International Indexed &Referred Research Journal, May, 2012. ISSN- 0975-3486, RNI-RAJBIL 2009/30097;VoL.

III *ISSUE-32

Research PaperEconomics

Fish Market Management: Vendors Status in Mumbai

May, 2012 A B S T R A C T
The Study Aims To Analyze The Socio-Economic And Living Conditions Of The Fish Vendors In The Mumbai City In Maharashtra And Issues Such As The Living Status Of Vendors, Marketing Support They Get From The Government & The Threats In Their Business.

* Dr. Ms. Beena Narayan

* Assot. Prof., Indian Edn. Society's Mangt. College & Research Centre Lotlikar Vidya Snkul Bandra Reclamation , Mumbai

Key words- Vendors, fish market, status Introduction Fish consumption has traditionally been and remains an important source of food and provides employment to many communities. Maharashtra is no exception to it. There are as many as 32 varieties of fish produced in Maharashtra. Mumbai and Thane alone account for about 60 percent of total fish catch of Maharashtra. But the share of Maharashtra in total fish production of India has steadily declined over the past two decades mainly due to a sharp decline in her share in total marine fish production of India. The declining trend in inland water spread are, numerical strength of fish curing yards and stagnant number of fishery schools are certainly disturbing features of the fisheries sector of Maharashtra. (MDR 2007) From the main market individual baskets, hand carts, taxis, tempos or small trucks are used to make fish reach to the different buyers. Being a huge unorganized market the trust between buyers and sellers makes this market successful. Literature Review Various studies have conducted to study fish market Gorden (1954) studied about fishing effort, catch and fish population. Clark and Anderson (1986) developed the fishery dynamic model to incorporate changes over time and space. Kumar (2004) estimated price, income and supply elasticity's for disaggregated and individual fish groups. Shrivastava (1985)studied the marketing of fish & fishery products in India. Panayotov (1982) studied that it is common for small and large scale fishers to co-exist and to compete for resource stock and space. Pillay. N.(1956) studied Socio-economic development of fishermen community in India. Objectives of the study and Methodolgy The study aims to analyze the socio-economic and living conditions of the fish vendors in the Mumbai city and issues such as the living status of vendors,

marketing support they get from the government & the threats in their business. Based on survey the interviewer went to fish market at different localities and interviewed 60 vendors from different area of the city. The vendors were interviewed during the month of August 2011. The simple percentages used as statistical method. The questionnaire had three sections. The first section consisted demographic information including gender, age, marital status, children, family members, place of residence and educational attainment. The second section focused about employment and income and the third section was related with their business issues. This kind of study is significantly helpful for the identification of problems, deficiencies and sufferings of vendors in an effective manner. The study aims to develop a profile of fish vendors in Mumbai. Do the vendors themselves benefit when they do business for earning livelihood? What is the status of earning, family, consumption pattern, children education and various other aspects? Limitations and Future Scope of the Study The current study only examined the socioeconomic aspect of fish vendors using few parameters. The study is based on selective category of vendors due to time constraints. The study is only preliminary in nature; it provides direction for future research. One could empirically test if recognition of such placement provides different results. Findings of the study Age groups We studied 40% male and 60% female fish vendors. The age group of the vendors comprised 40% were in the age group of 31-35 years, 35% vendors were in the age group of 36-40 years, 35% vendors were in the age group of 36-40 years, 15% vendors were in the age group of 46 years & above and 10% were in the age group of 20-25 years. Community Classification 7% respondents were belonging to Marathas,

RESEARCH ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION

61

International Indexed &Referred Research Journal, May, 2012. ISSN- 0975-3486, RNI-RAJBIL 2009/30097;VoL.III *ISSUE-32

82% respondents were Kolis and 11% respondents were from other migrant communities. In Maharashtra, Kolis are the main fishing communities that are concerned exclusively with business. They mainly speak Marathi language, though some Koli communities speak a variant dialect of Marathi. Marital Status and Size of the Family The marital status of the vendors shows that17% respondents had no children, 13% respondents had one child, 38% had two children, 32% had three children. Along with the number of children we tried to study the family size. 13% respondents had only two members in the family, 5% had three members, 32% had four members, 40%vendors had five members and 10% had more than 5 members in their family. 65% respondents children were attending the school, 13% mentioned that their children were not attending school and 22%respondents children were settled. Educational Status of Vendors and their Educational aspirations about childrenThe educational attainment of fish vendors shows that 40% respondents were illiterate, 17% respondents attained only primary education, 35% respondents has S.S.C. level education. We did not find any vendors having H.S.C. and higher education. We inquired that how much they would like to educate their children? 3% respondents replied that they would educate the children till S.S.C. level. 10% replied that they would educate them up to higher secondary level, 32% replied that they wish to educate them up to graduation level and 3% wanted up to post graduate level, whereas 30% respondent told that it's up to the children as much as they wish to study. We inquired about the expenditure on education by fish vendors. 36% percent respondents were spending Rs.500-1000 per month on education. 41% respondents were spending Rs.1000-2000 per month. 15% respondents were spending Rs.20003000 monthly and 8% respondents were spending Rs.3000-4000 monthly. The working status of the spouse The working status of their spouse showed that 65% respondents' spouses were also working to supplement in family income. 35% respondents told that their spouse is non-working. In the same link we tried to know the financial status of the fish vendor's family. 25 % vendors told that they are the only earning member in their family. 60 % vendors told that two family members were earning in the family, 10% vendors told that three family members were earning whereas 5% vendors almost all members were earning for their livelihood. Income Status Vendors were asked about their per month earning. 13% respondents were earning Rs. 2000-4000

per month. 47% respondents were earning Rs.40006000 per month, 15% respondents were earning Rs.6000-8000 per month and 20% were earning Rs.8000-10000 monthly. We also tried to know the total monthly income of their family. 12% respondents told that their total monthly income ranges between Rs.5000-7000. 25% respondents mentioned that their total monthly income ranges from Rs.7000-9000. 42% were having Rs.9000-11000, 12% respondents were having Rs.11000-13000 and 10% respondents had total. Rs. 13000 and more income monthly The Status of Accomodation The place of stay for fish vendors is normally their own slum colonies. 83% respondents were having own room in the colony. 10% were staying in chawls and 7% were staying in a rented room. We found that 95% vendors were staying with their families. 5% were not staying with their families as they were migrants. The basic amenities status of the vendors shows that 53% respondents had regular electricity and water supply. 47% respondents told that they had irregular supply of electricity & water. 67% respondents had gas connection for cooking food and heating water 30% respondents were using kerosene stove. 3% respondents were using wood & other sources of fuel. Monthly Expenditure on Necessities The total family expenditure of fish vendors was ranging different. 47% vendors had Rs.20004000 expenditure per month. 32% vendors had Rs.4000-6000 monthly expenditure. 17% vendors were spending Rs. 6000-8000 per month as family expenses. 5% vendors were having Rs.8000-10000 expenditure per month. We studied vendors per monthly medical expenditure. 50% vendors told that they spend 5001000 in medicines and treatment. 38% respondents were spending. 1000-2000 monthly. 12% respondent monthly medical budget was .Rs.2000-3000. Selling Operations of Fish vendors Ice purchase is necessary for vendors to save fish from perish ability. Vendors told that they normally sell a big fish per piece is Rs.90-100. Medium size fish per plate is sold on Rs.140 per plate. Small size fish which consist of 30-40 per plate is sold on Rs.300/- per piece and small fish is sold at Rs.7-10 according to its size. Due to larger number of customers on Sundays prices are higher. The pricing is decided on the basis of whole sale market supply. The amount of sale differs on the vendor's capacity. 28% vendors told that they were able to sell minimum one to three kg fish in a day. 50% vendors were able to sell three to six kg. fish on daily basis. 8% vendors were selling more than 6 kg fish in a day. The road side vendor face numerous difficulties.90% vendors had a fix space to sit for selling every

62

RESEARCH ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION

International Indexed &Referred Research Journal, May, 2012. ISSN- 0975-3486, RNI-RAJBIL 2009/30097;VoL.III *ISSUE-32

day. 10% vendors were engaged in door to door selling. The traditional koli vendors told that outside communities have snatched their business by door to door selling. 70% vendors were granted space by municipality. 17% vendors were granted space by big shop owners outside their shops. 10% vendors were provided space by their local village authorities. 63% respondents were paying rent to municipality for the business but 37% respondents told that they were not paying any regular rent but paying hafta to local goons & bribes to municipal authorities. Physical facilities & infrastructure in all types of fish markets are far from satisfactory [FAO 2001].Some of the problems in the fish market include high perish ability & bulkiness of material, high heterogeneity in size & weight among species, high cost of storage & transportation, no guarantee of quantity & quality of commodity, low demand elasticity & high price spread {Ravindranath 2008} Changing customers tastes are hunting the business of Mumbai's traditional fish vendors. During the visit of market we found low level of personal hygiene of vendors. The cleaning of fish with sufficient water was not guaranteed. Vendors sat on the road side which is the another cause of contamination. Due to home delivery available the customer need not to go to the

market to buy from the fresh market. Companies have started delivering frozen sea food, ready to cook meals, sea food snacks in hygienic way and temperature controlled packing. Due to value-added services customer choices have reduced for unhygienic fresh fish markets. Concluding remarks: With fish disappearing from the seas, fishermen face a loss of productive activity. In frustration they turn to alcoholism. They borrow money for gambling. Their bitterness is an additional burden for fisherwomen, who struggle to hold their families together and cope with increased wife beating and dissertation. (Business line 2006)In our study it was found that female are more in fish market in comparison to male vendors. Since we had more female members in our study, it showed that females were doing both responsibilities of looking after the house chores and marketing related activities efficiently. Due to limited access to capital and lack of advance knowledge they are unable to process and preserve fish for longer time and unable to earn more price. Sound marketing infrastructure is inevitable for increasing income of the fisherman.

R E F E R E N C E
1. Clark and Anderson, L. (1986) The Economics of Fishery Management, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Boltimore, U.S.A. Business Line(2006) December 15. 2. Clark C.W. (1985) Bio-economic Modelling and fishery Management, Wiley, New York, U.S.A. 3. CMFRI(2005b) Marine fisheries Census 2005-Maharshtra published by Central Marine fisheries Research Institute, Govt. of India, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheris, New Delhi, 319 pages. 4. Gorden, H.(1954) "The Economic Theory of the Common Property Resource: The fishery" Journal of Political Economy, Vol 62, pp124142. 5. Kumar, P. (2004) Fish demand and supply projections in India, Report of ICAR-ICLARM Project "Strategies and options for increasing and sustaining fisheries and aquaculture production to benefit poor households in Asia." Division of Agricultural Economics, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi. 6. Maharashtra Development Report (2007) Agricultural GrowthChapter 3(Fisheries Devlopment)Planning Commission Government of India Page 119 7. Panayotov (1982) "Management concepts for small scale fisheries" Economic and Social Aspects", FAO Fishery Technical Paper 228, p.53. 8. Pillay, T.V.R. (1956) Socio-economic development of fishermen community in India. All Indian Fisheries exhibition Cuttack, 92-94 9. Ravindranath K (2008) In national workshop on Development of Strategies for domestic Marketing for fish & fishery products, College of Fisheries Science Nellore India pp. 43-48. 10. Shrivastava , Uma Kant (1985) Inland fish marketing In India(Volume:1 Overview Summary & Conclusions). IIM-Ahmadabad & Concept Publishing Company, New Delhi.

RESEARCH ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION

63