Abstract
This study has been undertaken to make cotton production in the state of Punjab globally competitive by reducing the cost of production at farmer’s level through adoption of new pest management technologies, namely Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Insecticides Resistant Management (IRM). A sample of ten experimental and ten control plots has been taken for each technology in four villages of the cotton belt of Punjab. The study has revealed that the adopters of IPM and IRM technology could get significantly higher yield as compared to that by non-adopters. These technologies have been found cost-effective due to higher production and could reduce the per quintal production cost by Rs 253 and Rs 175, respectively. These technologies have been found to generate more income and employment as the adopters could earn Rs 6840/ha and Rs 5901/ha more income as compared to that by the nonadopters. The gain in human employment due to adoption of these technologies has been of 11 humandays/ha and 12 humandays/ha, respectively. The IPM and IRM technologies have reduced the pesticides consumption by 67 per cent and 54 per cent, respectively. The cost-benefit analysis has shown these technologies to be economically viable. The study has suggested that these technologies should be propagated among the farmers in the cotton belt of Punjab. These technologies will reduce the chemicals-consumption and enhance the productivity of cotton on sustainable basis with lower cost of production, which in turn would protect the environmental health and economic condition of the debtridden cotton growers on a long-term basis.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 12
Claim · model-written summary
IPM adopters had significantly higher cotton yield than nonadopters.
- Taxon
- Cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- IPMe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- non-adopterse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“adopters of IPM and IRM technology could get significantly higher yield as compared to that by non-adopters”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
IRM adopters had significantly higher cotton yield than nonadopters.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- IRMe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- non-adopterse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“adopters of IPM and IRM technology could get significantly higher yield as compared to that by non-adopters”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
IPM reduced cotton production cost per quintal by Rs 253.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- IPMe1
- Outcome
- per quintal production coste0
- Direction
- reducee0
- Value
- Rs 253e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“These technologies have been found cost-effective due to higher production and could reduce the per quintal production cost by Rs 253 and Rs 175, respectively”
e1“Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Insecticides Resistant Management (IRM)”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
IRM reduced cotton production cost per quintal by Rs 175.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- IRMe1
- Outcome
- per quintal production coste0
- Direction
- reducee0
- Value
- Rs 175e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“These technologies have been found cost-effective due to higher production and could reduce the per quintal production cost by Rs 253 and Rs 175, respectively”
e1“Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Insecticides Resistant Management (IRM)”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
IPM increased income by Rs 6840/ha relative to nonadopters.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- IPMe1
- Outcome
- incomee0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- Rs 6840/hae0
- Comparator
- nonadopterse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the adopters could earn Rs 6840/ha and Rs 5901/ha more income as compared to that by the nonadopters”
e1“Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Insecticides Resistant Management (IRM)”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
IRM increased income by Rs 5901/ha relative to nonadopters.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- IRMe1
- Outcome
- incomee0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- Rs 5901/hae0
- Comparator
- nonadopterse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the adopters could earn Rs 6840/ha and Rs 5901/ha more income as compared to that by the nonadopters”
e1“Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Insecticides Resistant Management (IRM)”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
IPM increased human employment by 11 humandays/ha.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- IPMe1
- Outcome
- human employmente0
- Direction
- gaine0
- Value
- 11 humandays/hae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The gain in human employment due to adoption of these technologies has been of 11 humandays/ha and 12 humandays/ha, respectively”
e1“Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Insecticides Resistant Management (IRM)”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
IRM increased human employment by 12 humandays/ha.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- IRMe1
- Outcome
- human employmente0
- Direction
- gaine0
- Value
- 12 humandays/hae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The gain in human employment due to adoption of these technologies has been of 11 humandays/ha and 12 humandays/ha, respectively”
e1“Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Insecticides Resistant Management (IRM)”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
IPM reduced pesticide consumption by 67 per cent.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- IPMe0
- Outcome
- pesticides consumptione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 67 per cente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The IPM and IRM technologies have reduced the pesticides consumption by 67 per cent and 54 per cent, respectively”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
IRM reduced pesticide consumption by 54 per cent.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- IRMe0
- Outcome
- pesticides consumptione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 54 per cente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The IPM and IRM technologies have reduced the pesticides consumption by 67 per cent and 54 per cent, respectively”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Cost benefit analysis found IPM and IRM economically viable.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- economically viablee0
- Qualifier
- IPM and IRM technologiese1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The cost-benefit analysis has shown these technologies to be economically viable”
e1“The IPM and IRM technologies”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend propagating IPM and IRM among cotton farmers in Punjab.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Outcome
- these technologies should be propagatede0
- Qualifier
- IPM and IRM technologiese1
- Setting
- Punjabe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“these technologies should be propagated among the farmers in the cotton belt of Punjab”
e1“The IPM and IRM technologies”
The same questions in other papers
insecticide · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
72 papers more in this group
See all 76 papers →insecticide · pest · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
50 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
72 papers more in this group
See all 76 papers →ipm · pest · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
22 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 papers →ipm · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
38 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
35 papers more in this group
See all 39 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.