CHAPTER IV

THE GANDHIGRAM SERVICE VILLAGES: A PROFILE

Introduction

In the last three chapters, the background for the problem of analysis has

been created first by providing a statement of the problem under study, the

objectives and the methodology, second by building an overview of the Indian

Rural Energy Systems and then by a brief but comprehensive review of the

existing literature. In the present chapter, it is the context that the discussion is

concerned about. The context is the study area, which provides the geographical

background for the analysis and the interpretation that follow.

About Gandhigram

Gandhigram was founded in the year of India's independence (1947), by

a team of dedicated disciples of Mahatma Gandhi, led by Dr. T.S. Soundaram and

Dr. G. Ramachandran. Gandhigram Rural Institute (GRI) was started in 1956, as

the higher education centre in Gandhigram, patterned after Gandhi's concept of

'basic education'.

GRI, one of the 14 Rural Institutes of higher education, functioned under

the Central Government's programme to carry higher education to the doorsteps

of the village community. After 20 years of active work in promoting education

through rural experiences, the Government of India, on the recommendation of the

122

123

University Grants Commission (UGC), New Delhi, conferred the status of Deemed

University on GRI in 1976.

Today, GRI has carved for itself a niche in the rural higher education map

of India and the developing world. GRI is fully funded by the Ministry of Human

Resources Development, New Delhi through University Grants Commission.

Students are drawn from various States and Union Territories of the Indian Union

and the developing countries.

The borad objectives of the GRI are:

1. To provide for instruction and learning and to promote a casteless and classless society.

2. To provide for research and advancement and dissemination of knowledge.

3. To function as a centre for extension work leading to integrated rural development.

GRI has been working in the villages of Dindigul district. The extension

programmes have been in operation in some select villages of the district, which

have been adopted by the GRI to demonstrate the usefulness of its programmes

of research and extension. The extension programme in the villages include

creche, women's fora, children's fora, science clubs, farmers' fora, youth clubs,

peace committees, planning committees, self-help groups, people's education

centres. Various programmes are sponsored through the people's organisations

in the spheres of farming, cattle rearing, non-farm activities, forestry, energy uses,

environment, pre-school and non-formal education, sanitation, health and hygiene,

nutrition and family welfare.

The impacts generated among the people of the 37 service villages are:

Greater awareness among people, greater income generating skills in women,

124

higher enrolments at all levels of education, low drop out rates, greater girls'

enrollment, better health and nutritional status among pre-school children, low

incidence of child labour, improved leadership qualities, better status of women,

increased farming knowledge and technology adoption, added social

infrastructures, enriched rural resources, and greater utilisation of government

programmes by poorer families.

The profile constructed of the six villages, chosen for study, in this chapter,

quite clearly, depends on both the secondary and primary sources of information.

Demographic details (population and related matters), some of the salient

geographical features (location, climate, and water resources) and economic

details (land use patterns, energy uses, basic amenities, and services) have been

gleaned from the secondary and documentary sources. On the other hand, energy

and energy use related details have been taken from the primary sources, that is,

the village respondents. The insights gathered from two sets of data, one from the

200 respondents (152 belonging to both household and agricultural sectors; 48

households of landless labourers) of the field survey and the other from the people

who belonged to other sectors (industry, transport, commercial and services

sectors), that is, all those who worked in the four sectors in the six Gandhigram

Service Villages in the Dindigul taluk, Dindigul district of Tamil Nadu, are

summarised in this chapter to provide a comprehensive profile of the villages and

their people.

Location

The geographical location of the study area can be appreciated from the

map in Figure 4.1, and the villages studied are as follows:

125

1. Chettiapatti, Athur Block;

2. Kalikkampatti, Athur Block;

3. Sirunaickenpatti, Dindigul Block;

4. Ulagampatti, Dindigul Block;

5. Kuttathupatti, Reddiarchatram Block; and

6. Silvarpatti, Reddiarchatram Block.

The villages are in two contiguous patches of three villages each. They

have been adopted by the GRI under its rural development programmes. The six

villages are so chosen as to belong to different development blocks, with 2 villages

each from three different blocks: Athur, Dindigul and Reddiarchatram. The

geographical location of the villages is within the area defined by 10° 05' N to 10°

9' N latitudes and 11° 30' E to 18° 20' E longitudes. Dindigul district, where the

villages are located, is bounded by Tiruchirappalli district on the east, Coimbatore

district and Kerala State on the west, Erode and Karur districts on the north and

Madurai district on the south. The district has a total area of 6,267 km2. It consists

of 7 taluks and 14 development blocks, under 3 revenue divisions.

Site and Situation

The villages of Chettiapatti and Kalikkampatti are in Athur Block,

Sirunaickenpatti and Ulagampatti are in Dindigul Block, and Kuttathupatti and

Silvarpatti are in Reddiarchatram Block. The average distance between thevillages

and their block headquarters is a mere 8 km.

The six villages, in the matter of energy, use both commercial and non­

commercial sources of energy, whatever may be its form. The villages use only

popular forms of energies. They are also trying to familiarise themselves with the

126

non-conventional energies such as bio-gas and biomass. As the villages have an

already functioning small industrial, commercial and basic institutional set up, they

also use commercial energies such as electricity and petroleum in their day-to-day

life. Their use of human and animal power, firewood, agricultural residues in the

household, farming and small transport sectors is an everlasting event: these will

continue to have a sway over the rural population. There is however a need to

focus on the management of the energy resources in these villages and the

difficulties the village population faces upto.

Physiography, the Land Mosaic

The slope of the land is from west to east and also southeast. In general,

the topography is undulating in nature. Soil is the basic determinant of land uses.

Red and black cotton soils are predominant in the entire study area, providing a

congenial atmosphere for dry land cultivation. This is not simultaneously'prevalent

in other areas suitable for agricultural operations.

Climate

Temperature. The mean maximum temperature of the locality is 35.6° C

and the mean minimum temperature is 30.5° C. The months of December and

January are the coolest while May is the hottest month during the year. The area

is semi-arid and therefore dry. This is because of its location in the rain shadow.

The distribution of temperature is such that the study area is hot throughout the

season, as the maximum temperature declines to a low of 30.5° C in the month

of December and then begins to climb through the year to peak in May.

127

Rainfall. The study area is influenced and benefitted most by the northeast

monsoon. The annual mean rainfall in this area is 780.95 mm during 1986-95. The

seasonal variations in rainfall are featured in Table 4.1. The region where the

study area lies receives 27.08 mm of rainfall in winter, 140.2 mm in summer and

180.2 mm during the southwest monsoon. It is only during the northeast monsoon

that a record 433.51 mm rainfall has been recorded.

Table 4.1: Rainfall during the Monsoons (in mm)

Year

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

Mean

Source:

Winter

38.8

3.4

15.8

6.4

151.8

45.0

-

-

5.2

4.4

27.08

Seasons/Monsoons

Summer

105.8

68.3

215.8

158.8

140.0

157.0

105.2

83.6

183.8

183.6

140.19

SWM

134.6

171.8

224.2

282.9

113.6

202.4

119.6

162.6

96.0

294.0

180.17

NEM

384.8

678.6

137.8

345.4

429.5

380.7

468.8

820.4

440.2

248.9

433.51

Rainfall records for 1986-95. Faculty of Agriculture Husbandry, Gandhigram Rural Institute, Gandhigram, = Southwest monsoon; NEM = Northeast monsoon.

Total

664.0

922.1

593.6

793.5

. 834.9

785.1

693.6

1066.6

725.2

730.9

780.9

and Animal 1995. SWM

There have been some odd years during the period 1986-95, in terms of

rainfall received: the region received a record 151.8 mm during the winter season

in 1990; the highest of summer rainfall (215.8 mm) has been during the year 1988,

128

while the highest of southwest (294 mm) and of northeast (820.4 mm) rainfalls

have been during the years of 1995 and 1996, respectively.

It is also found that no year is identical to any other, in the pattern of

rainfall, indicating that there are always some variations over the years, no matter

how long is the period of concern. The year 1993 has been a relatively copious

(1,067 mm) year when compared to other years and the year of least rainfall has

been that of 1988 (593.6 mm). Four out of ten years have recorded rainfall less

than the average for the ten-year period. The farmers store up their water during

the rainy months, so that they could cultivate suitable crops, coinciding with the

rainfall.

Wind Speed. The annual average speed of wind in the study area is 53.6

km/h. The minimum wind speed is 33 km/h which is normally recorded in the

months of December and January. The maximum wind speed is 80 km/h, which

occurs in the month of July which is the windiest of the months in the study area.

The minimum wind speed recorded in July is 62 km/h, which is the highest among

the minimum wind speeds. It is normal to have high wind speeds in the southwest

monsoon season (June-September). In the other seasons, the wind speeds are

milder. The winds that blow down the leewards of the Western Ghats cause such

speeds and they are normally hot and dry, because of the rain shadow. These

data are helpful to the farmers, showing how fast they must tap the wind energy

during the windiest times.

Population Distribution

According to the village profile constructed by the Gandhigram Rural

Institute in 1993, the population of the study area is 8,035, of which 4,171 (or 52

129

per cent) are males and 3,861 (48 per cent) are females spread over Chettiapatti,

Kalikkampatti, Sirunaickenpatti, Ulagampatti, Kuttathupatti and Silvarpatti villages.

The six villages put together have 2,002 households, and 12,680 ha of

geographical area. Chettiapatti is the smallest of the villages with 830 persons

while Sirunaickenpatti is the largest with 2,144 persons. Of the rural male

population, the largest of 1,113 is obviously in Sirunaickenpatti, followed by

Kuttathupatti with 689, Ulagampatti with 941, Kalikkampatti with 553, Chettiapatti

with 452, and Silvarpatti with 426, totalling 4,174. There is a corresponding and

similar pattern and order in terms of female population as well.

Size and Composition. Among the six villages, two - Chettiapatti.(830) and Silvarpatti (869) - have populations less than 1,000 while Kalikkampatti, Kuttathupatti and Ulagampatti have populations more than 1,000, and in fact a range of 1,050 to 1,750. About 15 per cent of the population (1,220 persons) of the six villages is of scheduled castes; of this SC population, the distribution by sex is almost equal, with 50.1 per cent male and the rest female. Ulagampatti has the largest of the SC population in the region (395 persons, 202 males as against 193 females) and Kuttathupatti has the least of 126 persons, with 69 males and 57 females. Although overall there is almost equal population, at the village level, there is greater variation. In Silvarpatti, females outnumber males (52 against 46, totalling 98 persons).

Literacy. It is found that 6,066 or 75.5 per cent of the total population are

literates. This is quite high when compared with other villages in the vicinity. The

remaining (1,969 persons or a little less than a fourth of the population) are

illiterates. There are 3,181 male literates (39.6 per cent) and 2,885 female literates

(Table 4.2).

In Kuttathupatti and Silvarpatti, female literates outnumber male literates;

and in all others, it is the general pattern of dominant male literacy.

Sirunaickenpatti, because of its large population, also has the largest number of

literates (1,715 with 890 male and 825 female literates).

130

Table 4.2: Area, Households and Population (in hundreds)

Village Details

Area (Ha)

Households

Population

Male

Female

SC Population

Male

Female

Literates

Male

Female

Illiterates

Source: 1.

2.

3.

Chet

1.70

2.30

8.30

4.52

3.78

2.11

1.07

1.04

7.47

3.95

3.52

0.83

Kali

1.50

2.72

10.62

5.53

5.09

3.35

1.64

1.71

7.95

4.82

3.13

2.67

Sim

1.90

5.70

21.44

11.13

10.31

0.55

0.23

0.32

17.15

8.90

8.25

4.29

Ulag

3.30

3.80

17.40

9.41

7.99

3.95

2.02

1.93

13.92

7.52

6.40

3.48

Kutt

0.96

3.30

13.90

6.89

7.01

1.26

0.69

0.57

9.38

4.48

4.90

4.52

Silv

3.39

2.20

8.69

4.26

4.43

0.98

0.46

0.52

4.79

2.14

2.65

3.90

Total

12.75

20.02

80.35

41.74

38.61

12.20

6.11

6.09

60.66

31.81

28.85

19.69

Profile of Service Villages of Gandhigram Rural Institute, Gandhigram, February 1993. Commissioner, General Particulars of Villages, Athoor, Reddiarchatram and Dindigul Blocks, 1996. President, Village Panchayat General Particulars, A.Vellode, 1996.

It is followed, in order, by Ulagampatti (1,392 literates with 752 male and

640 female literates), Kuttathupatti (938: 448 and 490 respectively), Kalikkampatti

(795: 482 and 313), Chettiapatti (747: 395 and 352) and Silvarpatti (479: 214 and

265). All are however part of the workforce, whether or not they are educated.

The illiterates are larger in number in Kuttathupatti (452) and smaller in Chettiapatti

(83).

Workforce. A majority of the workforce in the villages is engaged in

agriculture while small proportions are in the secondary and tertiary sectors. There

are different categories of workforce, namely, the cultivators, agricultural labourers,

mmmmmm

131

household industrial workers, and workers in manufacturing, processing, repairing

and other services. Table 4.3 shows the occupational structure of the population

of the six villages in detail. In all, there are 4,755 workers in the study area,

accounting for 59.2 per cent of the total population (Table 4.3 and Figure 4.2).

As expected, the larger the population of the village, the greater is the

number of persons in the workforce. This is exemplified by Sirunaickenpatti, with

1,170 workers, of whom 601 are males (51.4 per cent) and 569 are females. The

smallest share of workers is in Silvarpatti (500 of 4,755, which is 10.5 per cent of

all workers in the study area). There is a total of 4,755 main workers, of which

Sirunaickenpatti has the largest share (24.96 per cent), followed closely by

Ulagampatti (23.3 per cent) and the least is in Silvarpatti (10.52 per cent). The

main workers account for more than half the total population in all the villages, with

the following distribution: 54.6 per cent in Sirunaickenpatti, 57.54 per cent in

Silvarpatti, 57.6 per cent in Kuttathupatti, 60.8 per cent in Chettiapatti, 63.2 per

cent in Ulagampatti, and 63.4 per cent in Kalikkampatti.

There is a large proportion of non-workers, with 1,720 male and 1,560

female non-workers making a total of 3,280 (40.82 per cent). Sirunaickenpatti has

the most non-workers (974), of whom 512 are males and the rest are females. It

is found that 962 (11.9 per cent) of the total workforce are of cultivators, 1,246

(15.5 per cent) are of agricultural labourers, 2,085 (26 per cent) are of industrial,

manufacturing, processing, repairing and other workers, 462 people are marginal

workers (5.8 per cent) and 3,280 people (40.8 per cent) are non-workers who have

not worked for a minimum number of days in any given year, during the reference

period. In general, human energy from both the sexes is an essential basis in the

conduct of economic activities. There are variations in their participation in

economic activities, in all the villages. Each village presents a different picture,

altogether.

Fig 4.2 - Workers and Non-Workers hv Village

132

Table 4.3: Major Workforce - Main Workers

Category

Cultivators

Male

Female

Agricultural Labour

Male

Female

Household Industry

and Others

Male

Female

Marginal Workers

Male

Female

Total

Non-workers

Male'

Female

Grand Total

Chet

65

60

76

94

107

78

10

15

505

194

131

830

Kali

75

59

100

113

135

104

35

52

673

208

181

1062

Sim

120

112

100

128

325

254

56

75

1170

512

462

2144

Villages

Ulag

135

126

120

150

315

175

37

49

1107

334

299

1740

Kutt

70

65

90

110

200

172

41

52

800

288

302

1390

Silv

40

35

75

90

110

110

17

23

500

184

185

869

Total

505

457

561

685

1192

893

196

266

4755

1720

1560

8035

Sources: As in Table 4.2 above.

Land Use Patterns

The current utilisation of land is such that the land may be classified as

wet, dry and waste lands. Dry land is far larger (755 ha) in area than wet land (56

ha), garden land (280 ha) and waste lands are just about 157 ha. In wet and dry

133

lands, both kharif and rabi crops are grown. These lands produce a variety of

woods and wood lots, for cooking and domestic purposes.

Cropping Pattern. The farmers of the study area are cultivators of paddy,

grapes, groundnut, coconut, flowers, vegetables, onion, and betel vines in their wet

lands. They also cultivate cereals (jowar, samai and bajra, these being the

millets)and pulses such as red gram, black gram, horsegram, and green gram in

their dry lands. Cotton is cultivated by them in the suitable seasons. Cereals,

pulses and vegetables are very essential and nutritious food items for human

survival in the villages, just as elsewhere.

Sources of Irrigation. In the Gandhigram Service villages, the farmers use

groundwater, from the wells, and the rain water for irrigation. They use open wells,

ponds and tanks for the purpose. There is neither tubewell nor canal for irrigation.

Animal Husbandry. Of the total livestock, 621 are milch, 375 are dry, 218

are not yet calved, 139 not fit for breeding, 20 are graded bullocks and 167 are

local bullocks. They provide much valuable dung which is used for cooking and

other domestic purposes, after some processing (Table 4.4).

Of the total livestock of 6,820 (large and small), 27.8 per cent accounts for

poultry birds (1,896), 32.73 per cent for sheep (2,232), 10.72 per cent for goats

(731), and the remaining of 28.75 per cent for cattle. The cattle population consists

of 621 milch cattle (9.1 per cent), 375 dry (5.5 per cent), 218 not yet calved (3.2

per cent), 139 unfit for milk and breeding (2.04 per cent) and 179 bullocks (2.62

per cent). The young stock of the cattle number 155 he-cattle and 274 she-cattle,

totalling 429 accounting for 6.3 per cent of all livestock.

Table 4.4: Livestock Population in the Study Area

134

Cattle

Milch

Large

Small

Dry

Large

Small

Uncalved

large

Small

Unfit for Milk and Breeding

Large Small

Bulls

Young Stock

Large: he-

Large: she-

Small: he-

Small: she-

Sheep

Goat

Poultry

Grand Total

Source:

Chet

60

18

10

11

18

4

84

10

26

40

8

7

1390

325

316

2327

Livestock Inspectors

Kali

57

52

27

13

19

16

7

2

21

8

26

3

10

158

49

184

652

Siru

231

34

167

9

53

6

11

1

70

13

65

1

7

72

41

320

1101

Villages

Ulag Kut

23

6

38

4

6

7

-

32

13

18

2

4

40

14

42

249

34

12

15

8

20

10

34

34

18

17

5

6

212

147

404

976

Silv

58

36

42

31

34

25

-

12

42

50

16

24

360

155

630

1515

Total

463

158

299

76 -

150

68

136

3

179

1-20

216

35

58

2232

731

1896

6820

Livestock Census for 1996-97, Sub-Centres -

Ambathurai, Alamarath

Thepakulathupatti, 1997.

jpatt i , Konur , Sukkampatti and

135

Chettiapatti alone has 2079 small stock and 248 large stock, totalling

2,327 which is about a third (34.12 per cent) of all livestock in the studyarea.

Silvarpatti accounts for 22.2 per cent of all livestock with 238 large and 1,277 small

stock. Sirunaickenpatti accounts for 16.1 per cent of all livestock: small stock 491

and large stock 610. This village has thus the highest number of large stock.

Kalikkampatti has 165 large animals and 487small animals, accounting for 9.6 per

cent of the cattle population of the study area (652). Kuttathupatti has 976 animals

(172 large and 804 small stock) which is 14.3 per cent of all livestock in the study

area. The smallest number of livestock is in Ulagampatti (large 130 and small 119,

a total of 249). In these villages, sheep and goats are common and Chettiapatti

tops in sheep (at 1,390) and Ulagampatti is at the bottom (just 40). As for poultry

birds, Silvarpatti tops with 630 birds, followed by Kuttathupatti with 404 birds,

Sirunaickenpatti with 320 birds, Chettiapatti 316 birds and the rest in small

numbers by Kalikkampatti (184) and Ulagampatti (32).

Social Institutions

Education and Health. There are three primary schools and three middle

schools in these villages. They cater to the education of children below 14 years

of age. Only three of the six villages have sub-health centres: Chettiapatti,

Ulagampatti, and Kuttathupatti. The first of these centres is attached to the Primary

Health Centre (PHC) at Alamarathupatti, while the second is attached to the PHC

of Thadicombu and the third to the PHC of Kannivadi. The PHCs are all located

within 5 km of the village centres. The sub-centres are responsible for the general

health of the people, their care and for counselling. Births and deaths are recorded

and documents are maintained at these centres.

136

Financial institutions. There are two Primary Agricultural Cooperative

Banks, one at Kuttathupatti and the other at Silvarpatti. Other villages are covered

by other similar banks, importantly the Canara Banks which are located in the

neighbouring villages.

These institutions provide both long and short term credits to the

people/farmers under various governmental programmes. In addition, the fair price

shops .also function in all the villages and they supply the essential commodities

through the Public Distribution System (PDS).

Transport and Communication

For transporting commodities and goods the villagers produce, such as

flowers and grapes, they depend mostly on the railway transport that exists and

the stations such as Ambathurai and Dindigul serve the villages. The National

Highway 7 traverses the area near about Chettiapatti, Kalikkampatti and

Sirunaickenpatti. Buses ply regularly from Dindigul to Kannivadi and Alagupatti,

passing through Kuttathupatti and Silvarpatti. Ulagampatti alone has separate bus

services to the district headquarters, which is Dindigul. Invariably, all the villages

are in possession of radios and colour television sets and they are the essential

communication media among the villages. World news, weather forecasts and day-

to-day agricultural information are all communicated to the people through these

media. The people of the villages are interested in the regional, national and

international news and programmes which are an influence - especially cultural -

on the people of the villages.

There are postal and telegraph office services, in the study area, and the

coverage is 100 per cent. Postal services are available in all the villages but the

137

services relate primarily to collection and delivery of letters. There are also

telephones, available to the people of the villages in these offices, for their urgent

and immediate correspondence. There is however no Police Department in any of

these villages, which are served by those in the vicinity.

Basic Needs

In all the villages, there is provision for drinking water supply, namely, a

overhead tank (for water storage). In addition, there are 5-6 hand pumps which

help the people to pump water out of the groundwater storage, for drinking and

other domestic purposes. Mud roads are available to the people on the move; the

Village Panchayats have maintained all of them. Black-topped roads are found in

good measure. Tar paved roads connect the villages of Kalikkampatti,

Sirunaickenpatti and Kuttathupatti with the nearest main road. Generally, the

residents are not facing any transport and marketing problems.

Integrated Nutrition and Noon Meal Programme

There are six Tamil Nadu Integrated Nutrition Programme (TNIP) centres

attached to the Balwadis and the Noon Meal centres attached to the schools.

Children below 4 years benefit greatly through the Nutrition Programme and the

Balwadis. The school students below 14 years are covered under the Noon Meal

Programme. The TNIP centres are also taking care of the registered pregnant and

breast-feeding mothers. Mahalir Sangam (Women's Association) has been

effectively functioning in each of the 'study villages, raising the interests and

protecting the rights of women. The women here are well aware of the

governmental programmes, meant for them.

Marketing Facilities

138

There are several markets hereabout and the study area is served by the

Dindigul Supermarket, and the ordinary markets in Chinnalapatti, Panchampatti,

Kannivadi and Thadicombu, for marketing their agricultural and other products.

Socio-Economic Development and Energy in Rural Tamil Nadu

Now we turn to information gathered from 200 sample households of the

six Gandhigram Service Villages, towards providing an understanding of the socio­

economic milieu and development and the characteristic use of energy,

conventional as well as non-conventional, towards that development. Table 4.5

summarises the socio-economic status of the people of the six villages and

provides for an understanding of the variations among them. The study area is

dominated by the Christian population of all denominations (65 per cent) with the

Hindus accounting for 35 per cent. The sample chosen is representative of the

communal mix of the villages.

It appears that in Chettiapatti, Kalikkampatti and Silvarpatti, the Hindus

dominate as the majority population. Christian population is the majority in the

other three villages. There is a strong communal amity in the villages. The

backward classes, as deduced from the distribution of social classes in the

sample, account for 78 per cent of the total population; 8 per cent is of the most

backward classes; 12 per cent other backward classes and 2 per cent scheduled

castes and scheduled tribes. Hence, the sample is drawn heavily from the

backward classes. Sirunaickenpatti (27.5 per cent), Ulagampatti (18.5 percent)

and Kuttathupatti (13.5 per cent) account for higher proportions of backward

classes.

139

Table 4.5: Socio-Economic Status Of Respondents

Particulars

Religion Hinduism Christianity

Total

Social Status

BC MBC OBC SC/ST

Total

Size of Family SF MF BF

Total

Population Male Female Total Aged Work Force Children

Literates Mais Female Total.

Illiterates Male Female

Total

Farming Category MARG SF MF

BF LL

Total

Chet

20 3

23

10

1 12

-

23

13 8 2

23

60 63 123 17 50 56

54 53

107

6 10

16

6 5 3 1 8

23

Kali

18 9

27

12 9 6

27

14 10 3

27

70 74 144 14 72 58

63 52 115

7 22

29

10 14 1

. 2

27

Siru

2 55

57

55

1

-1 "

57

32 20 5

57

150 151 301 16

154 131

128 118 246

22 33

55

20 10 2

1 24

57

Village Ulag

1 37

38

37

--1

38

21 13 4

38

99 108 207 19

111 77

88 89 177

11 19

30

18 11 3

3 3

38

Kut

7 26

33

27 5

-1

33

10 12 11

33

107 111 218 24 93

101

81 71 152

26 40

66

15 5

-3 10

33

Silv

22

-

22

15

-6 1

22

10 8 4

22

60 63 123 17 61 45

52 42 94

8 21

29

15 2 1

3 1

22

Total

70 130

200

156 16 24 4

200

100 71 29

200

546 570 1116 107 541 468

466 425 891

80 145

225

84 47 10 11 48

200

140

"(Table 4.5 Continued)

Category

Land Details in acres

Wet Land Dry land

Total

Average Size of Land Holdings Percap Income (in '000) Percap Expenditure! in '000] Percap Energy Expenditure ('00)

Time Spent in Cooking/day in hrs

Livestock Bull Cow Buffalo Sheep Poultry

Total

Housing Ownership Owned Rented

Total

Housing Condition Pucca Tiled Thatched

Total

Stove Owned/Used Traditional Traditional/ Kerosene Others

Total

Chat

29.55 27.35

56,90

2.47 4.56 3.14

4.92

1.70

-16 7 -

30

56

19 4

23

4 12 7

23

13

8 2

23

Source: Computed by author from Note : Income and expenditures

Kali

31.45 32.85

64.30

2.38 6.84 4.59

4.19

2.00

4 36 2 3 5

54

26 1

27

7 11 9

27

18

9 -

27

Siru

41.10 44.70

85.80

1.51 6.55 3.64

3.58

1.70

7 74 1

-"5

93

52 5

57

4 30 23

57

36

8 13

57

Primary Data. are in rupees.

Villages Ulag

57.90 50.85

108.75

2.86 5.23 2.74

2.49

1.70

23 30 25 46 79

212

35 3

38

3 20 15

38

23

13 2

38

Kut

64.85 25.50

90.35

2.74 6.84 3.86

2.63

1.80

11 34 15 -20

82

31 2

33

3 18 12

33

19

13 1

33

Silv

109,05 18.30

127.35

5.79 7.45 3.76

2.00

1.90

11 13 18 --

42

21 1

22

2 10 10

22

12

7 3

22

Total

333.90 199.55

533.45

2.67 6.28 3.60

3.25

1.65

56 203 68 49 139

539

184" 16

200

23 101 76

200

121

58 21

200

141

Half the population in the villages belongs to small families (with less than

5 members); 35.5 per cent of the families is of medium sized (5-7 members) and

the big families (more than 7 members) account for 14.5 per cent of the total

population. A large number of small families (32) and medium families (20) has

been sampled from dominate Simnaickenpatti, while for big families a large

number has been chosen from Kuttathupatti (11).

The households chosen for interviews for an understanding of the socio­

economic status of the villages account for about 14 per cent of "the total

population (1,116 persons). This accounts for 6.8 per cent of the male population

and 7.1 per cent of the total population. The population distribution as deduced

from the sample data shows that Simnaickenpatti (301 persons), Kuttathupatti (218

persons), Ulagampatti (207 persons), Kalikkampatti (144 persons), Chettiapatti and

Silvarpatti (123 persons each) are all represented in the order of their population

sizes. In all villages, the sample households show a larger female population than

male population. Nearly 10 per cent of the sampled population is of older

population, 48.5 per cent is of the main workers, and 42.0 per cent is of children.

Literates in the sampled households account for 14.7 per cent, 52.3 per

cent of them being males and the rest females. There is a repeat of the pattern

that the larger the population, the larger is the proportion of literates in the

sampled households. The sampled households show a little more than 20 per cent

of illiterate members.

The sample respondents (heads of households) interviewed for the study

reported here have the following distribution: 42.0 per cent marginal farmers, 23.5

per cent small farmers, 5 per cent medium farmers, 5.5 per cent large farmers

and 24 per cent landless labourers. Ten percent of the marginal farmers

142

interviewed hails from Sirunaickenpatti, 7 per cent of the small farmers come from

Kalikkampatti, 1.5 per cent each of medium farmers from Chettiapatti and

Ulagampatti, 1.5 per cent each of large farmers come from Ulagampatti,

Kuttathupatti and Silvarpatti. These are in fact the largest proportions of farmers

selected from the respective villages.

The average size of land holdings in the six villages is 2.67 acres (1.12 ha),

with a range of 1.51 acres in Sirunaickenpatti to 5.79 acres in Silvarpatti. The total

area of both wet and dry land owned by the sampled farmers is 533.45 acres, with

333.9 acres of wet land and 199.55 acres of dry land. There is more of wet land

than dry land in Chettiapatti (29.55 acres), Ulagampatti (57.9 acres), Kuttathupatti

(64.85 acres) and Silvarpatti (109.05 acres). Dry land accounts for higher

proportions in Kalikkampatti and Sirunaickenpatti.

It is seen that the 200 households own varying numbers of livestock

population, totalling 539. Cows are the largest in number with 203, followed by

poultry birds (139). There are 68 buffaloes, 56 bulls, 49 sheep, and 49 goats.

Ulagampatti appears to have the largest of the livestock population (39.3 per cent),

followed by 17.25 per cent of the livestock by Sirunaickenpatti, and 7.8 per cent

by Silvarpatti. Table 4.5 provides information on the distribution of livestock

population in the villages. This distribution has relevance to energy uses in them,

for the village households use cattle dung as a source of energy, dried dung cakes

being the most important fuel in the kitchen. It is important to note that the larger

the number of cattle in a farming household, the greater is their contribution to field

nutrients and cooking fuel. There is a tendency among the farming households to

possess a number of cattle, not just for milk but also for cattle manure and dung

fuel. Even poultry droppings come in useful as plant nutrients, but only if there is

an organised collection of the droppings.

143

It is also found that only 8 per cent of the households in these villages lives

in rented houses while 92 per cent of-them own their houses. Sirunaickenpatti

accounts for 26 per cent of the owned houses and 2.5 per cent of the rented

houses and thus this village accounts for the largest proportion of the own and

rented houses among the villages studied. Only 11.5 per cent of the households

have pucca (proper) houses, 38 per cent thatched houses and the rest tiled

houses (Table 4.5).

It is found that 121 of the sampled households owned and used traditonal

type of stoves with Sirunaickenpatti (31), and Ulagampatti (23) sharing a large

number. Fifty-eight households interchangeably use both traditional and kerosene

stoves with 13 each from Ulagampatti and Kuttathupatty. And the remaining the

21 households use other types of stoves, especially iron stoves.

Firewood and Residues from Various Sources

Data have been gathered from the respondents drawn from the six villages

as to how much of firewood and residue collections are made and consumed by

them, from their own sources, gathered from the villages and about, and

purchased from shops (Table 4.6, Figures 4.1 and 4.2). A total of 1,108,400 Kwh

of firewood, with 521,800 Kwh from own sources, 63,000 Kwh gathered from

village and 433,500 Kwh have been purchased by the respondents for use in their

homes, for a variety of purposes but mainly cooking. Collection from own sources

amounts to 133,700 Kwh in Kuttathupatti, 129,900 Kwh in Ulagampatti, 84,700

Kwh in Chettiapatti, 72,000 Kwh in Sirunaickenpatti, 54,700 Kwh in Kalikkampatti

and 46,800 Kwh in Silvarpatti.

ykMM

144

Table 4.6: Firewood and Residues Consumption by Respondents (in 10,000 Kwh)

Category

Firewood Owned Gathered Purchased

Total

Residues Owned Gathered Purchased

Total

Grand Total

Source:

Chet

8.47 0.99 3.48

12.94

0.07 0.03 0.01

0.11

13.05

Kali

5.47 0.59

5.02

11.08

0.12 0.09 0.01

0.22

11.30

Computed by the author from

Siru

7.20 2.28

19.56

29.04

0.29 0.09 0.05

0.43

29.47

primary

Village Ulag

12.99

4.71

17.70

0.16 0.05 0.08

0.29

17.99

data.

Kut

13.37 2.15 8.32

23.84

0.16 0.04 0.02

0.22

24.06

Silv

4.68 0.29 2.27

7.24

0.09 0.06 0.01

0.17

7.41

Total

52.18 6.30

43.35

101.84

0.89 0.36 0.19

1.44

103.28

It appears that except for Sirunaickenpatti, in all other villages, own sources

provide for large quantities of firewood collection. In Sirunaickenpatti, therefore,

purchased firewood amounts to 195,600.Kwh and is thus the highest amount

purchased by any of the six villages.Purchased firewood energy is 83,200 Kwh in

Kuttathupatti, 50,200 Kwh in Kalikkampatti, 47,100 Kwh in Ulagampatti, 34,800 in

Chettiapatti and 22,700 Kwh in Silvarpatti. Silvarpatti thus has the least amount of

firewood based energy and Sirunaickenpatti the largest amount of energy from

firewood owned, gathered and purchased.

Residues, principally crop residues, form the minor energy source for the

villages when considered in terms of non-commercial resources. A total of 14,400

Kwh of residues has been reported to have been collected from own sources

145

(8,900 Kwh), gathered from village sources (3,600 Kwh) and purchased (1,900

Kwh) from the open market. Own sources are seen to account for a larger part of

the residues so collected for use by the respondents, while the purchased residues

account for the smaller part of the collection. Sirunaickenpatti has the largest

collection equalling 4,300 Kwh, followed by Ulagampatti with 2,900 Kwh,

Kalikkampatti and Kuttathupatti with 2,200 Kwh each, Silvarpatti with 1,700 Kwh

and Chettiapatti with 1,100 Kwh.

The households of the Gandhigram Service Villages use a variety of

firewood. Table 4.7 lists three important species of firewood and lumps all others.

A total of 1,018,400 Kwh of firewood is used by the respondents alone, of which

593,900 Kwh (or 58.3 per cent) is from prosopsis which grows abundantly in the

semi-arid regions of India. Sirunaickenpatti has used prosopis as much as 176,200

Kwh, Kuttathupatti 127,600 Kwh, Ulagampatti 114,900 Kwh, Chettiapatti 89,900

Kwh, Kalikkampatti 51,600 Kwh and Silvarpatti 33,700 Kwh.

Table 4.7: Types of Firewood used by the Respondents (in 10,000 Kwh)

Types

Prosopsis Neem Tamarind Others

Total

Source:

Chet Kali

8.99 5.16 0.39 1.03 0.19 3.03 3.37 1.86

12.94 11.08

Village Siru Ulag

17.62 11.49 1.39 1.26 2.29 1.93 7.74 3.02

29.04 17.70

Computed by the author from primary data

Kut

12.76 1.76 4.45 4.87

23.84

Silv

3.37 0.32 0.71 2.84

7.24

Total

59.39 6.15

12.60 23.70

101.84

Neem and tamarind are native to India and grow well in these parts.

Firewood from tamarind is 126,000 Kwh and from neem is 61,500 Kwh while other

146

sources give a total of 237,000 Kwh. Kuttathupatti has used a total of 44,500 Kwh

while Kalikkampatti 30,300 Kwh and the other villages progressively smaller and

smaller quantities. More than a fifth of the firewood used in these villages is from

'other' sources, with Sirunaickenpatti using as much as 77,400 Kwh, Kuttathupatti

48,700 Kwh, Chettiapatti 33,700 Kwh, Ulagampatti 30,200 Kwh, Silvarpatti 28,400

Kwh and Kalikkampatti 18,600 Kwh. The firewood usage reflects the natural,

renewable energy reources available to the people of these villages. They depend

very much on their environment to provide for their energy requirements.

Income, Expenditure and Energy Consumption

The total income of the sampled households from various sources but

primarily agriculture is more than Rs. 7 million. The farmers of Chettiapatti.account

for the smallest proportion of this income (Rs. 561 thousands or about 8 per cent)

and Sirunaickenpatti the highest (Rs. 1.97 million or 28.1 per cent). The medium

farmers in all the villages account for Rs. 484 thousands (6.9 per cent), and small

farmers for Rs. 2.043 million (29.1 per cent). Among the people of Chettiapatti, big

farmers make the least of the total income (Rs. 49.0 thousand out of Rs.561

thousand); even the landless labourers earn more income (Rs. 91 thousand) than

the big farmers of this village.

It is the medium (Rs.109 thousand) and small farmers (Rs.176.8 thousand)

who earn the highest income among the farmers and the landless of the village.

In Sirunaickenpatti, it is the landless labourers (Rs. 694 thousand) followed by

small farmers (Rs. 577 thousand) who make the highest income from all sources

(Rs. 1.97 million). In Kalikkampatti, it is the small farmers (Rs. 595 thousand) who

make the most income whereas in Ulagampatti it is the big farmers (Rs. 1.44

million), in Kuttathupatti it is the landless labourers (Rs. 489.3 thousand) and in

147

Silvarpatti it is the big farmers (Rs. 452.7 thousand). Thus, the income distribution

indicates to varied patterns by farmers categories and by the villages (Table 4.8).

The per capita income in the six villages is approximately Rs. 6,280, while

the range of per capita income is from Rs. 4,563 in Chettiapatti to Rs. 7,447 in

Silvarpatti. Among the marginal farmers, Ulagampatti shows the highest per capita

income (Rs. 7,408) and Silvarpatti the least (Rs. 4,062); among the small farmers,

Kuttathupatti has the highest per capita (Rs. 9,054) and Ulagampatti the smallest

(Rs. 4,186); as for the medium farmers, the farmers of Kalikkampatti show the

maximum per capita (Rs. 19,874) and those of Ulagampatti the minimum (Rs.

3,179); and among the big farmers, Silvarpatti has the highest per capita income

(Rs. 21,558) and Chettiapatti and Sirunaickenpatti the least (Rs. 6,125 each).

Table 4.8: Annual Income by Farmer Categories (in Thousand Rupees)

Category

MAR SF MF BF

LL

Total

Source:

Chet

135 177 109 49

91

561

Kali

221 595 139 -

30

985

Sim

539 577 112 49

694

1970

Village Ulag Kut

489 335 297 326 89 -144 342

63 489

1083 1492

Computed by the author from Primary Data. Incomes rounded off to the nearest thousand.

Silv

301 71 35

453

57

916

Total

2018 2403 484 1037

1425

7008

Table 4.9 brings out the variations in per capita incomes (Figure 4.3), both

by farmer categories and by the villages. Overall, the big farmers have a high per

capita (Rs. 11,152) and the marginal farmers a low per capita (Rs. 5,058).

148

Table 4.10 shows the annual expenditure of the people of the villages. By

the count of the sampled households, the total expenditure over a year is more

than Rs. 4 million. In order of annual expenditures, the money expended by

Chettiapatti amounts to Rs. 385,845; Silvarpatti Rs. 462,630; Ulagampatti Rs.

568,040; Kalikkampatti Rs. 661,600; Kuttathupatti Rs. 840,730; and

Sirunaickenpatti Rs. 1.095 million.

Table 4.9: Per Capita Income by Farmer Categories (in Rupees)

Category

MAR SF MF BF

LL

Total

Source: Computed by the

Chet

4504 6548 6056 6125

2282

4563

author from

Kali

4089 8041 19874

3333

6840

primary

Siru

5545 8015 11200 6125

6089

6545

data.

Village Ulag

7408 4186 3179 4979

4877

5231

Kut

4292 9054

12667

6354

6844

Silv

4062 5071 3889

21558

11328

7447

Total

5058 6949 6724 11152

5522

6279

Likewise, the farming households also show varying annual expenditures

by the categories. Marginal farmers of all the villages show an annual total

expenditure of nearly Rs. 1.3 million; small farmers Rs. 1.2 million; medium

farmers Rs. 236,900; big farmers Rs. 465,660; and landless labourers Rs.

864,485. The expenditure patterns range from a total of Rs. 94,230 (Chettiapatti)

to Rs. 331,555 (Sirunaickenpatti) for marginal farmers; Rs. 39,400 (Silvarpatti) to

Rs. 394,960 (Kalikkampatti) tor small farmers; Rs. 30,000 (Silvarpatti) to Rs.

60,780 (Sirunaickenpatti) for medium farmers; Rs. 22,600 (Chettiapatti) to Rs.

176,950 (Silvarpatti) for big farmers; and Rs. 21,700 (Silvarpatti) to Rs. 397,560

(Sirunaickenpatti) for landless labourers.

149

Table 4.10: Annual Expenditure (in Thousand Rupees)

Category

MAR SF MF BF

LL

Total

Note : Source

Expenditure roun Computed by the

Chet

94 136 52 23

81

386

Kal

182 395 51 -

34

662

Sim

332 280

61 24

398

1095

Village Ulag

235 166 43 68

56

568

ded off to the nearest thousdanc author from primary data.

Kut

236 157 -173

274

841

1.

Silv

195 39 30

177

22

463

Total

1272 1174 236 466

864

4014

The per capita expenditure (Figure 4.3) in the villages is Rs. 3,596, which

is 57.3 per cent of the average per capita income. The per capita expenditures

range from Rs. 2,744 in Ulagampatti to Rs. 4,594 in Kalikkampatti. As seen from

Table 4.11, marginal farmers have a range of Rs. 2,630 (Silvarpatti) to Rs. 3,554

(Ulagampatti); small farmers Rs. 2,343 (Ulagampatti) to Rs. 5,337 (Kalikkampatti);

medium farmers Rs. 2,907 (Chettiapatti) to Rs. 7,329 (Kalikkampatti); big farmers

Rs. 2,352 (Ulagampatti) to Rs. 8,426 (Silvarpatti); and landless labourers Rs. 2,014

(Chettiapatti) to Rs. 4,339 (Ulagampatti). The data do not however support the

view that the higher the income the greater is the per capita expenditure. It has

been found that the per capita expenditure is within limits of the per capita income.

The per capita expenditure for all the villages accounts for 57.3 per cent of the per

capita income, with energy expenditure accounting for 5.2 per cent of the per

capita income. The range of the per capita expenditure in the villages is from 50.5

per cent (Silvarpatti)of the per capita income to 68.75 per cent (Chettiapatti) of the

per capita income. In all villages, the per capita expenditure is more than

150

Table 4.11: Per Capita Expenditure (in Rupees)

Category

MAR SF MF BF

LL

Total

Source:

Chet

3141 5042 2907 2825

2014

3137

Kali

3361 5337 7329

3758

4594

Computed by the author from

Siru

3418 3894 6078 3058

3487

3637

primary

Village Ulag

3554 2343 1518 2352

4339

2744

data.

Kut

3924 4361

6421

3564

3857

Silv .

2630 2814 3333 8426

4340

3761.

Total

3189 3994 3290 5007

3351

3596

half the per capita income as is borne out by Table 4.12. The energy expenditure

per capita ranges, likewise, from 2.69 per cent of the per capita income

(Silvarpatti) to 10.78 per cent of the per capita income (Chettiapatti).

The expenditure on energy is Rs.325 to a person, which is not very high

when considered in terms of the household income. The largest of the per capita

energy expenditure is in Chettiapatti (Rs. 492) which is more than a tenth (10.78

per cent) of the per capita income of the village. This is followed in order by

Kalikkampatti (Rs. 419, or 6.13 per cent-of the per capita income), Sirunaickenpatti

(Rs. 358, or 5.47 per cent), Kuttathupatti (Rs. 263, or 3.84 per cent), Ulagampatti

(Rs. 249, or 4.76 per cent), and Silvarpatti (Rs. 200, or 2.69 per cent).

There does not seem to be a correlation between the per capita energy

consumption (Figure 4.4) and the per capita energy expenditure. For example, the

per capita energy consumption in Ulagampatti is 3,570 Kwh whereas the per

capita expenditure on energy is only Rs. 249; similar is the case with Silvarpatti

where energy consumption is 3,128 Kwh and the per capita energy expenditure

. 151

is Rs. 200. Where the per capita energy consumption is low, for example in

Chettiapatti (2,277 Kwh), the energy expenditure appears to be high. The reason

for such a relationship has to be sought in the different sources of energy. Where

the per capita energy expenditure is high, the use of commercial energy is more

than that of the non-commercial energy.

Table 4.12: Income, Expenditures, Energy Consumption of the Respondents (Per capita)

Particulars

Income Expenditures Energy Expenditures

Energy Consumption (Kwh)

Source: Computed by the author frorr

Chet

4563 3137 492

2277

primary

Kali

6840 4594 419

2203

data,

Siru

6545 3637 358

2377

Village Ulag

5231 2744 249

3570

Kut

6844 3857 263

2600

Silv

7447 3761 200

3128

Total

6279 3596 325

2678

Types of Houses and Energy Consumption

Table 4.13 presents energy consumption by the villages in terms of housing

conditions, pucca, tiled and thatched housing (Figure 4.5). It is seen that the

energy consumption by households with pucca houses, because of their small

number, is far less than the energy consumed by either the tiled houses or the

thatched houses. This is understandable because the larger the number of

households in the categories, the greater is the total consumption.

In Chettiapatti, the total consumption is 280,000 Kwh, more than half of

which is consumed by the households living in tiled houses; in Kalikkampatti, the

energy consumption is slightly higher at 303,000 Kwh, 121,000 Kwh of which is

consumed by the households living in tiled houses. Likewise, it is found that the

households living in tiled houses being larger in number and much better in

Fig 4.5 Pcrcapita Income (PCI) and Peraanita Expenditure (PCE) by Village

152

position to have access to various sources of energy consume in fact large

amounts of energy accounting for nearly half the energy consumed in

Sirunaickenpatti (334,000 Kwh against the total of 715,400 Kwh), Ulagampatti

(387,000 Kwh against 739,000 Kwh) and Kuttathupatti (305,000 Kwh against

567,000 Kwh). Invariably, the households being small in number, those living in

pucca houses use less energy than those in the tiled and thatched houses. It is

also borne out by the facts that the non-commercial energy consumption is far

greater than the commecial energy consumption. In all the villages, the non­

commercial constitutes more than 90 per cent of the total energy consumption.

Table 4.13: Energy consumption among different types of houses (in 10,000 Kwh)

Category

Pucca Houses Commercial Non-Commercial

Total

Tiled Houses Commercial Non-Commercial

Total

Thatched Houses Commercical Non-Commercial

Total

Grand Total

Source: Computed by the

Chet

6.57

author

Kali

0.39 8.57

6.96

1.04 13.72

14.76

0.63 5.66

6.29

28.01

from primary

Siru

0.68 6.27

9.25

0.82 11.25

12.07

0.74 8.22

8.96

30.28

data.

Ulag

0.13 2.48

6.40

3.04 30.34

33.38

1.39 30.37

31.76

71.54

Villages Kut

0.68 11.06

3.16

1.53 37.19

38.72

1.96 30.05

32.01

73.89

Silv

0.55 7.23

11.61

1.72 28.78

30.50

0.69 13.89

14.58

56.69

Total

0.19 42.18

7.42

1.01 17.65

18.66

0.57 11.83

12.40

38.48

2.62

44.80

9.16 138.93

148.09

5.98 100.02

106.00

298.89

Stove Types and Energy Consumption

153

There is information from the field survey that 64.1 per cent of the

households use traditional stoves, 26 per cent of the households both traditional

and kerosene stoves and the rest (9.9 per cent) use other types of stoves (Figure

4.6). Table 4.14 provides information on the use of commercial and non­

commercial sources of energy by the six villages, in respect of different types of

stoves. The people who use traditional chulhas (stoves) consume nearly 1.85

million Kwh, with nearly 500,000 Kwh, which is incidentally the highest quantum,

consumed by Ulagampatti followed closely by Sirunaickenpatti with 443,000 Kwh.

Table 4.14: Stove Types and Energy Consumption (in 10,000 Kwh)

Category

Traditional Stoves Commercial Non-Commercial

Total

Traditional / Kerosene Stoves Commercial Non-Commercial

Total

Other Stoves Commercial Non-Commercial

Total

Grand Total

Source: Computed by the author

Chet

0.67 17.28

17.95

1.05 6.22

7.27

0.34 2.45

2.79

28.01

from primary

Kali

1.19 15.33

16.52

1.04 12.72

13.76

-

30.28

data.

Sim

1.66 42.61

44.27

2.09 11.91

14.00

0.81 12.46

13.27

71.54

Village Ulag

1.32 48.63

49.95

2.79 16.42

19.21

0.07 4.66

4.73

73.89

Kut

0.96 32.93

33.89

1.90 19.15

21.05

O.10 1.65

1.75

56.69

Silv

0,32 22.17

22.49

0.94 8.81

9.75

0.51 5.73

6.24

38.48

Total

6.12 178.95

185.07

9.81 75.23

85.09

1.83 26.95

28.78

298.89

Those households which use both traditional chulhas and the modem

kerosene stove consume as much as 850,381 Kwh with Kuttathupatti ranking first

154

among the villages in the quantum consumed (211 thousand Kwh), followed

closely by Ulagampatti (192 thousand Kwh). The iron stove users (others) account

for 288 thousand Kwh, with nearly half of this consumed by Sirunaickenpatti

households (133 thousand Kwh).

There is support for the fact that the rural people consume largely non­

commercial energy, commercial energy consumed being a negligible proportion of

the total, no matter what types of stoves they use in their households. In the'

households using the traditional chulhas, commecial energy consumed is 61,229

Kwh whereas non-commercial energy is of the order of 1.79 million Kwh.

Sirunaickenpatti is the largest user of commecial energy (16,620 Kwh) and

Ulagampatti is the largest user of non-commercial energy (486,280 Kwh). Non­

commercial energy consumed by the largest user is nearly three times the

commercial energy consumed by the largest user among the villages. The largest

user of commercial energy among the households using both traditional and

kerosene stove is Ulagampatti at 27,880 Kwh and the largest user of non­

commercial energy in those households is Kuttathupatti at 191,549 Kwh. Non­

commercial energy consumption among the traditional chulha users accounts for

96.7 per cent, among those using both traditional and kerosene stoves accounts

for 88.5 per cent, and among those using iron stoves accounts for 93.6 per cent.

Education and Energy Consumption

There is information from the field survey about the levels of education of

the households and the energy use (Figure 4.7). The total consumption of energy

in the literate households is 1.73 million Kwh as against 1.26 million Kwh in the

illiterate households making the ratio 58:42. The consumption of commercial and

non-commercial energy by literate and illiterate households is shown in Table 4.15.

155

The overall ratios, in terms of villages, between the literate and illiterate

households do not mean much except the general belief that education quickens

the process of adoption of new uses and knowledge the adoption of new

technologies. But, overtime, everybody, irrespective of education, becomes wiser

in the use of energy. In the villages, the availability and access to non-commercial

sources of energy determine the higher quantum of use of the non-commercial

energy.

Table 4.15: Education and Energy Consumption (in 10,000 Kwh)

Category

Literates Commercial Non-Commercial

Total

Illiterates Commercial Non-Commercial

Total

Grand Total

Source: Computed by the author

Chet

1.73 19.91

21.64

0.34 6.03

6.37

28.01

from primary

Kali

0.97 12.75

13.74

1.26 15.30

16.56

30.28

data.

Village Siru

3.58 36.11

39.69

0.99 30.86

31.85

71.54

Ulag

2.93 48.40

51.33

1.24 21.32

22.56

73.89

Kut

1.62 17.74

19.36

1.33 36.00

37.33

56.69

Silv

1.12 36.34

27.46

0.65 10.37

11.02

38.48

Total

11.95 161.25

173.20

5.81 119.88

125.69

298.89

Human Energy Spent in Household Activities

Energy consumed in rural households need not be addressed only from the

commercial and non-commercial energy sources point of view, but equally well in

terms of time (human energy) spent by the household (Figure 4.8) in a range and

variety of activities. Table 4.16 presents energy expended in some normal day-to­

day activities and in the context of 'rural living'. The activities range from sweeping

and cleaning to entertainment and other services. It is seen from the table that,

invariably, in all the villages, the human energy spent in food preparation has

156

resulted in high energy consumption (275,700 Kwh) which is a little more than half

the total energy spent in the activities (548,700 Kwh).

Table 4.16: Human Energy spent in household activities (in 10,000 Kwh)

Particulars

Sweeping and Cleaning (5.6) Food Prepared (50.2) Fetching Water (5.9) Firewood Collection (1.0) Tending to Aminals (10.8) Child Rearing (2.7) Personal Hygiene (4.2) Shopping (2.7) Entertainment (7.6) Other Services (9.3)

Total

Note : Figures in paratheses Source: Computed by the ai

Chat

0.31 3.53 0.33 0.09 0.46 0.19 0.30 0.17 0.37 0.73

6.48

represent percen thor from primary

Kali

0.46 2.62 0.59 0.07 0.89 0.19 0.37 0.22 0.70 0.49

6.60

Siru

0,76 9.05 0.81 0.10 1.44 0.43 0.56 0.38 0.99 2.53

17.04

Village Ulag

0.60 4.34 0.68 0.09 1.38 0.27 0,48 0.32 0.85 0.55

9.56

tage, which add up to 100.0, data.

Kut

0.60 4.90 0.47 0.12 0.99 0.20 0.35 0.27 0.72 0.47

9.09

Silv

0.32 3.13 0.33 0.07 0.79 0.18 0.26 0.14 0.55 0.33

6.10

Total

3.05 27.57 3.21 0.54 5.95 1.46 2.32 1.50 4,18 5.09

54.87

Tending to animals involves much time and the rural households under

study spend as much as 59,500 Kwh with Sirunaickenpatti (14,400 Kwh) and

Ulagampatti (13,800 Kwh) spending more time than all the others. Firewood

collection demands just about 5,400 Kwh. Entertainment appears to consume

more energy from the households, nearly 41,800 Kwh. The information gathered

from the field survey indicates that, in all 548,700 Kwh of time is spent in various

household activities. It is found that Sirunaickenpatti (170,400 Kwh) accounts for

31 per cent of all such energy whereas the others account for lesser and far

smaller amounts of energy: Chettiapatti 64,800 Kwh, Kalikkampatti 66,000 Kwh,

Ulagampatti 95,600 Kwh, Kuttathupatti 90,900 Kwh and Silvarpatti 61,000 Kwh.

Summary

157

The profile has briefly outlines the GRI and the characteristic features of

its villages in terms of geographical location, demography, climate, monsoon, land

use and cropping pattern, water potential, social institutions, transport and

communication, marketing facilities, social factors such as caste, religion, house

ownership and environmental conditions, livestock population, per capita income,

expenditure and so on. These socio-economic factors are informative for

identifying energy potentials that enable the researcher to carry out energy studies

at micro level. Thus the factors above pave the way for an analysis of the energy

consumption patterns across the sectors in the study area.