
Production and Pricing
Figure : Tamarind
Production (in MTs)
|
Policy and its Impact
Like any other non-nationalised forest produce,
tamarind trade operated in the normal procedure of monopoly
lease till March 2000. TDCC was the major leaseholder of tamarind
and reportedly made a good profit in the produce. Apart from
TDCC, Kalinga Tamarind Products Ltd. operated in three ranges
of Rayagada forest division. Though monopoly was withdrawn,
at the operational level it existed denying processing and
storage rights to the tribal. Since tamarind could be easily
processed at the household level, rights to process and store
beyond a mere 100 kg could possibly add to household income.
Interestingly, though monopoly rights given to the Govt. Corporations
were withdrawn, the long-term monopoly trade agreement with
private parties existed.
Besides, one of the pressing issues in tamarind
trade was non-functionality of authorised leaseholders like
TDCC. Tamarind production is very high in the southern districts
of Orissa and consumption needs of bordering districts of
AP are dependent on it. So there is always a possibility of
tamarind being smuggled across the State because of the relatively
small and closed market. Apart from the alternative market,
tamarind that should have ordinarily been sold to TDCC is
sold to GCC.
Local middlemen and sahukars, who have gained
the status of 'friend in need' for tribal, especially when
TDCC or other authorised leaseholders refuse to buy, operate
the trade, which was illegal till March 2000. Interestingly,
tamarind trees are sold at throwaway prices to sahukars at
a time when the fruit is not even half ripe. These sahukars
use the same tribal to pluck ripen fruits and apparently the
labour charge for plucking fruits is included in the previous
deal when the trees are sold. Besides, the other channel of
trade is smuggling out of the State. In Gajapati district,
there exists a trading community called Kampu, natives from
AP who shuttle between the two states. This community by virtue
of knowing both languages play a major role in shipment of
tamarind across the border. Similarly, in Koraput district,
most of these illegal trades are done by the SCs who are a
powerful trading community. Tribal, on the other hand, fail
to excel in such trade and suffer. According to them SC communities
are smarter and that is the reason for their survival in this
kind of trade.
This consistent and constant failure of the
leaseholders in the realisation of the development objectives
of monopoly has not only created an undue dependence of the
primary collectors on these alternative markets but these
markets have become a familiar feature in rural forest economy.
Besides, absence of a fair market support, in many parts of
the State, has forced the primary collectors to sale in throwaway
price. This problem of alternative market and distress sale
is particularly acute in bordering districts.
The situation has changed since March 2000,
when Tamarind was among the NTFP, the ownership rights of
which have been handed over to the Panchayat. Only marginally,
as the trade done by the local traders have now become legal
and primary collectors continue to get low prices. In the
first year post new policy, the prices dived to Rs. 1-2 a
Kg in most of the areas where Tamarind is traded in Orissa.
However, the prices rose a bit in the year 2002 when the price
hovered between Rs. 2- 4. Interestingly, in the year 2001,
in the neighbouring states of Chhatisgarh and AP, the price
of Tamarind was much higher between Rs. 4-6. This was due
to the administered price by GCC in AP and the Imli Andolan
in Bastar. The traders made good of this opportunity of differing
prices and made a lot of money.
Issues in the trade
Especially for the non-nationalised NTFP
there is no structured or organised trade route and so also
the institutional set up or arrangement for the trade. Based
on the demand in the market and variation in profit margin
the institutional arrangements are made for the trade. For
the produces like Harida (Harra), Beheda and Sal seed the
demand in the market has declined because of several reasons.
Important among them is the increased use and acceptance of
their substitutes. In case of other produces too there is
a declining trend in the demand market.
The market for NTFP is virtually in the hands
of private traders and it is very complex to understand and
predict. There is no adequate data available for proper analysis
of the production and trends in marketing. The private traders
really decide the price factor and the procurement strategies,
targets, geographical areas to be covered under the trade.
Efforts were made to analyse the prices for different NTFP
in seven districts through sample studies (refer table 3.2).
There is a substantial variation in the procurement prices
of the same produce in different markets, which is basically
determined by the local traders and their agents. This difference
is more visible in case of Amla, Harida and Beheda. The regulatory
mechanisms of the government have failed to ensure better
prices to the primary collectors. In case of some of the produces
there are a number of intermediaries, which make the trade
more complex. More the number of intermediaries, lesser are
the margin distributed among them. But it is not always that
the primary collector does not just loose by the fact that
there is more number of intermediaries in the chain.
|
