Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Professor and Head, Department of Agricultural Economics, UAS, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
ABSTRACT
Record of rights, Tenancy and Crops (RTC) is an important revenue record which is essential for every
farmer in obtaining crop loans, availing schemes from government and for land transactions. Bhoomi project was
undertaken in Karnataka state, India for online delivery of land records for farmers replacing the earlier manual
system of issuing land records from June, 2002. Land records were computerized and RTCs are being provided in
kiosks. This study compares both manual system and bhoomi land record systems. Transaction cost involved in getting
the RTC, ease of access and cooperation of issuing authority during both the periods were compared. Study finds that,
benefits forgone by Rs. 488.93(US$8.14). An overall benefit because of bhoomi project was found to be of about Rs.
1084.73 (US$18.08) per farmer per year in real term.
KEYWORDS: Information Communication Technology, Bhoomi, Transaction Cost, Record of Rights
Received: Mar 11, 2016; Accepted: Mar 29, 2016; Published: Apr 07, 2016; Paper Id.: IJMCARAPR201609
Original Article
because of bhoomi project, the total transaction cost was reduced by Rs. 595.80(US$9.93) and there was reduction in
INTRODUCTION
Record of rights, Tenancy and Crops (RTC) is an important revenue record which is essential for every
farmer. RTC contains the information regarding the ownership, area, survey number and other cultivation details
regarding the land. RTCs are essential while availing farm loans and other benefits from the government. They
are also needed for land transactions and in legal litigations.
Bhoomi (computerized land record kiosks) project was undertaken in Karnataka state, India for online
delivery of land records for farmers. It became fully operation and replaced the earlier manual system of issuing
land records (pahani) from June, 2002. Under the bhoomi project, 20 million records of land and ownership of 6.7
million farmers in the state have been computerized1. Since the launch of bhoomi project, more than 12 million
times farmers have availed RTCs2. The objectives of this project were to provide the Record of rights, Tenancy
and Crops (RTC) to farmers at cheaper cost with easy access while ensuring tamper proof land records. Bhoomi
has been highly popular and replicated across India and also in other countries (Parkash and De, 2007). Though
there are problems of incorrect and out-of-date entries while computerizing (Saxena, 2005), still bhoomi has been
one of the successful projects which makes use of information technology.
1
2
http://www.bhoomi.karnataka.gov.in/landrecordsonweb/about.htm
rural.nic.in/sites/downloads/cirdap/Bhoomi.pps
www.tjprc.org
editor@tjprc.org
74
This study compares both manual system and bhoomi land record systems. Transaction cost involved in getting
the RTC, ease of access and cooperation of issuing authority during both the periods were compared. If farmers can get
their RTCs easily, this helps them to avail all the benefits from developmental agencies which require RTCs (Table 1).
Hence, present study tries to quantify these additional benefits because of bhoomi project, which otherwise would have
been forgone under the manual system.
METHODOLOGY
Data on cost per RTC, ease of accessing RTC, transaction costs, benefits forgone because of RTC during both
manual systems were collected from the questionnaire method. Responses from a random sample of 30 farmers from
Bangalore Rural and Chikkaballapur districts of Karnataka state were compiled. Data pertaining to manual system was
collected from the farmers by recall method for five years (1997 to 2001). For the data pertaining to bhoomi project, recent
five years (2009 to 2014) were collected from farmers. Costs and benefits for both the periods were expressed in real terms
(2014=100).
Paired t test was employed to know the significance of differences in selected parameters. Transaction cost was
calculated by considering fees, opportunity cost of labour, rent paid and travelling expenditure. Many times, farmers forgo
services/schemes announced by government because getting RTC is cumbersome. Such benefits forgone during both the
systems of land records were estimated and compared. Finally, overall benefits were calculated by considering the reduced
transaction cost and reduced benefits forgone under bhoomi project period.
RESULTS
Details pertaining to coverage of bhoomi project were presented in table 1. In Karnataka, 203 taluk offices were
equipped with computerized land record kiosks. With 1002 issuing centres, bhoomi project covers about 27000 villages in
Karnataka state. Under bhoomi project, about 20 million land record documents were computerized covering 6.7 million
farmer ownerships. Under the bhoomi project, more than 80 million RTCs have been issued so far.
For comparing manual and bhoomi projects, accessibility, quality of service and costs were considered. Under
accessibility, ease of accessibility, Number of RTCs availed per year, average number of trips made to obtain RTC, the
distance travelled and the time taken to get RTC were included.
Comparison of accessibility to RTC under manual and bhoomi system was presented in table 2. Farmers opined
that accessibility to RTC was easier under the bhoomi system (3.52) compared to manual system (1.47). Results of paired t
test showed the significant difference in ease of accessibility between these two systems. Number of trips/RTC, distance
and number of hours to get RTC were significantly lower under bhoomi project. This may be attributed to the fact that
increased number of kiosks has reduced the distance to be travelled to obtain RTC and travel cost. With faster issuing of
RTCs, number of hours/days taken to get RTC was also reduced under bhoomi (5.2 hours) compared to manual system
(10 hours).
With the increased ease of accessibility to RTCs under bhoomi project, average number of RTCs that the
farmers availed per year has also increased. As shown by the results of paired t test, there was significant difference among
two periods across all the parameters at one percent level except for RTC/year which was significant at 10 percent level.
These results were in line with the earlier reports. Lobo and Balakrishnan (2004) reported that a majority of users (78%) of
bhoomi project who had past experience with the manual system of land records found the bhoomi system simpler.
Impact Factor (JCC): 4.6257
Impact of ICT on Agriculture: Evidences from Bhoomi Project in Karnataka State of India
75
Quality of services provided under manual system and bhoomi were compared (Table 3). The variables
considered for the assessment of quality of services were cooperation by staff, ease of mutation, ease of transfer of
ownership and number of occasions where one would have forgone services/facilities because it involved RTC.
Results showed that cooperation by staff was higher in case of bhoomi (3.50) compared to manual system (2.03).
In the same way, ease of mutation and transfer ownership were easier under the bhoomi system than the manual system of
land records. As it was easier under bhoomi system to get RTC, number of occasions where the farmer forgone
services/schemes offered by the government were lesser under bhoomi period (0.67). Paired t test showed that there was
significant difference among two periods across all the parameters at one percent level.
Reduction in cost of getting RTC directly benefits the farmers. In table 4, transaction cost under manual and
bhoomi system were compared. All the values in this table are expressed in real terms (2013=100). As the distance of
travel and time to get RTC were significantly lower under bhoomi system, the wage loss was also lower under bhoomi [Rs.
209.40 (US$3.49)] compared to manual system [Rs. 457(US$7.62)]. Rent paid and also the fees under bhoomi system were
significantly lower compared to earlier system. The total transaction cost under manual system was Rs. 884.67(US$14.74)
and it was Rs. 288.87 (US$4.81) under bhoomi system in real terms. Paired t test showed the significant reduction in cost
under bhoomi system of land records.
CONCLUSIONS
As the results showed that bhoomi system outperformed manual system, savings in transaction cost, time spent
and overall benefits were presented in table 5. Results showed that on an average farmers saved about 4.8 hours in availing
RTC because of bhoomi project. Wage loss was also reduced to the extent of Rs. 247.60 (US$4.16) under bhoomi system.
There was saving in travel expenditure, fees paid and rent paid to get RTC. The total transaction cost was reduced by Rs.
595.80 (US$9.93) and there was reduction in benefits forgone by Rs. 488.93 (US$8.14). An overall benefit because of
bhoomi project was found to be of about Rs. 1084.73 (US$18.07) per farmer per year in real term.
REFERENCES
1.
Lobo, Albert, Balakrishnan, Suresh. (2004). Report card on service of bhoomi kiosks: An assessment of benefits by users of the
computerized land records system in Karnataka, Public Affairs Centre, Bangalore, Karnataka.
2.
Prakash, A. and De, R. (2007), Importance of development context in ICT4D projects: A study of computerization of land
records in India, Information Technology and People, 20(3): 262-281.
3.
Rajeev Chawla (2004). Online delivery of land titles to rural farmers in Karnataka, India. World Bank report.
4.
Saxena, Naresh C (2005), Updating land records: Is computerization sufficient? Economic and Political Weekly, 40(4):313321.
www.tjprc.org
editor@tjprc.org
76
APPENDICES
Table 1: Uses of RTC
Details
Number
203
1002
27000
20
6.70
80
Period
Mean
Variance
Manual system
1.47
0.26
Bhoomi
3.53
0.26
Manual system
2.67
1.68
Bhoomi
3.17
0.76
Manual system
1.93
0.48
Bhoomi
1.1
0.3
Manual system
16
13.59
Bhoomi
7.17
13.32
Manual system
10
14.34
p-value
Significance
<0.0001
0.0649
***
<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0001 *
Bhoomi
5.2
2.92
Note: * indicate significance at 1 % level and *** indicate significance at 10% level.
Table 3: Comparison of Quality of Service Provided under Manual and Bhoomi System
Parameters
Cooperation by staff (1 to 4)4
3
4
Period
Mean
Variance
Manual system
2.03
0.65
Bhoomi
3.50
0.26
p-value
Significance
<0.0001
Impact of ICT on Agriculture: Evidences from Bhoomi Project in Karnataka State of India
77
Table 4: Contd.,
Ease of Mutation (1 to 4)5
Ease of transfer of ownership (1 to 4)5
Manual system
1.43
0.25
Bhoomi
3.57
0.25
Manual system
1.37
0.24
Bhoomi
3.53
0.26
1.37
0.93
0.67
0.51
<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0001
Table 4: Comparison of Transaction Cost under Manual and Bhoomi System (Rs#)
Parameters
Fees
Average cost of trip
Opportunity cost of labour
Rent paid
Benefits forgone because of RTC
Total transaction cost
Period
Mean
Variance
Manual system
61.69
41.41
Bhoomi
20.20
8.42
Manual system
72.74
247.41
Bhoomi
18.49
57.90
Manual system
457.00
41409.29
Bhoomi
209.40
6150.60
Manual system
293.24
15018.37
Bhoomi
40.78
511.13
Manual system
2806.73
10168396.35
Bhoomi
362.10
189438.21
Manual system
884.67
43593.93
Bhoomi
288.87
7619.80
Note: * indicate significance at 1 % level; # One US$=Rs.60 (INR)
p-value
Significance
<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0002
<0.0001
Savings
Under
Bhoomi
System
Bhoomi
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
2.00
16.00
10.00
3.00
8.00
5.20
4.80
114.25
914.00
457.00
114.35
400.21
209.40
247.60
45.70
102.82
72.74
5.71
34.30
18.49
54.25
57.12
79.97
61.69
17.15
22.87
20.20
41.49
114.25
457.00
293.24
0.00
114.35
40.78
252.46
411.30
1416.69
884.67
142.93
491.69
288.87
595.80
0.00
3198.98
561.35
0.00
343.04
72.42
488.93
-1.89
3804.21
1084.73
One
US$=Rs.60
(INR)
www.tjprc.org
editor@tjprc.org