A STUDY ON PRODUCERS‟ SATISFACTION ABOUT

CO-OPERATIVE MILK SOCIETY

(With Special Reference to Erode District)

A PROJECT REPORT

Submitted by

< STUDENT NAME INITIAL.>

Reg No :

in partial fulfillment of the requirementfor the award of the degree

of

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

in

FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES

EXCEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE

(Autonomous)
Approved by AICTE, New Delhi & Affiliated to Anna University, Chennai
Accredited by NBA (AERO,CSE,ECE,MECH), NAAC with “A+” and Recognised by UGC (2f &12B)
KOMARAPALAYAM – 637303

May - 2024
 EXCEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE (Autonomous)
KOMARAPALAYAM - 637303

BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

Certified that this project report titled “<PROJECT TITLE>” is thebonafide

work of <STUDENT NAME> (<REG. NO.>), and who carried out the project under my
supervision. Certified further, that to the best of my knowledge the work reported herein
does not form part of any other project report or dissertation on the basis of which a degree
or award was conferred on an earlier occasion on this or any other candidate.

SIGNATURE OF THE GUIDE SIGNATURE OF THE HOD

Submitted for the viva-voce examination held on ………………

Internal Examiner External Examiner

COMPANY CERTIFICATE (IF
APPLICABLE)
 DECLARATION

I declare that the project report on “<PROJECT TITLE>” isthe result of original work
done by me and best of my knowledge, similar work has not been submitted to “ANNA
UNIVERSITY CHENNAI” for the requirement of Degree of Master of Business Administration
in Faculty of Management Science. This project report is submitted on the partial fulfilment of the
requirement of the award of Degree of Master of Business Administration.

Name

[Link]

I certified that the declaration made above by the candidate is true.

Date:
Place:

Signature of the Guide

[Link] Boopathy,
Assistant Professor/MBA,
Excel Engineering College (Autonomous),
Komarapalayam.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to express our sincere gratitude to our honorable chairman Prof.

[Link], [Link], MBA, [Link]., Ph.D., FTA, PHF, Excel Group Institution &
Vice Chairman [Link] KARTHICK., MBBS., [Link].(Diabetology)., MISTE.,
P.H.F of Excel Group Institution, Komarapalaym for providing immense facilities at our
institution.

I am very proudly rendering my thanks to our Principal [Link].,

[Link]., PhD., for the facilities and the encouragement given by him to the progress and
completion of our project.

I am proudly render our immense gratitude to the Head of the Department Dr.
K. ELAMVAZHUTHI.,Bsc.,B,Tech.,MBA.,Ph.D., for his effective leadership, encouragement
and guidance in the project.

We are highly indebted to provide our heart full thanks to our supervisor Mention Guide
Name, Qualification and Designation for his valuable ideas, encouragement and supportive
guidance throughout the project.

I wish to extend our sincere thanks to all faculty members of our MBA Department for
their valuable suggestions, kind co-operation and constant encouragement for successful
completion of this project.

I wish to acknowledge the help received from various Departments and various individuals
during the preparation and editing stages of the manuscript.

Name of the Student :

[Link]
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NO

ABSTRACT
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF CHARTS
INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Introduction to the Study 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 3
1.3 Scope of the Study 3
I 1.4 Objectives of the Study 4
1.5 Significance of the Study 4
1.6 Limitations of the Study 5
1.7 Industry profile 6
1.8 Company profile 14

II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 25
2.1 Review of Literature 25
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 31
III 3.1 Research Design 31
3.2 Statistical Tools Used 34
DATA ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION 36
4.1 Simple Percentage Analysis 36
IV
4.2 Chi- Square 54
4.3 ANOVA 64

FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS & CONCLUSION 67

5.1 Findings 67

5.2 Suggestions 69

5.3 Conclusion 70

BIBLIOGRAPHY 71

APPENDIX 73
 ABSTRACT

The market scenario is changing fast. A rise in household incomes has led to a
metamorphosis of rural and smaller markets. With globalization and entry of big players in
the organized sector, the challenges before the Indian dairy industry is to manage the
growth in production, processing and marketing without harming harbinger of this growth
the small farmer who is the most competitive milk producer in the world. In rural parts of
our country, dairy is the second important occupation after farming. Two key elements of
marketing strategy are focus on satisfaction and milk products mix expansionto include
UHT milk, cheese, ice creams. Milk is accepted as an essential part of a balanced diet. It is
a nutritive and a protective food. Any person from children to old agedpeople can consume
milk safely. Milk is produced by small farmers living in rural areas. They face a number of
problems which can be solved by co-operative efforts in the following ways. Small farmers
have one or two milk animals each. So their production ofmilk is carried on a small scale.
By availing co-operative loans with subsides.
Every small farmer can gradually keep many animals. This may results is increased
production milk. This will benefit such farmers as well as other milk consumers. Milk
produces farmers mostly depend on traditional milk vendors for marketing the milk
produced. Through milk producers co-operative society there is no problem for marketing.
This study has been conducted to know the level of satisfaction ofproducers’ about the co-
operative milk societies. To assess the satisfaction level ofProducers’ regarding the milk
procurement system by Co-operative Milk societies, a study was conducted in Erode
District. A total of 300 members were selected from various parts erode district. Data was
collected with the help of interview schedule by using questionnaire, which comprising of
different type of questions regarding the milk procurement system of co-operative milk
societies. To know the level of satisfaction I have employed Chi-Square, ANOVA, Simple
Percentage Analysis and Weighted Average Method. With the above statistical analysis
there are many facilities offered by co-operative milk societies but there are few demands
are knocking the doors of co- operative milk societies like price of the milk and percentage
of subsidies offered etc..
 LIST OF TABLES
Table No PARTICULERS PAGE NO
4.1 SIMPLE PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS 36
4.1.1 Gender of the Respondents 36
4.1.2 Age of the Respondents 37
4.1.3 Respondents’ Area of living 38
4.1.4 Marital Status of the Respondents 39
4.1.5 Educational Qualification of the Respondents 40
4.1.6 Family Size of the Respondents 41
4.1.7 Family Income of the Respondents 42
4.1.8 Occupation of the Respondents 43
4.1.9 Duration of the Membership in Cooperative Milk Society 44
4.1.10 Membership in cooperative milk society 45
4.1.11 Number of Milking Cattle own 46
Total revenue generated through milk production on
4.1.12 47
weekly basis
4.1.13 Average milk production per day (in Liters) 48
Liter(s) of milk supply averagely to cooperative milk
4.1.14 49
society per day.
4.1.15 Selling of milk directly to the public 50
Liter of Milk do you sell per day directly to the Public
4.1.16 51
Averagely
4.1.17 Feed required for Cows (per day) 52
4.1.18 Quality of Aavin Cattle Feed 53
4.2 CHI- SQUARE ANALYSIS 54
Comparison of Occupation and Membership in
4.2.1 54
Cooperative Milk Society
Comparison of Area of Living and Membership Duration
4.2.2 56
in Cooperative Milk Society
Comparison of Number of Milking Cattle and Revenue
4.2.3 58
generated through milk production on weekly basis
Comparison of Number of Milking Cattle and Cattle Feed
4.2.4 60
required Per Day
Comparison of Average Milk Production per day and
4.2.5 62
Average of Milk selling to the public directly (in Ltrs)
4.3 ANOVA 64
Comparison of Cattle feed required per day and
4.3.1 64
Availability cattle feed in co-operative milk society
 LIST OF CHARTS
Table No PARTICULERS PAGE NO
4.1 SIMPLE PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS 36
4.1.1 Gender of the Respondents 36
4.1.2 Age of the Respondents 37
4.1.3 Respondents’ Area of living 38
4.1.4 Marital Status of the Respondents 39
4.1.5 Educational Qualification of the Respondents 40
4.1.6 Family Size of the Respondents 41
4.1.7 Family Income of the Respondents 42
4.18 Occupation of the Respondents 43
4.19 Duration of the Membership in Cooperative Milk Society 44
4.1.10 Membership in cooperative milk society 45
4.1.11 Number of Milking Cattle own 46
Total revenue generated through milk production on
4.1.12 47
weekly basis
4.1.13 Average milk production per day (in Liters) 48
Liter(s) of milk supply averagely to cooperative milk
4.1.14 49
society per day.
4.1.15 Selling of milk directly to the public 50
Liter of Milk do you sell per day directly to the Public
4.1.16 51
Averagely

4.1.17 Feed required for Cows (per day) 52

4.1.18 Quality of Aavin Cattle Feed 53
 CHAPTER - 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1. INTRODUCTION ABOUT THE STUDY

India is ranked second in the world after the United States of America in milk
production. The future of India dairy industry will have to be built on quantity and quality
alone. The goal for dairy development in the eleventh five year plan was to achieve a
growth of at least 5% per annum. Tamilnadu Co-operative Milk Producers‟ Federation
Limited was registered in the State on 1st February 1981. The commercial activities of the
Department such as Milk Procurement, Processing, Chilling, packing and sale of milk to
the consumers etc., hitherto dealt with by the Tamilnadu Dairy Development Corporation
Ltd., were transferred to the newly registered Tamilnadu Co-operative Milk Producers‟
Federation Limited, popularly known as “Aavin”. Tamilnadu Co-Operative Milk
Producers‟ Federation Limited was constituted on 1st February 1981. Federation is
Procuring, Processing and Marketing of Milk and Milk Products. Federation has
implemented the Dairy Development activities under Operation Flood Programmer with
a financial and technical assistance of National Dairy Development Board.

Dairying has been practiced since time immemorial. A dairying activity is not
individual business entity, but a collective effort. Most of the farmers rear milch animals
for their own milk consumption and to earn considerable income. Presently there are
around 70,000 village dairy cooperatives across the country. The co-operative societies are
federated into 170 district milk producers unions, which in turn have 22-state cooperative
dairy federations. Milk production gives employment to more than 72 milliondairy farmers.
The history of the Dairy Development Movement in India is a new one. During the pre-
independence period this movement was limited to a few pockets of Calcutta, Madras,
Bangalore and Gujarat. The most notable of this venture was Kaira District Cooperative
Milk Producers’ Union Limited of Anand, Gujarat. But after independence, the National
Government took great initiative in setting up new Dairy Co operatives in many parts of
the country. The National Dairy Development Board (NDDB) was set up to make the
ambitious project a success over the span of three

1
decades, India has been transformed from a country of acute milk shortage to the world’s
leading milk producer, with production exceeding 144 million tonnes in 2014 gains of 4–
5 percent per annum. This phenomenal success is attributed to a Government initiative
known as Operation Flood (1970–1996) and its intense focus on dairy development
activities. In that initiative, rural milk shed areas were linked to urban markets through the
development of a network of village cooperatives for procuring and marketing milk. And
milk production and productivity were enhanced by ensuring the availability of veterinary
services, artificial insemination (AI), feed and farmer education. The investment paid off,
promoting production Livestock in general and dairying in particularplay a vital role in the
Indian economy. The contribution of the livestock sector to total national gross domestic
product (GDP) was 5.9 percent in 2000-01, with the milk group making the highest
contribution to the total value of the agriculture and allied sector (Rs. 1,44,088 crores). As
indicated above in the introduction, millions of people are employed in the livestock sector
and women constitute about 70 percent of the labour force.
Dairying has become an important secondary source of income for millions of rural
families and has assumed a most important role in providing employment and income
generating opportunity. Indian Dairying is unique in more than one way. It ranks first with
its 185.2 million cattle and 97.9 million buffaloes, accounting for about 51 percent of
Asia’s and about19 per cent of the world’s bovine population (Karmakar:2006). It also
ranks first in milk production with a production of 144 million tonnes in 2014. Contributing
about 5.3 per cent to India’s agricultural GDP, milk is a leading agricultural produce. The
value of output from milk at current prices, during 2006-07 has been over Rs.1,44,386
crores, which is higher than the output from paddy(Rs.85032 crore) alone and is also higher
than the value of output from wheat (Rs.66,721 crore) and sugarcane (Rs.28,488 crore),
put together. The unique feature of the system is that about 120 million rural families are
engaged in milk production activities, as against big specialized dairy farmers in the west
(Hegde: 2006). In spite of India’s position as highest producer of milk, productivity per
animal is very poor. It is only about 987 kg/lactation, as against world average of 2,038 kg/
lactation.

2
1.2. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The socio-economic profile of milk producers of co-operative milk society, the
level of producer satisfaction, the problems faced by the producers of co-operative milk
society and the producers‟ satisfaction with the function and opinion of co-operative milk
society play a vital role in the co-operative milk society.

1.3. SCOPE OF THE STUDY

This study emphasis in the following scope:
➢ To identify the producers’ level of satisfaction about cooperative milk societies in
Erode District.
➢ This study is helpful to the upcoming researchers for conducting further research.
➢ It is helpful to identify the producers’ level of satisfaction towards welfare measures
offered by cooperative milk societies.
➢ This study is helpful to cooperative milk societies for identifying the area of
dissatisfaction of Milk Producers’ or farmers.
➢ This study helps to make a managerial decision to the Aavin Diary.
➢ It is an interesting and significant area for conducting research.
➢ This study is useful to the management of Aavin Diary to know the satisfaction levels
of producers/ farmers and they can take measures to increase productivity.

3
1.4. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE
➢ To Know the Producers‟ Satisfaction about Co-Operative Milk Society.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVEs
➢ To know the socio-economic profile of milk producers /Farmers of co-operative milk
society.
➢ To know the milk producers /Farmers level of satisfaction about co-operative milk
society.
➢ To know the problem faced by the milk producers /Farmers of co-operative milk
society.
➢ To offer suitable suggestions for the improvement of consumers satisfaction.

1.5. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The present study will be helpful in many ways.
➢ With the help of the responses give n by the respondents and data analysis; the selected
dairy units will be able to understand its strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats.
➢ This study will be helpful to the educators to know about the Producers‟ Satisfaction
about Co-Operative Milk Society with special reference to Erode District.
➢ The study will be helpful to the selected dairy cooperatives for the improvement of the
producers’ satisfaction.
➢ The study will be helpful to increase the knowledge and will give proper guideline to
the researcher who is interested to make additions to the subject.

4
1.6. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The limitations of the present study are as under.
➢ The study is limited to cooperative milk societies working in Erode District at
Tamilnadu State. Its conditions cannot be applied to the whole cooperative milk societies
at national level.
➢ The tools and techniques used in the present study are not out of the verge of certain
limitations of their own which also applies to the study.
➢ The primary data have been collected through interview method from the respondents
of selected cooperative milk societies in Erode District. So there are the possibilities of
errors in the opinions of the respondents which apply to the present study.
➢ The data collection is subjected to the bias and prejudices of the respondents. Hence
100% accuracy can’t be assured.
➢ Respondents had answered the questions in questionnaires which may be socially
incorrect irrespective of their actual feelings.
➢ Since study is limited to the selected units only the findings and conclusion may not
have universal validity in it.
➢ Lack of cooperation of the respondents.

5
1.7. INDUSTRY PROFILE
Industry is one of the major constituents of the comprehensive term ‘Business’ which
may be defined as the regular or current production or purchase and sales of goods
undertaken with the main object of earning profit and acquiring wealth through the
satisfaction of human wants, and in the terms of Economics, business may be described as
a programmed of inputs (investment) and output (return) aiming at the maximization of
output with lowest input. Industry as a part of business activity is concerned with the
raising, producing, processing or fabricating products or services which may be used either
by the final consumers or by other industrial units for further production.
Industry may, broadly, be classified into four types viz., (a) Extractive (b) Genetic
(c) Manufacturing and(d) Constructive industry. Historically, they may be categorized into
(a) Primary or Natural industries, and (b) Factory industry. In the former are included
(1) Hunting (2) Fishing (3) Animal husbandry (4) Forestry (5) Agriculture (6) Mining (7)
and all other industries, which use, predominantly natural resources as the basis for their
productivity activities and whose products are utilized mainly by the ultimate consumers.
While the later covers those industries which undertakes, on massive scale, conversion of
raw material into finished products by extensive use of plant and machinery metallurgical
industries, engineering industries, textile industries, chemical and allied industries, food
industries, generation and distribution of electricity, etc. In the process of industrialization,
the primary industries get gradually and progressively submerged with the factory
industries.
Dairy industry occupies an important place in animal husbandry. It embraces the
production of milk, its preparation for sale as well as the manufacture of dairy products.
The Central Statistical Organization, Department of Statistics. Government of India, have
under the annual survey of industries, classified dairy industry under industries major
group-20, Food Manufacturing Industries.
A dairy industry depends on milk. Milk is raw material for dairy product. Milk is the
‘nature’s perfect food’ for all ages. It has almost all the vital nutrients needed for growth
and well being of the human body. Milk is the richest source of calcium and essential amino
acids which is good for bone formation. It is particularly beneficial for people recovering
from sickness, children, sport person, aged ones, women etc. The dairy

6
industry of India has grown from an almost completely unorganized but vastly complex
industry of a large magnitude to an organized industry during the last 55 years with an
annual milk production of about 29 million metric tones in the year 1979-80. India’s milk
production in 2001 is forecasted at 81 million tones. In India it took nearly 30 years to
achieve self-sufficiency in milk production. The country had produced 123 million tones
of milk in 2010-11, 127.9 million tons in 2011-12.
The annual growth rate for production of milk is increased about 5% in2011-12 as
compared to 2010-11. India continued to rank third amongst the countries of the world.
The first two position being held by Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and United States
of America. The dairy development in India has twin objectives of increasing total milk
supply on commercial basis and diversifying agricultural structure by developing dairy as
a supplementary or principal occupation which would help increasing the income of the
small and marginal agriculturists and/or landless labourers.
Dairy industry occupies an importance place in Indian economy. It embraces the
production of milk, its preparation for sale as well as manufacture of dairy products. The
growth of Indian dairy section has been spectacular during the past three decades. The
Indian dairy industry is not only a vital producer of an essential food item but it also is one
of the largest employers in the country in both the rural sector as well as the semi urban
and urban region. It gives an opportunity to about eight crores families across India. Apart
from the nutritional importance of milk for human consumption, dairying provides
employment to the vest number of persons with no means of production of their own and
put them to productive work so as to enable them to contribute to the national product and
earn their share in it. It processes tremendous potential for providing employment to the
massive rural population. It can equitably distribute the gain and thus assists even the
weakest sections of our society.
Further, milk is one of the few commodities which give the producer a large share
of what the consumer pays for it. Thus, dairying is a very important instrument for the
upliftment of the rural economy of our country. Dairy development on modern lives will
generate additional income and employment in rural areas itself and can act as an effective
instrument for social change in rural India. The composition of the milk production in India
has been dominated by buffalo milk with 76 per cent of the total milk

7
production as compared to 94 percent of cow milk in the total production of milk in the
ward. Although mulch buffaloes have come to be comparatively more prolific milk
procedures in India. The importance of cow continues as a supplier of cheap milk as also
bullocks. Livestock keeping in general and dairying in particular has been the integral part
of Indian agriculture. In additional, dairying provides a source of nutrition and additional
income to our farmers. Inefficient and poor maintenance of large number of cattle in the
context of available resources could be responsible for the fact that although there are 12
percent more dairy animals in India than four leading countries put together, India produces
less than 12 percent of the milk produced by these leading countries of the world.
DAIRY INDUSTRY IN INDIA
Dairy industry plays a dynamic role in India's agro-based economy. Dairy is now a
highly specialized field today that involves production, procurement, storage, processing
and distribution of dairy products. The dairy industry involves processing raw milk into
products such as consumer milk, butter, cheese, yogurt, condensed milk, skimmed milk
powder and ice cream, using processes such as chilling, pasteurization, and
homogenization.
India is the largest producer and consumer of milk in the world. The Indian dairy
sector is characterized by a very large number of small herds. Production of milk from
buffaloes exceeds that of cows, which are considered sacred by Hindus. India has an
extensive government supported dairy cooperative structure. Milk from the small herds is
collected by the cooperatives with centralized cooling facilities and transported to theend-
users in urban centers. Most of the milk produced (over 80%) is distributed as liquid milk
for home consumption or manufacturing of traditional products like ghee, paneer and
mithais. From burfi to kulfi, from Kalakh and to shrik hand, from yogurt to ice creams
extend the delectable world of Indian milk delicacies. India surpassed the US in 1998
with a production of 92 million tonnes to become the largest milk producing country in the
world. In 2006, India's milk production crossed 100 million tonnes, representing 15% of
world milk production. From being milk impoverished nation to the top producer has been
an astonishing success.

8
 Dairy sector, mainly an offshoot of agriculture sector in India, has taken shape of an
industry in a big way today. Intimately interwoven with the socio-economic fabric of rural
people in India, dairying has played a crucial role in providing nutritional security to the
millions of households. It has also strengthened our economy all along by supplementing
family incomes and generating gainful employment in the rural sector. Indian dairy
industry of late has become the major growth area and goes far beyond being an important
agri-business sector of the national economy. Besides being the largest milk producing
country with 5 per cent annual increase in milk production, India has a large market of
dairy products due to the constantly increasing demand for variety of milk products in the
urban as well as rural sectors.
The rising demand for value added milk products at the national level and opening
of the markets at the international level under the changing global scenario and WTO have
opened up new opportunities and threats alike for the Indian dairy industry Our country is
the world leader in the milk production thanks to the maximum cattle heads it has, and
farmers and co-operative societies. Main aim of the Indian dairy industry is only to better
manage the national resources to the highest milk producer in the entire globe –India boasts
of that status. India is otherwise known as the ‘Oyster’ of the global dairy industry, with
opportunities galore to the entrepreneurs globally. Anyone might want to capitalize on the
largest and fastest growing milk and milk products' market. The dairy industry in India has
been witnessing rapid growth.
The liberalized economy provides more opportunities for MNCs and foreign
investors to release the full potential of this industry. The enhance milk production and
upgrade milk processing using innovative technologies. The growth of the Indian dairy
section has been spectacular during the past three decades. But a sector growth depends
heavily on the country’s trade policy and especially so in the changing environment after
the setting up the world trade organization (WTO).The Indian dairy industry is not only a
vital producer of an essential food item but it also is one of the largest employers in the
country in both the rural sector as the semi-urban and urban regions. The Indian dairy has
called for continuous price monitoring of dairy products of both the international as well
as national level in order to curb dumping. As India is the largest milk producing country
in the world, industry expert says that the adverse impact of the recent policies going to

9
have a far reaching consequence on the economy as a whole. Overall, the Indian dairy
sector is experiencing an upheaval with new product launches, repositioning of brandsand
entry of newer players. This will also prompt several global players to enter the Indian
market. The growth of disposable incomes, change in family structures, more women
joining the work force and focus on healthy-nutritious and quality products are likely to
result in demand for a shift towards dairy products that are not just functional and
convenient but also meet the consumers' inspirational needs.
KEY AREAS OF CONCERN IN THE DAIRY INDUSTRY
1. Competitiveness cost of production, productivity of animals etc. The demand for
quality dairy products is rising and production is also increasing in many
developing countries. The countries which are expected to benefit most from any
increase in world demand for dairy products are those which have low cost of
production.
2. Production, processing and marketing infrastructure If India has to emerge as an
exporting country, it is imperative that we should develop proper production,
processing and marketing infrastructure, which is capable of meeting international
quality requirements. A comprehensive strategy for producing quality and safe
dairy products should be formulated with suitable legal backup.
3. Focus on buffalo milk based specialty Dairy industry in India is also unique with
regard to availability of a large proportion of buffalo milk. Thus, India can focus
on buffalo milk based specialty products, like Mozzarella cheese, tailored to meet
the needs of the target consumers.
4. Import of value-added products and export of lower value products With the trade
liberalization, despite the attempts of Indian companies to develop their product
range, it could well be that in the future, more value-added products will be
imported and lower value products will be exported. The industry has to prepare
them to meet the challenges.
NEW CHALLENGES OF GLOBALIZATION AND TRADE
Liberalization – Perspective 2010 The NDDB has recently put in place Perspective
2010″ to enable the cooperatives to meet the new challenges of globalization and trade
liberalization. Like other major dairying countries of the world, the Indian

10
cooperatives are expected to play a predominant role in the dairy industry in future as well.
However, India is in the mean time, attaining its past glory and is once again becoming
DOODH KA SAGAR. But, what percentage of this SAGAR is handled by the cooperatives
– just a little over 7%. Since liberalization of the dairy sector in 1991, a very large number
of private sector companies / firms have, despite MMPO, established dairy factories in the
country. The share of the total milk processing capacity by private sectoris 44% of total
installed capacity of 73 MLPD (Million Litres Per Day) in the country.
Therefore, the total share of the organized sector, both cooperatives as well as the
private sector is barely 12%. What is, therefore, disquieting is that as much as 88% share
of the total milk production is commanded by the unorganized sector – who specializes in
selling sub-standard, unpasteurized milk more often than not adulterated with harmful
chemicals. Besides, growth in milk production is likely to continue at the present rate of
4.4% in the near future. Who is going to handle this incremental milk? We must bear in
mind is both income and price what we must bear in mind both income & price elasticity
account for approximately 15% of the total expenditure of [Link] for milk, at current
rate of income growth is estimated to grow at 7% per annum. Interestingly, demand for
milk is expected to grow steadily over the next two decades as the low income rural and
urban families who have higher expenditure elasticity would also increase their income
due to new economic environment.

TAMILNADU CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS’ FEDERATION LIMITED

(TCMPF)
The Department of Dairy Development in Tamil Nadu was set up in the year 1958.
The Tamil Nadu Dairy Development Corporation Limited was formed in July 1972 to
manage the activities such as milk procurement, processing and marketing of the milk and
milk products.
Based on the “Anand” pattern developed by [Link], Tamil Nadu Co-operative
Milk Producers’ Federation (TCMPF) was formed in February’1981 as an apex body of
three tier cooperatives set up in Tamil Nadu and the District level milk producer unions
were formed in the year 1982.

11
 The Foundation of the Milk Co-operative Movement lies in the conviction that our
country’s socio-economic development is intertwined with the development of rural
[Link] Nadu ranks among the top ten States with a daily milk production of 201lakh
litres per day (LLPD) and fourth among the State Co-operatives with a daily average
procurement of 29.46 LLPD in [Link] per capita availability of milk in Tamil
Nadu has increased from 169 gm/day in 1993-94 to 268 gm/day in 2017-2018. This is due
to increase in Milk production, the rise in per capita income, changing life style, foodhabits
and export opportunities contributed to the rise in the demand for milk and milk
[Link] achieve the benefits of the “Second White Revolution”, TCMPF has taken
various measures such as payment of attractive procurement price to milk producers, huge
investment in dairy infrastructure at all levels starting from Primary Dairy Co- operative
Societies, to State level Federation.

OBJECTIVES
TCMPF is a Cooperative Apex Body in the State of Tamil Nadu representing
organizations of milk producers’ and implementing all round dairy development activities
to achieve the following objectives:

• To ensure assured and remunerative market round the year for the milk produced
by the farmer members.
• To make available quality milk and value added dairy products to consumers.
• To build & develop village level institutions as cooperative model units to manage
the dairy activities.
• To ensure provision of inputs for milk production, processing facilities and
dissemination of know how.
• To facilitate rural development by providing opportunities for self-employment at
village level, preventing migration to urban areas, introducing cash economy and
opportunity for a sustained income.

12
MILK CO-OPERATIVE SECTOR

[Link] ITEMS
1 Total number of Milk Producers Coop. Societies 12,585
Milk Producers Co-operative Societies formed during 2017-18
2 446
(in Nos.)
Total Number of members in Milk Producers Cooperative
3 20.26
Societies (In Lakh)
4 Number of milk pouring members (In lakh) 4.60
5 Milk Production by societies ( In LLPD) 31 to 36
6 Number of District Cooperative Milk Producers Union 17
7 State Level Federation 1
8 Milk Procurement by Unions (In LLPD) 26 to 31
9 Milk marketing in Chennai City (In LLPD) 11.91
10 Milk marketing in District Unions (In LLPD) 10.00
11 Number of Union Dairies 18
12 Number of Federation Dairies 5
13 Handling Capacity of Union Dairies (In LLPD) 29.57
14 Handling Capacity of Federation Dairies (In LLPD) 14.15
15 Number of Chilling Centres 34
16 Handling Capacity of Chilling Centres (In LLPD) 14.25
17 Number of Bulk Milk Cooler Units 341
18 Chilling Capacity of Bulk Milk Cooler units (In LLPD) 15.19
19 Number of rural milk collection routes 798
20 Number of milk distribution routes at the level of District Unions 304
21 Number of milk distribution routes in Chennai Metro 149
Number of Powder plants (Erode, Salem, Madurai Dharmapuri
22 5
District Unions and Federation)
23 Capacity of powder plants for drying Milk (MT/day) 90
24 Butter storage capacity (in MT) 4,304
25 SMP storage capacity (in MT) 6,950

13
 1.8 COMPANY PROFILE
The Department of Dairy Development in
Tamil Nadu was set up in the year 1958. The Tamil
Nadu Dairy Development Corporation Limited was
formed in July 1972 to manage the activities such as
milk procurement, processing and marketing of the
milk and milk products.
Based on the “Anand” pattern developed by [Link], Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk
Producers’ Federation (TCMPF) was formed in February’1981 as an apex body of three
tier cooperatives set up in Tamil Nadu and the District level milk producer unions were
formed in the year 1982.
The Foundation of the Milk Co-operative Movement lies in the conviction that our
country’s socio-economic development is intertwined with the development of rural India.
Tamil Nadu ranks among the top ten States with a daily milk production of 201
lakh litres per day (LLPD) and fourth among the State Co-operatives with a daily average
procurement of 29.46 LLPD in 2017-2018.
The per capita availability of milk in Tamil Nadu has increased from 169 gm/day
in 1993-94 to 268 gm/day in 2017-2018. This is due to increase in Milk production, the
rise in per capita income, changing life style, food habits and export opportunities
contributed to the rise in the demand for milk and milk products.
To achieve the benefits of the “Second White Revolution”, TCMPF has taken
various measures such as payment of attractive procurement price to milk producers, huge
investment in dairy infrastructure at all levels starting from Primary Dairy Co- operative
Societies, to State level Federation.

OBJECTIVES
TCMPF is a Cooperative Apex Body in the State of Tamil Nadu representing
organizations of milk producers’ and implementing all round dairy development activities
to achieve the following objectives:

14
 • To ensure assured and remunerative market round the year for the milk produced
by the farmer members.
• To make available quality milk and value added dairy products to consumers.
• To build & develop village level institutions as cooperative model units to manage
the dairy activities.
• To ensure provision of inputs for milk production, processing facilities and
dissemination of know how.
• To facilitate rural development by providing opportunities for self-employment at
village level, preventing migration to urban areas, introducing cash economy and
opportunity for a sustained income.
The philosophy of dairy development is to eliminate middlemen and organize
institutions to be owned and managed by the milk producers themselves, employing
professionals. To sum it up, every activity of TCMPF revolves around meeting one basic
objective: ‘Achieve economies of scale to ensure maximum returns to the milk producers,
at the same time facilitate wholesome milk at reasonable price to urban consumers’.
Ultimately, the complex network of cooperative organization should build a bridge
between masses of rural producers and millions of urban consumers and in the process
achieve a socio-economic revolution in every hinterland of the State.

STRATEGIES ADOPTED TO ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVES

Facilitating the active performance of the primary societies and transforming the
defunct societies as functional societies.

• Developing necessary facilities at primary and union levels for the benefit of milk
producers.
• Imparting skills among the target group.
• Imparting extension education to the milk producers on milk testing process so as
to strengthen the clean milk production at village level.
• Planning and implementing various schemes of State and Central Government for
achieving the best in milk production, processing and marketing.

15
 • Increasing the handling capacity of district level dairies to meet out the
requirements.
• Establishing new parlours, sales points and developing the retail units.
• Formation of new milk routes, consumer societies and increasing the sale of milk
cards.
DAIRY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
The head of the department is the Director of Milk Production and Dairy
Development (DMPDD). The DMPDD is also functioning as the ex-officio Managing
Director of Tamil Nadu Cooperative Milk Producers Federation (TCMPF) and as the
Registrar of all the 3 tier milk co-operatives. The Director is vested with the powers of
Registrar in discharging the statutory functions under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Co-
operative Societies Act, 1983 (TNCS Act) and Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Rules,
1988 (TNCS Rules). The Deputy Milk Commissioner at Head Office is assisting the
Director of Milk Production and Dairy Development both in carrying out the administrative
and statutory functions.
There are 29 circle Deputy Registrars (Dairying) functioning in the State who are
carrying out the administrative and statutory functions at the district level as per the powers
delegated by the TNCS Act, 1983 and TNCS Rules, 1988. The Department has cadre
strength of 805 employees including field staff.
MILK CO-OPERATIVES
The management of the dairy cooperatives is vested with the Board of Directors,
democratically elected from among the members of the society. The elections are
conducted according to the provisions of Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 and
Rules 1988, as and when the 5 year term of Board expires.
As the 5 year term of the existing Board expired during April 2018, election process
initiated in 4 states to constitute the new Board. The 1st stage of election was completed
and new elected Board in 1,663 societies assumed charge on 09.04.2018 and further
process was stopped based on court orders. The further process will be completed once the
legal issues are resolved.
However, to manage the day to day affairs of the societies especially for making
milk cost payment to the milk producers without any difficulty, the departmental officers

16
were authorized to operate the bank accounts of the society jointly with the staff of the
society.
Following are the three levels of Milk Producers Cooperative Societies in the State:
1. Milk Producers Society at the village level (MPCS)
2. Milk unions at the district level (DCMPU)
3. Federation at State level (TCMPF / AAVIN)

THREE TIER STRUCTURE OF DAIRY COOPERATIVES

STATISTICAL INFORMATION
Table-1
Approved Cadre Strength in District Cooperative Milk Producers Unions

Sl. No Name of the Post Cadre Strength

1 General Manager 17
2 Deputy General Manager 23
3 Asst. General Manager 83
4 Manager 379
5 Deputy Manager 330

17
 6 Extension Officer 302
7 Office Staff 533
8 Driver 255
9 Technical staff, Helpers 2,349
Total 4,271

Table-2
Milk Procurement by DCMPU
Average milk procurement
Sl. No. Year
per day (in lakh litres)
1 2010-2011 20.67
2 2011-2012 21.40
3 2012-2013 24.36
4 2013-2014 23.22
5 2014-2015 23.68
6 2015-2016 28.97
7 2016-2017 28.50
8 2017-2018 29.46

Table-3
District Union wise Milk Procurement (Average litre per day) (Annexure– I)
Sl. No Name of the Union 2016-17 2017-18
Kancheepuram -
1 97,812 1,11,775
Thiruvallur
2 Villupuram 2,09,878 2,16,913
3 Vellore 3,05,089 3,21,662
4 Dharmapuri 1,78,698 1,90,177
5 Salem 4,97,708 5,29,493
6 Erode 2,99,428 2,91,956
7 Coimbatore 2,62,369 2,44,319
8 Nilgiris 14,223 12,861
9 Madurai 2,59,329 2,76,340
10 Dindigul 63,575 59,693
11 Tiruchirapalli 4,11,508 4,34,652
12 Thanjavur 52,466 56,868
13 Pudukottai 42,810 48,639

18
 14 Sivagangai 61,435 57,513
15 Virudhunagar 16,663 17,547
16 Thiruneveli 69,193 69,456
17 Kanniyakumari 7,570 5,738
Total 28,49,755 29,45,602

MILK SALES
Table-4
District Union-wise Milk Sales

Name of the District Avg. Milk Sales Litre Per

S. No.
Union Day
2016-17 2017-18
Kancheepuram -
1 97,812 18,653
Thiruvallur
2 Villupuram 21,329 21,643
3 Vellore 69,173 72,039
4 Dharmapuri 24,953 27,343
5 Salem 1,89,922 1,95,938
6 Erode 66,114 65,608
7 Coimbatore 1,42,015 1,52,050
8 Nilgiris 16,493 16,486
9 Madurai 1,56,317 1,62,727
10 Dindigul 10,757 14,559
11 Trichy 1,17,873 1,17,830
12 Thanjavur 22,440 26,054
13 Pudukkottai 11,616 13,127
14 Sivagangai 28,952 33,518
15 Virudhunagar 5,127 5,381
16 Thiruneveli 41,926 42,359
17 Kanniyakumari 15,348 15,638
TOTAL 9,52,931 10,00,953

19
PRIMARY MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (MPCS)
The basic requirement to form a Primary Milk Producers Cooperative Society is at least 25
independent milk producers residing in the area of operation of the proposed society.

There are 12,585 Primary Milk Co-operative Societies at village level, out of which 2,044
are exclusive Women Milk Producers Co-operative Societies. These primary milk co-
operative societies procure around 35 lakh litre of milk per day from their members and
after selling around 4.5 LLPD locally, the remaining quantum of milk is sent to the district
unions and metro dairies.

The Primary Milk Producers Cooperative Societies are paid with remunerative prices based
on the quality of milk procured from the farmers. The current procurement price for cow
milk and buffalo milk is Rs.28 and Rs.35 per litre respectively. The societies are sharing
the profit with the milk producers.

ACTION TAKEN ON REVIVING THE DORMANT SOCIETIES

There are 4171 Milk Producers Cooperative Societies which are in dormant position in
Dairy Development Department. Efforts are being taken to revive 2130 dormant Milk
Producers Cooperative Societies which are dormant within 2 years and to organise 2041
new Milk Producers Cooperative Societies in lieu of dormant societies which are dormant
for more than 2 years.

20
 Action has been taken to supply of cattle feed, mineral mixture and 2 milk cans for each
society at subsidized rate. It is also proposed to increase the number of milch animals by
facilitating with banks to issue loans to the milk producers to purchase the milch animals
with subsidy under Dairy Entrepreneur Development Scheme (DEDS) and other
Governmental schemes.

Efforts have been taken to attract the milk producers who are now pouring milk to private
parties, by ensuring instant payment of milk cost based on the quality of milk.

By implementing all the above measures, the Dairy Development Department is aiming
to revive all the dormant Milk Producers Cooperative Societies in a phased manner, thereby
increase milk production.

PRIMARY MILK CONSUMERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES

The Milk Consumer Cooperative Societies had been formed to ensure prompt and regular
supply of hygienic and quality milk and milk products at a reasonable price to the
consumers. They receive milk in sachets and milk products from Federation / District
Cooperative Milk Producers Unions and supply it to the consumers.

There are 62 Milk Consumer Co-operative Societies are functioning across the State. In
Chennai City and suburban areas alone, 49 Milk Consumers Cooperative Societies are
selling nearly 3.17 lakh litre of milk per day.

MCCS PARLOURS (AS ON 03.04.19)

PARTY MOBILE
SL. No. SOCIETY NAME AREA
CODE NUMBER
1 M001 WEST MAMBALAM MCCS WEST MAMBALAM
2 M002 TAMBARAM WEST MCCS TAMBARAM
3 M003 CROMPET MCCS CROMPET
4 M004 PALLAVARAM MCCS PALLAVARAM 9840844023
5 M005 KORATTUR MCCS - I KORATTUR
6 M007 CHETPET MCCS CHETPET
7 M009 RANGARAJAPURAM MCCS RANGARAJAPURAM
8 M010 NANGANALLUR MCCS NANGANALLUR 9381180850

21
9 M011 ADAMBAKKAM MCCS ADAMBAKKAM
10 M012 PETERS ROAD MCCS PETTERS ROAD
11 M013 ICF MCCS I.C.F.
12 M014 METHA NAGAR MCCS METHA NAGAR
13 M015 [Link] MCCS [Link]
14 M016 KILPAUK MCCS KILPAUK
15 M017 VIRUGAMBAKKAM MCCS VIRUGAMBAKKAM
16 M018 WASHERMENPET MCCS WASHERMENPET
17 M020 WEST ANNA NAGAR MCCS
M.C.C.S PATTABIRAM
18 M022 PATTABIRAM
BUS STOP
19 M023 EAST ANNA NAGAR MCCS EAST ANNA NAGAR
20 M024 TAMBARAM EAST MCCS TAMBARAM
21 M025 NUNGAMBAKKAM MCCS NUNGAMAKKAM, CH-34
22 M026 THIRUVANMIYUR MCCS-I THIRUVANMIYUR 9710624337
69, VENKATAPURAM,
AMBATTUR MCCS
23 M027
(AMBATTUR)-I
[Link]
4, SINGARA THOTTAM,
24 M028 ROYAPURAM MCCS
IST LANE
25 M030 KALMANDAPAM MCCS ROYAPURAM CHENNAI 13
26 M031 THIRUVOTTIYURE MCCS 5/2 CINNAMETUPALAYAM 1ST
27 M032 SAIDAPET MCCS SAIDAPET
GANDHI NAGAR, AVADI,
28 M034 AVADI MCCS
CH-54
29 M036 [Link] EAST MCCS 225, JEEVANANDAN SALAI
30 M037 KORATTUR MCCS UNIT-III NOLAMBUR MOGAPAIR
31 M038 VALLALAR NAGAR MCCS NO.508, MINI STREET
32 M039 VELACHERY MCCS VELACHERY 9884296712
33 M040 CHOOLAI MEDU MCCS CHOOLAIMEDU
34 M041 CHOOLAI MCCS CHOOLAI
35 M042 ASHOK NAGAR MCCS ASHOK NAGAR
36 M043 MANDAIVELI MCCS MANDAIVELI
SAIDAPET MILK
37 M046 SAIDAPET 9382516383
PROCUREMENT SOCIETY

38 M047 SEMBAKKAM MCCS SEMBAKKAM

39 M048 PEERKAN KARANAI MCCS KAMARAJ NAGAR 9790735505

22
40 M053 CHENGALPET MCCS CHENGALPET 9841184875
AMBATTUR MCCS VENKATAPURAM,
41 M054
(AMBATTUR)-II AMBATTUR, CH-53
NANGANALLUR MCCS
42 M056 KEELKATTALAI
UNIT-II
PALKALI NAGAR,
43 M057 THIRUVANMIYUR MCCS -II
PALAVAKKAM
AMBATTUR MCCS RAM NAGAR,
44 M060 9840256846
(AVM 146)-III CHENNAI - 53
45 M061 THIRUVANMIYUR -II KANATHUR 9500107139
46 M062 THIRUVANMIYUR -II MAHABALIPURAM
47 M063 THIRUVANMIYUR -III KOTIVAKKAM

SERVICES TO PRODUCERS
The main objective
of the milk co-operatives is
to protect the interest of the
milk producers. To achieve
these objectives the
following services are
provided to the milk
producers.

23
24
 CHAPTER – 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 REVIEW

1. Vyas and chaudhri (1971) in their study on “Economics of Dairy farming in Mehsana
District” have shown that high – yield of reduction and low cost of productivity occurred
in dairy farming in the co-operative sector. The results are observed based on the
comparative study of co-operative and non-co-operative dairy forming.

2. Narayanan (1971 in his study on the “Impact of co-operative milk union on Rural
Industry” emphasizes that the spread effects of dairy farming by way of external
economics, creation of demand for dairy input services. Demonstration effects and
infrastructure facilities are essential for rural industrial of dairy units.

3. Patel S.M Thakur D.S. and Pandey M.K (1976) made a case study “Impact of dairy
development through milk co-operatives” with the objectives of the study being to examine
the progress of selected co- operative milk societies and to analysis the impact of co-
operative milk societies on economic conditions of the farmers in general and weaker
sections in particular in different villages. It is a comparative study of the villageswith and
without dairy co-operatives.

4. Balishter and Diwakar Singh (1981) have made “A study on marketing of milk in Agra
district” with the objectives of studying costs and margins in milk marketing they have
worked out price spread under different channels of milk marketing. The study used the
primary data collected from the sample households of two classified zones. Following
multistage restricted proportionate stratified random sampling method the study found that
more than 90% of the marketed milk is sold through first channel namely producer. The
suggested that higher price share in value added can be transferred to producer if they
organize the dairy enterprise on co-operative basis.

5. M.K. Radhekrishanan (1998)“A study on the performance of dairy co-operatives in

erode district” the study concluded that attempted to examine the intricacies of co-
25
operative dairy industries mounting in terms of their utility to society or this impact to the
milk producers to analysis the performances of the union societies and its members
problem.

6. [Link] (Dec 2001) “A study on marketing of aavin milk in Nilgiris district with
special references to Ooty” with the objectives of decreasing sales to find out it prices
influences the buying behavior of the consumer to find any sales promotional activities.
Though the quality of product is superior the products are not sold to the expected level
due to the reasons such as higher price, task of attractive package, awareness salesmen
behavior and lack of advertisement when compared with the western countries, the dairy
consumption of milk per head in our country is low.

7. Boopathiraj (2005) “A study on members satisfaction of milk producers co-operative

societies in Bhavani taluk” to objectives of the study to review the performance of milk
producers co-operative societies in erode, performance of societies from the members point
of view, to identify the factors influencing members satisfaction. It concluded that the
satisfaction of the members could be increased by making arrangement for the members to
visit different leading and successful co-operative societies.

8. Patel (1976)5 in his article ‘Milk for Millions’ suggests that the significant increase in
milk production could be achieved only if additional feed is made available and a greater
percentage of the available feed is reserved for high yielding animals.

9. Grewal and Rangi (1980)6 in their article “Economics and employment of Dairyingin
Punjab” pointed out that the total milk production in the state of Punjab was 21.03 lakh
tonnes in 1970-71 which increased to 29.26 lakh tonnes in 1978-79. The percapita
production of milk had increased from 437gm per day to 511gm in the same period. This
was done by replacement of low yielding indigenous cows with high yielding buffaloes
and cross breed cows.

26
10. Velappan and Chidambaranathan (1982)7 in their book ‘Agricultural Economics’ says
that measures, both preventive as well as curative, should be undertaken on a large scale
to tackle various cattle diseases. Proper nutritive fodder, sound breeding and healthy
surroundings would help the prevention of diseases and surely increase milk production.

11. Singh and Tewari (1986)8 in their article. “An Economic Analysis of Inter State
isparities of Milk Production and Institutional Facilities in India” pointed out that the
institutional encouragement for co-operative societies, might greatly help in increasing the
production of milk in backward areas of India.

12. Muniraj (1987)9 in his book “Farm Finance for Development” indicated that increasing
milk production depended on meeting the fodder and concentrate feed requirements
adequately during lactation and dry period. Feeding the animals with balanced diet gave
better milk yield.

13. Punjab Singh and Majumdar (1992)10 in their article, “Current status of Feed and
Forage in management of livestock in India” stated that the proper feeding and
management could substantially increase milk production. This required regular supply of
dry and green fodder. Available production technologies and land could maintain supply
of fodder at optimum level but required a massive production drive to increase the
production.

14. Shine Charen Mathus (1993)11 in his article “Livestock Development vital for Animal
Energy in Rajasthan state” Suggested that pasture development programme hadto be taken
in a big way and resources would have to be diverted for the success of livestock
development programme. Production of ordinary and leguminous fodder, financial
assistance to individual farmers for the development of indigenous pasture, afforestation
and growing of fodder in irrigated areas had to be taken up in a big way. This was very
much essential for increasing milk production in the backward areas of Rajasthan.

27
15. Sandip K. Bhatt (1994)12 in his article ‘Issue of Co-operative Dairying in India” stated
that milk production increased by upgrading cows and buffaloes through artificial
insemination. Also a conscious attempt should be made to alter the relative ratio between
buffaloes and cows in favour of the latter to reduce fluctuations in milk production between
the summer and winter seasons.

16. Kulandaisamy (1991)13 studied the “Women participation in Dairy cooperatives in

Tamil Nadu”. The study concluded that the livestock and dairy had been one of the sectors
in India where female work force participation had been high. Poor rural women performed
a large part of the work relating to the maintenance of Dairy cattle, milk production and
processing. The women’s welfare department had agreed to give 20 percent margin money
for purchase of milch cattle by women cooperative members.

17. Raja Mohan (1996)14 in his article, ‘Problems Facing Dairy Cooperatives in
Uselampatty Taluk in Madurai District of Tamil Nadu” states that the unsatisfactory
marketing facilities compels the milk producers to convert their surplus milk into milk
products like butter, curd and ghee and force some others to sell it to the private vendors
or middlemen at lower prices. The staff members of the societies are not trained properly
and they are not sincere in the testing and dispatching of milk. They have failed to keep
and maintain profit and loss accounts. This would lead to wrong calculation of income of
the milk producers and finally affect their income.

18. Madanna and MV Srinivasa Gowda (1994)15 “Co-operative and the commercialization
of milk production in India” stated that for a long period dairying in India was characterized
by the dominance of small and marginal farmers, scattered production, inadequate
marketing channels, lack of modern inputs and facilities for products transportation. Milk
marketing was represented by unorganized private traders who turned milk trading into an
exploitative market. Nowadays for marketing of milk - a highly perishable commodity, it
has been felt that a well conceived and organized network of dairy co-operatives right
from the village level would be essential for the speedy growth of dairy industry in the
country.

28
19. Ramanujam K.N. (2003)16 studied the ‘Role of Co-operatives in Milk Marketing
venture’ as Indian middle class consumers have a craze for milk and its products. As they
have good purchasing power, there exists high demand for milk and milk products. As a
result, India is emerging as one of the largest and fastest growing consumer market for milk
and value added milk products in the world and the ever increasing demand for milk
products is a testimony for this. Therefore, only by having an effective and sound system
of distribution of milk and milk products, will India emerge as the world’s leading dairy
nation.

20. Sunil Kulkarni (2004)17 in his article the “Role of Logistics in Dairy Industry as a
dairy” unit felt the need for strong logistic system which will primarily maintain the
equilibrium of milk collection, processing and distribution. It will increase the productivity
of the dairies and maintain an optimum supply for the consumers.

21. Sathya Sundram (2005)18 in his article “Rural Poverty and Dairy Development” said
that milk production increased from 17 million tonnes in 1950- 51 to 88.1 million tonnes
in 2003-2004. The quantum of additional employment generation in dairy industry depends
on various factors like number and type of animals possessed, size of households and
feeding practices.

22. Suriyamurthi S. and Ramachandran S (2003)19 in their article “Problems and prospects
of Co-operative milk producers union in Tamil Nadu” say that the rural farmers joined
together with production managers to make the country self sufficient in milk. Theaim of
Co-operative society is not to maximize the return on capital employed but to render service
to its members effectively and efficiently.

23. Periyasami N. (2006)20 in his article “Milk production in India” through which it is
established that the cost of production per litre of milk in India worked out to be the lowest
in the world. Thus there will be competitive advantage to increase India’s global

29
share of export in the dairy sector. Since Indian dairy sector is one of the least subsidized
sectors in the world, it can therefore, afford to take an aggressive stand in its position in
world milk production. India became the world leader in milk production in 2001 with a
production of 84 million tonnes.

24. Antony Reegan M (2004)21 in his report, ‘A financial Analysis of KDCMPU’,

explains its financial performance. He found that the Kanyakumari Union is one of the 17
profit earning unions. The milk produced in the union is sold through their own parlors, to
the shops in the societies and also to other districts. He gave some suggestions to encourage
the MPCS by way of giving more awards and prizes as well as ideas to improve milk
production.

25. Jebasiya. C (2002)22 in her report ‘Human Resource Development and Climate survey
in KDCMPU Ltd’ explains the labour recruitment, remuneration and other welfare
measures. She found that the KDCMPU Ltd., has a well structured human resource
development system.

26. Rajaprabhaker P. (2005)23 in his study ‘A study on consumer preference of Aavin Full
cream Milk in Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil Aavin Dairy”, explained the products of
KDCMPU and the methods of preparation, particularly the full cream Milk. He found that
more than 58% of the people prefer the full Cream Milk, and so the production increases
year after year.

27. K.A. Sheeba (2006)24 in her study “A study on production and Marketing of milk in
Agesteeswaram Taluk”, found out that more milk producers societies have been
functioning in the Taluk. Further she gave some valuable suggestions to improve the
economical production and marketing of milk.

30
 CHAPTER – 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research methodology is a way to systematically represent a research on any
problem. It tends taken by the researcher in studying the research problem along with the
logic behind them. It tends to define the methodology for the solution of the problem that
has been undertaken for the purpose of the study.

3.1. RESEARCH DESIGN

SOURCES OF DATA COLLECTION
PRIMARY DATA:
For evaluating the objectives of the study, both primary and secondary data were utilized.
The primary data were collected from the respondents through pretested questionnaire.
SECONDARY DATA:
Secondary data was collected through following sources.
✓ Available Books, Thesis and Dissertation
✓ Published research studies, journals, reports, articles, research papers, etc.
✓ Data through internet source
✓ Annual Reports of the selected Co-operative milk societies.
SAMPLING DESIGN
UNIVERSE
✓ Co-operative milk societies in Erode District.
SAMPLE ELEMENTS
✓ Mullampatti Co-operative milk society
✓ Kajikovil Co-operative milk society
✓ Kangeyam Co-operative milk society
✓ Kunnathur Co-operative milk society and
✓ Ingur Co-operative milk society.
SAMPLE SIZE
A convenient sample of 300 milk suppliers has been selected for the present study.

31
SAMPLE METHOD
The research was made by the survey in accordance to the convenience of the employees.
So the sample type is convenient sampling.
METHODOLOGY
A questionnaire encompassing of well-thought-out questions regarding the
satisfaction level of member dairy farmers regarding the milk procurement system of co-
operative milk society was used for interviewing the member farmers of co-operative milk
society.
HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY
In the present study two hypothesis were used
(i) Null hypothesis and
(ii) Alternative hypothesis.

Null Hypothesis (H0)

A statistical hypothesis that states that there is no difference between a parameter
and a specific value, or that there is no difference between two parameters.

Alternative Hypothesis (H1)

A statistical hypothesis that states the existence of a difference between a parameter
and a specific value, or states that there is a difference between two parameters.
Hypothesis Formulated
1. H0 (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between Occupation and
Membership in Cooperative Milk Society.
H1 (Alternate Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between Occupation and
Membership in Cooperative Milk Society.
2. H0 (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between Area of Living and
Membership Duration in Cooperative Milk Society.
H1 (Alternate Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between Area of Living and
Membership Duration in Cooperative Milk Society.

32
3. H0 (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between Number of Milking
Cattle and revenue generated through milk production on weekly basis.
H1 (Alternate Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between Number of
Milking Cattle and revenue generated through milk production on weekly basis.
4. H0 (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between Number of Milking
Cattle and Cattle Feed required Per Day.
H1 (Alternate Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between Number of
Milking Cattle and Cattle Feed required Per Day.
5. H0 (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between Average Milk
Production per day and Average of Milk selling to the public directly.
H1 (Alternate Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between Average Milk
Production per day and Average of Milk selling to the public directly.

33
3.2. STATISTICAL TOOLS USED
Chi-Square Test
To determine whether the association between two qualitative variables is
statistically significant, researchers must conduct a test of significance called the Chi-
Square Test. There are five steps to conduct this test.

Step 1: Formulate the hypotheses

Step 2: Specify the expected values for each cell of the table (when the null
hypothesis is true)
Step 3: To see if the data give convincing evidence against the null hypothesis,
compare the observed counts from the sample with the expected counts, assuming H0 is
true.
Step 4: Compute the test statistic
The chi-square statistic compares the observed values to the expected values. This
test statistic is used to determine whether the difference between the observed and expected
values is statistically significant.
Step 5:
Decide if chi-square is statistically significant. The final step of the chi-square test
of significance is to determine if the value of the chi-square test statistic is large enough
to reject the null hypothesis. Statistical software makes this determination much easier.

Simple Percentage Analysis

This is a method to compare two or more serious of data. It identifies the
relationship between the data’s.
SAA= Number of the Respondents
× 100

34
 Total Number of Respondents
Where, SAA - Simple Average Analysis.
ANOVA(Analysis of Variance)
Statistical technique for determining the degree of difference or similarity between
two or more groups of data. It is based on the comparison of the average value of a common
component.

ANOVA

Correction Factor: (G) 2

n
Total Sum of Square = ∑ Yij2- C.F

Column Sum of Square (CSS) = ∑ Cij2 - C.F

ri
Row Sum of Square (RSS) = ∑ rij2 - C.F - CF
ri

Error Sum of Square (ESS) = TSS-(CSS+RSS)

35
 CHAPTER – 4
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
[Link] PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS
Table No: 4.1.1. Gender of the Respondents

Valid Cumulative
[Link] Gender Frequency Percent
Percent Percent

1 Male 185 61.7 61.7 61.7

2 Female 115 38.3 38.3 100.0

Total 300 100.0 100.0

(Source: Primary Data)

Interpretation:
The above table reveals that 61.7% of the respondents are belongs to Male
and 38.3% of the respondents are belongs to Female Category.
Chart No: [Link] of the Respondents
70.0
Male, 61.7 %
60.0

50.0

40.0 Female, 38.3%

30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0
1

36
Table No: 4.1.2. Age of the Respondents
Valid Cumulative
[Link] Age Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
1 Below 30 39 13.0 13.0 13.0
2 30 to 40 114 38.0 38.0 51.0
3 41-50 36 12.0 12.0 63.0
4 51-60 61 20.3 20.3 83.3
5 Above 60 50 16.7 16.7 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table shows that 13% of the respondents are coming under the age
category of Below 30 Years, 38% of the respondents are belongs to 30 to 40 years, 12% of
the respondents are in between 41-50 age category, 20.3% of the respondents are between
51-60 years of age and 16.7% of the respondents are coming under above 60 agecategory.

Chart No: 4.1.2. Age of the Respondents

40.0

35.0

30.0
% of the Respondents

25.0

20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0
Below 30 30 to 40 41-50 51-60 Above 60
Age group of Respondets

37
Table No: 4.1.3. Respondents’ Area of living
Area of Cumulative
[Link] Living Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
1 Village 180 60.0 60.0 60.0
2 Urban 75 25.0 25.0 85.0
3 Semi Urban 24 8.0 8.0 93.0
4 City 21 7.0 7.0 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table illustrates that 60% of the respondents are residing in Village,
25% of the respondents are living in Urban, 8% of the respondents are belongs to Semi
Urban area and 7% of the respondents are residing in City side.

Chart No: 4.1.3. Respondents’ Area of living

60.0%
60.0
50.0
40.0
25.0%
30.0
20.0
8.0%
10.0 7.0%
0.0
Village
Urban
Semi Urban
City

Series2

38
Table No: 4.1.4. Marital Status of the Respondents
Marital Valid Cumulative
[Link] Frequency Percent
Status Percent Percent
1 Single 74 24.7 24.7 24.7
2 Married 182 60.7 60.7 85.3
3 Widower 36 12.0 12.0 97.3
4 Divorced 8 2.7 2.7 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table exemplifies that 24.7% of the respondents are Single, 60.7%
of the respondents are Married, 12% of the respondents are belongs to widower category
and 2.7% of the respondents are divorced.

Chart No: 4.1.4. Marital Status of the Respondents

70.0

60.0
% of the Respondents

50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0
Single Married Widower Divorced
Series2 24.7 60.7 12.0 2.7

39
Table No: 4.1.5. Educational Qualification of the Respondents

Educational Valid Cumulative

[Link] Frequency Percent
Qualification Percent Percent

1 Illiterate 38 12.7 12.7 12.7

2 Schooling 130 43.3 43.3 56.0
3 Undergraduate 55 18.3 18.3 74.3
4 Post Graduate 42 14.0 14.0 88.3
5 Doctorate 35 11.7 11.7 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table demonstrates that 12.7% of the respondents are Illiterate,
43.3% of the respondents has been completed their school education,18.3% of the
respondents are completed their Under graduation, and 14% of the respondents are Post
Graduates and 11.7% of the respondents are did Doctoral degree .

Chart No: 4.1.5. Educational Qualification of the Respondents

50.0
45.0 43.3%

40.0
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0 18.3%
12.7% 14.0%
15.0 11.7%
10.0
5.0
0.0
Illiterate Schooling Undergraduate Post Graduate Doctorate

40
Table No: 4.1.6. Family Size of the Respondents
Family Valid Cumulative
[Link] Frequency Percent
Members Percent Percent
1 2 Members 81 27.0 27.0 27.0
2 3 Members 75 25.0 25.0 52.0
3 4 Members 91 30.3 30.3 82.3
5 Members
4 53 17.7 17.7 100.0
& Above
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table exhibits that 27 % of the respondents family consists of 2
Members, 25% of the respondents family consists of 3 Members, 30.3% of the respondents
are having 4 members in their family, and 17.7% of the respondents family consists of 5
and above members .

Chart No: 4.1.6. Family Size of the Respondents

35.0

30.0
30.3%
27.0%
25.0
25.0%

20.0

17.7%
15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0
2 Members 3 Members 4 Members 5 Members & Above

41
Table No: 4.1.7. Family Income of the Respondents
Valid Cumulative
[Link] Income Level Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
1 10000-20000 48 16.0 16.0 16.0

2 20001-30000 138 46.0 46.0 62.0

3 30001-40000 42 14.0 14.0 76.0

4 40001-50000 19 6.3 6.3 82.3

5 Above 50000 53 17.7 17.7 100.0

Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table exhibits that 16 % of the respondents’ family income is
Rs.10000-20000, 46% of the respondents family is Rs.20001-30000, 14% of the
respondents’ family income is Rs.30001-40000, 6.3% of the respondents family’s monthly
earning is Rs.40001-50000 and 17.7% of the respondents family income lays under Above
50000 Rupees.

Chart No: 4.1.7. Family Income of the Respondents

50.0
45.0
46.0%
40.0
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0 17.7%
16.0%
10.0 14.0%
5.0
6.3%
0.0
10000-20000 20001-30000 30001-40000 40001-50000 Above 50000

42
Table No: 4.1.8. Occupation of the Respondents
Cumulative
[Link] Occupation Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Percent
1 Farming 140 46.7 46.7 46.7
2 Salaried 33 11.0 11.0 57.7
3 Business Person 30 10.0 10.0 67.7
4 Professional 34 11.3 11.3 79.0
5 Self Employed 36 12.0 12.0 91.0
6 Housewives 27 9.0 9.0 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table displays that 46.7% of the respondents are doing farming, 11%
of the respondents are salaried, 10% of the respondents are doing their own business,
11.3% of the respondents are professionals, 12% of the respondents are self employed and
9% of the respondents are housewives.

Chart No: 4.1.8. Occupation of the Respondents

9%
Farming
12%
Salaried

47% Business Person

11% Professional
Self Employed

10% Housewive

11%

43
Table No: 4.1.9. Duration of the Membership in Cooperative Milk Society

Duration of Valid Cumulative

[Link] Frequency Percent
membership Percent Percent
1 Less Than 5 Years 56 18.7 18.7 18.7
2 5 Years to 10 Years 89 29.7 29.7 48.3
3 11 Years to 15 Years 47 15.7 15.7 64.0
4 15 Years to 20 Years 53 17.7 17.7 81.7
5 Above 20 Years 55 18.3 18.3 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table shows that 18.7% of the respondents are having less than 5 years
of membership in cooperative milk society, 29.7% of the respondents are having
membership in between 5 to 10 Years, 15.7% of the respondents are having membership
between 11 to 15 years, 17.7% of the respondents are having membership in between 15
to 20 Years and 18.3 % of the respondents are member having membership more than 20
years in the cooperative milk society.
Chart No: 4.1.9. Duration of the Membership in Cooperative Milk Society

18% 19%

Less Than 5 Years

5 Years to 10 Years
11 Years to 15 Years
18%
15 Years to 20 Years
Above 20 Years
29%

16%

44
Table No: 4.1.10. Who is having membership in cooperative milk society?

Membership Cumulative
[Link] Frequency Percent Valid Percent
owns by Percent
1 Myself 25 8.3 8.3 8.3
2 Father 65 21.7 21.7 30.0
3 Husband 50 16.7 16.7 46.7
4 Wife 65 21.7 21.7 68.3
5 Mother 95 31.7 31.7 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table shows that 8.3% of the respondents are having own membership
society, 21.7% of the respondents’ fathers are having membership, 16.7% of the
respondents’ husbands are having membership, 21.7% of the respondents’ wives are
having and 31.7% of the respondents’ mothers are member having membership.

Chart No: 4.1.10. Who is having membership in cooperative milk society?

Husband
16%

Mother
Other 32%
Father Wife
54%
22% 22%

Myself
8%

45
Table No: 4.1.11. Number of Milking Cattle own
Valid Cumulative
[Link] [Link] Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
1 Up to 2 52 17.3 17.3 17.3
2 2-3 108 36.0 36.0 53.3
3 4-5 55 18.3 18.3 71.7
4 5-6 52 17.3 17.3 89.0
5 6 Above 33 11.0 11.0 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table shows that 17.3% of the respondents are having upto 2 Cattle in
their farm, 36% of the respondents are having 2-3 cattles in their farm, 18.3% of the
respondents are having 4-5 cattles, 17.3% of the respondents are having 5-6 cattles in their
farm and 31.7% of the respondents’ mothers are member having membership.

Chart No: 4.1.11. Number of Milking Cattle own

11%
17%

Upto 2
17% 2-3
4-5
5-6

36% 6 Above
19%

46
Table No: 4.1.12. Total revenue generated through milk production on weekly basis

Valid Cumulative
[Link] Revenue Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
1 Below 1000 35 11.7 11.7 11.7
2 1001-5000 87 29.0 29.0 40.7
3 5001-10000 92 30.7 30.7 71.3
4 10001-15000 47 15.7 15.7 87.0
5 Above 15000 39 13.0 13.0 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table illustrates that 11.7% of the respondents are generating Below1000
rupees revenue through milk production, 29% of the of the respondents are generating in
between Rs.1001-5000 revenue through milk production, 30.7% of the respondents are
generating in between Rs.5001-10000 through milk production, 15.7% ofthe respondents
are generating revenue in between Rs.10001-15000 and remaining 13% of the respondents
are earning above 15000 rupees through milk production on weekly basis.
Chart No: 4.1.12. Total revenue generated through milk production on weekly basis

13% 12%

Below 1000
16% 1001-5000
5001-10000
29%
10001-15000
Above 15000

30%

47
 Table No: 4.1.13. Average milk production per day (in Liters)

Milk Production Valid Cumulative

[Link] Frequency Percent
Per day Percent Percent
1 Below 5 45 15.0 15.0 15.0
2 5 to 10 37 12.3 12.3 27.3
3 11-15 85 28.3 28.3 55.7
4 16-20 80 26.7 26.7 82.3
5 Above 20 53 17.7 17.7 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table typifies that 15% of the respondents are producing Below 5 ltrs of
milk per day, 12.3 % of the respondents are producing in between 5 to 10 ltrs per day,
28.3% of the respondents are producing in between 11-15 ltrs of milk per day, 26.7% of
the respondents are producing in between 16-20 ltrs of milk per day and 17.7% of the
respondents are producing above 20 ltrs of milk per day.

Chart No: 4.1.13. Average milk production per day (in Liters)

30

25

20

15

10

0
Below 5 5 to 10 11 to 15 16-20 Above 20
Series1 15 12.3 28.3 26.7 17.7

48
Table No: 4.1.14. Liter(s) of milk supply averagely to cooperative milk society per
day

Average Milk Valid Cumulative

[Link] Frequency Percent
Supply Percent Percent
1 Below 5 38 12.7 12.7 12.7
2 5 to 10 92 30.7 30.7 43.3
3 11-15 103 34.3 34.3 77.7
4 16-20 33 11.0 11.0 88.7
5 Above 20 34 11.3 11.3 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table symbolizes that 12.7% of the respondents are supplying Below 5
Ltrs of Milk every day to the cooperative milk society, 30.7% of the respondents are
supplying in between 5-10 ltrs of milk per day, 34.3% of the respondents are supplying in
between 11-15 ltrs of milk per day, 11% of the respondents are supplying 16-20 ltrs of milk
per day and 11.3% of the respondents are supplying above 20 lts of milk per day to the
cooperative milk society.

Chart No: 4.1.14. Liter(s) of milk supply averagely to cooperative milk society per
day

11% 13%

11% Below 5
5 to 10
11-15
31% 16-20
Above 20
34%

49
Table No: 4.1.15. Selling of milk directly to the public
Sales to Valid Cumulative
[Link] Frequency Percent
Public Percent Percent
1 Yes 84 28.0 28.0 28.0
2 No 216 72.0 72.0 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table indicates that 28% of the respondents are selling milk directly to
the public and remaining 72% of the respondents are not directly selling milk to the public.

Chart No: 4.1.15. Selling of milk directly to the public

28%

72% Yes
No

50
Table No: 4.1.16. Liter of Milk do you sell per day directly to the Public Averagely?

Sales to the Valid Cumulative

[Link] Frequency Percent
Public Percent Percent
1 Below 5 9 3.0 3.0 3.0
2 5 to 10 12 4.0 4.0 7.0
3 11 to 15 13 4.3 4.3 11.3
4 16 to 20 9 3.0 3.0 14.3
5 Above 20 15 5.0 5.0 19.3
6 Nil 242 80.7 80.7 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table shows that 3% of the respondents are selling below 5 Liters of milk
everyday directly to the public, 4% of the respondents are selling in between 5 to 10 liters
of milk directly to the public,4.3% of the respondents are selling in between 11 to 15 liters
of milk directly to the public, 3% of the respondents are selling in between 16 to 20 liters
of milk directly to the public, 5% of the respondents are selling above 20liters of milk
directly to the public and 80.7% of the respondents are not selling milk directly to the
public.
Chart No: 4.1.16. Liter of Milk do you sell per day directly to the Public Averagely?

Below 5 5 to 10
11 to 15
16 to 20
Above 20

Nil

51
Table No: 4.1.17. Feed required for Cows (per day)
Daily
Valid Cumulative
[Link] Consumption of Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
feed
1 Below 5 57 19.0 19.0 19.0
2 5 to 10 110 36.7 36.7 55.7
3 11 to 15 54 18.0 18.0 73.7
4 16 to 20 40 13.3 13.3 87.0
5 Above 20 39 13.0 13.0 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table reveals that 19% of the respondents’ cattles are consuming Below
5 Kg of feed per day, 36.7% of the respondents’ cattles are consuming 5 to 10 Kgs of feed
per day, 18% of the respondents’ cattles are consuming in between 11 to 15 Kgs of feed
per day,13.3% of the respondents’ cattles are consuming 11 to 16 Kgs of feed per day and
13% of the respondents are saying Above 20 Kgs of feed is required to their cattles for its
daily consumption.

Chart No: 4.1.17. Feed required for Cattles (per day)

40.0 36.7%
35.0

30.0

25.0
19.0% 18.0%
20.0

15.0 13.3% 13.0%

10.0

5.0

0.0
Below 5 5 to 10 11 to 15 16 to 20 Above 20

52
Table No: 4.1.18. Quality of Aavin Cattle Feed
Quality of
Valid Cumulative
[Link] Cattle Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
feed
1 Good 154 51.3 51.3 51.3
2 Reasonable 81 27.0 27.0 78.3
3 Not Good 65 21.7 21.7 100.0
Total 300 100.0 100.0
(Source: Primary Data)
Interpretation:
The above table reveals that 51.3% of the respondents are feel good about the quality
of cattle feed given by Aavin, 27% of the respondents are says the quality of cattle feed is
reasonable and 21.7% of the respondents are saying the quality of cattle feedis not good.

Chart No: 4.1.18. Quality of Aavin Cattle Feed

60.0 51.3 51.3

50.0

40.0
27.0 27.0
30.0 21.7 21.7

20.0

10.0

0.0
Good Reasonable Not Good

Series2 Series1

53
4.2 CHI- SQUARE ANALYSIS
4.2.1 : Comparison of Occupation and Membership in Cooperative Milk Society
OBSERVED FREQUENCY (O)

Membership in Cooperative Milk Society

Occupation
Yes No Total
Farming 111 29 140
Salaried 24 9 33
Business Person 15 15 30
Professional 23 11 34
Self Employed 15 21 36
Housewives 15 12 27
Total 203 97 300
Hypothesis:
H0 (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between Occupation and
Membership in Cooperative Milk Society.
H1 (Alternate Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between Occupation and
Membership in Cooperative Milk Society.
Computation of Calculated Value:
O E (O-E) (O-E)2 (O-E)2/E
111 94.73333 16.26667 264.6044444 2.79315
29 45.26667 -16.2667 264.6044444 5.845459
24 22.33 1.67 2.7889 0.124895
9 10.67 -1.67 2.7889 0.261378
15 20.3 -5.3 28.09 1.383744
15 9.7 5.3 28.09 2.895876
23 23.00667 -0.00667 0.000044488 1.93
11 10.99333 0.006667 0.000044488 1.98
15 24.36 -9.36 87.6096 3.596453
21 11.64 9.36 87.6096 7.526598
15 18.27 -3.27 10.6929 0.585271
12 8.73 3.27 10.6929 1.224845
Calculated Value 30.14767

54
Degrees of Freedom:
= (c-1) × (r-1)
= (2-1) × (6-1)
= 1×5 = 5

5% of Significant Level with Degrees of Freedom (5) = 11.071

Calculated Value = 30.14767
Calculated Value (30.14767) is greater than Tabulated Value (11.071)

Interpretation
Calculated Value (30.14767) is greater than Tabulated Value (11.071). So H0 (Null
Hypothesis) is rejected. Hence there is a significant relationship between Occupation and
Membership in Cooperative Milk Society.

55
4.2.2 : Comparison of Area of Living and Membership Duration in Cooperative Milk
Society
Membership Area of Living
Duration Village Urban Semi-Urban City Total
Less than 5 Years 30 26 0 0 56
5 to 10 Years 62 15 12 0 89
11 to 15 Years 35 12 0 0 47
16 to 20 Years 32 15 0 6 53
Above 20 Years 21 7 12 15 55
Total 180 75 24 21 300

Hypothesis:
H0 (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between Area of Living and
Membership Duration in Cooperative Milk Society.
H1 (Alternate Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between Area of Living
and Membership Duration in Cooperative Milk Society.

Computation of Calculated Value:

O E (O-E) (O-E)2 (O-E)2/E
30 33.6 -3.6 12.96 0.231429
62 53.4 8.6 73.96 0.831011
35 28.2 6.8 46.24 0.98383
32 31.8 0.2 0.04 0.000755
21 33 -12 144 2.618182
26 14 12 144 2.571429
15 22.25 -7.25 52.5625 0.59059
12 11.75 0.25 0.0625 0.00133
15 13.25 1.75 3.0625 0.057783
7 13.75 -6.75 45.5625 0.828409
0 4.48 -4.48 20.0704 0.3584
12 7.12 4.88 23.8144 0.267578
0 3.76 -3.76 14.1376 0.3008
0 4.24 -4.24 17.9776 0.3392
12 4.4 7.6 57.76 1.050182
0 3.92 -3.92 15.3664 0.2744
0 6.23 -6.23 38.8129 0.4361
0 3.29 -3.29 10.8241 0.2303
6 3.71 2.29 5.2441 0.098945
15 3.85 11.15 124.3225 2.260409
Calculated Value 14.33106

56
Degrees of Freedom:
= (c-1) × (r-1)
= (4-1) × (5-1)
= 3×4 = 12

5% of Significant Level with Degrees of Freedom (12) = 21.026

Calculated Value = 14.33106
Calculated Value (30.14767) is less than the Tabulated Value (21.026)

Interpretation
Calculated Value (30.14767) is less than the Tabulated Value (21.026). So H0 (Null
Hypothesis) is accepted. Hence there is no significant relationship between Area of Living and
Membership Duration in Cooperative Milk Society.

57
 4.2.3 : Comparison of Number of Milking Cattle and Revenue generated through
milk production on weekly basis

OBSERVED FREQUENCY
[Link]. Revenue generated through milk production on weekly basis (in Rs)
Milking
Cattle Below 1000 1001-5000 5001-10000 10001-15000 Above 15000 Total
Up to 2 14 9 10 7 12 52
2 to 3 9 18 11 17 6 61
4 to 5 11 26 14 16 12 79
6 to 7 8 18 15 18 16 75
7 Above 0 0 7 20 6 33
Total 42 71 57 78 52 300

Hypothesis:
H0 (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between Number of Milking
Cattle and revenue generated through milk production on weekly basis.
H1 (Alternate Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between Number of
Milking Cattle and revenue generated through milk production on weekly basis.
O E O-E O-E2 O-E2/E
14 7.28 6.72 45.1584 6.203077
9 12.30667 -3.30667 10.93404 0.888465
10 9.88 0.12 0.0144 0.001457
7 13.52 -6.52 42.5104 3.14426
12 9.013333 2.986667 8.920178 0.989665
9 8.54 0.46 0.2116 0.024778
18 14.43667 3.563333 12.69734 0.879521
11 11.59 -0.59 0.3481 0.030035
17 15.86 1.14 1.2996 0.081942
6 10.57333 -4.57333 20.91538 1.978125
11 11.06 -0.06 0.0036 0.000325
26 18.69667 7.303333 53.33868 2.852844
14 15.01 -1.01 1.0201 0.067961
16 20.54 -4.54 20.6116 1.003486
12 13.69333 -1.69333 2.867378 0.2094
8 10.5 -2.5 6.25 0.595238
18 17.75 0.25 0.0625 0.003521
15 14.25 0.75 0.5625 0.039474
18 19.5 -1.5 2.25 0.115385
16 13 3 9 0.692308
0 4.62 -4.62 21.3444 4.62
0 7.81 -7.81 60.9961 7.81
7 6.27 0.73 0.5329 0.084992
20 8.58 11.42 130.4164 15.20005
6 5.72 0.28 0.0784 0.013706
Calculated Value 47.53001

58
Degrees of Freedom:
= (c-1) × (r-1)
= (5-1) × (5-1)
= 4×4 = 16

5% of Significant Level with Degrees of Freedom (16) = 26.296

Calculated Value = 47.53001
Calculated Value (47.53001) is greater than the Tabulated Value (26.296)

Interpretation
Calculated Value (47.53001) is greater than the Tabulated Value (26.296). So H0 (Null
Hypothesis) is Rejected and H1 (Alternate Hypothesis) is accepted. Hence there is a significant
relationship between Number of Milking Cattle and revenue generated through milk
production on weekly basis.

59
4.2.4 : Comparison of Number of Milking Cattle and Cattle Feed required Per Day

OBSERVED FREQUENCY
[Link]. Cattle Feed required Per Day (in Kgs)
Milking
Below 5 5 to 10 11 to 15 16 to 20 Above 20 Total
Cattle
Up to 2 19 15 8 7 3 52
2 to 3 7 18 11 9 10 55
4 to 5 6 10 25 15 12 68
6 to 7 3 8 10 18 28 67
7 Above 0 5 8 15 30 58
Total 35 56 62 64 83 300

Hypothesis:
H0 (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between Number of Milking
Cattle and Cattle Feed required Per Day.
H1 (Alternate Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between Number of
Milking Cattle and Cattle Feed required Per Day.
O E O-E O-E2 O-E2/E
19 6.066667 12.93333 167.2711 27.57216
7 6.416667 0.583333 0.340278 0.05303
6 7.933333 -1.93333 3.737778 0.471148
3 7.816667 -4.81667 23.20028 2.968053
0 6.766667 -6.76667 45.78778 6.766667
15 9.706667 5.293333 28.01938 2.886612
18 10.26667 7.733333 59.80444 5.825108
10 12.69333 -2.69333 7.254044 0.571485
8 12.50667 -4.50667 20.31004 1.623937
5 10.82667 -5.82667 33.95004 3.13578
8 10.74667 -2.74667 7.544178 0.702002
11 11.36667 -0.36667 0.134444 0.011828
25 14.05333 10.94667 119.8295 8.526768
10 13.84667 -3.84667 14.79684 1.068621
8 11.98667 -3.98667 15.89351 1.325933
7 11.09333 -4.09333 16.75538 1.510401
9 11.73333 -2.73333 7.471111 0.636742
15 14.50667 0.493333 0.243378 0.016777
18 14.29333 3.706667 13.73938 0.961244
15 12.37333 2.626667 6.899378 0.557601

60
 3 14.38667 -11.3867 129.6562 9.012246
O E O-E O-E2 O-E2/E
10 15.21667 -5.21667 27.21361 1.788408
12 18.81333 -6.81333 46.42151 2.467479
28 18.53667 9.463333 89.55468 4.831218
30 16.04667 13.95333 194.6955 12.13308
Calculated Value 97.42433

Degrees of Freedom:
= (c-1) × (r-1)
= (5-1) × (5-1)
= 4×4 = 16

5% of Significant Level with Degrees of Freedom (16) = 26.296

Calculated Value = 97.42433
Calculated Value (97.42433) is greater than the Tabulated Value (26.296)

Interpretation
Calculated Value (97.42433) is greater than the Tabulated Value (26.296). So H0
(Null Hypothesis) is Rejected and H1 (Alternate Hypothesis) is accepted. So there is a significant
relationship between Number of Milking Cattle and cattle feed required per day.

61
4.2.5 : Comparison of Average Milk Production per day and Average of Milk selling
to the public directly (in Ltrs)

OBSERVED FREQUENCY

Avg. Milk Average of Milk selling to the public directly (in Ltrs)
Production per
day (in Ltrs) Below 5 5 to 10 11 to 15 16 to 20 Above 20 Total
Below 5 30 0 0 0 0 30
5 to 10 20 6 0 0 0 26
11 to 15 15 10 10 0 0 35
16 to 20 22 20 20 17 0 79
Above 20 20 28 27 20 35 130
Total 107 64 57 37 35 300

Hypothesis:
H0 (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between Average Milk
Production per day and Average of Milk selling to the public directly.
H1 (Alternate Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between Average Milk
Production per day and Average of Milk selling to the public directly.

O E O-E O-E2 O-E2/E

30 10.7 19.3 372.49 34.81215
20 9.273333 10.72667 115.0614 12.40777
15 12.48333 2.516667 6.333611 0.507365
22 28.17667 -6.17667 38.15121 1.354
20 46.36667 -26.3667 695.2011 14.99355
0 6.4 -6.4 40.96 6.4
6 5.546667 0.453333 0.205511 0.037051
10 7.466667 2.533333 6.417778 0.859524
20 16.85333 3.146667 9.901511 0.587511
28 27.73333 0.266667 0.071111 0.002564
0 5.7 -5.7 32.49 5.7
0 4.94 -4.94 24.4036 4.94
10 6.65 3.35 11.2225 1.687594
20 15.01 4.99 24.9001 1.658901
27 24.7 2.3 5.29 0.21417

62
 0 3.7 -3.7 13.69 3.7
0 3.206667 -3.20667 10.28271 3.206667
0 4.316667 -4.31667 18.63361 4.316667
17 9.743333 7.256667 52.65921 5.40464
20 16.03333 3.966667 15.73444 0.981358
0 3.5 -3.5 12.25 3.5
0 3.033333 -3.03333 9.201111 3.033333
0 4.083333 -4.08333 16.67361 4.083333
0 9.216667 -9.21667 84.94694 9.216667
35 15.16667 19.83333 393.3611 25.9359
Calculated Value 149.5407

Degrees of Freedom:
= (c-1) × (r-1)
= (5-1) × (5-1)
= 4×4 = 16

5% of Significant Level with Degrees of Freedom (16) = 26.296

Calculated Value = 149.5407
Calculated Value (149.5407) is greater than the Tabulated Value (26.296)

Interpretation
Calculated Value (149.5407) is greater than the Tabulated Value (26.296). So H0
(Null Hypothesis) is Rejected and H1 (Alternate Hypothesis) is accepted. Hence there is a significant
relationship between Average Milk Production per day and Average of Milk selling to the
public directly.

63
4.3. ANOVA
4.3.1. Comparison of Cattle feed required per day and Availability cattle feed in co-
operative milk society.

Cattle feed Availability of cattle feed in society

required per day S.A A N D.A [Link] Total
Below 5 Kg 16 10 17 4 5 52
5 to 10 Kg 22 17 12 6 10 67
11 to 15 kg 6 10 8 5 4 33
16 to 20 Kg 10 16 22 8 15 71
Above 20 Kg 11 16 12 18 20 77
Total 65 69 71 41 54 300

NULL HYPOTHESIS (H0)

There is no significant difference between Cattle feed required per day and
Availability cattle feed in co-operative milk society.
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS (H1)
There is significance difference between Cattle feed required per day and
Availability cattle feed in co-operative milk society.

Correction Factor:
n
= (65+69+71+41+54)2
25
= 4500
Total Sum of Square:
=∑ Yij2- C.F
= (16)2+(10)2+(17)2+(4)2+(5)2+(22)2+(17)2+(12)2+(6)2+(10)2+(6)2+(10)2+(8)2+(5)2
+(4)2+(10)2+(16)2+(22)2+(8)2+(15)2+(11)2+(16)2+(12)2+(18)2+(20)2 - 4500

= 4354 – 4500 = -146

64
Column Sum of Square (CSS)

= ∑ Cij2 - C.F
ri
= (65)2+(69)2+(71)2+(41)2+(54)2
5 - 4500
= 3724.8 – 4500 = - 775.2

Row Sum of Square (RSS)

=∑ rij2 - C.F
ria
= (52)2+ (67)2+(33)2+(71)2+(77)2
5 - 4500
= 3850.4 – 4500 = -694.6

Error Sum of Square (ESS)

= TSS - (CSS+RSS)
= 4354 – ( -775.2 + (-694.6))
= 4354 +1424.8
= 5777.8

Sources of Degrees of Su m of Mean sum of

F- ratio F- table
variable freedom square square
Column 4 -775.2 F(4,16) =
-193.8
-4.039
Row 4 - 694.6
4.7726
-173.65
F(4,16) =
Error 16 5777.8
-1.144
361.112
Total 24 4308 4.7726

65
Between column
If calculated value < tabulated value
-4.039 < 4.7726
H0 is accepted.
Between row
If calculated value < tabulated value
-1.144 < 4.7726
H0 is accepted.

Conclusion
There is no significant difference between Cattle feed required per day and
Availability cattle feed in co-operative milk society.

66
 CHAPTER – 5
FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS & CONCLUSION

5.1 FINDINGS
Simple Percentage Analysis
➢ 61.7% of the respondents are belongs to Male Category.
➢ 38% of the respondents are belongs to 30 to 40 Years Old.
➢ 60% of the respondents are residing in Village Area.
➢ 60.7% of the respondents are Married.
➢ 43.3% of the respondents have completed only School Education.
➢ 30.3% of the respondents are having 4 members in their family.
➢ 46% of the respondent’s families are earning in between Rs.20001-30000.
➢ 46.7% of the respondent’s occupation is farming.
➢ 29.7% of the respondents are having membership in co-operative milk society in
between 5 to 10 Years.
➢ 31.7% of the respondents’ mothers are member having membership in co-
operative milk society.
➢ 36% of the respondents are having 2-3 cattles in their farm.
➢ 30.7% of the respondents are generating in between Rs.5001-10000 through milk
production on weekly basis.
➢ 28.3% of the respondents are producing in between 11-15 ltrs of milk per day.
➢ 34.3% of the respondents are supplying in between 11-15 ltrs of milk per day to
the co-operative milk society.
➢ 72% of the respondents are not directly selling milk to the public.
➢ 5% of the respondents are selling above 20 liters of milk per day directly to the
public.
➢ 36.7% of the respondents are saying their cattles are consuming 5 to 10 Kgs of
feed per day.

67
Chi-Square Analysis
➢ There is a significant relationship between Occupation and Membership in
Cooperative Milk Society.
➢ There is no significant relationship between Area of Living and Membership
Duration in Cooperative Milk Society.
➢ There is a significant relationship between Number of Milking Cattle and revenue
generated through milk production on weekly basis.
➢ There is a significant relationship between Number of Milking Cattle and cattle
feed required per day.
➢ There is a significant relationship between Average Milk Production per day and
Average of Milk selling to the public directly.

ANOVA
There is no significant difference between Cattle feed required per day and
Availability cattle feed in co-operative milk society.

68
5.2. SUGGESTIONS

➢ The finding says that, there is lack of cattle feed for farmers. Hence it is suggested that
the society should increase the supply of more cattle feed to the producers.
➢ In generally there is a high charge for cattle insurance. Hence it is suggested that if the
government could provide subsidies or reduce the amount of cattle insurance premium.
The farmers are highly benefited and protect their cattle from the unexpected losses.
➢ There is lack of training facilities from the society to the producers. Hence it is suggested
that arrange proper training for the producers regarding using modern technology and
producers. To implement in practice and give subsidies and financing facilities.
➢ There is a lack of bonus. It is one of the problems faced by the producers. Hence it is
suggested that the yearly bonus for milk producers could be increased from 8% to 12%. It
could attract more milk producers.

69
 5.3 CONCLUSION

The findings and analysis of the study lead the following conclusions can be drawn.
In order the dreams becomes reality and for turning liabilities into assets one most have to
meet the needs of the producers and consumers.
The important factors considered by the producers before supplying milk are
measurement, correct testing, market price, payment, distance, cattle feed and loan
facilities.
Further it is indented to identified that majority of the producers are satisfied with the
co-operative milk society because of its measurement, correct testing , market price,
payment and bonus. Some producers are not satisfied with the society milk because of its
timing, high charges for cattle insurances, lack of training facilities, and lack of loan
facilities and high cost of fodder feed.

70
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books
➢ Bonavia, N. Food Science, Wiley Publishing House, New Delhi

➢ Gupta S.P, 1990, Statistical Methods, Sultan Hand and Sons, New Delhi.

➢ Kothari, C.R. 2003, Research Methodology, Vishwa Prakasham, New Delhi.

➢ Kneafsey J.T. Economic Analysis, Himalaya Publishing House, Mumbai

➢ Panikkar, K. K. Banking Theory & System‟s. Chant & Co., New Delhi.

➢ Rudder Datt, Indian Economy, [Link] & Company Pvt Ltd, New Delhi.

➢ Sankaran S., 1998, Indian Economy, Margham Publications, Chennai.

➢ Sundharam K.P.M., 1986, Indian Economy, [Link] & Company Pvt Ltd., Ram

Nagar, New Delhi.

➢ Sharma S.K. Rural Economics, Wiley Eastern Ltd, New Delhi

➢ Varma J.D., 1995, Indian Economics, [Link] & Company Pvt Ltd., Ram Nagar,

New Delhi

➢ Wilkinson & Bhandarkar methodology and technique of social research Himalaya

publishing house.

Journals
➢ Agarwal A.N., 1997, Indian Economy, Wiley Eastern Ltd, New Delhi, Pp no.12
➢ Balishter and Dowager Singh, 1981 have made “A study on marketing of milk in
Agra district” Agriculture marketing, vol 24, Pp. 25-30.
➢ [Link] Nair, Marketing of Services, Facts for you, New Delhi, pp.25 to
26.
➢ Hogle H., 1972, “The Influence of Agricultural Extension in selected villages in
Kaira district, Gujarat”, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis Michigan University, P: 22.
➢ Mekala, 1970 “Studies on consumer behavior with reference to pasteurized
packaged milk in erode” P: 8.

71
➢ Narayanan B.K., 1971 “Spread Effects of dairy enterprise: A case study of
Anand”, small industry extension training institute, Hyderabad, P: 14.
➢ Pater [Link], 1978, “Analyzed the consumption patterns of milk and milk products
in south kerala” P: 21.
➢ Prabhuram, 1980, “Milk distribution by co-operative dairy –A study in Madurai
city”, Indian Journal of Marketing [Link], No. 4
➢ Patel S.M., Thakur D.S. and Pandey M.K., 1976, made a case study “Impact of
dairy development through milk co-operatives” P: 9.
➢ Vyas K.M. . and Chaudhuri V.S, 1971, “Economics‟ of Dairy farming in
Mehasana District” Arthvikas, Vol-I, No. I, PP: 20-40

72
 APPENDIX
A Study on Producers‟ Satisfaction about Co-Operative Milk Society
(With Special Reference to Erode District)
Dear respondent(s),
I am Name of the Student pursuing final MBA at Excel Engineering
College(Autonomous), Komarapalayam. As a part of curriculum and syllabus of Anna
University Chennai am doing project in research project in Marketing. You are requested
to fill the questionnaire to enable, to undertake the study on the said Project. This is for
your kind information all responses given by you will be strictly kept confidential and used
for academic purpose only.

Objective
➢ To know the socio-economic profile of milk producers /Farmers of co-operative
milk society.
➢ To know the milk producers /Farmers level of satisfaction about co-operative
milk society.
➢ To know the problem faced by the milk producers /Farmers of co-operative milk
society.
➢ To offer suitable suggestions for the improvement of consumers satisfaction.
QUESTIONNAIRE
1. Name
2. Age (in Years)
a) Below 30 b) 30-40 Years c) 41 – 50 Years d) 51-60 Years e) Above 60
Years
3. Area of Living
a) Village b) Urban c) Semi-Urban d) City
4. Gender
a) Male b) Female
5. Marital Status
a) Single b) Married c) Widower d) Divorced
6. Educational Qualification
a) Illiterate b) Schooling c) Under Graduate d) Post Graduate
73
e) Doctorate
7. Occupation
a) Farming b) Salaried c) Business Person d) Professional
e) Self – Employed f) Housewives
8. Family Size
a) 2 Members b) 3 Members c) 4 Members d) 5 Members & Above
9. Family Income (Monthly in Rs.)
a) 10000-20000 b) 20001-30000 c)30001-40000 d) 40001-50000
e) 50000 & Above
10. Do you have membership in cooperative milk society?
a) Yes b) No
11. If yes, how long you are having membership in society?
a) Less than 5 Years b) 5 Years to 10 Years c) 11Years to 15 Years
d) 15 Years to 20 Years e) Above 20 Years
12. Who is having membership in cooperative society?
a) Myself b) Father c) Husband d) Wife e) Mother
13. Mention your Membership Identification Number

14. How many number of milking cattle do you own?

a) Up to 2 b) 2 - 3c) 4-5 d) 5-6 e) 6 Above
15. Total revenue generated through milk production on weekly basis (in Rs)
a) Below 1000 b)1001-5000 c) 5001-10000 d) 10001-15000
e) Above 15000
16. Average milk production per day (in Liters)
a) Below 5 b) 5 to 10 c) 11 to 15 d) 16 to 20 e) Above 20
17. How many liter(s) of milk do you averagely supply per day to the cooperative
milk society?
a) Below 5 b) 5 to 10 c) 11 to 15 d) 16 to 20 e) Above 20
18. Whether do you sell milk directly to the public?
a) Yes b) No
19. How many liter(s) of Milk do you sell per day directly to the Public Averagely?

74
 a) Below 5 b) 5 to 10 c) 11 to 15 d) 16 to 20 e) Above 20
20. How much feed do your cows require per day?
a) Below 5 Kg b) 5 -10 Kg c) 11-15 Kg d) 16-20 Kg
e) Above 20 Kg

Rate your level of satisfaction about the following attributes.

Strongly Strongly
[Link] Aspects Agree Neutral Disagree
Agree Disagree
21. Fodder provided by Aavin

22. Opinion as to milk price paid by

MPCS
23. Frequency of payment made by
Aavin
24. Subsidy received from Aavin
Diary
25. Medical checkup made by doctors
for cattle
26. Emergency visit of Doctor
27. Timing of milk procurement

28. Procurement system

(Technological Improvement)
29. Financial Assistance provided for
Purchasing of Cattle
30. Subsidies offered for Cattle Feed

31. Quality Medicines given by

Aavin for Cattle
32. Seeds given for cultivate the
Cattle feed
33. Training given by Aavin to
farmers
34. The behavior of employees in
procurement centre
35 Aavin Cattle Feed is available in
the society

36. Opinion as to the quality of Aavin Cattle Feed

75
1. Good [Link] [Link] good
37. Do you want change in milk collection time?
1. Yes [Link]
38. Opinion as to milk price paid by private trader
1. Low [Link] [Link]

39. Problems Faced by Producers about Co-Operative Milk Society

[Link] Problems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 Milk Collection Timing
2 Lack of measurement
3 Incorrect testing
4 Less than market price
5 Late payment
6 Distance
7 High cost of fodder feed
8 Lack of loan facilities
9 Lack of improved equipment
10 Lack of training facilities

40. Suggestions if any

76