DDP (desert devdevelopment programme)sec.pptx

contains a ppt on desert development programme

1. Desert Development Programme Presented by: Surbhi, Jasmine, Jyoti, Aastha

2. meet our team TAKUMA HAYASHI MIRJAM NILSSON​ FLORA BERGGREN​ RAJESH SANTOSHI president chief executive officer chief operations officer vp marketing 20XX presentation title 2

3. agenda Evolution 4 Coverage area 7 Objectives 11 Schemes 13 Funding pattern 14 Case study 19 Conclusion 28

4. 20XX presentation title 4 Evolution A sizable proportion of the country’s total land area falls under:

5. A drought is a long period of dry weather caused by a shortfall in the usual rainfall in a given time period of more than a certain percentage, usually 50% in the sowing season. A drought-prone area is characterized by: 20XX presentation title 5

6. 20XX presentation title 6 On the recommendations of the National Commission on Agriculture , in its Interim Report (1974), the hot desert areas were identified for the implementation of a program comprising afforestation and livestock development. As for the cold desert areas of Jammu & Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh, the National Commission (in its Final Report, 976) recommended that their specific problems should be studied in depth. The above recommendations lead to the Desert Development Programme (DDP) in the year 1977-78. The DDP program was implemented on a sectoral basis to develop poor areas in the long term. It was launched in both the hot-desert areas of Rajasthan, Gujarat, and Haryana and the cold-desert areas of Jammu & Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh.

7. Coverage Upto 1994-95 ,DDP was under implementation in 131 blocks of 21 districts in 5 states.Professor Hanumantha Rao committee recommended: - Including of 384 new blocks; and - Transfer of 64 blocks from DPAP to DDP.

8. Inclusion of new blocks and transfer of blocks from DPAP to DDP was agreed to. Thus, from 1995-96 total blocks covered under DDP became 227 in 40 districts of 7 States. Subsequently, with the re-organization of Districts and Blocks, the programme is now covered in 235 blocks of 40 districts in 7 States. The corresponding physical area under the programme is about 4.57 lakh sq. km. 

9. S. no. Name of state No. of district No. of blocks Area in sq. kms. 1. Andhra Pradesh 1 16 19136 2. Gujarat 6 52 55424 3. Haryana 7 45 20542 4. Himachal Pradesh 2 3 35107 5. Jammu & Kashmir 2 12 96701 6. Karnataka 6 22 32295 7. Rajasthan 16 85 198744 Total 40 235 457949 20XX presentation title 9

10. 20XX presentation title 10 Coverage Area        J&K Haryana Rajasthan Gujarat Andhra Pradesh Karnataka Himachal Pradesh

11. Aims and objectives The basic objective of the programme is to: minimize the adverse effects of drought on the production of crops and livestock. promote overall economic development improve the socio-economic conditions of the resource-poor and disadvantaged sections inhabiting the programme areas.

12. To restore ecological balance by harnessing, conserving and developing natural resources i.e. land, water, vegetative cover and rising land productivity

13. SCHEMES UNDER DDP 20XX presentation title 13

14. Funding pattern The Central share under each type of eco-system under DDP was as under: 20XX presentation title 14 Hot Arid Non Sandy Areas 75% Cold Arid Areas 100% Hot Arid Sandy Areas 100%

15. 20XX presentation title 15 The above Central share was applicable up to 31st March 1999.  With effect from 1st April 1999, the program is being funded based on 75:25 .   In all these cases the watershed projects are being sanctioned on or after this date.  From 1.4.1995 till 31.3.2000, each cost ranged between Rs. 22.50 lakhs to Rs. 25 lakhs. With effect from 1.4.2000, a uniform rate of Rs. 30 lakh per project has been prescribed.

16. Releases made under DDP (1995-96 to 2002-03) as on 31-1-2003 20XX presentation title 16 S. No Name of state 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Total 1. Andhra Pradesh 4.05 6.74 4.22 4.83 4.37 6.51 9.99 6.41 47.12 2. Gujarat 18.61 10.27 11.01 8.60 27.51 24.45 22.58 30.39 153.42 3. Haryana 4.50 6.34 7.97 6.08 4.54 8.11 14.83 11.50 63.87 4. Himachal Pradesh 6.36 8.00 1.50 0.30 2.55 4.51 5.14 7.36 35.72 5. Jammu & Kashmir 10.00 13.30 2.25 5.85 4.86 7.84 5.75 9.02 58.97 6. Karnataka 3.90 4.32 8.42 3.50 2.15 5.03 9.95 11.24 48.51 7. Rajasthan 53.58 16.40 34.64 60.64 39.1 78.54 81.64 58.41 412.86 Total 101.00 65.35 70.80 79.80 84.99 134.99 149.89 134.33 820.37 Rs. in crore

17. Findings In J&K no soil, topographic or hydrological surveys were undertaken by any agency for deciding the areas of thrust and in the formulation of the area-based schemes. There was no voluntary agency or peoples involvement in the identification of the areas or the formulation and implementation of schemes of the DDP. It was observed that the visits of Senior Officers were very few which had no desired impact on the program. The main reasons for the depletion of vegetable cover and degradation of The environment in the desert areas was due to an uncontrolled overgrazing of livestock

18. 20XX presentation title 18 Suggestions There should be a clear cut policy in granting the funds for proper maintenance of the assets created under the DDP. The State Government may be given powers to incur expenditure on schemes as per the felt needs of the people and the area. Block Agency should be effectively involved especially in the schemes under agriculture, forestry and pasture development. In order to reduce the consumption of firewood, the non-conventional sources of energy like bio-gas plants and Solar Energy may be introduced

19. Case study The impact of the DDP watershed development programme on the agricultural economy so that living standard of the rural population improved; this study has taken up the following specific objectives:

20. 20XX presentation title 20 The watershed projects under IWDP and DDP have been completed in three Rohtak Yamuna Nagar Kaithal and five Bhiwani Hissar Sirsa Narnaul Rewari districts respectively till 31-07-2013 which were implemented under Haryali Guideline, 2003.

21. presentation title 21 Source of Data The study has been made by an intensive reference to the primary data in trying to analyze the study objective. Interview schedule method has been used as the main tool for the data collection. Reference year of the study is 2014-15 20XX

22. Analytical Techniques For analyzing the impacts of the watershed development programme on production, productivity, cropping pattern, and cropping intensity simple analytical techniques average and percentage methods have been used. For analyzing the result the study used the following concepts have been used: Cropping Intensity = gross cropped area net sown area 100 20XX presentation title 22

23. Production Total Cost has been included following Costs: Variable Cost = Operational Cost + Interest of Working Capital (12.5 % p.a. for half the period of crop) Total Cost = C2 [Variable Cost + Rental Value of Land + 10 % p.a. of present value of fixed assets] + 10 % of C2 as managerial input 20XX presentation title 23 Estimation of Production Cost:

24. 20XX presentation title 24 Results and Discussions: A comparison of WSA and Non-WSA under DDP watershed development programme related to production, productivity of different crops, cropping pattern, cropping intensity, cost and returns of different crops has been done. Then find out percentage deviation between them so that impacts of DDP watershed development programme have been examined.

25. 20XX presentation title 25

26. 20XX presentation title 26 Table 2 Impact of DDP on Cropping Pattern and Cropping Intensity in Haryana

27. 20XX presentation title 27

28. Conclusion General finding of present study suggests that DDP programme have positive impact on the production of crops and agriculture production has been higher in WSA for those crops which were cropped at higher percentage of gross cropped area as compared to Non-WSA under both programmes . DDP watershed development programme has significant positive impact on the productivity of most of crops and the productivity of crops were ranged 0.14 quintals per acre in case of cotton crop to 44.67 quintals per acre in case of carrot (vegetable) crop in WSA as compared to Non-WSA. DDP watershed development programme has positive impact on cropping pattern due to water resources increased so that cropping pattern changed in favour of cash, vegetable and more water required crops. DDP watershed development programme has negative impact on cropping intensity because farmer shift from cotton half yearly crop to yearly sugarcane crop. 20XX presentation title 28

29. thank you