chapter iv development of coir industry...
TRANSCRIPT
58
CHAPTER IV
DEVELOPMENT OF COIR INDUSTRY-AN OVERVIEW
The present chapter is proposed to examine the development of the coir
industry over the years including the history, origin, features and structure of coir
industry, location of the industry and its relation with coconut cultivation, and
emergence of co-operatives, types and organizational pattern of coir co-operatives,
governmental policies and supportive measures.
The Coir is extracted from the exocarp of the fruit of the coconut palm,
Cocos Nucifera Linn. The early Spanish explorers called coconut, coco, which
means “monkey face” because the three indentations (eyes) on the hairy nut
resemble the head and face of a monkey. Nucifera means “nut bearing”(Kareen,
2011). The fibre obtained from the coconut husk, either by the natural retting
process or by the mechanical extraction process is locally called coir. To be
authentic, the prepared fibre of husk of the coconut fruit used in making rope,
matting etc. is called coir (Webster’s Dictionary, 1994). Coir is natural,
biodegradable and environmental friendly. It is tough and durable, versatile and
resilient, resistant to flame and fungi, provides insulation and helps sound
modulation and so it capture both domestic and foreign markets (Coir Board,
1956). The coconut palm which is a tropical palm tree, largely grown in sea coast
climate and it can grow and bear fruits with a well distributed rainfall of 100cm but
for profitable cultivation of the plant rainfall ranging from 100cm to 225 cm per
59
annum, evenly distributed throughout the year appears necessary. Temperature is
another important weather factor which influences on the growth of coconut. The
optimum mean annual temperature for better growth and yield is recorded as 270
Celcius with slight variations (Elevitch, 2006). Thus countries having the above
geographical features are the most important coconut growers in the world.
India is one of the monsoon countries of the world and has a tropical
monsoon climate and receives a rainfall between 100 cm and 200 cm. The mean
temperature of India is 250C in south to 150C in the Gangetic plains. The Tropic of
Cancer passes almost through the centre of India and divides it into two halves.
The northern half lies in the temporate zone and the southern half lies in the
tropical zone. The coconut being a tropical palm tree, its cultivation is extensive in
the southern part of India especially in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andra
Pradesh. Also India has a coast of 5700 Km including the coast of Andaman and
Lakshadweep Islands. In short, Indian physical geographical features are
conducive for coconut cultivation, and thus India, particularly South India, has
become one of the potential growers of coconut in the world. Development of coir
industry has all along been in areas where there is concentration of coconut
cultivation and availability of coconut husk (Jose, 2002). The coir industry tends to
be localized in Kerala for historical and geographical reasons but of recent, it is
spreading to other states of India like Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka.
4.1. Coconut in the Global Scenario
Coconut is a versatile crop grown all over the world except Europe and
Australia (Kerala Agricultural University, 2008). About 91 countries of the world
grow coconut spread over the 15 APCC countries, 8 Asian countries, 13 Pacific
60
countries, 24 African countries and 31 American countries (APCC Year Book,
2007). The distribution of area harvested and coconut production in the different
countries of the world are given in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1
World area and production of coconuts- 2009
Sl.No Name of Countries AreaHarvested
(In ‘000 ha)
Percentage
of Area
Production ofNuts
(In Million)*
Percentage of
Production
1. Bangladesh 43 0.38 113 0.15
2. Brazil 287 2.53 2467 3.17
3. China 28 0.25 388 0.50
4. Columbia 16 0.14 102 0.13
5. Cote d’ Ivoire 32 0.28 267 0.34
6. Fiji 60 0.53 188 0.24
7. Ghana 56 0.49 396 0.51
8. India 1940 17.07 12685 16.28
9. Indonesia 2950 25.96 26957 34.60
10. Malaysia 174 1.53 575 0.74
11. Mozambique 70 0.62 338 0.43
12. Mexico 179 1.58 1256 1.61
13. Papua New Guinea 203 1.79 1163 1.49
14. Philippines 3380 29.75 19585 25.14
15. Sri Lanka 395 3.48 2624 3.37
16. Thailand 246 2.17 1726 2.22
17. Vietnam 138 1.21 1411 1.81
18. Other Countries 1165 10.25 5673 7.28
19. Total 11362 100.00 77914 100.00
Source: FAOSTAT, FAO Statistics Division, 2011
*Calculated by using conversion factor of one ton nuts=1250 whole nuts (Source; Coconut DevelopmentAuthority, Sri Lanka)
61
India with an annual production of 12685 million nuts occupies the third
place in the world production after Indonesia and Philippines. The share of India in
the world coconut production is about 16.28% of the total production and 17.07%
in the area harvested. The four Asian countries India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia and
Philippines, together have recorded 76.26% of the area harvested and 79.39% of
the world production of coconut. Therefore, these four countries have the potential
to produce the raw material required for the coir industry and even they could
develop monopoly of the coir industry in the world (See Table 4.1 for details).
The decadal growth of coconut production in the world has showed
positive growth over the last five decades registering a growth rate of 161%. (See
Figure 4.1)
Figure 4.1
The world production of coconut over the decade from 1961 upto 2009
shows an increasing trend and estimated a steady growth rate of 161% (See Figure
62
4.1). Eventhough the production in terms of number has increased, the percentage
of decadel variation during the two decades, 1981 and 2009 showed a slow down
growth. An analysis of country wise coconut production for different decades will
identify the countries where a set back in production have registered during these
periods.
Brazil, Fiji, India and Sri Lanka witnessed a fall in production during the
decade 1981 and after that these countries except, Fiji have improved their position.
In the case of Fiji the production continued to be on the decrease in the remaining
decades also (See Table 1 in Appendix C). It may be inferred that the slowdown in
the production of coconut in the world during the decade 1981was mainly due to
fall in production in India and Sri Lanka. However, in 2009 production in Brazil
and Sri Lanka again fell down along with some other countries like Columbia, Cote
d’Ivoire, Malaysia, Mozambique, Mexico and Thailand. It is to be noted that the fall
in production of coconut in these countries, usually would make no negative impact
in the production of coir in the world because all the coconut growing countries are
not potential producers of coir. As India and Sri Lanka being the leading producers
of coir in the world, the setbacks, if any, occur in coconut production in these two
countries would definitely affect the entire coir industry.
As has been seen in the case of world production of coconut, Indian
coconut production has also showed an increasing trend over the decades 1961 up
to 2009 except in the decade 1981 (See Table 1 in Appendix C). From 1961 to 2009
the Indian coconut production showed a growth of 204.93% which is much higher
than that of the world growth rate of 158.20%. During 1981, a fall in the production
of coconut is also seen (See Table 1 in Appendix C). After the decade 1981,
63
coconut production increased tremendously especially during 1991 and then
onwards production is showing a continuous increase.
Country wise recent trends in production of coconuts for the current years
from 2000 to 2009 are given in Table 2 in Appendix C. The world production of
coconut showed an increasing trend, but in certain coconut producing countries
like Brazil, Columbia, India, Mexico, Sri Lanka and Thailand, production has seen
decreased after 2007. However, this fall in production might be a temporary
phenomenon as there has seen an upward trend in production of coconut in the
different decades from 1961to 2009. This high-lights the possibility of ensuring the
raw material, husk, to the coir industry for the future development on the context
of crisis in the industry due to severe shortage of husks.
4.2. Coconut in the Indian Scenario
The coconut palm is supposed to be one of the five legendary
“DevaVrikshas” and is eulogized as Kalpavriksha- the all giving tree in Indian
classics. All parts of the palm are used in someway or another in the daily life of
the people in the traditional coconut growing areas. Its fruit is called Lakshmi
Phal and is used in social and religious functions in India irrespective of whether
palm is locally grown or not (Markose, 2008). This is a versatile tree crop which
provides food and refreshing drink, oil for edible and non edible uses, fibre of
commercial value, shell for fuel and industrial uses, thatch, an alcoholic beverage,
timber and varieties of miscellaneous products for use. Coconut possesses the
unique characteristics of allowing any crop combination in the inter-spaces. A well
spaced coconut garden provides adequate inter-spaces where it is possible to grow
a variety of crops, both seasonal and perennial (Markose, 2008). Because of the
64
geographical and other reasons discussed above, India, continues to be one of the
major producers of coconut in the world.
Production of coconut in India is concentrated in South Indian states of
Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. Major share of it is cultivated
in the low land i.e., coastal tracts, mid land and high land of Kerala with varying
rates. To get an idea about the state wise distribution of area, production and
productivity of coconuts in India (See Table 3 in Appendix C).
The four South Indian states namely Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and
Andhra Pradesh together grab 90 % of the area under coconut and 91 % of the
coconut production in India and they are infact the hub of coconut production in
India. Kerala ranks first in the national production of coconuts with its share in the
area under cultivation 41.58% and 36.89% in production. However, Kerala keeps
predominance in its area under cultivation over the other coconut growing states in
India especially, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. But in terms of
productivity, Lakshadweep, Pondicherry and Tamil Nadu scored top position
compared to the other states including Kerala. Lakshadweep is having the highest
productivity of 19630 nuts per hectare which is much higher than the national
average of 8303 nuts per hectare. The productivity in Kerala is only 7365 nuts per
hectare explaining a low level of productivity below the national average.
Whereas, the productivity status of other three south Indian states have been
13771in Tamil Nadu, 5193 in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh 9327 nuts per
hectare (See Table 3 in Appendix C).
65
Table 4.2
Indian production of coconuts: decadal growth
Source: Directorate of Economics & Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India
The production of coconut has showed an upward trend except the decades
1981 and 2009. The growth of the coconut production in India for the decades
from 1961 to 2009 showed an appreciable growth of 173%. Importantly, from a
negative growth of -2.19% in 1981 was tremendously increased to 63.25% in
1991which might be the outcome of the efforts of the Coconut Development Board
constituted in the year 1981(See Table 4.2). Interestingly, similar events witnessed
in the case of world production of coconuts (See figure 4.1). In India also the
coconut production decreased drastically during the very same two decades 1981
and 2009 (See figure 4.1). This focuses the fact that the world production of
coconut fluctuate in concurrence with the changes in Indian production of coconut
and therefore it may be stated that Indian production influences the growth of the
world production of coconuts.The overall performance of production of coconut in
India leaves scope for high production in the future also though the production in
certain years fluctuates, which can be viewed as a temporary phenomina. The trend
in coconut production favours the coir industry in India as the increase in
Sl.No. Decades Production(Million Nuts)
CumulativeGrowth (%)
1 1961 4639 -
2 1971 6075 30.96
3 1981 5942 -2.19
4 1991 9700 63.25
5 2001 12678 30.70
6 2009 12685 0.06
66
production of coconut raises the chances for getting raw material to the industry
and widens its scope in the future.
4.3. Coconut and Kerala
One of the most commonly seen tropical trees in Kerala is the coconut
tree. The name of Keralam is believed to be derived from this tree, ‘Kera’, means
coconut and ‘Alam’, means land and thus Keralam means the land of coconut. This
strip covers an area of 38863 km and has a coastline of 590 km and inland water
spread of over 400000 hectares including backwaters. There are 44 rivers flowing
through Kerala and have a diverse soil types and these soil types support a variety
of crops such as rice, spices, coconut and rubber (Advantage Kerala, 2010).
Because of the blessings of these nature’s gifts, Kerala acquired prime place in the
world tourism map and is popularly known as ‘God’s own Country.’
In Kerala, Coconut is grown in all the 14 districts with varying degrees
based on the topography of the area. On the basis of physiography, Kerala can be
divided into three natural regions viz; lowlands, midlands and highlands
(GOK,1986). Although coconut is cultivated in all these regions more than 50 % of
coconut production is from low land region which has nearness of sea coast
followed by midland region with about 40 % and highland region which account
for only less than 10 % (GOK,1986). The statistics on area under coconut
cultivation and production of coconuts for the period 2009 shows that the highland
districts of Pathanamthitta, Idukki, Palghat and Wayanad together share 13.27 % in
area and 11.68 % in production of coconuts. The remaining 88.32 % is produced in
the other two regions, mid land and low land (See Table 4.3).
67
Table 4.3
Area, production and productivity of coconuts in Kerala- 2009
Sl.No Name of Districts Area of Crops(In ha)
%of Area
Production(In Million Nuts)
% ofProduction
Productivity
1. Thiruvananthapuram 71675 9.10 600 10.34 8371
2. Kollam 58397 7.41 443 7.64 7586
3. Pathanamthitta 16632 2.11 111 1.91 6674
4. Alappuzha 38859 4.93 275 4.74 7077
5. Kottayam 34881 4.43 194 3.34 5562
6. Idukki 17776 2.26 79 1.36 4444
7. Ernakulam 46240 5.87 249 4.29 5385
8. Thrissur 76753 9.74 531 9.15 6918
9. Palakkad 59076 7.50 450 7.76 7617
10. Malappuram 105789 13.43 952 16.41 8999
11. Kozhikkode 120704 15.32 941 16.22 7796
12. Wayanadu 11016 1.40 38 0.65 3450
13. Kannur 77705 9.86 500 8.62 6435
14. Kasaragod 52266 6.63 439 7.57 8399
15. State Total 787769 100.00 5802 100.00 7365
Source:Agricultural Statistics, Dept. of Eco.&Stat.,Govt.of Kerala -2009
Kozhikkode district is the highest producer of coconut in Kerala whereas,
Wayanadu the lowest producer. The districts of Kozhikkode and Malappuram
together contribute 28.75 % in area under coconut and 32.63 % in production of
coconuts. Malappuram, Kasaragod and Thiruvananthapuram districts recorded
high productivity.
The pertinent question to be answered is whether the entire coconut husk
produced in Kerala in different regions could be collected and utilized for coir
production proces which is taking place in coastal regions where natural retting
facilities are available. Transportation of the husks collected from mid land and
high land regions to the low land plains would no doubt escalate the prices of
husks and thus it becomes uneconomic. The high power committees and high level
committes and the enquiry committees appointed by the government to study the
68
coir industry had pointed out that the coir industry is loosing their base due to the
non availability of the raw material in economic prices. They had also reported that
the major reason for poor performance of the coir co-operatives is really shortage
of husks, their only raw material. The factors affecting the industry in this regard
are lack of an efficient system for collection and distribution of husks to the
industry in Kerala and other coir producing states; involvement of a number of
small holdings in the production of coconuts, particularly in Kerala, which render
mobilisation and distribution of husk for coir production rather difficult; increased
use of tender coconuts as health drink and wastage of husk at tender stage; and
utilization of coconut husk for other purposes such as fuel in sugar mills, brick
making industryetc. (Nair, 2004). This being the fact, it is highly essential to
analyse the real situation of coconut production in Kerala.
Table 4.4
Area and Production of Coconut in Kerala Decadal Growth
Source: 1. Statistical Abstract of Kerala, Bureau of Economics and Statistics, 1964 & 1974
2. Statistics for Planning, Department of Economics and Statistics, 1983 & 1993
3. Agricultural Statistics, Department of Economics and Statistics, 2009
Sl. No. Decades Area underCoconut(Hectare)
CumulativeGrowth in
Area %
CoconutProduction
(Million Nuts)
CumulativeGrowth in
coconutProduction in
Kerala %1 1961 500760 - 3220 -2 1971 719136 43.61 3981 23.633 1981 651370 -9.42 3008 -24.444 1991 870000 33.56 4232 40.695 2001 925783 6.41 5536 30.816 2009 787769 -14.00 5802 4.80
69
The decades from 1961 to 2009, Kerala showed a growth of 57.31 % area
under coconut and 80.18 % in production of coconut. However, a closer watch on
growth rates reveals a drastic decline during the two decades 1980’s and 2000’s. In
the case of production of coconut, Kerala resembles the pattern of India ie., after a
fall in production during 1980’s a sudden jump is visible during 1990’s (See Table
4.4). It began to slow down during 2000 and thereafter declined in 2009. During
the decade 1980’s, both area under cultivation and production of coconut touched
the lowest levels due to the unprecedented drought experienced in Kerala (GOK,
1986). From the above discussions it can be concluded that Kerala’s coconut
production determines the total production of India as well as of the world since,
the fall in production in Kerala during 1980’s created a reflex effect to the coconut
production of India and the world during the same period.
Table 4.5
Recent Trends in Area, Production and Productivity in Kerala
Sl. No. Year Area(Hectares)
CumulativeGrowth %
Production(Million Nuts)
CumulativeGrowth %
Productivity(Nuts / Ha.)
1 2000-01 925783 - 5536 - 5980
2 2001-02 905718 -2.16 5479 -1.02 6049
3 2002-03 899198 -2.87 5709 3.12 6349
4 2003-04 898498 -2.94 5876 6.14 6540
5 2004-05 899267 -2.86 6001 8.39 6673
6 2005-06 897833 -3.01 6326 14.27 7046
7 2006-07 872943 -5.68 6054 9.35 6935
8 2007-08 818812 -11..55 5641 1.89 6889
9 2008-09 787769 -14.90 5802 4.80 7365
Source: ‘Agricultural Statistics’various issues, Department of Economics and Statistics, Govt. ofKerala.
Area under coconut cultivation and production in Kerala is showing a
dismal performance(See Table 4.5). This trend warns that in the near future, Tamil
70
Nadu will overtake Kerala in area under cultivation as well as in production of
coconut. The escalating labour cost has been one of the major factors that uprooted
the confidence of the coconut farmers. The influx of money from non resident
keralites upset the the traditional wage structure in the labour market. Many
farmers turned away from coconut farming and several among them switched over
to rubber, lured by handsome prices it fetched. The farmers of Tamil Nadu availed
the benefit of this shift in cropping pattern. As the escalation in labour charges has
been less in the neighbouring state and the farming operations continue to thrive
there (Pillai, 2010). Fragmentation of palm gardens into housing plots and as sites
for commercial constructions have also contributed to the fall in area under
coconut over the years (DNA, 2010). The coir industry which totally depends upon
the availability of husk would no doubt has an adverse effect when the coconut
production slips down.
4.4. Origin of Coir Industry
Coir industry has a chequered history dating back to 3000BC. The Arab
writers of the 11th century AD referred to the extensive use of coir as ship's cables,
fenders and for rigging (Coir Board, 2006). During those days coir making was
largely a dissipated and unorganized industry and totally a traditional cottage
industry with households producing miniscule quantity of products. James
Darragh, an American of Irish origin in 1859 set up a coir factory in Kerala and
initiated to develop the unorganized coir industry into an organized one on factory
lines (Coir Board, 2006). After Darragh, so many foreign entrepreneurs started coir
factories in Kerala and turned to act as agency firms. They collected orders for coir
from their own countries and supplied coir and coir products produced and
71
manufactured in India. This mode of operation developed a supply chain and an
export orientation in Indian coir industry. This export orientation of Coir industry
has led to the concentration of coir industry in port towns of Alleppey and Kollam
(Asari, 1988). The golden textured Kerala Coir Fibre, which earned the unofficial
brand name ‘golden fibre’, captured European and world markets in no time.
“Kerala Coir-The Golden Yarn of God’s Own Country” is the brand logo for
Kerala Coir” (GOK, 2010).
4.5. Manufacturing of Coir and Coir Products
The coir industry remains a traditional industry with thrust on the skill of
the workers. The major segments of the coir industry are spinning, weaving and
marketing. In the early periods of last century there was a boom in the coir sector
after the introduction of factory culture but the post independence period witnessed
several structural changes that had affected the performance of coir sector
adversely (KITCO, 2009). The preliminary stages involve retting of green husks,
defibering the retted husks, spinning of fibre into yarn and finally weaving the coir
products. Retting is a process wherein the green coconut husks are soaked in saline
water by the side of backwaters and lagoons for a period of 6 to 10 months. Retted
husks are taken out of the retting pits, washed, the outer covering peeled off and
then placed on wooden blocks and beaten with a wooden mallet and separate the
fibre and freed of piths. This process is called defibering.
There are three varieties of fibre viz., White, Brown and Green Husk fibre.
The white fibre is produced out of retted husks and this white fibre is known in the
world market as fine golden coir fibre. This fibre is almost entirely spun into coir
yarn which then has been used as the basic raw material for the coir weaving
72
industry, netting and coir geo textiles. The retting activity has almost disappeared
from coir production process due to the absence of labour to work in unhygienic
conditions and also the environmental pollution emerging out of retting process.
The alternative method for natural retting is the application of Biotechnology in
coir extraction which will reduce the period of retting of coconut husks to three
months. "COIRRETT" a bacterial cocktail has been able to reduce the retting
period to three months in the natural retting system and improve the quality
of mechanically extracted fibre in 72 hours in RCC tanks. The application of a
bacterial consortium grown on husk leachate in laboratory scale studies have been
observed to yield encouraging results indicating that coir extraction using
biotechnology can eliminate pollution caused by retting. The quality of the fibre
has been observed to be equivalent to retted fibre as tested for light fastness ratings
and degree of softness (Ravindranath, 2001). The brown fibre is extracted from dry
husks by mechanical extraction process without a process of natural retting and
usually this is not used for spinning. Sri Lanka is the major producer of brown
fibre. The brown fibre also is of two types, the bristle fibre, which is mainly used
for making brooms and brushes and door mats, and the other variety, the mattress
fibre, which is used in the manufacture of mattresses, upholstery pads, insulation
materials and also as filter for air conditioning and sound proofing plants. Bristle
and mattress fibre combined together are used extensively in the manufacture of
rubberized coir for production of car seats, mattress, filter, insulation etc. In some
coir producing countries brown fibre is used for spinning into coir yarn. India
holds virtual monopoly of retted fibre, which is preferred for many products rated
high in the world market (KITCO, 2009). Tamil Nadu and Karnataka are the two
principal producers of brown fibre in India.
73
The green husk fibre is produced from green husks by using the same
defibering machinery used in the brown fibre extraction process. This green husk
fibre which has a resemblance of golden fibre is also used for spinning. The
spinning of fibre into yarn is done either by hand or on spinning wheels. Hand
spinning is done by twisting the fibre between the palms of the hand and wheel
spinning is done on spinning wheels called ratts. The manufacturing sector
produces coir products mostly using coir yarn. The products of production sector
are mats and mattings, rope making, the mattress and bristle fibre, and the
rubberized coir. The mats and mattings involves the major processing activity in
the manufacturing sector.
4.6. Coir in the World
As stated earlier coconut husk being the only raw material for the coir
industry, coir production depends entirely on the production of coconuts. Simply it
can be stated that, the total number of coconuts produced in the world provides
equal number of husk to the coir industry. Presumably the coconut husk available
to the coir industry during the period 2009 would be 77135 million husks which
are equal to the production of coconuts. It is also true that all the husks produced
need not be available for utilization of coir production due to many valid reasons
like usage of husks as fuel by the rural people or difficulty in collecting the entire
husks from the distant regions and the cost factor involved etc. Though coconut is
grown in a number of countries in the world, coir industry prospered commercially
only in India and Sri Lanka because of the unique geographical and hisorical
reasons. Indeed, there is so much potential to develop the coir industries in the
major coconut producing countries such as Indonesia, and Philippines, and even
74
countries like Thailand, Papua New Guinea, Vietnam and Malayesia. In Indonesia
alone there is potential to produce 0.9 million metric tons of fibre and 2.1 million
metric tons of coir pith annually even if only 50% of the available husks will be
processed or utilized (Romulo, 2009).
Due to the differences in parametres governing coir production, many of
the large coconut producing countries viz. Indonesia, Thailand, Malyesia and
Philippines have relatively small contribution to the world production of coir (See
Tables 4.6 & 4.7).
Table 4. 6
Country wise world production of coir (Tonnes)
Sl.No. Country 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2009
1. Bangladesh 6368 7338 9883 9710 11390 11520
2. Cote d’ Ivoire NA NA NA NA 2000 2000
3. Ghana NA NA NA 28100 39400 39400
4. India 166500 227500 206900 374500 450000 507400
5. Malaysia 48800 48800 49200 40100 28500 23400
6. Sri Lanka 136000 143000 120000 116000 147300 191200
7. Thailand 700 2300 5000 8900 14000 50000
8. Vietnam NA NA NA NA 223000 282000
9. TOTAL 358368 428938 390983 577310 915590 1106920
Source: FAOSTAT, FAO Statistics Division, 2011
Philippines and Indonesia together account for 59.74% of the world production of
coconut but their share in the world production of coir is insignificant and
therefore their statistics is not even mentioned in the Food and Agricultural
Organization(FAO) Statistics. It is revealed that though India and Sri Lanka
75
together contribute to the world production of coconut only 19.65%, their share in
the world production of coir is 63.11% during 2009 (See Table 4.7).
Table 4.7
Percentage distribution of world production of coir
Sl.No. Country 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2009
1. Bangladesh 1.78 1.71 2.53 1.68 1.24 1.04
2. Cote d’ Ivoire 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.18
3. Ghana 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.87 4.30 3.56
4. India 46.46 53.04 52.92 64.87 49.15 45.84
5. Malaysia 13.62 11.38 12.58 6.95 3.11 2.11
6. Sri Lanka 37.95 33.34 30.69 20.09 16.09 17.27
7. Thailand 0.20 0.54 1.28 1.54 1.53 4.52
8. Vietnam 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.36 25.48
9. TOTAL 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
Computed from the data published by FAOSTAT(2011)
Philippines and Indonesia together account for 59.74% of the world
production of coconut but their share in the world production of coir is
insignificant and therefore their statistics is not even mentioned in the Food and
Agricultural Organization(FAO) Statistics. It is revealed that though India and Sri
Lanka together contribute to the world production of coconut only 19.65%, their
share in the world production of coir is 63.11% during 2009 (See Table 4.7).This
shows the importance of these two countries in the global coir scenario. India
alone contributes to45.84% to the coir production in 2009 and continues to be the
major producer of coir in the world. Sri Lanka’s production was showing a
decreasing trend over the decades from 1961 to 2001, but during the period 2009
its production has increased slightly. Surprisingly, Indian production of coir after
76
its peak in 1991 is continuously decreasing. It is to be remembered that after the
decade 1980 coconut production has increased both in India as well as in Sri Lanka
but the corresponding increase in coir production has not been taken place. This
may have happened due to the inability of the industry to collect the husks for coir
production. The Tables also explore that Vietnam has now been emerged as one of
the major producers of coir and secured the second place with 25.48 % of the
world production of coir by replacing the place of Sri Lanka.This reflects a shift of
the industry from the traditional areas to other coconut growing areas in the world.
If the other countries having coconut production also follow to produce coir in
similar lines, they would certainly displace the positions of India and Sri Lanka.
4.7. World Coir Production Decadal Growth
The growth of world production of coir from the decade 1961 to 2009
shows a significant growth rate i.e., 20.09%, with differences in the decade1981
and the period 2009 (See Table 4.8).
Table 4. 8
World production of coir - decadal growth
Source: FAOSTAT (2011)
Sl.No. Decades Coir Production(Tonnes)
Cumulative Growth ofcoir Production %
1 1961 358368 -
2 1971 428938 19.69
3 1981 390983 -8.85
4 1991 577310 47.66
5 2001 915590 58.60
6 2009 1106920 20.90
77
A fall in actual production of coir was observed in 1981 compared to the
previous decade 1971 followed by a decline in growth rate of -8.85% that has
happened in contrary to the production of coconut which has increased during the
same period (refer Fig. 1 also). But there was a real fall in production of coconut in
the two major coconut producing countries viz., India and Sri Lanka in 1981.
Naturally there is reason to believe that the fall in production of coir in the world
during the decade 1981 might have been the result of fall in production of coconut
in India and Sri Lanka, who are the major producers of coir in the world. The
world coir production after the set back in the decade 1981 has regained significant
position in the remaining decades though the growth rate declined during 2009 as
in the case of coconut production. The data analysis on production of coir in the
world reveals the fact that India has a decisive role as has in the case of coconut
production.
4.6. World Coir Production and Production Potential
Since, coconut husk is used as domestic fuel in rural areas, it is practically
impossible to collect all the husks for coir production and to achieve cent percent
utilisation of husk for coir production (GoK,1986). However, analysis has been
done on the availability of husk for production, coir production potential, actual
production of coir and the potential utilization in the world (See Table 4.9 for
details).
78
Table 4. 9
World coir production and production potential
Sl.No. Decades Availability ofHusks
(Million)*
CoirProductionPotential(Tons)**
WorldProduction ofCoir (Tons)
PotentialUtilisation
( % )
1 1961 17881 1519902 358368 23.58
2 1971 21495 1827075 428938 23.48
3 1981 25553 2171988 390983 18.00
4 1991 30512 2593554 577310 22.26
5 2001 38563 3277821 915590 27.93
6 2009 46748 3973614 1106920 27.86
Computed from data published by FAOSTAT (2011)
There is a wide gap between the coir production potential and potential
utilization over the decades from 1961 to 2009. During the period 2009, world coir
production potential, from 46748 million husks, was estimated to be 3973614
tonnes. The actual production of coir during the period was only 1106920 tonnes,
which expresses that only 27.86 % of the total coir production potential was tapped
even now. This pin points that there is ample scope for the coir industry to develop
further, fully utilizing its production potential i.e., the underutilized portion of
72.14 % also.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: 1. Out of the total production of coconut and equivalent number of husks 60% husks are
considered available for coir production. 2. For estimating coir production potential it is assumed
that 60 pc of the husks are made available to the coir industry. Average yield of coir fibre from one
million husks is estimated to be 85 tonnes.
(** Conversion factor used is I million husk = 85 tonnes fibre) (Dept. oc Eco.&Stat. Govt. of Kerala,1986).
79
4.7. Coir Production in India
As discussed in foregoing paragraphs India has recorded a dominant
position in the case of coconut production and coir production in the world and
maintained an upward trend in its production for the periods from 1981 to 2009. A
comparative analysis of India’s coir production over the decades and its
contribution to the world coir production is done (For details see Table 4.13). The
polynomial and exponential trend lines fitted over the diagrams explain the
situation more clearly.
Figure 4.2 Figure 4.3
India’s share of the world coir production over the decades seems
unattractive particularly after 1991 even though Indian coir production has
significantly improved during the same period. Therefore India has to see this
caution seriously; otherwise India’s present unbeatable monopolistic position in
the coir industry will be displaced by countries like Vietnam in the near future.
Note: For World production a polynomial trendline is used as the data fluctuates period to period.
Indian coir production is plotted with exponential trendline because the data values rise at higher
rates.
80
As has been seen in the global scenario, Indian coir production also has not spread
along all the states having coconut production due to varying reasons like lack of
natural retting facilities, skilled labour, low cost technology etc.
Table 4.10
State wise production and production potential in India
Sl.No. State CoconutProduction(Million)
HuskUtilization
(%)
Coir FibreProduction
(Tonnes)
%Share
Coir FibreProductionPotential*
PotentialUtilization
%
1. AndhraPradesh
1051.8 26 23000 6.30 53642 42.88
2. Karnataka 1670.3 26 36500 10.03 85185 42.85
3. Kerala 5167.0 42 171000 46.98 263517 64.89
4. Orissa 163.3 12 1300 0.36 8328 15.61
5. TamilNadu
3222.0 43 121000 33.25 164322 73.64
6. Others 977.2 20 11200 3.08 49837 22.47
7. Total 12251.6 37 364000 100.00 624831 58.26
Source: Coir Board (2000-2001)Annual Report * Estimated- assumed 60%husks are available and1 million husk produces 85 tonnes Fibre.
An analysis on the husk availability, utilization of husk, coir production,
percentage share of the states to coir production and the coir fibre production
potential in India are done and the data reveal that only 37% of the coconut husk
produced in India is being utilized for coir production leaving the major chunk
unutilized (See Table 4.10). Efforts are being made by the Coir Board to improve
the extent of utilization of husks, but they do not succeed in the absence of natural
retting facilities in many places (Unnithan, 1970). Among the states, Tamil Nadu
and Kerala utilizes husk 43 % and 42 % respectively. The figures for 1999-2000
shows that out of the total coir fibre produced in India, Kerala contributes the
major share of 46.98% followed by Tamilnadu 32.25%. As has been discussed
earlier coconut production in India is concentrated in South India. Likewise, coir
81
production is also seen concentrated in four southern states viz., Kerala, Tamil
Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. These four states together contribute 96.56
% of coir fibre production in India. The fibre produced in India is of two types one
is white fibre and the other is brown fibre. White fibre produced out of natural
retting process is mainly concentrated in Kerala with a share of 90 % in the total
output whereas, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka are the two principal producers of
brown fibre using mechanized system of extraction (Nair, 2003).
The major producers of coir, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, utilize its production
potential better than the others. The potential utilization in Tamil Nadu is about
74% followed by Kerala, about 65%. The overall performance of Tamil Nadu
shows their achievements in Coir Industry and if they continue the same pace
unaffected, no doubt, in near future they would displace Kerala’s traditional
monopoly over the coir industry.
It has been estimated that the fibre production in India has recorded a
substantial growth of 71% over the period from 2000-01 to 2007-08. The growth
rate of the yarn production during the same period was recorded 24%, but coir
products registered 141%. Coir rope showed only a growth of 1.36% but curled
coir reported 58% and rubberized coir grown by 37%. (See Table 4.11).
Table 4.11Production of Coir and Coir Products in India
(Quantity in Metric Ton)Item 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
Fibre 256000 369400 353700 364000 385000 410000 430000 437800Yarn 233400 236900 226800 232500 245500 270000 288000 290000Coir
Products71500 72575 75750 77900 98000 120000 170000 172000
Coir Rope 51300 52700 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 52000Curled Coir 31000 31800 28000 29500 36500 38000 48000 49000Rubberised
Coir51000 51800 50250 51000 60000 62000 68000 70000
Source: Annual Reports, Coir Board, 2007-08 & 2008-09
82
Kerala was considered to be the sole producer of white fibre as it has the natural
retting facility but due to environmental reasons and shortage of husks white fibre
production is disappearing from Kerala. Even then fibre production growth in India
is at a higher side because of the entry of Tamil Nadu with brown fibre.
4.8. Export of Coir and Coir Products from India
Coir industry in India has a strong export orientation with the sale of
traditionally made yarn, mats, matting rugs and carpets. Since the 1970’s the
export markets have begun to decline because of severe competition from synthetic
fibre. A significant recovery during the last decades can be attributed partially to
increasing environmental and ecological awareness of the people of foreign
countries. Indian exports are mainly to USA, Canada, Japan, New Zealand and
UAE.
The export of coir and coir products from India in terms of quantity has
showed a dismal performance up to the period 1990-91 and thereafter since the
period 2000-01 it had a steep rise and reached an all time high level of 321016
tonnes valued at Rs.807.07 crores in the year 2010-2011. It registered a cumulative
growth of 375.63% in quantity and 157.31% in value (See Table 4.12).
Table 4.12Export of Coir Decadal Growth (1961 to 2010)
Sl.No. Decades QuantityExported(Tonnes)
CumulativeGrowth%
Value inRs.Lakhs
CumulativeGrowth %
1 1960-61 70937 - 866.77 -
2 1970-71 52218 -26.39 1387.34 60.06
3 1980-81 28610 -45.21 2544.66 83.42
4 1990-91 27926 -2.39 4832.85 89.92
5 2000-01 67493 141.69 31366.00 549.02
6 2010-11 321016 375.63 80707.08 157.31
Source: Coir News, Various Issues, Coir Board, Cochin.
83
This sudden change in export of coir and coir products are due to the
demand from China for coir based erosion control products, and the spread of coir
pith as a peat moss substitute in horticulture (Coir Board, 2011).
There are 14 varieties of coir and coir products exported from India to
foreign countries. The comparison of the total quantity exported and the value of
those items received for the last two years shows a disappointing picture of the
Indian coir export scenario as the growth of quantity exported is only 9% and the
value worth of 0.38%. The item wise details of growth also show that in many
items export is declining and so it warns a threat to Indian coir industry (See Table
5 Appendix C). The production of value added, diversified and innovative products
to meet global and internal demand and by developing brand equity for Kerala’s
traditional industry products etc., alone will ensure critical mass for forward
integration. Thus the success and future development of coir industry in India
which has export orientation mainly depends on the ability and efficiency of the
industry to explore and tap overseas markets of the coir products.
4.9. Coir Industry in Kerala
Coconut husk, being the raw material for the coir industry, coir production
concentrate mainly in the areas where it is abundantly available. Although India
has a long coastline growing coconut palms, coir industry is concentrated in
Kerala. Growth of coir industry in other coastal states in India is insignificant.
Kerala is the traditional home of Indian coir industry. For historical and
geographical reasons, Kerala ranks first in coconut production and in coir
production (Economic Review, 1995). The foregoing discussions reveal that any
shock in Kerala’s production of coconuts would lead to a chain reaction or
84
sequence of reactions in coir production of Kerala, India and the world. The
decadal cumulative growth rates of world coir production, Indian coir production
and the coconut production in Kerala are analysed. (See Table 4 Appendix C)
Figure 4.4
It is evident that falls in production of coconut in Kerala during the decade
1981resulted in corresponding fall in production of coir in India as well as in the
world. During the next decade, 1991, Kerala’s coconut production showed higher
growth and thereby Indian coir production and the world coir production recorded
higher growth. During the decade 2001 world coir production increased notably
but it is not due to the effect of Kerala’s coconut production alone but it is partly
due to the emergence of Vietnam as a major producer of coir in the world. During
2008, again the Kerala’s effect is visible ie., when Kerala’s coconut production
decreased the coir production in India as well as in the world decreased (See
Figure 4.4). This shows Kerala’s importance in the world coir scenario. That is
why, Kerala is considered to be the location and hub of the Indian coir industry and
even global coir industry. All other coconut growing regions still have
85
opportunities for full utilization of husk and further expansion of the industry since
they had so far utilized only less capacity to produce but Kerala has already
utilized about 65 % of its capacity (refer Table 4.10). To maintain the traditional
monopoly of Kerala in global coir industry it is essential to restructure the entire
coir industry for full utilization of husks after analyzing the present plight of the
coir sector and further the various subsidiary variables.
4.10. Role of Co-operatives in Coir Industry
The crisis in the coir industry touched its peak and developed it as a
sensitive socio-political issue in Kerala after Indian Independence and therefore the
government was forced to make policy prescriptions to solve the issues. The
factors which lead the industry to a crisis may be listed as export orientation,
withdrawal of Europeans from the industry, exploitation by the middlemen, under
employment and low wages (Issac et al 1992). The export of coir and coir goods
have steadily declined during and after 1950-51 due to competition from synthetic
products and this created an uncertainty in the industry. The retted coconut husk,
the only raw material for the coir industry was concentrated largely under the
possession of big retters. The small scale producers could not raise the price of coir
products in view of competition from synthetic products, leading to very low
wages of workers. The workers had no alternative source of employment in the
locality and thus their life become miserable. Besides low wages there were
considerable underemployment and unemployment among the coir worker
households. It was under these circumstances that attempts were made to re-
organise the coir industry on co-operative basis.
The first attempt of revitalizing the coir industry was made by the Erstwhile
Travancore-Cochin state in 1950-51 by introducing the Coir Development Scheme.
86
The attempt was to establish a net work of co-operatives which will provide full
employment and better wages to the workers. Another aim of the scheme was to
bring all the persons engaged in the various stages of the industry into co-operative
fold (GOK, 2002). In the initial period co-operatives were organized only in the
spinning sector. Subsequently the scope was extended to include the manufacturing
and marketing sectors also. Three types of co-operatives were organized under this
scheme viz., Thondu Societies, Primary Societies, and Coir Marketing Societies.
By the end of the second five year plan, 367 coir co-operatives of different types-
316 primaries, 31 Thondu societies, 3 Central coir marketing societies, 2 Matts and
Mattings societies and 15 coir co-operative unions were organized. The number of
coir co-operative societies in Kerala has increased from 367 during the second five
year plan to 834 at the end of 31-03-2010 (See Table 4.13).
Table 4.13Coir Co-operative Societies in Kerala Sector Wise
Sl.No Type of Society No. Of SocietiesAs on
31/03/2009As on
31/03/20101 Primary 489 4882 Manufacturing 53 533 Small Scale Producers 40 554 Husk Procurement and
Distribution2 2
5 Defibering Mill 72 806 Coir Marketing Federation 1 17 Under Liquidation 163 1558 Total 820 834
Source: Economic Review, 2010.
Interestingly, according to the official sources during 2009-10 out of the
total societies registered only 56% was found to be working, about 19% was under
liquidation and about 23% was under the category of dormant societies (See Table
4.14).
87
Table 4.14
Coir Co-operative Societies in Kerala
YEARNo. of Societies Working
Societies %Working Under
Liquidation Dormant New Total
1980-81 480 210 - - 690 70
1990-91 479 202 62 79 822 58
2000-01 539 130 103 54 826 65
2008-09 449 163 182 25 819 55
2009-10 463 155 188 27 834 56
Source: Economic Review, Various Years, State Planning Board, Govt. of Kerala
Among the coir co-operative societies, 56% to 70% were working societies
over the period 1980-81 to 2009-10. However, On local enquiry it was understood
that many of the societies reported as working officially were not found actually
engaged in any coir work for the last so many years. In reality the working
societies would be in between 30% to 35% of the total registered societies and
further the societies working regularly would be less than 30%. Hence, it become
evident that the co-operativisation of coir industry has not yet succeeded in
realizing the mission envisaged by it.
In the Coir Development Scheme, one of the objectives fixed was to bring
more and more coir workers under the co-operative sector and to materialize this
even a special drive was initiated during the Sixth Five Year plan of Kerala to
bring at least 60% of the coir workers under the co-operative fold. But available
data reveal that of the total coir workers (3.66 Lakhs) only 40.72% has joined the
coir co-operative societies till 2007-08 leaving the vast majority in other sectors
(See Table 4.15).
88
Table 4.15
Coir Workers in Kerala (2007-08)
Sl.No. Sector Number Percentage
1 Co-operative 149200 40.72
2 Unorganized 185000 50.55
3 Govt. & Others 32000 08.73
4 Total 366200 100.00
Source: Coir Commission Report, Govt. of Kerala, 2008
A close observation of the percentage of membership to total coir workers
in the coir co-operative societies reveals that the societies had achieved the targets
as envisaged in the sixth five year plan of Kerala (1980-85). The membership in
the coir co-operative societies had increased from 54.20% in 1980-81 to 64.58%in
1984-85 but the societies could not maintain this trend thereafter (See Table 4.16 )
Table 4.16
Coir workers under Co-operatives
Year Member Workers % to Total CoirWorkers
1980-81 198363 54.20
1984-85 236348 64.58
1990-91 250343 68.40
2000-01 201755 55.12
2001-02 191766 52.40
2002-03 165372 45.18
2003-04 154113 42.11
2004-05 57240 15.64
2005-06 56284 15.38
2006-07 51172 13.98
2007-08 98261 26.85
2008-09 116150 31.73
2009-10 76276 20.84
Source: Various issues of “Economic Review”, State Planning Board, Kerala
89
It is important to note that after so many years of governmental
interventions and supportive measures the co-operatives had not succeeded in
bringing more coir workers into the co-operative sector and not even to stop the
drain of workers from their roll. In the year 2009-10 the percentage of workers in
the roll of the coir co-operatives is only 20.84% which reminds the depletion of the
base of the co-operativization of coir industry.
Providing regular employment and reasonable wages to the coir workers in
the coir co-operative societies was also one of the objectives of the coir
development scheme. Importantly, it is observed that the coir co-operative
societies are struggling to provide at least 200 days of regular employment in a
year to its member workers (See Table 4.17).
Table 4.17
Coir workers employed in primary co-operatives
No. of Days No. of Societies % of Societies
Below 20 37 8.4
21-40 112 25.3
41-60 90 20.3
61-80 71 16.0
81-100 54 12.2
101-120 28 6.3
121-140 23 5.2
141-160 8 1.8
161-180 7 1.6
181-200 7 1.6
Above 200 6 1.3
Total 443 100.0
Source: Thachadi Committee Report, 1993, Govt. of Kerala
90
The Thachadi Committee (1993) appointed by the Government to study the
coir co-operative societies in 1993 reported that more than 82% of the societies
could provide employment to its workers only 100 days or below. Societies
providing employment above 200 days is only 1.3%. The problem of employment
has always been a crucial factor in the coir industry. A disappointing performance
of the coir co-operatives in respect of employment is observed.
The minimum wages have not been strictly implemented even in the coir
co-operative sector of the coir industry in Kerala. The trade unions complained that
though the minimum wages of Rs.176/- per day for coir workers was announced in
1972, that was not been implemented in the state so far. The current daily wages
of a coir worker is only around Rs.100/-per day. This amount is significantly less
than the wages under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee
Scheme (MGNREGS). In the absence of regular employment the average daily
earnings of the coir workers would become meagre causing continued poverty
among coir worker households. This has become one of the main reasons for
workers leaving the coir co-operatives in the recent years (See Table 4.16).
It is important to note that though the co-operative societies have more
number of coir workers in their membership register, the actual coir workers in
societies would be very less. The official published statistics for the period 2009-
10 reveal that of the total members the actual workers comes only 18% (See Table
4.18).
91
Table 4.18
Details of Member Workers and Average Daily Earnings
Period Members ActualWorkers
Workers % Wage
(Rs.lakhs)
AverageDaily Wage
1980-81 198000 69000 34.85 283 2.73
1990-91 246000 80000 32.52 572 4.77
1998-99 281000 86000 30.60 967 7.50
2000-01 194000 50440 26.00 1229 16.24
2009-10 69210 12458 18.00 851 45.54
Source: Economic Review Various Issues and Coir Directorate, Govt of Kerala
The percentage of actual workers of the coir co-operatives is observed to
have declined from 34.85% in 1980-81 to 18% in 2009-10. However, the average
daily wage earnings have progressed from Rs.2.73/- to Rs.45.54/- during the same
period. But this cannot be considered as an achievement because the days of
employment provided to the workers are meagre and therefore this would not make
any improvement in the living condition of the coir workers.
4.11. Institutional Support of the Coir Industry and the Coir Co-operatives
The following institutions were set up on the basis of the recommendations
of different committees and study teams appointed by the Central as well as the
state Governments time to time, either to study or to reorganize the coir industry,
such as Coir Board, The Kerala State Coir Corporation Ltd., COIRFED and the
Directorate of Coir Development. The Coir Board at Cochin, Kerala was set up
92
under the Coir Industry Act,1953 with the main objectives to promote measures as
it thinks fit for the development of the coir industry under the control of Central
Government, export promotion, regulate production of husks, fixing grades or
standards to the products, coir yarn and coir products by registering spindles and
looms, licensing exporters, undertake research, promoting co-operative
organizations, assisting to set up factories, licensing of retting places and
warehouses and advise all matters related to the development of the coir industry.
The Kerala State Coir Corporation Ltd. was constituted in the year 1979 by
integrating 4 Central Coir Marketing Co-operatives with the objective of develop,
promote, and stabilize the coir industry in Kerala and to work as an export house
for coir and coir products. The corporation is a complete state government
company with its own small scale manufacturing units and marketing outlets all
over India. This corporation has no obligation to lift the coir co-operatives except
when government intervenes in the purchases coir products from COIRFED.
The Kerala State Co-operative Coir Marketing Federation Ltd. (COIRFED)
is the apex federation of the coir co-operative societies. COIRFED is entrusted
with the marketing task of the produce of the coir co-operative societies in Kerala
for which they have showrooms as well as marketing outlets. Besides set up a
number of factories for the manufacture of coir fibre, rubberized coir products,
rubber backed coir products, PVC tufted mats and pith briquette. The COIRFED is
instrumental in implementing the innovative schemes of the Government of Kerala
such as Distress purchase scheme, Fibre subsidy scheme, Price fluctuation fund,
Purchase price stabilization fund etc.
The Coir Co-operatives in Kerala are governed by the Directorate of Coir
Development, Kerala and the government implement its policies and schemes
93
through this directorate. Under the Coir Directorate there are Project Offices and
Circle Offices for the organization, management and control of the coir co-
operative societies. This institution aims at promoting progressive development of
the coir sector and generating more sustained employment therein
(www.coir.kerala.gov.in).
In addition to these Foam Mattings India Ltd., National Coir Research and
Management Institute and the Coir Workers Welfare Fund Board also have been
functioning in the coir sector.
The Coir Development Scheme launched by erstwhile Travancore-Cochin
Government was intended helpful to solve the problems of coir workers by
ensuring regular work, living wages, standard quality of products and also to bring
all the coir workers into the co-operative fold (Nair,1977). Since then the central
and state governments have been spending considerable amount of their resources
for the development of the co-operative sector. Many of the earlier reports of the
committees appointed by the Government recorded that the coir co-operatives are
poor performers due to the scarcity of coconut husks at reasonable prices. The
scarcity of husks would appear to be a paradox when it is considered that the
utilisation of husk is only one third of the available quantity (GoK,1886). There is
no disagreement with the argument that it is impracticable to collect all husks from
several lakhs of coconut growers spread over the entire state. As the coir industry
in Kerala is concentrated in the coastal region where natural retting facilities are
available, transportation of husks from interior region to the retting areas are costly
due to the high transport cost and hence, the available husks in the economic hinter
land of the working area are generally used causing scarcity of the material.
94
In conclusion the above discussions on the overview of coir industry is to
be inferred that the government policy interventions and supportive measures
could not make any appreciable development in coir industry particularly co-
operatives. The coir co-operatives are not successful to ensure at least 200 days of
employment and not even to ensure the minimum wages fixed by the government.
Only positive effect of wages paid to the workers in the co-operative sector is that
it has influenced the determination of wages in the private sector and thus
enhanced the wage rates in the coir industry as a whole (Jose, 2002). Infact, these
wages are insufficient to ensure a better living of the workers. Though it was
envisaged to bring all the coir workers in the co-operative fold in a phased manner,
even now more than 80% workers are engaged in jobs outside the coir co-
operatives. It is unfortunate to see that about half of the co-operative societies
registered are not functioning. In respect of various promotional agencies like, Coir
Corporation, COIRFED, and Directorate of Coir Development are all not playing
their role effectively for the promotion of the coir co-operatives. Unless there is
determined efforts by the coir workers, management government and other
concerned to tackle the adverse factors which prevent the development of the co-
operative sector, is bound to go into wilderness in the years to come at a great cost
to the nation.
====================