ss

Title: A study on Entrepreneurial Behavior of Vegetable Growers in Dhubri District of Assam

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Submitted by, Md. Muzammel Haque PhD Scholar Department of E.E.S Palli Siksha Bhavan, Visva Bharati: Sriniketan Year 2011

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

1. ENTREPRENEUR DEFINITIONS
The word entrepreneur appeared for the first time in the French languageEntreprendre meaning to undertake. In France, in sixteenth century, a leader of the military expedition was referred to as entrepreneur. Cantillon Richard (1730) was the first to use the term entrepreneur. He defined entrepreneur as one who buys factors of production at certain prices and sells his products at uncertain prices. Joshi and Kapur (1973) described farm entrepreneur as the person or a group ofpersons who organizes and operates the business and is responsible for the results i.e.,losses and gains from the business. He is pioneer in organizing and developing the farm. Porchezhian (1991) defined farm entrepreneur as one who maintains one or more enterprises like poultry, dairy and sericulture apart from the main occupation of crop husbandry. Chatterjee (1992) defined an entrepreneur as one who creates something new, undertakes risk, organizes production and handles the economic uncertainty. He termed entrepreneurship as the mission and entrepreneur as the missionary. Harold (1994) stated that entrepreneurs take personal risks in initiating change, and they expect to be rewarded for it. They need some degree of freedom to pursue their ideas; this inturn requires that sufficient authority be delegated. Sarmah and Singh (1994) stated that an entrepreneur is one who can transform raw materials into goods and services, who can effectively utilize physical and financial resources for creating wealth, income and employment, who can innovate new products, standardize or upgrade existing products for creating new markets and new customers. Tyson et al. (1994) viewed entrepreneur as a person who either creates new combinations of production factors such as new methods of production, new products, new markets, finds new sources of supply and new organizational forms; or as a person who is willing to take risks; or a person who, by exploiting market opportunities, eliminates disequilibrium between aggregate supply and aggregate demand, or as one who owns and operates a business.

According to Desai (1995) an entrepreneur is one who can see possibilities in given situation, where others see none and has the patience to workout the idea into scheme towhich financial support can be provided. Balu (1998) stated that women entrepreneur is defined as an adult woman who creates, owns and runs an enterprise. Ramana (1999) defined entrepreneurs as those people who work for themselves. 2. ENTREPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOUR OF FARMERS Nandapurkar (1982) stated that entrepreneurial behaviour consists of different components like farm decision making, innovativeness, risk taking ability, achievement motivation, information seeking, knowledge of the farming, assistance of management service, co-ordination of farm activities, cosmopoliteness and leadership ability. Narayana Swamy (1996) described entrepreneurial behaviour as it is not necessarily doing new things but also doing things in a new way that has been already done. Nomesh Kumar and Narayana Swamy (2000) defined entrepreneurial behaviour as a combination of seven components viz., innovativeness, decision making ability, achievement motivation, information seeking ability, risk taking ability, co-ordinating ability and leadership ability. Narmatha et al. (2002) stated that innovativeness, achievement motivation and risk orientation were the most important components. And further, the component decisionmaking, innovativeness, management orientation, economic motivation, level of aspiration and risk orientation were found to be crucial in influencing the entrepreneurial behaviour. Subramanyeswari and Veeraraghava Reddy (2003) operationalized entrepreneurial behaviour as the changes in the knowledge, skill and attitude of women livestock farmers towards dairy enterprises. Vijay Kumar et al. (2003) operationalized entrepreneurial behaviour as the cumulative outcome of information seeking behaviour, farm decision making, leadership ability, risk taking ability, innovativeness, achievement motivation and market orientation of respondent farmers. 3. PERSONAL, SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF FARMERS 1. Age Pandya (1996) reported that 45.00 per cent of the sugarcane growers were in middle age group followed by old and young age group with 40 and 18 per cent, respectively.

Subramanyeswari (1997) observed that majority of the respondents (52.50%) were of middle age followed by young (29.00%) and old age (18.50%) categories. Vijay Kumar (2001) reported that majority of the respondents (50.83%) were under middle age category followed by 30.84 per cent of young age category and 18.33 per cent old age category. Prasad (2002) observed that majority of the beneficiaries of on farm extension demonstrations were middle aged (60.71%) followed by young age (35.70) and old age (3.58%) groups, respectively. Bhagyalaxmi et al. (2003) observed that majority (66.67%) of the respondents belonged to middle age group followed by young age (22.22%) and old age (11.11%). Suresh (2004) observed that 64.58 per cent of respondents belong to middle age followed by 17.92 per cent in young age and 17.50 per cent in old age. 2. Education Goud (1990) reported that 25.4 per cent of farmers were illiterates followed by 24.3 per cent of respondents who had education upto primary school level. Pandya (1996) concluded that more than half (56.00%) of sugarcane growers had education up to secondary level followed by 22.00 per cent in each under higher and primary level of education. Chandrapaul (1998) indicated that majority (43.30%) of the respondents were functionally literate and only few (7.50%) respondents had high school education. Baswarajaiah (2001) reported that education status among the farm families of Mahaboobnagar district was 74.17 per cent, primary school (11.67%), middle school (8.33%), high school (4.17%) and college education (4.17%). Vijay Kumar (2001) observed that majority of the respondents (31.66%) had education upto primary school level and the illiteracy level among the respondents was only 11.66 per cent. 3. Occupation Anitha (2004) reported that 3.33 per cent of farm women were practicing agricultural and subsidiary enterprises in addition to other sources of income. Great majority (92.50%) of farm women were practicing agricultural and subsidiary enterprises while 4.17 per cent of farm women were dependent only on agriculture. 4. Size of the land holding

Pandya (1996) revealed that majority (64.00%) of sugarcane growers had medium land holding followed by 24 and 12 per cent of them were in the category of big and small holdings, respectively. Suresh Kumar (1997) indicated that majority of the respondents (60.00%) had land holding of above 10 acres whereas 40.00 per cent of respondents had below 10 acres of land holding. Sivanandan (2002) observed that majority of the respondents (56.00%) were small farmers followed by marginal (26.00%) and big (18.00%) farmers. Suresh (2004) observed that majority of the respondents (68.75%) were having medium size of land holding followed by high (19.17%) and low (12.08%) size of land holding. 5. Annual income Manjula (1995) reported that majority (65.00%) of respondents belonged to medium income group followed by high (21.67%) and low (13.33%) income group. Vijay Kumar (2001) reported that 45.84 per cent of respondents were under medium income group followed by 27.50 per cent of low and 26.66 per cent of high income groups. Suresh (2004) reported that most of respondents were in medium income group with 80.33 per cent followed by high and low income groups i.e., 15.00 and 4.17 per cent, respectively. 6. Assets Saikrishna (1998) reported that majority of the respondents possessed the agricultural materials like sprayer (89.33%) and cart (76.00%). More than one-third of the respondents (38.61% and 36.67%) possessed leveller and puddler, respectively. Whereas, only 11.33 per cent of the respondents possessed tractor. In case of nonagricultural materials, it was found that majority (96.00%) of the respondents possessed cycle. Radio and television were possessed by 81.33 and 64.00 per cent of the respondents, respectively. More than one-fourth of the respondents (28.00%) possessed motor cycle, whereas only 1.33 per cent of the farmers possessed a car. 7. Social participation Khan et al. (1997) observed that majority (81.81%) of paddy cultivators had medium social participation followed by 18.19 per cent having high social participation.

Nadre (2000) reported that majority (53.80%) of the cotton growers had low social participation, 26.70 per cent had medium and 19.13 per cent farmers had high social participation. Vijay Kumar (2001) reported that majority (45.84%) of the respondents fell under category of medium social participation followed by 41.66 and 12.50 per cent of low and high social participation, respectively. Anitha (2004) reported that around one third (32.50%) of farm women had high organizational participation, whereas 45.80 per cent of farm women had medium level and 21.70 per cent had low level of organizational participation. 8. Mass media participation Gattu (2001) reported that majority (66.67%) of the respondents had medium mass media contact followed by low (18.33%) and high (15.00%) mass media contact. Neelaveni et al. (2002) revealed that half of the respondents belonged to medium mass media consumption category followed by low (32.50%) and high (14.16%) category. Anitha (2004) reported that one-fifth (20.00%) of farm women had high level of mass media exposure. More than half (52.50%) of farm women were having medium level of mass media exposure and 27.50 per cent had low level of mass media use. Suresh (2004) reported that 64.17 per cent of respondents were exposed to mass media to a moderate extent followed by 21.25 per cent to low extent and 14.58 per cent to high extent. 9. Extension participation Sakharkar (1995) found that, 36.00 per cent of the respondents had participated in one or more extension activities whereas, two-third (64.33%) of the respondents did not participate in any extension activity. Angadi (1999) reported that majority of the respondents had not participated in various extension activities viz., discussions with extension personnel (98.76%), group meeting (75.23%) and training programmes (72.50%). Only (43.75%) and (38.13%) of the respondents participated regularly in extension activities like method demonstrations and Krishimela, respectively. Anitha (2004) reported that 17.50 per cent of respondents had high extension participation, 44.20 per cent had medium and 38.30 per cent had low extension participation . 10. Level of aspiration

Neelaveni et al. (2002) reported that nearly three-fourth of the respondents had medium level of aspiration. Anitha (2004) reported that, about 30.80 per cent of respondents had high level of aspiration, while, one third (33.40%) of farm women had medium aspiration level and 35.80 per cent of farm women had low aspiration level. 11. Adoption of improved practices Yavalkar et al. (1991) revealed that 50.00 per cent of the respondents had partially adopted the recommended plant protection measures in cultivation of orange. Srinivasareddy (1995) conducted a study in Kolar district of Karnataka state and reported that 37.00 per cent of mango growers had medium level of adoption while, 33.00 and 30.00 per cent belonged to high and low adoption categories, respectively. Chapke Rajendra (2000) conducted a study in Akola district of Maharashtra about biocontrol measures, he revealed that 85.40 per cent of the respondents had overall moderate adoption level about biocontrol measures. A negligible percentage of the respondents had low and high adoption level of biocontrol measures. 4. ENTREPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOURAL COMPONENTS OF FARMERS 1. Innovativeness Nandapurkar (1982) reported that innovativeness has taken second position in explaining the variance of the entrepreneurial behaviour of small farmers in Maharashtra. Reddy (1997) revealed that majority (62.00%) of the farmers had medium innovativeness, 20 per cent had high and 18 per cent had low innovativeness. Vijay Kumar (2001) indicated that 47.50 per cent of respondents fell in low category followed by 31.66 per cent in medium category and 20.84 per cent in high category. Bhagyalaxmi et al. (2003) observed that majority (69.44%) of the respondents had medium innovativeness followed by 15.56 and 15.00 per cent of respondents having high and own innovativeness, respectively. Suresh (2004) indicated that the milk producers in the district had medium, high and low innovativeness in the order of 55.00, 24.58 and 20.42 per cent, respectively.

2. Farm decision making

Suresh Kumar (1997) reported that majority of the respondents (46.70%) were having high decision making ability followed by 36.70 per cent with medium and 16.6 per cent with low decision making ability. Chandra Paul (1998) concluded that majority of respondents (50.90%) had medium decision making ability followed by low (25.80%) and high (23.30%) decision making categories. Vijay Kumar (2001) indicated that majority (46.66%) of the respondents had medium decision making followed by low (27.50%) and high (25.84%) decision making categories, respectively. Suresh (2004) observed that majority of milk producers had medium level of decision making ability (65.83%) followed by low and high with 21.67 and 12.50 per cent, respectively. 3. Achievement motivation Sivanarayana (1990) reported that little more than three fourth (77.00%) of the respondents had medium level of achievement motivation followed by low (13.33%) and high (9.17%) level of achievement motivation. Sabitakumari (1995) found that majority (71.67%) of the rural women had medium achievement motivation whereas 19.17 per cent had high and 9.16 per cent had low achievement motivation. Chandra Paul (1998) revealed that 52.50 per cent of respondents had medium achievement motivation followed by more or less equal percentage of 22.50 and 25.00 per cent of respondents in low and high achievement motivation categories, respectively. Vijay Kumar (2001) reported that 44.16 per cent of respondents had medium achievement motivation followed by 28.34 and 27.50 per cent of respondents in low and high achievement motivation, respectively. Suresh (2004) indicated that 61.25 per cent of the respondents had medium achievement motivation followed by 20.42 per cent low level and 18.33 per cent high level. 4. Knowledge of farming enterprise Shreeshailaja and Veerabhadraiah (1992) found that 36.00 per cent of dairy women had medium knowledge followed by high (33.00%) and low (31.00%) level of overall knowledge of improved dairy practices.

Clothe and Borkar (2000) found that more than half (58.67%) of the respondents had medium level of knowledge followed by high (22.67%) and low (18.66%) knowledge levels on bio-fertilizers. Kalaskar et al. (2001) revealed that majority of the respondents (67.25%) were moderately aware about different IPM practices in cotton. In other words, it could be stated that quite a few (16.97%) respondents had high level of knowledge about IPM practices. Suresh (2004) reported that most of the respondents had medium level of knowledge regarding dairy enterprise followed by high and low level with 74.17, 16.66 and 9.17 per cent, respectively. 5. Risk taking ability Verma (1993) found that majority (64.00% and 50.67%) of the member and nonmember dairy farmers had medium orientation towards admitting risk. There were 20.67 per cent members and 16.00 per cent non-members who had high risk preference ability as against 14.87 per cent members and 33.33 per cent non-members who had low risk preference ability. Meeran and Jayaseelan (1999) reported high risk orientation (72.00%) among shrimp farmers followed by medium (26.00%) and low (20.00%) risk orientation. Vijay Kumar (2001) indicated that 38.34, 35.00 and 26.66 per cent of total respondents fell under low, medium and high risk taking ability categories, respectively. Subramanyam (2002) revealed that 75.00 per cent of the trained farmers had medium risk preference followed by high (13.34%) and low (11.66%) levels of risk preference. Bhagyalaxmi et al. (2003) revealed that majority of the respondents (75.56%) had medium risk orientation followed by low (15.56%) and high (13.33%) risk orientation categories. Suresh (2004) indicated that majority of respondents had medium level of risk taking ability followed by low and high level at the rate of 62.02, 24.58 and 13.34 per cent, respectively. 6. Information seeking behavior Chandra Paul (1998) revealed that 41.60 per cent of the respondents had low information seeking followed by medium (32.50%) and high (25.90%) information seeking categories.

Kumar (2001) observed that 41.66 per cent of the respondents from floriculture had low information seeking followed by medium (32.50%) and high (25.90%) information seeking categories, respectively. Vijay Kumar (2001) reported that 41.66 per cent of respondents fell under low information seeking category followed by 33.34 and 25.00 per cent of respondents fell under medium and high information seeking categories, respectively. Suresh (2004) reported that majority of the respondents had medium level of information seeking behaviour followed by high and low level with 68.75, 17.08 and 14.17 percent, respectively. 7. Assistance of management service Reddy (1997) observed that majority (72.00%) of the fish farmers in Nellore district had medium level of managerial assistance followed by high (15.33%) and low (12.66%) managerial assistance. Rajaram (2002) stated that majority (77.50%) of the respondents had medium management orientation followed by 22.50 per cent had high management orientation leaving none in the low management orientation. 8. Leadership ability Chandra Paul (1998) reported that 37.50 per cent of total respondents fell in low leadership ability category followed by medium (32.50%) and high (30.00%) leadership ability categories. Vijay Kumar (2001) reported that 36.66, 32.60 and 30.84 per cent of total respondents fell under low, medium and high leadership ability categories, respectively. Suresh (2004) reported that among the respondents, 67.92 per cent had medium level of leadership ability, 16.25 per cent had low and remaining 15.83 per cent had high level of leadership ability. 9. Cosmopoliteness Rogers and Shoemaker (1971) found that early adopters were more cosmopolite than late adopters in the case of farming community. Kashem and Hossain (1992) in their study on sugarcane growers in Bagladesh reported that majority of sugarcane growers had medium level of cosmopoliteness. Anitha (2004) indicated that more than one-fourth (28.30%) of farm women had high cosmopoliteness followed by medium (44.20%) category and low (27.50%) cosmopoliteness groups.

Suresh (2004) reported that 45.00 per cent of respondents had low level of cosmopoliteness, 44.17 per cent of them had medium level and 10.83 per cent had high level of cosmopoliteness. 10. Level of entrepreneurial behavior Pandya (1997) indicated that majority of inland fishermen (64.08%) belonged to the category of medium entrepreneurial behaviour followed by 18.44 and 17.48 per cent belonged to low and high entrepreneurial behaviour, respectively. Porchezhian et al. (1998) reported that most of the farmers had high (66.00%) entrepreneurial behaviour followed by medium (23.00%) level of entrepreneurial behaviour. Patil et al. (1999) revealed that majority (58.00%) of the respondents had medium entrepreneurial behaviour, while 23.00 and 19.00 per cent respondents had low and high entrepreneurial behaviour score, respectively. Senthilvinayagam (1999) observed that 53.75 per cent of agribusiness entrepreneurs had high level of entrepreneurial behaviour followed by low (30.00%) and medium (16.25%) levels. Narmatha et al. (2002) observed that more than 53.00 per cent of the livestock farm women had high entrepreneurial behaviour. Bhagyalaxmi et al. (2003) observed that nearly fifty per cent of women in vegetable production (46.67%) and dairy (51.67%) had medium entrepreneurial experience. Patel et al. (2003) revealed that majority of sugarcane growers (63.00%) had medium level of entrepreneurship, while 21.00 and 16.00 per cent of respondents had high and low level of entrepreneurship, respectively. Rao and Dipak De (2003) revealed that majority (60.00%) of the respondents had medium entrepreneurial behaviour, while 16.00 and 23.30 per cent respondents had low and high entrepreneurial behaviour score, respectively. Anitha (2004) reported that 47.50 per cent of farmwomen belonged to the medium category of entrepreneurial behaviour, whereas 28.30 per cent were in high entrepreneurial behaviour category and around one-fourth (24.20%) had low entrepreneurial behaviour. Senthilvinayagam (1999) observed that 53.75 per cent of agribusiness entrepreneurs had high level of entrepreneurial behaviour followed by low (30.00%) and medium (16.25%) levels.

Narmatha et al. (2002) observed that more than 53.00 per cent of the livestock farmwomen had high entrepreneurial behaviour. Bhagyalaxmi et al. (2003) observed that nearly fifty per cent of women in vegetable production (46.67%) and dairy (51.67%) had medium entrepreneurial experience. Patel et al. (2003) revealed that majority of sugarcane growers (63.00%) had medium level of entrepreneurship, while 21.00 and 16.00 per cent of respondents had high and low level of entrepreneurship, respectively. Rao and Dipak De (2003) revealed that majority (60.00%) of the respondents had medium entrepreneurial behaviour, while 16.00 and 23.30 per cent respondents had low and high entrepreneurial behaviour score, respectively. Anitha (2004) reported that 47.50 per cent of farmwomen belonged to the medium category of entrepreneurial behaviour, whereas 28.30 per cent were in high entrepreneurial behaviour category and around one-fourth (24.20%) had low entrepreneurial behaviour.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anitha, B., 2004, A study on entrepreneurial behaviour and market participation of farm women in Bangalore rural district of Karnataka. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. Anjaneyaswamy, G., 1992, Implications of rural entrepreneurship in non-farm activities.Kurukshetra, 11(6) : 24-26. Anonymous, 1992, Ministry of rural development Circular No. 280/12/16/91 IRD-III (Vol. II), dated 15th November 1991, Grameen Vikas Newsletter, 8(1) : 14-20. Balu, V., 1998, Women entrepreneurship in India- Problems and prospects. Third Concepts, 29(139): 39-41. Baswarajaiah, V., 2001, Impact of Edira watershed development programme on farm families in Mahaboobnagar district of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Bhagyalaxmi et al. 2003, Profile of the rural women micro-entrepreneurs. Journal of Research, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad, 31(4) : 51-54. Bheemappa, A., 2003, Entrepreneurship development in agriculture. Yojana, 47(12) : 19-20.

Biradar, N. B., 1997, Effectiveness of teaching methods in communicating nutritional knowledge to rural women An experimental study. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Cantillon Richard, 1730, Essai Sur la Narure commerce en General (originally published in French language in 1730), quoted from Misra, P. N., Development Banks and the new entrepreneurship in India, New Delhi, National Publishing House, 1987, p. 8. Cantrill, H., 1965, The pattern of human concerns, Rudgers University, New Burnswick. Chandrapaul, K., 1998, A study on entrepreneurial behaviour of vegetable growers in Krishna district of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Chapke Rajendra, 2000, Knowledge and adoption of farmers about bio-control measures. Maharashtra Journal of Extension Education, 19 : 41-47. Chatterjee, A., 1992, Entrepreneurship employment. Yojana, 38(6) : 12-15. Development Programme and Self-

Chidananda, 1996, Influence of socio-economic status on aspiration and work orientation of small farmers. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. Clothe, G. D. and Borkar, M. M., 2000, Constraints faced by farmers in adoption of biofertilizers. Maharashtra Journal of Extension Education, 19 : 298-299. Desai, V., 1995, Small Scale Industries and Entrepreneurship, Himachal Publishing House, Bombay, pp. 15-24. Dhamodaran, T. and Vasantha Kumar, J., 2001, Relationship between selected characteristic of registered sugarcane growers and their extent of adoption of improved sugarcane cultivation practices. Journal of Extension Education, 12(2) : 3138-3143. Ganeshan, G., 2001, Entrepreneurship Development. Kisan World, 28(6) : 50-51. Gattu, K. C., 2001, Production constraints of turmeric cultivation in Karimnagar district of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Goud, M. P., 1990, A study to measure entrepreneurial behavioural characteristics among small, medium and big farmers as related to their productivity. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad.

Hanchinal, S. N., 1999, Privatization of extension service : Attitude and preference of farmers and extension personnel. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Harold, K., 1994, Essentials of Management. I Edition, McGraw Hill Publishing Company, New York, p. 39. Joshi, S. S. and Kapur, t. r., 1973, Fundamentals of Farm Business, Ronald Press, New York. Kalaskar et al., 2001, Factors influencing knowledge of cotton growers about integrated pest management practices in cotton. Maharashtra Journal of Extension Education, 16 : 386-399. Kashem, M. A. and Hossain, M., 1992, Adoption behaviour of sugarcane growers. Indian Journal of Extension Education, 28 : 92-96. Khan et al.,1997, Farmers characteristics of adoption of paddy technology in eastern Madhya Pradesh A path analysis. Journal of Extension Education, 8(4) : 1800-1807. Kumar, K., 2001, Entrepreneurial behaviour of floriculture farmers in Ranga Reddy district of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Manjula, S., 1995, A study of entrepreneurial behaviour of rural women in Ranga Reddy district of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (H. Sc.) Thesis, Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Meeran, M. N. and Jayaseelan, M. J., 1999, Socio-personal, socio-economic and sociopsychological profile of shrimp farmers. Journal of Extension Education, 10(2) : 2445-2448. Meti, S. K., 1998, Technology reach perception, knowledge, adoption and attitude towards improved agriculture technology by small and marginal farmers in Tungabhadra Command Area. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Murali, K. and Anitha Jhamtani, 2003, Entrepreneurial characteristics of floriculture farmers. Indian Journal of Extension Education, 39(1&2) : 19-25. Nadre, K. R., 2000, A study on constraints in adoption of recommended practices of cotton in Aurangabad and Jalna districts. MANAGE Extension Research Review, 1(2): 66-76.

Naik, R., 1993, A study on awareness, attitude and use pattern of seed supplying agencies by farmers in Dharwad district, Karnataka. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. Nandapurkar, C. G., 1980, A study on entrepreneurial behaviour of small farmers. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. Nandapurkar, C. G., 1982, Significance of entrepreneurship in agricultural development : An empirical study. Maharashtra Journal of Extension Education, 1(1) : 47-51. Narayanaswamy, B. K., 1996, Small farmers development co-operative as a desirable model. Paper presented in the Seminar on Rediscovering Co-operation, held at Anand during November 19-21. Narmatha et al, 2002, Entrepreneurship behaviour of livestock farm women. Journal of Extension Education, 13(4) : 3431-3438. Neelaveni et al., 2002, Developmental priorities of farm women in agribusiness management A case of an adopted village K. B. Palm. MANAGE Extension Research Review, 6(3) : 74-83. Nirmaladevi,M . and Manoharan, M., 1997, Adoption level of guava cultivators An analytical study. Journal of Extension Education, 8(2) : 1662-1664. Nisha,P. R., 1996, Role of farm women in dairy co-operatives. M. V. Sc. Thesis, TANUVAS, Madras. Nomesh Kumar, N., 1998, Entrepreneurial behaviour of farmers practicing sustainable agriculture. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences,Bangalore. Nomesh Kumar, N. and Narayanaswamy, B. K., 2000, Entrepreneurial behaviour and socio-economic characteristics of farmers who adopted sustainable agriculture in India. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 13(1) : 83-90. Pandya, R. D., 1996, Entrepreneurial behaviour of sugarcane growers. Journal of Extension Education, 6(7) : 1299-1301. Pandya, R. D., 1997, Entrepreneurial behaviour of inland fishermen. Journal of Extension Education, 8(2) : 1718. Patel, M. M. and Sanoria, Y. C., 1997, Correlates of entrepreneurial behaviour of sugarcane growers. Maharashtra Journal of Extension Education, XVI : 344- 346. Patel, M. M., Sanoria, Y. C. and Amit Chatterjee, 2003, Communication factors and entrepreneurial behaviour of sugarcane growers. Journal of Research, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad, 31(3) : 62-67.

Patil et al., 1999, Entrepreneurial behaviour of little gourd growers. Maharashtra Journal of Extension Education, XVIII : 240- 243. Petrin, T., 1992, Partnership and institution building as factors in rural development. Paper presented at the Sixth Session of the FAO/ECA Working Party on Women and the Agricultural Family in Rural Development, Innsbruck, Austria, 13-16October. Petrin, T., 1994, Entrepreneurship as an economic force in rural development, Keynote Paper presented at the Seventh FAO/REU International Rural Development Summer School, Herrsching, Germany, 8-14 September, 1994. Porchezhian, M. R., 1991, An analysis of entrepreneurial behaviour of farmers. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore. Porchezhian et al., 1998, Entrepreneurial behaviour of farmers. Journal of Extension Education, 9(1) : 1963-1964. Prasad, C., 2002, A study on the impact of on-farm extension demonstration (OFEDs) in rice in Nellore district of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Rajaram, M.K., 2002, A study on production constraints of groundnut cultivation in Sangli district of Maharashtra. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Ramana, A. V., 1999, Entrepreneurship and economic development. Kurukshetra, 48(2) : 8- 10. Ramanna et al., 2000, Motivation factors and constraints of hybrid sunflower seed growers. Journal of Extension Education, 11(3) : 2840-2844. Rao, M. S. and Dipak De, 2003, Entrepreneurial Behaviour of Vegetable Growers, Department of Extension Education, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi. Rao, R. J., 1995, A study on the knowledge and adoption level of paddy farmers in Hospet taluk of Tungabhadra Command Area in Karnataka. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. Rao, T. V. S., 1989, A study on entrepreneurial characteristics of vegetable growers in Guntur district of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad.

Rao, V. G. K., 1985, A prediction analysis of farming performance of farmers through their entrepreneurial behavioural factors. Ph. D. Thesis, Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Reddy, G. P., 1996, An analysis of roles and farming performance of farm women in rice based farming system in Ranga Reddy district of Andhra Pradesh. Ph. D.Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Reddy, V. P., 1997, A study of the entrepreneurial characteristics and farming performance of fish farmers in Nellore district of Andhra Pradesh. Ph. D. Thesis, Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Rogers, E. M. and Shoemaker, F. F., 1971, Communication of innovations across cultural approach, The Free Press, New York. Rogers, E. M. and Svenning, I., 1969, Modernization among peasants : The impact of communication, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York. Sabitakumari, 1995, Developmental priorities of rural women of Chandpur village in medak district of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (H. Sc.) Thesis, Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Saikrishna, N., 1998, A study on knowledge of paddy cultivation practices and adoption behaviour of Andhra migrant farmers in Raichur district. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Sakharkar, V. S., 1995, A study on knowledge, fertilizer use pattern and constraints in then cultivation of soybean by farmers of Nagpur district, Maharashtra. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Samwel, K. l., 2003, Co-operative entrepreneurship A perspective. Kurukshetra, pp. 20-23. Saravanakumar,R., 1996, A study on management of mango gardens by farmers in Krishnagiri taluk of Dharmapuri district, Tamil Nadu. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Sarmah,R. C. and Singh, A. K., 1994, Determinants of entrepreneurship in Agriculture. Agriculture Extension Review, 35(3) : 538-539. Senthilvinayagam, S., 1999, Entrepreneurial behaviour of agricultural business operators. Ph. D. Thesis, Kerala Agricultural University, Vellanikera. Shashidhara, K. K., 2003, A study on socio-economic profile of drip irrigation farmers in Shimoga and Davanagere districts of Karnataka. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad.

Shreeshailaja, K. T. and Veerabhadraiah, V., 1992, Knowledge and adoption of improved dairy practices among farm women. Indian Journal of Dairy Science, 27(8) : 40-42. Singh et al., 1999, Correlates of knowledge, attitude and risk preference of farmers towards dry farming technologies. Maharashtra Journal of Extension Education, XVII : 146-149. Sivanandan, S., 2002, A study on listening behaviour of the farmers towards selected farm broadcasts in Theni district of Tamil Nadu. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Sivanarayana, G., 1990, An analytical study on adoption of improved practices among small and marginal farmers of diversified farming in Guntur district of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Srinivasa Reddy, M. V, 1995, A study on knowledge and adoption of recommended mango cultivation practices among farmers of Kolar district. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. Stevenson, H. H., 1985, New business ventures and the entrepreneur. Homewood, IL: Irwin. Subashini et al., 1997, Adoption behaviour of tapioca farmers. Journal of Extension Education, 8(4): 1843-1846. Subramanyam, I., 2002, A study on the impact of agricultural market yard committee level training programmes in nellore district of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Subramanyeswari, B., 1997, A study on the entrepreneurial behaviour of rural dairy women in Chittoor district of Andhra Pradesh. M. V. Sc. Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Subramanyeswari, B. and Veeraraghava Reddy, K., 2003, Entrepreneurialbehaviour of rural dairy women. Madras Agricultural Journal, 30(1-3) : 173-175. Sundaraswamy, B, 1987, A study on need achievement and job performance of Assistant Agricultural Officers in Karnataka state. Ph. D. Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore. Supe, S. V., 1969, Factors related to different degrees of rationality in decision-making among farmers in Buldana district. Ph. D. Thesis, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi.

Suresh Kumar, 1997, Feasibility analysis of privatization of extension services for selected farm enterprises. Ph. D. Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Suresh, 2004, Entrepreneurial behaviour of milk producers in Chittoor district of Andhra Pradesh A critical study. M. V. Sc. Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Suresh Reddy, J, 2004, Entrepreneurship: Concept and Development. Third Concept, 17(203) : 39-42. Timmons, J. A., www.ruraleship.org. 1989, The entrepreneurial mind, Andover Brick House.

Trivedi, G., 1963, Measurement and analysis of socio-economic status of rural families. Ph.D. Thesis, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi. Twaalfhover, B. W. H. and Indivers, N.V., 1993, The role of dynamic entrepreneurs in dynamic entrepreneurship in eastern Europe, D. F. Abell and T. Koellermeler (Eds.), Delwel Publisher, The Hague, 1993, pp. 7-13. Tyson, l., Petrin, T. and Rogers, H., 1994, Promoting entrepreneurship in Central and Eastern Europe. Small Business Economics, 6 : 1-20. Vedamurthy, H. S., 2002, A study of arecanut management practices in Shimoga district in Karnataka. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Venkata Ramaiah, P., 1991, Entrepreneurial behaviour of small and marginal farmers of Guntur district in Andhra Pradesh. Extension Research Series, II(2) : 1-120. Verma, K., 1993, A study of differential impact of milk co-operative societies in uppern Gangetic plains. Ph. D. Thesis, National Diary Research Institute, Karnal. Vijay Kumar, K., 2001, Entrepreneurship behaviour of floriculture farmers in Ranga Reddy district of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. Vijay Kumar, K., Pochaiah, M. and Raghupathi Reddy, G., 2003, Correlates of entrepreneurial behaviour of floriculture farmers. MANAGE Extension Research Review, IV(1) : 153-164. Vijayalakshmi, V., 1992, Women entrepreneurship (Ed.) Rajkumari Chandrasekhar Womens Resource and National Development A perspective, Gaurav Publishing House, New Delhi.

Yavalkar et al., 1991, Correlates of adoption of plant protecting recommendations of Kolsi by orange growers A path analysis. Maharashtra Journal of Extension Education, 10 : 216-220