export promotion of horticulture crops in madhya pradesh...horticulture crops in madhya pradesh”...

1

- Aaron Christian

(DoMS, IIT Madras- May to July 2018)

Export Promotion of Horticulture

Crops in Madhya Pradesh

‘’Farming needs a lot of water-

Mostly in the form of perspiration’’

2

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank Atal Bihari Vajpayee Institute of Good Governance and Policy Analysis

for giving us the opportunity to work with the Department of Horticulture, Madhya Pradesh on

this project.

I am grateful to Shri Satyanand (IFS), Commissioner, Department of Horticulture and Food

Processing, Madhya Pradesh for providing us with the opportunity to work on this project.

I am very thankful to Dr. Vijay Agarwal, Deputy Director, Department of Horticulture, MP,

for mentoring and providing guidance during the course of the project. The opportunities and

experience garnered from them are priceless.

I extend my heartfelt thanks to Mr Gaurav Khare, Deputy Advisor (Governance), Atal Bihari

Vajpayee Institute of Good Governance and Policy Analysis for his guidance, inputs, insights

and foremost for selecting us for this internship. It has truly been a learning experience.

I also thank our institute DoMS, IIT Madras for giving us this internship opportunity.

The internship was a test of all that we learnt in the college, and for this we thank the faculty

members of Department of Management Studies- Indian Institute of Technology, Madras. The

knowledge I have gathered from them was of immense help.

3

Declaration

This is to certify that Aaron Christian, pursuing Masters in Business Administration

(MBA) from Department of Management Studies- Indian Institute of Technology,

Madras have successfully completed the project titled “Export Promotion of

Horticulture Crops in Madhya Pradesh” which was assigned by the Department of

Horticulture and Food Processing, Government of Madhya Pradesh.

I acknowledge that Aaron Christian, has worked under my guidance, during the course

of their internship and has submitted original work in this report.

Vijay Agarwal

Deputy Director

(Department of Horticulture

& Food processing)

4

Declaration

I, Aaron Christian, hereby declare that the project report titled “Export Promotion of

Horticulture Crops in Madhya Pradesh” is my original work. The contents of the project

report have not been published before and reflect the work done by us during our Summer

Internship from 16th May 2018 to 13th July 2018 with the Department of Horticulture and

Food processing, Government of Madhya Pradesh. The internship was under Atal Bihari

Vajpayee Institute of Good Governance and Policy Analysis.

Place: Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh Aaron Christian

Date: 13-7-18 DoMS, IIT Madras

5

Index

Topic Pg. No.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

-Overview of Horticulture 6

-Export Scenario 8

-Abstract, findings and challenges 10

Data Collection methodology 12

Approach of report 13

A- CROP ANALYSIS

1- Fruits

Guava 16

Orange 23

Banana 30

Mango 36

Pomegranate 43

Custard Apple 48

2- Vegetables

Onion 53

Potato 60

Tomato 68

Green Peas 76

Green Chilly 83

3- Spices

Garlic 90

Ginger 97

Coriander seeds 105

Red Chilly 113

PART B

Crop infrastructure analysis 118

Potential products 120

Organic agriculture analysis 121

MP Mandi Analysis 126

E-NAM Analysis 130

Post-Harvest Management 132

C- RECOMMENDATIONS 139

D- EXPORT STANDARDS FOR CROPS

1-Fruits 143

2-Vegetables 170

3-Spices 195

6

Executive Summary1

Madhya Pradesh, a state in Central India has an immense potential for exports

of Horticulture crops and can increase Indian horticulture crop exports to a

good extent.

Objective of study- The objective of this study is to select major horticulture

crops which can be exported from MP and analyse them in details regarding

production, arrivals, prices, import and exports and quality standards.

1- Overview of Horticulture

India is a major producer of Horticulture crops with many crops having

production in the top 3 countries in the world.

Yet our horticulture exports do not form a major part in the total Indian exports

and India is also not a major competitor to other countries in some crop

exports.

Horticulture Production- Share of each heads

Vegetable production in India has a significant share in Horticulture production

followed by fruits. For MP the same trend is seen. The only difference is that

MP has no production of Plantation Crops which include Arecanut, Cashewnut,

Cocoa, Coconut, etc. due to the unfavourable soil and climatic conditions.

The total production in 2016-17 for horticulture crops is 295164000 MT in

India and 23792510 MT in MP which is 8.06% of the Indian production.

This shows that MP has a huge potential for exports.

1 Source- Horticulture at a glance 2017

59%

32%

2%

1%6%

Share in Total Horticulture Production: 2016-17- India

Vegetables

Fruits

Spices

Flowers andAromaticPlantationcrops

69%

25%

3%

3%

0%

Share in Total Horticulture Production: 2016-17- MP

Vegetables

Fruits

Spices

Flowers andAromaticPlantationcrops

7

2- Production statistics

Production Trend- India

Production Trend- MP

The above graphs show the production of each group of crops trend over 3

years.

In India, every group of crops production in rising in the last 3 years.

For MP, production of vegetables and flowers & aromatic is rising but the

production of fruits and spices is decreasing. Factors creating this decreasing

trend should be sought and measures should be taken.

The total Horticulture produce from 2013-14 to 2015-16 in India has increased

by 3.09% and for MP it has increased by 13.18% which shows that the

production for MP is increasing rapidly as compared to India.

Vegetables Fruits SpicesFlowers and

AromaticPlantation

crops

2013-14 169478 86602 6108 3143 15575

2014-15 169064 90183 6988 3206 16658

2015-16 175008 92846 7077 3227 16867

020000400006000080000

100000120000140000160000180000200000

Pro

du

ctio

n-

'00

0 M

T

Year

Production Trend- India

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

Vegetables Fruits SpicesFlowers and

AromaticPlantation

crops

2013-14 14199 6119 699 624 0

2014-15 15568 5783 711 713 0

2015-16 16447 5937 691 718 0

02000400060008000

1000012000140001600018000

Pro

du

ctio

n-

'00

0 M

T

Year

Production Trend- MP

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

8

3- Export Scenario in India2

India is the 17th largest export economy in the world having exports worth

$261B in 2016. It also imported worth $339B creating a negative trade balance

of $78B in 2016. This export value has decreased by 3.1% from 2011 when the

exports were worth $274B.

The top exports included diamonds, refined petroleum, packaged medicaments,

jewellery and cars. Though India has a vast area and has high horticultural

produce, horticultural exports do not have a major share in Indian exports.

Top 10 importers from India-

Trade Balance of India

2 Source- https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/

0

10

20

30

40

50

Bill

ion

$

Top 10 importers from india- 2015

0

100

200

300

400

500

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

20

14

20

15

20

16

Bill

ion

$

Trade Balance

Export value Import value

9

Indian Exports-

4- Export scenario in MP

MP has a lot of surplus for many crops. This surplus can be used for exports

directly or can be processed and exported.

We have selected 15 crops who have a lot of export potential in MP and

analysed them.

The crops selected are-

Fruits Guava Orange Banana Pomegranate Mango Custard apple

Vegetables Tomato Onion Potato Green peas Chilly green

Spices Garlic Coriader seed Ginger Chilly red

10

Brief abstract of the report

After selecting 15 potential crops, we have divided each crop in 4 sections

namely Production analysis, Mandi analysis, Export Analysis, Standard

required for exports.

a- Production Analysis- Here we have analysed the area, production and

productivity statistics of each crop for MP and compared it with India. We have

also shown the key districts in MP for production of each crop.

b- Mandi Analysis- Mandis are markets where the crops come from the farm. We

have analysed the arrival and price trend for each crop for 5 years. We have

also mentioned the key districts, key mandis and key months for arrival of each

crop. We have focused on mandis as mandis can be established as a unit for

procurement for exports.

c- Export Analysis- The export analysis is a major part of our report and includes

the export potential of each crop. For this we have calculated the surplus of

each crop which can be used for exports for MP. We have also analysed the

data of Indian exports of that crop with other country and also compared it to

the world’s largest importers of that crop to check if India exports tothem or

not. We have also analysed the world export, import, re-export and re-import

data for each crop too.

d- Standard required for exports- This section includes the standards required

for each crop for exporting. These standards include quality, size, tolerance,

presentation, marking, labelling, nature of produce, contaminants and hygiene

for each crop.

Key Findings-

India is a huge producer of Horticulture crops and ranks in the top 3 countries

in many crops.

India has a lot of production but the exports as compared to production is low.

The productivity in India and MP has been increasing due to enhanced

technology.

MP also ranks in the top 5 states for many horticulture crops in India.

MP has also increased production of many crops by a huge margin in 5 years

from 2012 to 2017.

The arrivals in Mandis are very low for most of the horticulture crops. They

may even be less than 15% of the production. Horticulture produce is not

regulated as compared to agriculture and so it is not necessary to sell it via

mandis. So most of these crops are sold unregulated outside the mandis directly

to customers, private and unregulated markets, exporters, food processing

units, etc.

11

There is a lot of surplus for these 15 crops in MP. Some crop’s surplus is even

more than the total Indian exports for that crop.

A crop can be exported in its raw form or can be processed and exported. The

processed crop fetches a very high value too.

Eg-

This shows that processing can be very profitable. The demand also exists a lot

and tapping the right markets would be very beneficial.

All countries pay different prices for the same product. Sometimes the

difference is large too. Eg- Onions have an import price ranging from 12 rs/kg

to 47 rs/kg.

Indian crops have less exports because they do not meet the quality standards

set and improving them is necessary in India.

Key Challenges for exports-

There is a lot of post-harvest losses in India for many crops which reduces

surplus.

The productivity in India is very less than the top countries in terms of

productivity.

The arrivals in mandis are very low for horticulture crops and so there is less of

an organised flow of crops.

The quality of the crop is less in India and for some crops less than 20%

produce meets the quality set for exports. Crops do not meet the global

standards.

The surplus is huge but the export markets are not tapped properly.

There is a huge potential for processing too but it has not been utilized at its

potential in MP and India.

We have given our recommendations at the end of this report after

analysing each crop.

Orange prices in 2017 Price(Rs./Kg)

Mandi price in MP- Median 8

Export price of fresh/dry oranges 22

Export price of orange squash 96

Export price of orange oil 1089

12

Data Collection Methodology

The data has been collected through primary and secondary sources.

1- For primary data, we have collected data from-

Deputy Director, Department of Horticulture

District assistant directors of horticulture, Madhya Pradesh

Mandi board Managing Director of Madhya Pradesh

Deputy director- E-Nam, Madhya Pradesh

And mandi secretaries, Madhya Pradesh

2- For secondary data, we have collected major data from various governmental

and institutional resources. They include

Indian government agriculture sites

MP government agriculture and horticulture sites

National sample survey organisation- Report on Household consumption of various

goods and services in India

Indian council of Agricultural research- Central institute of post-harvest engineering

and technology- Report on post-harvest losses.

World trade Organisation

Food and Agriculture Organisation

Organisation of Economic cooperation and Development

UN comtrade

Ministry of Commerce and Industry- Department of Commerce

13

Approach of Analysis

After collection of data, firstly we have selected the 15 crops to be analyzed based on

different factors which included MP’s rank in Indian production, current surplus in

MP, future production and surplus in MP, current export scenario from India and the

future export potential for each crop.

We analysed the production statistics data first by comparing area, production and

productivity data of MP with India’s data.

For mandi analysis, we have analysed mandi’s arrival data for 5 years, price trend for

5 years, wholesale price trend for 2017 and found out the key mandis for each crop.

For export analysis, we first found out the production and surplus of each crop till

2021.

Production was based on forecasting and we have forecasted each crops production by

Average annual growth rate, compounded annual growth rate, linear forecasting,

exponential forecasting, logarithmic forecasting, polynomial forecasting and power

forecasting. The most appropriate values for each crop from these methods was

selected for use based on the accuracy and r2 value.

We then found out the consumption data of each crop for MP from the report of

National Sample Survey organisation study where the data given is in per capita terms

and we multiplied it with the population of MP. The population of MP was taken as

per the CAGR between 2001 and 2011 and used it for finding the population till 2021.

Rural and Urban population were taken into consideration.

Post-harvest losses were found out from the report titled Harvest and Post-harvest

losses of major crops and livestock produce by Indian council of agricultural research-

Central institute of post-harvest engineering and technology.

The surplus was then found out by subtracting the production from the post-harvest

losses and consumption.

We also found out the top countries who import these crops from India and the total

volume and value of these imports and compared it with our surplus.

The top importing, exporting, re-importing and re-exporting countries in the world for

these crops were also found and analysed.

The quality standards required for exporting for each crop were found out from WTO

and FAO.

Assumptions

The median prices were found to be a more accurate measure than the average and

mode value for analysing the price trend of 5 years in mandis and so we have used the

median value.

We had the data for post-harvest losses for majority of the crops but for those that we

did not have we have assumed it by taking value from similar type of crops.

From the surplus we have assumed that only 35% of the surplus can be used for

exports as the other part of surplus won’t be able to match the quality standards for

exports.

The exports are assumed to increase 10% per year till 2021.

14

Limitations of the data-

Data for production of MP from Indian agricultural sites differed from the data which

MP government has with them.

The mandi data was unavailable sometimes.

The global export data for mango and guava is combined and not available for mango

specifically or guava specially.

We could not find the export data for a few crops and hence we could not analyse it.

Standard for coriander for exports is unavailable.

Sanitary and phyto-sanitary requirements for each crop are unavailable and we could

not mention them.

Note- The references for the first crop are given in that crop itself and for the others

they are not given as the source is same as the first crop. The references are given in

guava, garlic and onion.

Abbreviations-

MP- Madhya Pradesh

CAGR- Compound Annual Growth Rate

AAGR- Annual Average Growth Rate

Ha- Hectares

MT- Metric Tonnes

PHM- Post- harvest management

15

FRUITS

16

GUAVA

Indian Rank in Guava Production in the world- 1st

MP’s Rank in India in Production- 2nd

A- Production Analysis3

Production statistics of Guava-

Year Region Area ('000 Ha) Production ('000 MT)

2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 21.28 801.22

India 214.32 2397.28

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 23.2 371.26

India 268.22 3667.89

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 22.28 394.73

India 246.24 3993.5

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 27.58 482.67

India 254.87 4047.79

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 32.55923 624.6543

India 260 3826

2012-17 Total Madhya Pradesh 126.899 2674.53

India 1243.65 17932.5

3 Sources- Horticulture at a glance 2017 and Data taken from MP government

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

MP 16.00 17.72 17.50 19.19

India 13.67 16.22 15.88 14.72

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year

Productivity (MT/Ha)

MP India

17

Production Insights-

1. India is a major producer for guava and MP has a significant share in India’s

production with a whole belt of districts producing Guava.

2. Guava production in MP is around 15% of the Indian production.

3. The area of production in MP has increased by 53% in last 5 years while for

India it has increased by 21.31%.

4. The production for MP has increased by 68.25% in the last 4 years while for

India it has increased by 4.31%. (We have ignored production value for 2012-

13 as we feel it is an outlier and it may be a reporting error.)

5. The productivity of India and MP is almost stable in the last 5 years with MP’s

productivity being a bit higher than the Indian productivity. This may be due to

the favourable climatic situations in MP for Guava.

B- Mandi Analysis4

Arrival trend of Guava in MP-

Year Arrival in MP (MT) Production (MT) Ratio of Arrival over

Production (%)

2013 36.9 801220 0.46%

2014 120.19 371263 3.24%

2015 300.79 394731 7.62%

2016 298.78 482674.8 6.19%

2017 199.5 624654.3 3.19%

Total 956.16 2674543.1 3.58%

Price Trend

4 http://agmarknet.gov.in/

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 675 1000 800 1000 800

Modal 675 1100 860 1200 1000

Maximum 675 1200 1000 1500 1000

0

500

1000

1500

2000

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year

Mandi Price Trend- Median prices (Rs./Quintal)

Minimum Modal Maximum

18

2017 Price Trend- Wholesale Monthly Prices

Key Districts and Mandis in MP

Districts Mandis Arrival %

Bhopal Bhopal 68.02%

Sheopur Syopurkalan 13.18%

Mandi Insights 1. Mandis in MP have negligible arrival % for Guava. The arrivals are just 3-4% of the

production.

2. The production is increasing yet the arrivals are not increasing much.

3. Guava does not reach the Mandis as majority of it is sold outside Mandis directly to

customers, private markets, exporters, food processing units, etc.

4. The price fluctuations in Mandis are less in MP in the last 5 years as arrivals are

nearly same.

5. The key mandis for Guava in MP are Bhopal mandi in Bhopal district and

Sheopurkalan Mandi in Sheopur district and they constitute more than 81% of the

total arrivals in MP.

6. The 2017 price tend graph shows seasonality factor in prices. Guava majorly arrives

in 4 months from November to February and the prices in November and December

are a bit higher than in January and February.

7. Only 7-8 Mandis have guava arrivals in MP in the last 5 years which is a very low

number.

The key months for arrivals of guava in MP are November, December,

January, February and March.

1200 1200

864.36 864.36

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Jan Feb Nov Dec

Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Monthly Prices Trend- Guava- Rs./Quintal- 2017

19

C- Exports Forecasted Surplus of Guava in MP (in MT)

Year Production Production after

PHL Consumption Surplus

2017-18 631451.8899 531177.3298 114341.4862 416835.8

2018-19 638323.5035 536957.7311 116478.8716 420478.9

2019-20 645269.8956 542801.0362 118656.2111 424144.8

2020-21 652291.88 548707.9295 120874.2517 427833.7

We have forecasted the surplus of MP for the next 4 years as per the method given in

methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 16.5 Lac MT for Guavas in MP which

can be used for processing and exporting till 2021.

Indian Exports of Guava5

Year Product Value (Rs.

Lacs) Qty (MT)

Avg Value-

Rs per kg

2016-17 Guava

4,219.59 8851.82 47.66

2017-18 5,547.74 11813.02 46.96

2016-17 Guava Fresh/Dry

610.79 1408.16 43.37

2017-18 553.26 1226.59 45.10

2016-17 Guava Preserved/

Prepared

14.43 15.73 91.73

2017-18 82.58 178.18 46.34

Insights 1. The average price for exported Guava is 400% more on average than the modal price

available in Mandis. This means that there is huge profit for exports.

2. Guava is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP can take

advantage of it by encouraging SME’s and processing units.

3. Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Guava.

Guava export potential in MP-

Year MP Surplus- 35%

MT

Exports forecast

MT MP Surplus over Indian exports MT

2017-18 145892.53 11813.02 1235.01%

2018-19 147167.61 12994.32 1132.55%

2019-20 148450.68 14293.75 1038.57%

2020-21 149741.79 15723.12 952.37%

If we assume only 35% of the surplus is used for exports, yet the surplus is much

more than all Indian guava exports.

5 http://commerce-app.gov.in/eidb/Default.asp

20

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Guava exports and can highly

increase Indian exports too by tapping the right markets and improving fruit

quality.

Top 10 importing Nations of Guava from India-6

Country

Values in Rs. Lacs Quantity MT

Value per

kg 2017-18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

INDONESIA 1886.52 1736.35 31.30% 4095.4 2929.95 24.80% 59.26210345

SUDAN 44.29 879.88 15.86% 103 2650 22.43% 33.20301887

SAUDI ARAB 331.72 652.15 11.76% 961.42 2002.64 16.95% 32.56451484

NETHERLAND 353.74 530.3 9.56% 670.28 891.48 7.55% 59.4853502

TANZANIA

REP 63.41 140.77 2.54% 177 417 3.53%

33.75779376

U ARAB EMTS 147.47 166.82 3.01% 293.66 358.33 3.03% 46.55485167

TAIWAN 1.01 108.8 1.96% 1.6 264.98 2.24% 41.05970262

U K 348 153.02 2.76% 549.6 234.1 1.98% 65.36522853

KUWAIT 91.56 112.44 2.03% 181.8 213.65 1.81% 52.62813012

JAPAN 46.47 125.37 2.26% 86 211.6 1.79% 59.24858223

Total 4219.59 5547.74 100.00% 8851.82 11813.02 100.00% 46.96292735

Insights

1- Almost 60% of guava in terms of value is being exported in just 3 countries in the

Middle East & South East Asia at prices almost as good as EU and US, hence we can

prioritize these countries as our major Export partners for guava.

2- Nepal imports 28% of fresh and dry guava which in turn means that we can

exclusively meet their demand as it would be transported through land. Our major

competitor would be Uttar Pradesh as it has the advantage of proximity.

3- UK, Japan, US, Indonesia, UAE, Qatar are high paying countries hence we can try

and increase our export contribution to these countries.

4- Guava net exports has dropped by 12.9% in 2017-18 from 2016-17 which means we

need to find the cause of this slump in demand for Indian guava and rectify it.

5- New markets should be explored to keep demand and prices stable so that it doesn’t

shock local market with excess supply.


21

Top 5 exporting nations of Guava in the world- (Competitors)- (2017

Data)-7

1- Total exports in 2017- 1342766029 Kg

2- Total Export Value in 2017- 1633447697 US $

Top 5 importing nations of Guava in the world (2017 Data)-

1- Total imports in 2017- 869321351 KG

2- Total import Value in 2017- 1812311903 US $

Insights- 1- India leads Guava production in the world yet it is ranked 4th in world exports having

just 9% of the total world exports.

2- India has the lowest per Kg export value in the top 5 exporters which may create more

demand. This value is lower than the global average too.

3- The top 3 importing countries US, Germany and UK have nearly 55% of the total

imports. India has negligible share of this in US and Germany and it has a very low

share in UK. If these markets are tapped, exports can rise significantly.

7 https://comtrade.un.org/data/ https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/visualize/tree_map/hs92/import/show/all/080450/2016/

28%

12%12%9%

5%

34%

Contribution to total global exports of Guava

Mexico

Brazil

Peru

India

Spain

Others

134

79 77 74 68 63

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Spain Globalaverage

Peru Brazil Mexico India

Per Kg export value of Guava in Rs.

36%

11%9%6%

5%

33%

Contribution to total global imports of Guava

USA

Germany

United Kingdom

Canada

Spain

Others

164152

136 131 124106

020406080

100120140160180

Per Kg import value of Guava in Rs.

https://comtrade.un.org/data/

https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/visualize/tree_map/hs92/import/show/all/080450/2016/

22

4- Also the import price in these countries is more than 2 times which can be a huge

benefit for exports in India.

Top 3 Re-exporting nations of Guava in the world (2017 Data)-8

Country % of Total Re-exports Re-export Value- Rs./Kg

USA 46.75% 95.91

China, Hong Kong, SAR 46.61% 98.4

Cananda 6.44% 104.7

1- Total re-exports in 2017- 34064344 KG

2- Total re-export Value in 2017- 54105649 US $

3- Per KG average re-export value in Rs.- 103.24

Top 3 Re-importing nations of Guava in the world (2017 Data)-

Country % of Total Re-imports Re-import Value- Rs./Kg

Australia 35.55% 319.97

Egypt 31.96% 164.11

Slovakia 29.57% 267.94

1- Total re-imports in 2017- 11815 KG

2- Total re-import Value in 2017- 41536 US $

3- Per KG average re-import value in Rs.- 228.51

Insights-

1- USA and China, Hong Kong are the largest re-exporters with 92% of the total re-

exports. They import a lot, process it and re-export orange products.

2- Australia, Egypt and Slovakia are major re-importers with a high share in exports.

3- Also the price gaps are huge between export prices, import price, re-export price and

re-import price of the global average.

Limitation- The world exports data available is a combination of mango, guava and

mangosteen. So the analysis may have some amount of error.

8 https://comtrade.un.org/data/ https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/visualize/tree_map/hs92/import/show/all/080450/2016/

https://comtrade.un.org/data/

https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/visualize/tree_map/hs92/import/show/all/080450/2016/

23

ORANGE

Indian Rank in Orange Production in the world- 3rd

MP’s Rank in India in production-

Mandarin- 1th, Sweet Orange- 4th, Lime/Lemon- 5th

A. Production Analysis

Production statistics of Orange-


2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 49.52 844.36

India 323.15 3519.91

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 26.05 277.44

India 334.94 3886.20

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 93.82 1116.20

India 274.68 4228.99

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 108.54 1395

India 349.26 4819.66

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 118.69 1612.15

India 298.38 4639.09


India 1580.41 21093.84

Sweet Orange (2012-2017) - Area: 93.33 Thousand Ha & Production- 1383.62 Thousand MT

Lime/Lemon (2012-2017) - Area: 71.32 Thousand Ha & Production- 1070.72 Thousand MT

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

MP 17.05 10.65 11.9 12.85 13.58

India 10.89 11.6 15.4 13.8 15.55

0

5

10

15

20

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year


MP India

24

Production Insights- 1- India ranks third in Orange production after Brazil and China.

2- MP has a very good share in the Indian production with high production of Kinnow

and Mandarin oranges.

3- MP also has good production of Sweet oranges and Lime/Lemon but we have majorly

worked on Oranges in this report.

4- Orange production in MP is around 20-30% of the Indian production which is huge.

5- Even though the area of production in India has decreased by 7.67% in the last 5

years, MP has increased its area of production by 139.68% in the last 5 years.

6- The production for MP has increased by 90.93% in the last 5 years while for India it

has increased by 31.80%. The increase in MP as compared to India is more due to the

increase in area.

7- The productivity of India and MP is increasing in the last 4 years with MP’s

productivity being a bit lower than the Indian productivity.

B- Mandi Analysis Arrival trend of Orange in MP-


Production (%)

2013 3284 844358 1.08%

2014 2617 277435 0.94%

2015 6878 1116201 0.62%

2016 3093 1395002 0.22%

2017 9082 1612146 0.56%

Total 24955 5245142 0.48%

Price Trend- Orange

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 800 800 600 800 600

Modal 1000 1000 800 900 800

Maximum 1140 1050 1000 1000 1000

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year

Mandi Price Trend-Median prices (Rs./Quintal)


25

2017 Price Trend- Wholesale Monthly Prices


Key Districts Key Mandis Mandi Rank

Gwalior Lashkar 62.67%


Mandi Insights 1- Mandis in MP have a very low arrival % for Orange. The arrivals are less than 1% of

the production.

2- The production is increasing yet the arrivals are not changing much in MP.

3- 99% of the oranges do not reach the Mandis as majority of it is sold outside Mandis

directly to customers, private markets, exporters, food processing units, etc.

4- The prices are almost stable in the last 5 years.

5- The 2017 price trend graph depicts the seasonality factor in price fluctuations. We see

that the prices are least in May and June and the highest in November, December and

January.

6- The key mandis for Oranges in MP are Lashkar mandi in Gwalior district and Bhopal

mandi in Bhopal district. They constitute more than 80% of the total arrivals in MP.

7- Only 13-15 Mandis have orange arrivals in MP in the last 5 years which is a very low

number.

Key months for arrivals of Orange are November, December, January,

February, March and April with peak in March and April.

1147

879 832 793

537 500643 643

785 785

1413

884

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Monthly Prices Trend- Orange-Rs./Quintal- 2017

26

C. Exports

Forecasted Surplus of Oranges in MP (in MT)



2017-18 1688583 1524959 47598 1477361

2018-19 1788513 1615206 48488 1566719

2019-20 1873003 1691509 49394 1642115

2020-21 1946191 1757606 50317 1707289


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 63.5 Lac MT for Oranges in MP which


Indian Exports of Oranges

Year Product Value (Rs. Lacs) Qty (MT) Avg Value

per kg

2016-17 Orange Fresh/Dry

11,732.53 48091.43 24.40

2017-18 3485.35 15780.36 22.09

2016-17 Orange preserved

5.58 19.1 29.21

2017-18 68.51 38.94 175.94

2016-17 Onion Squash

36.44 26.92 135.36

2017-18 70.42 73.13 96.29

2016-17 Orange oil

167.05 17.8 938.48

2017-18 308.98 28.36 1089.49

Insights

1- The average price for exported Oranges is around 3 times the modal price in

Mandis. This means that there is huge profit for exports.

2- Oranges can be exported in many forms. We see that just making orange

squash, the export price shoots up from 24 to 135 rs and by making oil, it is

sold at around 1000 rs. This is a very good opportunity for Food processing

units in MP.

3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Orange.

Orange export potential in MP-

Year MP Surplus- 35% MT Exports forecast


2017-18 517076 31936 1619%

2018-19 548351 35129 1561%

2019-20 574740 38642 1487%

2020-21 597551 42507 1406%

27

If we assume only 35% of the surplus is used for exports, the surplus has a greater

share than all Indian orange exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in orange exports and can highly

increase Indian exports too by tapping the right markets and improving fruit

quality.

Top 10 importing Nations of Fresh/Dry Oranges from India-

Country


Value per

kg 2017-

18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

Bangladesh 8785.87 1615.99 46.37% 35429.86 7236.11 45.86% 23

Nepal 2069.85 1413.88 40.57% 10473.26 7645.67 48.46% 18

UAE 258.85 205.66 5.87% 536.91 469.01 2.97% 43

Qatar 41.47 71.26 2.04% 51.33 147.71 0.94% 48

Oman 49.22 67.82 1.95% 92.56 128 0.81% 53

Kuwait 10.94 35.49 1.02% 12.82 59.73 0.38% 39

Saudi Arabia 11.53 25.41 0.73% 27 64.96 0.41% 124

Uk NR 22.79 0.65% NR 18.45 0.12% 80

Singapore 4.17 3.7 0.11% 6 4.65 0.03% 11

Bhutan 5.94 0.34 0.01% 22.5 2.98 0.02% 22

Total top 10 11237.84 3461.34 99.31% 46652.24 15777.27 99.99%

Total 11732.53 3485.35 100% 48091.43 15778.88 100% 22

Insights

1- Almost 85% of oranges in terms of value is being exported just in 2 countries in

Bangladesh and Nepal, hence we can prioritize these countries as our major Export

partners for oranges.

2- Also we can exclusively meet their demand as it would be transported through land

and transportation would be cheap.

3- Saudi Arabia and UK are high paying countries hence we can try and increase our

export contribution to these countries which is currently low.

4- UAE, Qatar and Oman also pay a good price and we export around 9% to them which

we can focus on increasing.

5- Orange net exports dropped a lot in 2017-18 and which means that we need to find the

cause of this slump in demand for Indian oranges and rectify it.



Top nations to target for export of Orange Squash- Saudi Arabia, Somalia,

Iran, Costa Rica and Nepal

Top nations to target for export of Orange oil- Singapore, Indonesia,

Egypt, China, UAE and Sri Lanka

28

Top 5 exporting nations of Oranges in the world- (Competitors)-

(2017 Data)-



Top 5 importing nations of Oranges in the world (2017 Data)-



Insights- 1- India’s orange production is at 3rd in the world yet it is has no place in the top 5 world

exporting nations.

2- India has very low per Kg export value than the top 5 exporters which may create

more demand. This value is half the global average too.

3- The top 3 importing countries are Germany, Hong Kong and Russia but India has a

negligible share in these countries. Tapping these markets along with Korea who

import highly and pay a good price too will be beneficial for India.

27.1%

19.8%

9.9%

11.2%

3.2%

28.9%

Contribution to total global exports of Orange in the world

Spain

South Africa

USA

Egypt

Australia

Others

72 70

54 52 4842

01020304050607080

Per Kg export value of Orange in Rs.

10.3%

7.3%

9.8%

6.6%

3.2%

62.8%

Contribution to total global imports of Orange in the world

Germany

China, HongKong SARRussianFederationUnitedKingdomRep. of Korea

Others

102

6856 55 53

41

020406080

100120

Per Kg import value of Orange in Rs.

29

Top 3 Re-exporting nations of oranges in the world (2017 Data)-


China, Hong Kong 98.5% 57.68



3- Per KG average re-export value in Rs.- 58

Top 3 Re-importing nations of oranges in the world (2017 Data)-


South Africa 96.8% 38.03




Insights-

1- China, Hong Kong are the largest re-exporter with 98.5% of the total re-

exports. They import a lot, process it and re-export orange products.

2- South Africa is a major re-importer with a high share in exports. South Africa

exports at Rs. 42 and re-imports at Rs. 38 which is a good margin for

them.

30

BANANA

Indian Rank in Banana Production in the world- 1st

MP’s Rank in India in production- 7th

A- Production Analysis

Production statistics of Banana-


2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 25.76 1701.35

India 750.24 24808.09

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 21.09 1304.25

India 802.57 29724.55

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 19.13 1225.45

India 821.8 29221.47

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 22.63 1535.83

India 841.19 29134.82

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 26.97 1873.67

India 860 30477


India 4075.79 143365.94

66.0561.85 64.07 67.86 69.47

33.0737.04 35.56 34.64 35.44

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year


MP India

31


1- India ranks first in Banana production and MP has a low yet important share in

production.

2- Banana production in MP is around 4-5% of the Indian production.

3- The area of production in MP has increased by 4.71% in last 5 years while for India it

has increased by 14.63%. MP could not increase much area as the Indian average.


has increased by 22.85%. The increase in MP as compared to India is less due to less

increase in area.

5- The productivity of India and MP is almost stable in the last 5 years with MP’s

productivity being almost double of the Indian productivity. This may be due to the

favourable climatic situations in MP for Banana.

B- Mandi Analysis

Arrival trend of Banana in MP-


Production (%)

2013 225723 1701346 15.33%

2014 222672 1304252 17.07%

2015 356215 1225446 29.07%

2016 340082 1535834 22.14%

2017 260781 1873669 13.92%

Total 1179752 7640547 15.44%

Price Trend

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 535.27465 608.3281 549.55545 722.46955 811.18725

Modal 811.97975 1084.3515 874.64505 1186.5885 1277.1725

Maximum 670.5649 858.95205 725.1189 961.9716 1040.7895

0200400600800

100012001400

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year

Mandi price trend- Median prices (Rs./Quintal)


32

2017 price trend- Wholesale prices

Key Districts and Mandis in MP for Bananas


Burhanpur Burhanpur 96.24%

Mandi Insights

1- Mandis in MP have a higher arrival % for Banana as compared to other horticulture

crops. The arrivals are 15-20% of the production.

2- The production is not increasing much and the arrivals are pretty stable in MP.

3- 80% of the bananas do not reach the Mandis as majority of it is sold outside Mandis


4- The prices in Mandis are increasing in MP in the last 5 years at a constant rate.

5- The only key mandi for Banana in MP is Burhanpur mandi in Burhanpur disrict and it

constitutes more than 96% of the total arrivals in MP.

6- Only 8-9 Mandis have banana arrivals in MP in the last 5 years which is a very low

number.

Banana have arrivals all across the year with more arrivals in May, June,

July, august, September and October.

C. Exports

Forecasted Surplus of Banana in MP (in MT)



2017-18 1952995 1801442 407079 1394364

2018-19 2136622 1970820 414688 1556132

2019-20 2320249 2140198 422440 1717758

2020-21 2503876 2309575 430336 1879238


methodology.

1538 1538

1247

897

1053 10531186 1186

971907 909 865

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800


Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Monthly Prices Trend- Banana- Rs./Quintal- 2017

33

As we can see there is a high surplus above 6.5 Lac MT for Bananas in MP

which can be used for processing and exporting till 2021.

Indian Exports of Banana


Lacs) Qty (MT)

Avg Value-

Rs per kg

2016-17 Banana- Fresh

and Dry

39820 112693 35.33

2017-18 35539 102112 34.8

Insights 1- The average price for exported Banana is 3 times the modal price in Mandis. This

means that there is huge profit for exports.

2- Banana is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP can take


3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Banana.

Banana export potential in MP-

Year MP Surplus- 35% MT Exports forecast MT MP Surplus over Indian exports MT

2017-18 488027 102112 478%

2018-19 544646 112324 485%

2019-20 601215 123556 487%

2020-21 657733 135911 483.94%

If we assume only 35% of the surplus is used for exports, yet the surplus is

much more than all Indian banana exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Banana exports and can

highly increase Indian exports too by tapping the right markets and

improving fruit quality.

Top 10 importing Nations of Banana from India-

Country


Value per

kg 2017-18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

UAE 11920 9155 25.76% 24413 19082 18.69% 47.97

Oman 4618 6283 17.68% 12933 18159 17.78% 34.60

Iran 5512 4939 13.9% 15816 14095 13.8% 35.04

Saudi Arabia 5285 3827 10.77% 10481 7946 7.78% 48.16

Kuwait 4308 2657 7.48% 10460 6133 6.01% 43.32

Qatar 2246 2319 6.53% 3757 4602 4.51% 50.39

Nepal 2767 2048 5.76% 28837 21263 21.18% 9.47

34

Iraq 189.4 NR -- 593 4985 4.88% --

Bahrain 1306 928 2.61% 2608 2069 2.03% 44.87

Maldives 467 601 1.69% 1504 1708 1.67% 35.2

Total top 10 38619 32756 92.17% 111403 100402 98.33% 32.63

Total 39820 35539 100% 112639 102112 100% 34.8

Insights

1- Almost 65% of banana in terms of value is being exported just in 4 countries in the

Middle East & South East Asia, hence we can prioritize these countries as our major

Export partners for Banana.

2- Nepal imports 5.76% of fresh and dry banana which in turn means that we can

exclusively meet their demand as it would be transported through land and

transportation would be cheap.

3- Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain are high paying countries hence we can try

and increase our export contribution to these countries.

4- Banana net exports has dropped by 10.75% in 2017-18 from 2016-17 which means

we need to find the cause of this slump in demand for Indian banana and rectify it.



Top 5 exporting nations of Banana in the world- (Competitors)-

(2017 Data)-



Top 5 importing nations of Banana in the world (2017 Data)-

38.6%

14.3%13.3%

5.6%

4.0%

24.1%

Contribution to total global exports of Banana in the world

Ecuador

Philippines

Belgium

USA

Germany

Others

6052

47

33 3025

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Per Kg export value of Banana in Rs.

35



Insights- 1- India leads the Banana production in the world yet it has no place in the top 10

countries who export Banana.

2- India’s per Kg export value is 34.8 on average which is lower than the top 3 exporting

countries but is higher than the global average which may cause lesser demand.

3- The top 3 importing countries US, Belgium and Russia have nearly 75% of the total

imports. India has negligible share in these countries and if these markets are tapped,

exports can rise significantly.

4- Also the import price in these countries is higher than the Indian export price which

can be a huge benefit for exports in India.

Top Re-exporting nation of Banana in the world (2017 Data)-


USA 99.28% 45.26




Top 3 Re-importing nations of Banana in the world (2017 Data)-


Cananda 85.75% 64.91

Indonesia 8.46% 65

Slovakia 5.73% 264.22




Insights-

1- USA tops the world in imports of Banana at 63 Rs./Kg and also tops in re-exporting them at

45.26 Rs./Kg. Almost all re-exports of Banana in the world is done by USA.

2- Canada is a major re-importer of Banana but it has a low share in Banana exports.

22.0%

11.1%

9.1%

8.1%6.8%

43.0%

Contribution to total global imports of Banana in the world

USA

Belgium

RussianFederationGermany

Japan

Others

6356

49 48 48 47

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Per Kg import value of Banana in Rs.

36

MANGO

Indian Rank in Mango Production in the world- 1st



Production statistics of Mango-


2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 25.18 375.59

India 2474.84 17626.38

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 31.07 362.23

India 2515.97 18431.33

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 30.64 410.48

India 2163.47 18526.98

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 38.75 504.90

India 2208.56 18642.53

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 43.61 588.51

India 2212 19506


India 11574.83 92733.23

14.9

11.713.4 13.0 13.5

7.1 7.38.6 8.4 8.8

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year


MP India

37

Production Insights- 1- India ranks first in Mango production in the world but MP has a low share in Indian

production.

2- Mango production in MP is just around 2% of the Indian production.

3- Even though the area of production in India has decreased by 10.62% in the last 5

years, MP has increased its area of production by 73.17% in the last 5 years.



increase in area.


productivity being higher than the Indian productivity. This may be due to the

favourable climatic situations in MP for Mango.

B. Mandi Analysis

Arrival trend of Mango in MP-


Production (%)

2013 4163 375592 1.11%

2014 17103 362228 4.72%

2015 33357 410483 8.13%

2016 23715 504895 4.7%

2017 24968 588515 4.24%

Total 103304 2241713 4.61%

Price Trend- Mango

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 1000 1000 1000 1520 1200

Modal 1429 1500 1200 2000 1737

Maximum 2000 2050 1500 2500 2500

0500

10001500200025003000

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year



38

2017 Price Trend- Wholesale Prices




Indore Indore 15.19%

Alirajpur Alirajpur 8.15%

Mandi Insights 1- Mandis in MP have a low arrival % for Mango. The arrivals are 4-8% of the

production.

2- The production is increasing yet the arrivals are decreasing in MP.

3- 90% of the mangoes do not reach the Mandis as majority of it is sold outside Mandis


4- The prices in Mandis are correlated to the arrivals. The prices were low when the

arrivals were the high and vice-versa.

5- The key mandis for Mangoes in MP are Bhopal mandi in Bhopal district, Indore

mandi in Indore district and Alirajpur Mandi in Alirajpur district. They constitute

more than 97% of the total arrivals in MP.

6- Only 10-11 Mandis have mango arrivals in MP in the last 5 years which is a very low

number.

Key months for arrivals of Mango are April, May and June.

3894.43 3894.43

2833.83

2238.42

1252.32 1213.85

1813.09

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Monthly Prices Trend- Mango- Rs./Quintal-2017

39

C. Exports

Forecasted Surplus of Mango in MP

Year Production Production after PHL Consumption Surplus

2017-18 618876 540278 138377 401902

2018-19 675689 589876 140963 448913

2019-20 732502 639474 143598 495876

2020-21 789315 689071 146283 542789


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 18 Lac MT for Mangoes in MP which


Indian Exports of Mango


per kg

2016-17 Mango Pulp

84601.78 130886.1 64.64

2017-18 67392.13 110923.7 60.76

2016-17 Mango Fresh

44366 52760.99 84.09

2017-18 38234 49180.46 77.74

2016-17 Mango Squash

7480.12 11832.01 63.22

2017-18 4512.37 7005.88 64.41

Insights 1- The average price for exported Mango is around 3-4 times the modal price in Mandis.

This means that there is huge profit for exports.

2- MP mango exports are low as the varieties grown here are not much in demand in the

world.

3- Mango pulp is highly exported more than fresh mangoes, so processing units for

Mango pulp should be encouraged too as many Mango drink companies buy it in

bulk.

4- Mango is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP can take


5- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Mango.

Mango export potential in MP-



2017-18 140666 160104 87.86%

2018-19 157119 176115 89.21%

2019-20 173557 193726 89.59%

2020-21 189976 213099 89.15%

40

If we assume only 35% of the surplus is used for exports, the surplus has a

great share in all Indian mango exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in mango exports and can



Top 10 importing Nations of Mango from India (Mango Pulp)-

Country


Value per

kg 2017-18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

Saudi Arabia 18350 13611 20.20% 32437 26759 24.12% 51

Yemen 8421 7237 10.74% 16670 15461 13.94% 47

Netherland 9414 7124 10.57% 13404 10986 9.90% 65

UK 6906 5687 8.43% 8985 7383 6.66% 77

Kuwait 4912 4197 6.23% 8364 7985 7.20% 53

USA 4502 4109 6.10% 5040 4731 4.26% 87

UAE 4954 2444 3.63% 8130 4270 3.85% 57

China 2064 2396 3.55% 2781 3187 2.87% 75

Germany 2473 2099 3.12% 2681 2264 2.04% 93

Sudan 1804 2060 3.06% 3216 4052 3.65% 51

Total top 10 63801 50956 75.61% 101708 87076 78.50% 59

Total 84602 67392 100% 130886 110924 100% 61

Insights

1- Almost 50% of mango pulp in terms of value is being exported just in 4 countries in

the Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Netherland and UK, hence we can prioritize these countries

as our major Export partners for mango pulp. Also UK pays a very high price for

mango pulp which is a benefit to us.

2- China imports around 4% of mango pulp which in turn means that we can exclusively

meet their demand as it would be transported through land and transportation would

be cheap. Also China pays a good price for mango pulp.

3- Germany, USA, UK and China are high paying countries hence we can try and

increase our export contribution to these countries.

4- Mango net exports has dropped by 20.30% in 2017-18 from 2016-17 which means we

need to find the cause of this slump in demand for Indian mangoes and rectify it.



41

Top 10 importing Nations of Mango from India (Mangoes Fresh)-

Country


Value per

kg 2017-18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

UAE 24745 18458 48.28% 28483 23543 47.87% 78

UK 4957 4798 12.55% 3031 3729 7.58% 129

Saudi Arab 2446 2199 5.75% 2372 2671 5.43% 82

Qatar 2147 1981 5.18% 2254 2322 4.72% 85

USA 1549 1773 4.64% 616 801 1.63% 221

Kuwait 1911 1631 4.27% 1100 1300 2.64% 125

Oman 823 1588 4.15% 898 2231 4.54% 71

Nepal 1604 1512 3.95% 9415 7878 16.02% 19

Bahrain 979 908 2.37% 1086 1288 2.62% 70

Singapore 878 819 2.14% 841 841 1.71% 97

Total top 10 42037 35667 93.29% 50096 46602 94.76% 77

Total 44366 38234 100.00% 52761 49181 100.00% 78

Insights

1- Almost 60% of fresh mangoes in terms of value is being exported just in 2 countries in

the UAE and UK, hence we can prioritize these countries as our major Export partners for

fresh mangoes. Also UK pays a very high price for fresh mangoes which is a benefit to

us.

2- Nepal imports around 4% of fresh mangoes which in turn means that we can exclusively

meet their demand as it would be transported through land and transportation would be

cheap.

3- USA, UK and Kuwait are high paying countries hence we can try and increase our export

contribution to these countries.

4- Mango net exports has dropped by 13.82% in 2017-18 from 2016-17 which means we

need to find the cause of this slump in demand for Indian mangoes and rectify it.



Top 5 exporting nations of Mango in the world- (Competitors)- (2017 Data)-



28%

12%12%9%

5%

34%

Contribution to total global exports of Mango

Mexico

Brazil

Peru

India

Spain

Others

134

79 77 74 68 63

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Spain Globalaverage

Peru Brazil Mexico India

Per Kg export value of Mango in Rs.

42

Top 5 importing nations of Mango in the world (2017 Data)-

1. Total imports in 2017- 869321351 KG

2. Total import Value in 2017- 1812311903 US $

Insights-

1- India leads Mango production in the world yet it is ranked 4th in world exports having

just 9% of the total world exports.




imports. India has a good share of this in UK and a low share in the US and Germany.

If these markets are tapped, exports can rise significantly.

Top 3 Re-exporting nations of Mango in the world (2017 Data)-


USA 46.75% 95.91

China, Hong Kong, SAR 46.61% 98.4

Canada 6.44% 104.7




Top 3 Re-importing nations of Mango in the world (2017 Data)-


Australia 35.55% 319.97

Egypt 31.96% 164.11

Slovakia 29.57% 267.94




Insights- 1- USA and China, Hong Kong are the largest re-exporters with 93% of the total re-exports.

2- Australia, Egypt and Slovakia are major re-importers but they have low share in exports.

Limitation- The world exports data available is a combination of mango, guava and

mangosteen. So the analysis may have some amount of error.

36%

11%9%6%

5%

33%

Contribution to total global imports of Mango

USA

Germany

United Kingdom

Canada

Spain

Others

164152

136 131 124106

020406080

100120140160180

Per Kg import value of Mango in Rs.

43

POMEGRANATE

Indian Rank in Pomegranate Production in the world- 1st



Production statistics of Pomegranate-


2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 2.16 23.096

India 111.08 721.96

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 4.69 56.56

India 130.76 1345.72

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 6.128 74.34

India 180.63 1789.31

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 7.96 73.39

India 196.88 2306.44

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 9.35 103.52

India 216 2613


India 835.38 8776.43

10.6812.05 12.13

9.21

11.07

6.49

10.29 9.9

11.71 12.09

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year


MP India

44

Production Insights- 1- India is a major producer for pomegranate in the world and MP produces

pomegranate in many districts contributing 3-4% share in Indian production.

2- The area of production in MP has increased by 332.7% in last 5 years while for India

it has increased by 94.44% which is a good sign for MP.


has increased by 261.93%.

4- The productivity of India has increased significantly by 86.14% in 5 years. In

comparison, MP has not done that well as productivity in MP has increased just by

3.59% in 5 years.

B. Mandi Analysis

Arrival trend of Pomegranate in MP-


Production (%)

2013 748.94 23096 10.34%

2014 1981.47 56559 3.5%

2015 1427.6 74339 1.92%

2016 1301.53 73390 1.77%

2017 2387.73 103519 2.31%

Total 7098.33 330904.49 2.15%

Price Trend

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 2500 2000 2000 2000 1500

Modal 5000 4000 4000 4000 3624

Maximum 7000 5750 6000 6000 5000

010002000300040005000600070008000

Pri

ce-M

edia

n

Year

Mandi Price Trend- Median Prices (Rs./Quintal)


45

2017 price trend- Wholesale Prices





Mandi Insights 1- Mandis in MP have negligible arrival % for pomegranate. The arrivals are just 2-3%

of the production.

2- The production is increasing by a huge extent and the arrivals are increasing too but

by a meagre change.

3- Pomegranate does not reach the Mandis as majority of it is sold outside Mandis


4- The prices of pomegranate has been decreasing in the last 5 years which may be due

to the increase in arrivals.

5- The key mandis for pomegranate in MP are Indore mandi in Indore district and

Bhopal mandi in Bhopal district and they constitute more than 94% of the total

arrivals in MP.

6- Only 7-8 Mandis have pomegranate arrivals in MP in the last 5 years which is a very

low number.

Pomegranate comes in the mandi all around the months with the key months

with major arrivals are in MP are September, October, November and

December.

5070 5070

6680

5223

4456 4456

2774 2774

3993 3993 3787

2663

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000


Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Monthly Prices Trend- Pomegranate- Rs./Quintal- 2017

46

C. Exports Forecasted Surplus of pomegranate in MP (in MT)



2017-18 119485 105146 47518 57628

2018-19 137253 120782 48406 72376

2019-20 155021 136418 49311 87107

2020-21 172789 152054 50232 101821


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus around 3 Lac MT for pomegranate in MP


Indian Exports of Pomegranate


Lacs) Qty (MT)

Avg Value-

Rs per kg

2016-17 Pomegranate

49144.30 49852.04 98.58

2017-18 53772.83 47335.71 113.6

Insights 1- The average price for exported pomegranate is more than 2 times the modal price in

Mandis. This means that there is high profit for exports.

2- Pomegranate is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP can

take advantage of it by encouraging SME’s and processing units.

3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of pomegranate.

Pomegranate export potential in MP-



2017-18 20170 47335 42.61%

2018-19 25331 52069 48.65%

2019-20 30487 57276 53.23%

2020-21 35637 63003 56.56%

If we assume only 35% of the surplus is used for exports then the surplus is around

half of the total Indian exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Pomegranate exports and can

highly increase Indian exports too by tapping the right markets and improving

fruit quality.

47

Top 10 importing Nations of Pomegranate from India-

Country


Value per

kg 2017-18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

UAE 25229 23202 65.29% 20880 19799 19.39% 117.18

Nepal 1724 2346 6.6% 5144 8482 8.31% 27.66

Saudi Arabia 3040 3632 10.22% 2664 3888 3.81% 93.42

Netherland 2893 5813 16.36% 1300 2435 2.38% 238.74

Qatar 641 2201 6.19% 555 2077 2.03% 105.97

Oman 643 2794 7.86% 450 1947 1.91% 143.52

Sri Lanka 1030 1825 5.14% 956 1504 1.47% 121.36

Kuwait 1508 1507 4.24% 1187 1318 1.29% 114.31

UK 1393 1827 5.15% 369 447 0.44% 409.43

USA 1809 1965 5.53% 343 418 0.41% 470.4

Total 39819 35539 100% 112693 102112 100% 34.81

Insights

1- UAE is the major importer of pomegranate from India with a share of about 1/5 of the

total Indian exports.

2- Neighbouring countries like Nepal and Sri Lanka also import from us and we can

export more to them and transportation costs will be lower too.

3- UK, USA, and Netherland are high paying countries hence we can try and increase

our export contribution to these countries.

4- Pomegranate net exports has dropped by 9.39% in 2017-18 from 2016-17 which

means we need to find the cause of this slump in demand for Indian pomegranate and

rectify it.



Due to unavailability of world imports and exports of Pomegranate we

could not analyse it.

48

CUSTARD APPLE

MP’s Rank in India in production- 3rd


Production statistics of Custard apple-


2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 2.68 34.08

India 19.55 135.63

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 3.16 39.84

India 21.77 165.15

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 5.56 56.04

India 29.87 228.37

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 5.91 68.67

India 36.83 298.00

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 12.48 147.19

India 44 383


India 152.02 1210.16

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

MP 12.7 12.6 10.1 11.6 11.8

India 6.9 7.6 7.7 8.1 8.7

0.02.04.06.08.0

10.012.014.0

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year


MP India

49

Production Insights- 1- MP has a significant share in India’s production of Custard apple with many districts

producing Custard apple.

2- Around 25-30% of Indian production comes from MP.

3- The area of production in MP has increased by 365.46% in last 5 years which is quite

high as compared to India’s which has increased by 125.03%.

4- Similarly the production for MP has increased by 331.89% in the last 5 years while

for India it has increased by 182.38%.


productivity being a bit higher than the Indian productivity. This may be due to the

favourable climatic situations in MP for Custard apple.

B. Mandi Analysis

Arrival trend of Custard apple in MP-


Production (%)

2013 NR 34080 --

2014 NR 39841 --

2015 678 56041 1.21%

2016 2084 68670 3.03%

2017 3.28 147187 0.00%

Total 2765.28 345820 0.8%



Ujjain Ujjain >90%

Mandi Insights 1- Mandis in MP have very negligible arrival % for Custard apple as compared to

production.

2- The production is increasing yet the arrivals do not have a specific increasing pattern.

3- Custard apple does not reach the Mandis as majority of it is sold outside Mandis


4- We could not analyse the price trend due to unavailability of data.

5- There is only one key mandi for Custard apple in MP that is Ujjain mandi in Ujjain

district and it constitutes more than 90% of the total arrivals in MP.

6- Only 2-3 Mandis have Custard apple arrivals in MP in the last 5 years which is a very

low number.

October is the key month for arrival of Custard apple in Mandis.

50

C. Exports Forecasted Surplus of Custard apple in MP (in MT)



2017-18 145675 128194 45736 82475

2018-19 171179 150637 46592 104046

2019-20 196683 173081 47462 125618

2020-21 222187 195524 48349 147175


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 4.5 Lac MT for Custard apples in MP


Indian Exports of Custard apple


Lacs) Qty (MT)

Avg Value-

Rs per kg

2016-17 Custard Apple

729.08 749.23 97.31

2017-18 681.37 780.04 87.35

Insights 1- The average price for exported Custard apple is more than the market price in India.

This means that there is profit potential for exports.

2- Custard apple is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP

can take advantage of it by encouraging SME’s and processing units.

3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Custard apple.

Custard apple export potential in MP-



2017-18 28860 780.04 3700%

2018-19 36416 858.04 4244%

2019-20 43966 943.84 4658%

2020-21 51511 1038.23 4961%


more than all Indian custard apple exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Custard apple exports and can


fruit quality.

51

Top 10 importing Nations of Custard apple from India-

Country


Value per

kg 2017-18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

UAE 280.61 258.5 37.94% 288.44 280.37 35.94% 92

Oman 174.36 177.7 26.08% 179.65 205.17 26.3% 87

Saudi Arabia 112.09 69.04 10.13% 111.39 79.24 10.16% 87

Bahrain 52.56 58.03 8.52% 61.01 93.51 11.99% 62

Kuwait 45.26 50 7.34% 42 50.58 6.48% 99

Qatar 46.94 45.14 6.62% 51.08 49.28 6.32% 92

Singapore 13.48 19.02 2.79% 13.03 18.53 2.38% 103

Canada 2.43 1.86 0.27% 1.72 1.49 0.19% 125

Maldives 0.23 0.53 0.08% 0.19 0.46 0.06% 115

Norway 0.2 0.45 0.07% 0.25 0.52 0.07% 87

Total 729.08 681.37 99.84% 749.23 780.04 99.89% 87

Insights

1- Almost 80% of custard apple in terms of value is being exported just in 4 countries in

the Middle East & South East Asia and hence we can prioritize these countries as our

major Export partners for custard apple.

2- Canada, Maldives and Singapore are high paying countries hence we can try and


3- Custard apple net exports by quantity has increased by 4.11% in 2017-18 from 2016-

17 but in value terms it has decreased by 6.54% in the same period.



Due to unavailability of world imports and exports of Pomegranate

we could not analyse it.

52

VEGETABLES

53

Onion

Indian Rank in onion Production in the world- 2nd

MP’s Rank in India in production- 2nd

A. Production Analysis9

Production statistics of Onion-


2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 111.73 2691.07

India 1051.53 16813.01

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 111.44 2422.91

India 1203.57 19401.68

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 117.58 2677.95

India 1173.35 18927.41

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 147.87 3413.49

India 1320.04 20931.21

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 150.84 3821.05

India 1306.00 22427.00


India 6054.47 98500.30

9 Horticulture at a glance and Data from MP government

24.09

21.7422.78 23.08

25.33

15.99 16.12 16.13 15.8617.17

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

pro

du

ctiv

ity


54

Production insights

1- India is a major producer for onion and MP has the second largest share in

India’s production with a whole belt of districts producing Onion.

2- Onion production in MP is around 17% of the Indian production.

3- The area of production in MP has increased by 580% in last 5 years.

4- The production for MP has increased by 600% in the last 5 years while for

India it has increased by 500%.


productivity being a bit higher than the Indian productivity.

B. Mandi Analysis10

Arrival trend of Onion in MP-


Production (%)

2013 519419.91 2691066 19.30%

2014 1337921.88 2422914 55.22%

2015 1339265.96 2677954 50.01%

2016 1592988.96 3413488 46.67%

2017 2587607.08 3821046 67.72%

Total 7377203.79 15026468 49.09%

Price Trend


2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 600 400 600 300 400

Modal 1000 750 900 500 500

Maximum 1200 1000 1200 650 700

0200400600800

100012001400

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year



55





Shajapur shujalpur 21.90%

Mandi Insights 1- Mandis in MP have 49% arrival for Onion out of the total production.

2- The production and arrivals are increasing for onions.

3- Half of the onions are sold outside Mandis directly to customers, private markets,

exporters, food processing units, etc.

4- The prices in mandis have decreased in the past 5 years due to increase in arrivals.

5- The 2017 price trend graph shows the seasonality factor in the price fluctuations. We

see that the prices are lowest in the beginning of the year and they keep increasing

throughout the year.

6- The key mandis for Onion in MP are Indore & shujalpur mandi in Indore & Shajapur

district and they constitute more than 51% of the total arrivals in MP.

7- MP has 2 key Mandis that have Onion arrivals in the last 5 years, other mandis have

arrivals but their contribution is less than 5% per head.

The key months for arrivals of Onion in MP are all 12 months, as considerable

arrivals are their all year long.

547442 498 408

772 772

1096 1096

1630 1630

2492 2492

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000


Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Monthly Prices Trend- Onion- Rs./Quintal- 2017

56

C. Exports Forecasted Surplus in MP



2017-18 3950324.00 3626397.43 780275.00 2846122.43

2018-19 4275378.00 3924797.00 794860.69 3129936.32

2019-20 4600432.00 4223196.58 809719.02 3413477.56

2020-21 4925486.00 4521596.15 824855.09 3696741.05


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 36 Lac MT for Onions in MP which


Indian Exports of Onion11


Lacs) Qty (MT)

Avg Value

per kg

2016-17 070310 ONIONS

AND SHALLOTS

FRESH OR

CHILLED

3,20,665.02 2465885 13.00

2017-18 3,15,730.01 1606295 19.66

2016-17 071220 ONIONS

DRIED

74520.69 66655 111.80

2017-18 59196.74 63336 93.46

2016-17 12099130 ONION

SEEDS USED

FOR SOWING

1985.85 329 603.60

2017-18 1818.62 297 612.33

Insights 1- The average price for exported Onion with value addition is considerably more on

average than the modal price available in Mandis. This means that there is huge profit

for exports with value addition.

2- Onion is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP can take


3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Onion.

4- Major export of onion is in the form of green/spring onions where arrivals are

negligible & hence we are not a player in that market. This is a opportunity for us to

sell more of our product at better prices.


57

Onion export potential


MT

Exports forecast


2017-18 996142.85 1669631.0 59.66%

2018-19 1095477.71 1836594.1 59.65%

2019-20 1194717.15 2020253.5 59.14%

2020-21 1293859.37 2222278.9 58.22%


more than all Indian Onion exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Onion exports and can highly

increase Indian exports too by tapping the right markets and improving produce

quality.

Top importing Nations from India for Onion & Shallots- Fresh/Chilled12

Country

Values in Rs. Lacs Quantity MT Value

per kg

2017-

18 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-

18 % 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-

18 %

BANGLADESH

PR 97590.930 59951.830 19% 846869.880 333165.470 21% 17.995

MALAYSIA 53492.610 60432.320 19% 397539.190 283409.560 18% 21.323

SRI LANKA

DSR 29776.040 60546.260 19% 218796.100 236841.300 15% 25.564

U ARAB EMTS 40109.740 41773.980 13% 303222.400 226580.190 14% 18.437

NEPAL 16311.050 14363.340 5% 133530.160 100150.950 6% 14.342

INDONESIA 11430.210 11130.430 4% 81871.820 65478.270 4% 16.999

QATAR 9484.900 10456.460 3% 70427.920 54086.720 3% 19.333

KUWAIT 8957.830 7511.400 2% 65697.940 52196.630 3% 14.391

SAUDI ARAB 7717.270 5802.630 2% 59614.530 45055.380 3% 12.879

VIETNAM

SOC REP 5186.860 7476.880 2% 44881.010 44112.000 3% 16.950

Total(all

countries) 320665.020 315730.010 2465885.07 1606295.19 19.656

Insights

1- Almost 94% of Onion in terms of value is being exported just in Asian countries in

the Middle East & South East Asia at prices not as good as EU and US, hence we

should prioritize EU & USA as we already have good exports to these countries as

our major Export partners for Onion.

2- Bangladesh imports 21% of fresh and dry Onion which in turn means that we can

exclusively meet their demand as it would be transported through land.

3- Qatar, UAE are high paying countries hence we can try and increase our export



58

4- Onion net exports has decreased by 17% in terms of quantity in 2017-18 from 2016-

17 but the value has almost remained the same which means we are getting better

prices for our crop.

5- New markets should be explored to keep up the export quantity and prices stable so

that it doesn’t shock local market with excess supply.

Top 5 exporting nations of Onion in the world- (Competitors)-

(2017 Data)-13



Top 5 importing nations of Onion in the world (2017 Data)-



Insights- 1- India is ranked second in Onion production in the world and it is ranked 2nd in world

exports having 16.6% of the total world exports.

13 https://comtrade.un.org/data/

17.8%

16.6%

10.1%9.5%6.0%

39.9%

Contribution of total global exports of Onion in the world

Mexico

India

USA

Egypt

Spain

Others

60

44

3330

2519

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Mexico USA GlobalAverage

Egypt Spain India

Per Kg export value of Onion in Rs.

17.1%

6.8%

6.8%

5.7%

5.4%

58.3%

Contribution of total global imports of Onion in the world

USA

Malaysia

UnitedKingdomGermany

Canada

Others

4740 39

33 31

19

0

10

20

30

40

50

Per Kg import value of Onion in Rs.

59

2- India has the lowest per Kg export value in the top 5 exporters which means that with

more supply we increase our export contribution because we have cost advantage.

The export value per kg value is lower than the global average too.

3- The top 3 importing countries US, Malaysia and UK have nearly 31% of the total

imports. India has negligible share of this in US and UK, If these markets are tapped,

exports can rise significantly.



Top 3 Re-exporting nations of Onion in the world (2017 Data)-


USA 97.35% 98

China, Hong Kong 1.12% 58




Top 3 Re-importing nations of Onion in the world (2017 Data)-


Slovakia 71.52% 20

Egypt 12.72% 39

Italy 7.87% 25



6- Per KG average re-import value in Rs.- 25

Insights- 1- USA and China, Hong Kong are the largest re-exporters with 98.5% of the total re-

exports.

2- Slovakia, Egypt and Italy are major re-importers but they have low share in exports.

3- We can see that the export price is Rs. 33, the import price is Rs. 31, the re-export price is Rs.

96 and the re-import price is Rs. 25.

60

POTATO

Indian Rank in Potato Production in the world- 2nd



Production statistics of Potato-

Year Region Area ('000 Ha) Production ('000 MT) MP prod %

of India

2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 108.9 2299.0 5.07%

India 1992.2 45343.6

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 114.2 2435.8 5.86%

India 1973.2 41555.4

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 125.4 2578.0 5.37%

India 2075.9 48009.2

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 135.3 2828.0 6.51%

India 2116.9 43417.0

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 160.0 3461.0 7.12%

India 2179.0 48605.0

2012-17

Total

Madhya Pradesh 643.8 13601.8 5.99%

India 10337.2 226930.2

61


1- India is a major producer for Potato and MP has the fifth largest share in

India’s production.

2- Potato production in MP is around 6% of the Indian production.


4- The production for MP has increased by 50% in the last 5 years while for India

it has increased by 8%.

5- The productivity of India and MP is not stable at all in the last 5 years with

MP’s productivity being a bit more stable but less than the Indian productivity.

B. Mandi Analysis Arrival trend of Potato in MP-


Production (%)

2013 142671.52 2299008 6.21%

2014 178479.41 2435791 7.33%

2015 245731.38 2578038 9.53%

2016 230285.23 2828020.47 8.14%

2017 283105.84 3460980.46 8.18%

Total 1080273.38 13601837.93 7.94%

21.1221.32

20.5620.90

21.63

22.76

21.06

23.13

20.51

22.31

19.00

19.50

20.00

20.50

21.00

21.50

22.00

22.50

23.00

23.50

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year


MP India

62

Price Trend

2017 price trend- Wholesale Monthly prices



Bhopal Bhopal 20.92

Indore Indore 32.48

Jabalpur Jabalpur 12.61

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 600 800 500 600 310

Modal 800 1100 600 825 450

Maximum 1000 1200 750 1000 570

0200400600800

100012001400

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year



458

403 390 390

463 463

417 412389

347

455

394

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500


Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Monthly Prices Trend- Potato- Rs./Quintal- 2017

63

Mandi Insights

1- Mandis in MP have 8% arrival for Potato of total production.

2- The production is increasing so are the arrivals but the percentage contribution of

production coming to mandis has remained the same.

3- Most of the potatoes are sold outside Mandis directly to customers, private markets,


4- There is decrease in prices in Mandis in MP in the last 5 years due to increase in

arrivals.

5- 2017 whole price trend graph is shown to see the seasonality factor in price

fluctuations. We see that almost throughout the year potato prices stable and don’t

fluctuate much.

6- The key mandis for Potato in MP are Indore & Bhopal mandi in Indore & Bhopal


The key months for arrivals of Potato in MP are all 12 months, as considerable


C. Exports

Forecasted Surplus in MP



2017-18 3629702.00 3303028.82 1375196.17 1927832.65

2018-19 3901319.00 3550200.29 1400902.72 2149297.57

2019-20 4172936.00 3797371.76 1427089.79 2370281.97

2020-21 4444553.00 4044543.23 1453766.38 2590776.85


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 25 Lac MT for Potatoes in MP which


Indian Exports of Potato


Lacs) Qty (MT)

Avg Value

per kg

2016-17 070190 POTATOES

FRESH OR CHILLED

OTHER THAN SEEDS

66,147.51 396332.67 16.69

2017-18 41,182.48 395720.45 10.41

2016-17 200410 POTATOE

S PRPD/PRSVD,

FRZN

4102.65 5380.29 76.25

2017-18 11112.57 14705.69 75.57

2017-18 1818.62 297 612.33

64

Insights 1- The average price for exported Potato with value addition is considerably more on



2- Potato is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP can take


3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Potato.

4- Major export of Potato is in the form of Potato Fresh or Chilled, Dehydrated Potato

powder, Dehydrated Potato flakes, flour and meal of potatoes, starch of

potato potatoes cooked or uncooked frozen where arrivals are negligible & hence we

are not a player in that market. This is a opportunity for us to sell more of our product

at better prices.

Potato export potential


MT

Exports forecast


2017-18 674741.43 410426.14 164%

2018-19 752254.15 451468.75 167%

2019-20 829598.69 496615.63 167%

2020-21 906771.90 546277.19 166%


more than all Indian Potato exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Potato exports and can highly


quality.

Top importing Nations from India for Potatoes- Fresh/Chilled

Country


per kg

2017-

18 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-

18 % 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-

18 %

NEPAL 49,379.02 20,301.37 49.30% 3,11,212.47 2,74,153.75 69.28% 7.41

SRI LANKA

DSR

5,694.18 7,288.11 17.70%

32,277.86 49,066.06 12.40% 14.85

OMAN 3,276.78 3,258.59 7.91% 16,838.34 19,619.73 4.96% 16.61

MALAYSIA 1,339.09 1,651.08 4.01% 6,626.83 8,496.01 2.15% 19.43

MAURITIUS 1,764.74 1,859.86 4.52% 7,280.00 8,485.00 2.14% 21.92

KUWAIT 1,478.50 1,393.92 3.38% 7,143.68 7,910.83 2.00% 17.62

INDONESIA 109.42 1,711.02 4.15% 453 7,591.00 1.92% 22.54

65

U ARAB EMTS 891.02 883.33 2.14% 4,875.58 5,854.36 1.48% 15.09

MALDIVES 1,265.86 1,127.86 2.74% 5,276.86 5,589.78 1.41% 20.18

VIETNAM SOC

REP

42.28 458.01 1.11%

230 2,254.00 0.57% 20.32

Total 66,147.51 41,182.48 396332.67 395720.45 10.41

Top importing Nations from India for Potatoes- Prepared/Preserved

Country


per kg

2017-

18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

THAILAND 290.92 2,011.75 18.10% 316.6 3,238.64 22.02% 62.12

CHINA P RP 93 2,202.03 19.82% 147.12 3,162.50 21.51% 69.63

PAKISTAN IR 1,958.48 2,343.97 21.09% 2,668.29 3,056.37 20.78% 76.69

AUSTRALIA 37.05 1,716.81 15.45% 38.62 2,015.79 13.71% 85.17

SOUTH

AFRICA

436.98 631.23 5.68%

618.36 810.02 5.51% 77.93

NEW

ZEALAND

11.87 517.53 4.66%

11.55 584.76 3.98% 88.50

MALAYSIA 399.26 307.42 2.77% 586.95 561.92 3.82% 54.71

NEPAL 199.09 328.37 2.95% 207.82 266.04 1.81% 123.43

SRI LANKA

DSR

102.83 191.68 1.72%

143.18 243.08 1.65% 78.85

SAUDI ARAB 183.37 142.77 1.28% 247.11 191.74 1.30% 74.46

Total 4,102.65 11,112.57 100.00% 5380.29 14705.69 100.00% 75.57

Insights

1- Almost 72% of Potato in terms of value is being exported just in Asian countries in

the Middle East & South East Asia at prices not as good as EU and US, hence we

should prioritize EU & USA as we already have good exports to these countries as

our major Export partners for Potato.

2- Nepal imports 70% of fresh and dry Potato which in turn means that we can


3- Mauritius, Indonesia are high paying countries hence we can try and increase our

export contribution to these countries.

4- Preserved & frozen potato fetches a better value than fresh potato we should try and

increase our share in this products market.

66

5- Potato net exports has decreased by 33% in terms of value in 2017-18 from 2016-17

but quantity has almost remained the same which means we are getting lower prices

for our crop.



Top 5 exporting nations of Potato in the world- (Competitors)-

(2017 Data)-



Top 5 importing nations of Potato in the world (2017 Data)-



Insights- 1- India is 2nd in Potato production in the world yet it is not ranked in top 5exporters in

world exports having just 5.19cggtf% of the total world exports.

2- India has the lowest per Kg export value in comparison the top 5 exporters which may

create more demand. This value is lower than the global average too.

18.0%

12.6%

11.1%

11.1%9.7%

37.5%

Contribution of total global exports of Potato in the world

Germany

Egypt

USA

Canada

Belgium

Others

2926

2320

14 13

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Per Kg export value of Potato in Rs.

18.8%

9.0%

8.7%

7.1%

4.5%

51.9%

Contribution of total global imports of Potato in the world

Belgium

Germany

USA

Italy

UnitedKingdomOthers

37

2826

2320

15

05

10152025303540

Per Kg import value of Potato in Rs.

67

3- The top 3 importing countries Belgium, US, Germany have nearly 37% of the total

imports. India has negligible share of this in Belgium, US and Germany. If these

markets are tapped, exports can rise significantly.



Top 3 Re-exporting nations of Potato in the world (2017 Data)-


Jordan 71.75% 24

USA 10.22% 47

Namibia 9.37% 43




Top 3 Re-importing nations of Potato in the world (2017 Data)-


Slovakia 37.58% 22

Canada 33.14% 42

Russia 10.58% 13




Insights- 1- USA and Jordan, Namibia are the largest re-exporters with 92% of the total re-

exports.

2- Canada, Russia and Slovakia are major re-importers but they have low share in

exports.



68

TOMATO

Indian Rank in Tomato Production in the world- 2nd

MP’s Rank in India in production- 1st

4- Production Analysis

Production statistics of Tomato-


of India

2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 62.59 1845.07 10.12%

India 879.63 18226.64

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 66.46 1634.57 8.72%

India 882.03 18735.91

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 71.88 1633.31 9.97%

India 767.32 16384.98

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 74.80 1923.09 10.27%

India 773.88299 18731.96743

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 95.39542 2722.68298 13.15%

India 797 20708

2012-17

Total

Madhya Pradesh 371.13 9758.72 10.52%

India 4099.86 92787.49

69

Production Insights 1- India is a major producer for Tomato and MP has the largest share in India’s

production.

2- Tomato production in MP is around 10.5% of the Indian production.


4- The production for MP has increased by 50% in the last 5 years while for India it has

decreased by 9.5%.

5- The productivity of India and MP has been rising for the last 3 years with MP’s

productivity being a bit higher than the Indian productivity.

B. Mandi Analysis Arrival trend of Tomato in MP-


Production (%)

2013 35695.52 533998.00 6.68%

2014 537156.82 672226.00 79.91%

2015 166183.62 775841.00 21.42%

2016 136419.22 836365.95 16.31%

2017 71803.84 957601.58 7.50%

Total 947259.02 3776032.53 25.09%

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

MP 29.5 24.6 22.7 25.7 28.5

India 20.7 21.2 21.4 24.2 26.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year


MP India

70

Price Trend




Jabalpur Jabalpur 9.70%

Shivpuri Shivpuri 63.75%

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 700 600 800 700 600

Modal 900 800 1000 850 800

Maximum 1000 1000 1200 1000 1000

0200400600800

100012001400

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year



324 324605 605

922 922

3273

2205

943 943

1278

654

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500


Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Monthly Prices Trend- Tomato- Rs./Quintal- 2017

71

Mandi Insights 1- Mandis in MP have 25% arrival for Tomato of total production.

2- The production is increasing so are the arrivals except for last year but the percentage

contribution of production coming to mandis has no trend.

3- Tomato reaches the Mandis as well as lot of it is sold outside Mandis directly to


4- There is some price fluctuations in Mandis in MP in the last 5 years as arrivals have

increased.

5- The wholesale price trend 2017 graph is shown to depict the seasonality factor in

price fluctuations. We see that the tomato prices are low in January and February and

they start increasing from March with peak in July thereafter again decreasing till

December.

6- The key mandis for Tomato in MP are Shivpuri & Jabalpur mandi in Shivpuri &

Jabalpur district and they constitute more than 74% of the total arrivals in MP.

The key months for arrivals of Tomato in MP are all 12 months, as considerable





2017-18 2747378 2406703 751237 1655466

2018-19 2823458 2473349 765279 1708070

2019-20 2891063 2532571 779585 1752986

2020-21 2952037 2585984 794158 1791827


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 18 Lac MT for Tomatoes in MP which


Indian Exports of Tomato


Lacs) Qty (MT)

Avg Value

per kg

2016-17 070200 TOMATOES

FRESH OR CHILLED

54,815.65 267515.43 20.49

2017-18 11,421.90 47446.09 24.07

72

Insights 1- The average price for exported Tomato with value addition is considerably more on



2- Tomato is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP can take


3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Tomato.

4- Major export of Tomato is in the form of Tomato Fresh or Chilled.

5- Tomato has good arrivals at mandi level & hence we can be a player in that market.

This is a opportunity for us to sell more of our product at better prices.

Tomato export potential


MT

Exports forecast


2017-18 579413.25 47446.09 12.21

2018-19 597824.49 52190.70 11.45

2019-20 613545.20 57409.77 10.69

2020-21 627139.33 63150.75 9.93


more than all Indian Tomato exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Tomato exports and can highly


quality.

Top importing Nations from India for Tomatoes- Fresh/Chilled

Country


per kg

2017-

18 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-18

% 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-18

%

U ARAB EMTS 8945.89 6450.95 56.48% 30784.72 19960.65 42.07% 32.32

NEPAL 1610.82 2208.26 19.33% 14687.77 18799.66 39.62% 11.75

QATAR 44.67 1027.94 9.00% 158.82 2670.57 5.63% 38.49

BANGLADESH

PR 6659.33 518.76 4.54% 29082.91 2473.54 5.21% 20.97

OMAN 194.6 541.98 4.75% 659.23 1800.89 3.80% 30.10

MALDIVES 480.34 583.08 5.10% 1152.4 1218.74 2.57% 47.84

PAKISTAN IR 36845.47 34.11 0.30% 190739.7 265 0.56% 12.87

SINGAPORE 0.36 35.22 0.31% 1.15 112.3 0.24% 31.36

73

BHUTAN 4.99 2.22 0.02% 155.57 55.34 0.12% 4.01

MALAYSIA 2.55 0.02% 30.1 0.06% 8.47

Total 54815.65 11421.9 100.00% 267515.43 47446.09 100.00% 24.07

Insights

1- 81% of Tomato in terms of quantity & 76% in terms of value is being exported just to

UAE & Nepal at prices not as good as EU and US, hence we should prioritize EU &

USA as we already have good exports to these countries as our major Export partners

for Tomato.

2- Nepal imports 40% of fresh and chilled Tomato which in turn means that we can


3- Maldives & Qatar are high paying countries hence we can try and increase our export


4- Preserved & frozen Tomato fetches a better value than fresh Tomato we should try

and increase our share in this products market.

5- Tomato net exports has decreased by 80% in terms of value in 2017-18 from 2016-17

& quantity has reduced by 92%, this is not good for our market as it would lead to

domestic flooding & prices to dive.

6- Pakistan imported 190739 Mt in 2016-17 & 265 Mt in 2017-18 which lead to excess

supply in the market.



Top 5 exporting nations of Tomato in the world- (Competitors)-

(2017 Data)-



35.5%

20.7%

7.6%

6.1%

5.6%

24.6%

Contribution of total global exports of Tomato in the world

Mexico

Spain

Canada

USA

Belgium

Others

133

10691 90

74 72

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Canada USA Spain Belgium GlobalAverage

Mexico

Per Kg export value of Tomato in Rs.

74

Top 5 importing nations of Tomato in the world (2017 Data)-



Insights- 1- India leads Tomato production in the world yet does not feature in top 5 exporters in

the world, having just 0.93% of the total world exports.

2- India has the lowest per Kg export value in comparison to the top 5 exporters which

may create more demand. This value is also lower than the global average too.


imports. India has no share of this in UK, US and Germany. If these markets are

tapped, exports can rise significantly.



Top 3 Re-exporting nations of Tomato in the world (2017 Data)-


USA 69.76% 118

Canada 30.06% 174




Top 3 Re-importing nations of Tomato in the world (2017 Data)-


Slovakia 76.39% 95

Canada 8.46% 110

Azerbaijan 5.73% 948

31.1%

20.1%

9.2%

7.6%

4.6%

27.5%

Contribution of total global imports of Tomato in the world

USA

Germany

UK

Russia

Canada

Others

132

109101 96 92

70

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Per Kg import value of Tomato in Rs.

75




Insights-

1- USA and Canada are the largest re-exporters with 99.82% of the total re-

exports.

2- Slovakia, Canada & Azerbaijan and are major re-importers but they have low

share in exports.

3- We can see that the export price is Rs. 74, the import price is Rs. 92, the re-export

price is Rs. 130 and the re-import price is Rs. 102.

76

PEAS

Indian Rank in Peas Production in the world- 2nd



Production statistics of Peas-


of India

2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 53.45 534.00 13.33%

India 420.90 4006.17

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 71.54 672.23 17.38%

India 433.56 3868.63

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 80.85 775.84 16.68%

India 475.89 4651.53

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 87.44 836.37 17.39%

India 497.57 4810.77

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 95.21 957.60 17.92%

India 530.00 5345.00

2012-17

Total

Madhya Pradesh 388.47 3776.03 16.65%

India 2357.92 22682.11

77

Production Insights- 1- India is a major producer for Peas and MP has the second largest share in India’s

production.

2- Peas production in MP is around 17% of the Indian production.



increased by 28%.

5- The productivity of India and MP is almost same, MP was ahead but India has caught

up in the last 5 years with MP’s productivity.

B. Mandi Analysis Arrival trend of Peas in MP-


Production (%)

2013 6908.60 533998.00 1.29%

2014 18399.71 672226.00 2.74%

2015 34910.00 775841.00 4.50%

2016 41804.68 836365.95 5.00%

2017 27276.40 957601.58 2.85%

Total 129299.39 3776032.53 3.42%

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

MP 9.9 9.4 9.6 9.6 10.1

India 9.5 8.9 9.8 9.7 10.1

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year


MP India

78

Price Trend

2017 Price trend- Monthly wholesale prices





2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 2500 2551 2155.5 1760 1000

Modal 2750 3170 2585 2000 1168

Maximum 2926 3400 2800 2200 1358

0500

1000150020002500300035004000

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year



784 784

2504 2504 2395 23952671 2671

3832

1663

23191984

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500


Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Monthly Prices Trend- Green Peas- Rs./Quintal- 2017

79

Mandi Insights 1- Mandis in MP have 3.42% arrival for Peas of total production.

2- The production is increasing so are the arrivals but the percentage contribution of

production coming to mandis has remained the same.

3- Peas reaches the Mandis as well as most of it is sold outside Mandis directly to


4- There is price fluctuations in Mandis in MP in the last 5 years as arrivals have

increased.

5- The 2017 price trend shows the trend of prices considering the seasonality of price

fluctuations. We see that the prices are lowest in January and February and they

constantly rise from then with peak in September and then again decreasing.

6- The key mandis for Peas in MP are Lashkar & Jabalpur mandi in Gwalior & Jabalpur


The key months for arrivals of Peas in MP are October, November December,

January, February.




2017-18 1058612 949575 131418 818157

2018-19 1159747 1040293 133875 906418

2019-20 1260882 1131011 136377 994634

2020-21 1362017 1221729 138927 1082802


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 10 Lac MT for Peas in MP which can

be used for processing and exporting till 2021.

Indian Exports of Peas


Lacs) Qty (MT)

Avg Value

per kg

2016-17 071021 PEAS

SHELLED OR

UNSHELLED,FRZN

2,814.49 4435.31 63.46

2017-18 4,529.43 8102.29 55.90

80

Insights 1- The average price for exported Peas with value addition is considerably more on average than

the modal price available in Mandis. This means that there is huge profit for exports with

value addition.

2- Peas is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP can take advantage

of it by encouraging SME’s and processing units.

3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Peas.

4- Major export of Peas is in the form of shelled, unshelled and frozen.

Peas export potential


MT

Exports forecast


2017-18 286354.82 8102.29 35.34

2018-19 317246.34 8912.52 35.60

2019-20 348121.79 9803.77 35.51

2020-21 378980.87 10784.15 35.14

If we assume only 35% of the surplus is used for exports, yet the surplus is much more than

all Indian Peas exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Peas exports and can highly increase

Indian exports too by tapping the right markets and improving produce quality.

Top importing Nations from India for Peas

Country


per kg

2017-

18 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-18

% 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-18

%

SAUDI ARAB 828.13 1,542.28 34.05% 1,703.73 3,693.46 45.59% 41.76

U ARAB

EMTS

403.66 649.86 14.35%

651.04 1,269.05 15.66% 51.21

U S A 775.38 839.76 18.54% 737.11 794.64 9.81% 105.68

NEPAL 232.92 214.21 4.73% 493.56 415.1 5.12% 51.60

KUWAIT 53.43 179.08 3.95% 105.25 413.44 5.10% 43.31

QATAR 58.11 218.93 4.83% 95.17 401.92 4.96% 54.47

BAHARAIN IS 50.81 93.26 2.06% 74.88 185.6 2.29% 50.25

OMAN 71.79 106.28 2.35% 106.18 185.38 2.29% 57.33

U K 4.61 262.74 5.80% 7.98 151.96 1.88% 172.90

CANADA 81.02 111.03 2.45% 95.29 115.25 1.42% 96.34

Total 2,814.49 4,529.43 100.00% 4435.31 8102.29 100.00% 55.90

81

Insights

1- Almost 62% of Peas in terms of value is being exported just in Asian countries

in the Middle East & South East Asia and we can focus on these countries.

2- Nepal imports 5% of fresh and frozen Peas which in turn means that we can


3- UK & USA are high paying countries hence we can try and increase our export


4- Preserved & frozen peas fetches a better value than fresh peas we should try

and increase our share in this products market.

5- Peas net exports has increased by 60% in terms of value in 2017-18 from 2016-

17 & quantity by 80% which means we are getting lower prices for our crop.

6- New markets should be explored to keep up the export quantity and prices

stable so that it doesn’t shock local market with excess supply.

Top 5 exporting nations of Peas in the world- (Competitors)- (2017

Data)-



Top 5 importing nations of Peas in the world (2017 Data)-

29.6%

22.6%

9.8%

9.4%

5.1%

23.5%

Contribution of total global exports of Peas in the world

USA

Ukraine

Peru

Mexico

Belgium

Others

251237

100

6141

14

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

USA Peru Belgium Mexico GlobalAverage

Ukraine

Per Kg export value of Peas in Rs.

21.7%

18.0%

17.9%

15.4%

8.3%

18.6%

Contribution of total global imports of Peas in the world

USA

Canada

UK

Belgium

Germany

Others

301272

251

172

98

26

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Per Kg import value of Peas in Rs.

82



Insights-

1- India is 2nd in Peas production in the world yet it is not ranked in top 5 in the

world, having just 2.6% of the total world exports.

2- India has the lowest per Kg export value in comparison to the top 5 exporters

which may create more demand.

3- The top 3 importing countries US, Canada and UK have nearly 57% of the total

imports. India has negligible share of this. If these markets are tapped, exports

can rise significantly.

4- Also the import price in these countries is more than 2 times which can be a

huge benefit for exports in India.

Top 3 Re-exporting nations of Peas in the world (2017 Data)-


USA 92.43% 310

Uganda 7.17% 84




Top 3 Re-importing nations of Peas in the world (2017 Data)-


Slovakia 98.63% 118

Canada 1.37% 235




Insights-

4- USA and Uganda are the largest re-exporters with 99.6% of the total re-

exports.

5- Canada and Slovakia are major re-importers but they have low share in exports.



83

GREEN CHILLY

Indian Rank in Chilli Production in the world- 2nd


A-Production Analysis

Production statistics of Chilli-


2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 119.6 787.0

India 140.0 1687.3

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 119.2 679.2

India 181.4 1997.7

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 32.9 515.2

India 292.1 2955.4

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 43.1 701.6

India 316.0 3634.0

2012-17

Total

Madhya Pradesh 314.80 2683.08

India 10337.2 226930.2

84


1- India is a major producer for Chilli and MP has the second largest share in

India’s production.

2- Chilli production in MP is around 26% of the Indian production.

3- The area of production in MP has decreased by 60% in last 4 years.

4- The production for MP has decreased by 12% in the last 4 years while for

India it has increased by 120%.

5- The productivity of India and MP is not stable at all in the last 5 years with

MP’s productivity has grown at a considerable rate and has taken a lead

over the Indian productivity.

B-Mandi Analysis

Arrival trend of Chilli in MP-


Production (%)

2013 11221.84 #DIV/0!

2014 15086.63 787011 1.92%

2015 20319.57 679246 2.99%

2016 3095.69 515204.87 0.60%

2017 30230.32 701616.5 4.31%

Total 79954.05 2683078.37 2.98%

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

MP 6.6 5.7 15.7 16.3

India 12.1 11.0 10.1 11.5

0.02.04.06.08.0

10.012.014.016.018.0

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year


MP India

85

Price Trend

2017 price trend- Wholesale Prices







2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 1000 1000 1000 700 1000

Modal 1200 1200 1400 850 1500

Maximum 1500 1600 1683 1000 1800

0

500

1000

1500

2000P

rice

-M

edia

n

Year



1012895

1194 11941388 1388

2239

1784

1404 1404 1344 1288

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500


Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Mnthly Prices Trend- Green Chilly- Rs./Quintal-2017

86

Mandi Insights

1- Mandis in MP have 3% arrival for Chilli of total production.

2- The production has decreased and the arrivals is unstable & the percentage

contribution of production coming to mandis is minimal.

3- A very small portion of Chilli reaches the Mandis as most of it is sold outside Mandis


4- There is price fluctuations in Mandis in MP in the last 5 years with erratic arrivals.

5- The graph of wholesale price trend for 2017 is shown to view the seasonality factor in

price fluctuations. We see that the least in February, maximum in July and August and

almost stable in the remaining months.

6- The key mandis for Chilli in MP are Bhopal, Lashkar, Indore, Jabalpur mandi in

Bhopal, Gwalior, Indore, Jabalpur district and they constitute more than 75% of the

total arrivals in MP.

The key months for arrivals of Chilli in MP are all 12 months, as considerable


C-Exports

Forecasted Surplus in MP



2017-18 710011.40 591084.49 164610.48 426474.01

2018-19 718506.74 598156.86 167687.54 430469.32

2019-20 727103.73 605313.86 170822.13 434491.73

2020-21 735803.59 612556.49 174015.30 438541.18


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 4 Lac MT for Chillies in MP which can

be used for processing and exporting till 2021.

Indian Exports of Chilli


Lacs) Qty (MT)

Avg Value

per kg

2016-17 07096010 GREEN

CHILLY

21,707.70 45008.27 48.23

2017-18 22,074.05 44903.25 49.16

Insights 1- The average price for exported Chilli is considerably more on average than the modal

price available in Mandis. This means that there is huge profit for exports.

87

2- Chilli is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP can take


3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Chilli.

4- Major export of Chilli is in the form of Green Chilli.

Chilli export potential

Year MP Surplus- 35% MT Exports forecast MT MP Surplus over Indian exports MT

2017-18 149265.90 44903.25 3.32

2018-19 150664.26 49393.58 3.05

2019-20 152072.11 54332.93 2.80

2020-21 153489.41 59766.23 2.57


more than all Indian Chilli exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Chilli exports and can highly


quality.

Top importing Nations from India for Chilli Fresh

Country


per kg

2017-

18 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-18

% 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-18

%

U ARAB EMTS 14,200.02 13,017.11 58.97% 25,648.30 24,377.79 54.29% 53.40

BANGLADESH

PR

2,149.39 1,353.05 6.13%

10,760.28 8,717.40 19.41% 15.52

OMAN 343.11 2,242.89 10.16% 447.92 3,523.56 7.85% 63.65

QATAR 1,044.06 1,686.93 7.64% 1,615.66 2,731.42 6.08% 61.76

U K 1,894.99 2,138.47 9.69% 2,577.24 2,412.18 5.37% 88.65

BAHARAIN IS 596.24 758.62 3.44% 1,148.12 1,602.43 3.57% 47.34

NEPAL 126.45 102.66 0.47% 961.45 505.74 1.13% 20.30

ITALY 173.91 132.91 0.60% 276.79 184.71 0.41% 71.96

BELGIUM 167.68 163.8 0.74% 187.26 183.49 0.41% 89.27

GERMANY 285.94 116.92 0.53% 342.83 169.27 0.38% 69.07

Total 21,707.70 22,074.05 100.00% 45008.27 44903.25 100.00% 49.16

88

Insights

1- Almost 85% of Chilli in terms of value is being exported just in Asian countries in the

Middle East & South East Asia at prices not as good as EU and US, hence we should

prioritize EU & USA as we already have good exports to these countries as our major

Export partners for Chilli.

2- UAE imports 59% of green at prices above global average.

3- Belgium & UK are high paying countries hence we can try and increase our export


4- Chilli net exports has increased by 4% in terms of value in 2017-18 from 2016-17 but

quantity has decreased which means we are getting better prices for our crop.



Due to unavailability of world export, import, re-export and re-import data

of Green Chilly, World scenario is not available.

89

SPICES

90

GARLIC

Indian Rank in Garlic Production in the world- 2nd

MP’s Rank in India in production- 1st

A. Production Analysis14

Production statistics of Garlic-


2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 96.92 1151.16

India 247.52 1259.27

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 107.71 1140.46

India 230.59 1251.88

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 101.31 1090.30

India 262.06 1425.46

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 114.79 1243.14

India 280.95 2611.48

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 156.88 1779.91

India 321 3197.91


India 1342.12 9745.999

14 Horticulture at a glance 2017 and Data taken directly from MP government

11.88

10.59 10.76 10.8311.35

5.09 5.43 5.44

9.309.96

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Productivity (Mt/Ha)

91

Production Insights- 1- India is a major producer for garlic and MP has the largest share in India’s production.

2- Garlic production in MP is around 65.7% of the Indian production.

3- The area of production in MP has increased by 62.5% in last 5 years.


has increased by 260%.


productivity being a bit higher than the Indian productivity, but national productivity

is catching up with MP.

B. Mandi Analysis15

Arrival trend of Garlic in MP-


Production (%)

2013 681834.92 1151157 59.23%

2014 664296.42 1140456 58.25%

2015 636617.69 1090303 58.39%

2016 622476 1243135 50.07%

2017 764417.02 1779912 42.95%

Total 3369642.05 6404963.00 52.61%

Price Trend


2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 1000 1000 1500 3000 1500

Modal 2000 2254 3230 5728 2500

Maximum 3100 3978 5200 8000 3500

02000400060008000

10000

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year



92

2017 price trend- Wholesale Monthly Prices



Indore Indore 10%

Mandsaur Mandsaur 35%

Neemuch Neemuch 26%

Ratlam Ratlam 12%

Shajapur Shujalpur 9%

Mandi Insights 1- Mandis in MP have 52% arrival for Garlic of the total production.

2- The production and arrivals are increasing but the arrivals as a % to production are

decreasing.

3- 50% of the garlic is sold outside Mandis directly to customers, private markets,


4- There are price fluctuations in Mandis in MP in the last 5 years but arrivals are nearly

same. Especially price had shot up in 2016.

5- The 2017 price trend is for showing the seasonality factor in prices. We can see that

the prices are high from January to May and they keep decreasing from July to

December.

6- The key mandis for Garlic in MP are Neemuch & Mandsaur mandi in Neemuch &

Mandsaur district and they constitute more than 61% of the total arrivals in MP.

7- MP has around 5 key Mandis that have garlic arrivals in the last 5 years which is a

very good number.

The key months for arrivals of garlic in MP are September, October, November,

December and January.

8171

4998

3409 3026 3160 2913 2671 2596 2440 2409 2109 2068

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000


Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Monthly Prices Trend- Garlic- Rs./Quintal-2017

93

C. Exports Forecasted Surplus in MP (in MT)

Year Production Production after PHL Consumption Surplus

2017-18 1689050.0 1588382.6 63112.7 1525270.0

2018-19 1825069.0 1716294.9 64292.4 1652002.5

2019-20 1961088.0 1844207.2 65494.3 1778712.9

2020-21 2097107.0 1972119.4 66718.5 1905400.9


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 19 Lac MT for Garlics in MP which


Indian Exports of Garlic16

Year Product Value (Rs. Lacs) Qty (MT) Avg Value per kg

2016-17 Garlic Fresh

or Chilled

14,256.19 23547.25 60.54

2017-18 13,266.01 31222.7 42.49

2016-17 Dehydrated

Garlic

powder

7861.06 6038.3 130.19

2017-18 6734.03 7415.17 90.81

2016-17 Dehydrated

Garlic flakes

9623.94 4433.89 217.05

2017-18 8737.57 8921.61 97.94

2016-17 Dried Garlic

2,082.18 1245.91 167.12

2017-18 3,546.22 3230.32 109.78

2016-17 Garlic oil

1987.25 106.16 1871.94

2017-18 2941.4 125.08 2351.61

Insights 1- The average price for exported Garlic with value addition is considerably more on


for exports.

2- Garlic is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP can take


3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Garlic.

Garlic export potential in MP-


MT

Exports forecast


2017-18 533844.48 50914.88 1048.50%

2018-19 578200.86 56006.37 1032.38%


94

2019-20 622549.52 61607.00 1010.52%

2020-21 666890.31 67767.71 984.08%


much more than all Indian garlic exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Garlic exports and can



Top 10 importing Nations of Garlic from India-17

Country


Value per

kg 2017-18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

MALAYSIA 5012.58 2533.83 19.1% 7,958.46 9,654.18 30.92% 26.25

INDONESIA 2517.05 3245.77 24.47% 4,612.00 6,313.00 20.22% 51.41

BANGLADESH

PR

3677.37 1923.86 14.5% 6,740.98 5,178.00 16.58% 37.15

VIETNAM SOC

REP

913.29 1124.35 8.48% 1,516.20 2,949.18 9.45% 38.12

TAIWAN 154.66 1230.12 9.27% 257.58 1,985.33 6.36% 61.96

SRI LANKA DSR 487.84 1238.74 9.34% 592.02 1,700.72 5.45% 72.84

PHILIPPINES 240.68 437.59 3.30% 396 767.03 2.46% 57.05

THAILAND 168.55 142.82 1.08% 253.05 653.11 2.09% 21.87

U ARAB EMTS 256.96 367.87 2.77% 343.23 640.12 2.05% 57.47

TUNISIA NR 68.94 0.52% NR 259 0.83% 26.62

Top 10 total 13428.98 12313.89 92.82% 22669.52 30099.67 96.40%

Total 14256.19 13266.01 100% 23547.26 31222.71 100% 11.36

Insights

1- Almost 68% of garlic in terms of value is being exported just in 3 countries in the

Indian subcontinent & South East Asia at prices not as good as EU and US, hence we

can prioritize these countries as our major Export partners for garlic.

2- Bangladesh imports 17% of fresh and chilled garlic which in turn means that we can


3- Taiwan, Sri Lanka, Philippines, Indonesia & UAE are high paying countries hence we

can try and increase our export contribution to these countries.

4- Garlic net exports has increased by 75% in 2017-18 from 2016-17.


95

Top 5 exporting nations of Garlic in the world- (Competitors)-

(2017 Data)-18



Top 5 importing nations of Garlic in the world (2017 Data)-



Insights- 1- India is ranked second in Garlic production in the world yet it is not ranked in top 5

exporters in the world, having just 2.1% of the total world exports.

2- India has the lowest per Kg export value in comparison to the top 5 exporters which

may create more demand. This value is lower than the global average too.

3- The top 3 importing countries Indonesia, US and Brazil and they consist of nearly

50% of the total imports. India has negligible share of this in US and Brazil and it has

a very low share in UK. If these markets are tapped, exports can rise significantly.



18 https://comtrade.un.org/data/

44.6%

22.9%

4.2%

3.8%

3.4%21.1%

Contribution to total global exports of Garlic in the world

Spain

Argentina

Italy

Chile

Egypt

Others

238206

176143 139 134

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Per Kg export value of Garlic in Rs.

26.6%

13.0%

10.1%8.4%3.7%

38.2%

Contribution to total global imports of Garlic in the world

Indonesia

Brazil

USA

Malaysia

Germany

Others

226

186

11799

79 70

0

50

100

150

200

250

Per Kg import value of Garlic seeds in Rs.

96

Top 3 Re-exporting nations of Garlic in the world (2017 Data)-


USA 77.91% 289

New Zealand 10.8% 194

China, Hong Kong 6.9% 87




Top 3 Re-importing nations of Garlic in the world (2017 Data)-


Argentina 45.01% 257

Slovakia 27.96% 246

Australia 19.96% 184




Insights- 1- USA, New Zealand and China, Hong Kong are the largest re-exporters with 93% of

the total re-exports.

2- Australia, Argentina and Slovakia are major re-importers but they have a low share in

exports.



97

GINGER

Indian Rank in Ginger Production in the world- 1st


Production statistics of Ginger-


of India

2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 25.03 352.28 50.50%

India 145.25 697.63

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 24.89 372.47 55.59%

India 141.62 670.06

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 19.52 336.82 43.11%

India 152.65 781.31

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 20.34 325.43 28.85%

India 174.62 1128.18

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 23.15 372.64 34.22%

India 179.00 1089.00

2012-17

Total

Madhya Pradesh 112.93 1759.64 40.30%

India 793.15 4366.18

98

Insights- 1- India is a major producer for Ginger in the world.

2- Ginger production in MP is around 17% of the Indian production.



increased by 28%.

5- The productivity of India and MP is almost same, MP was ahead but India has caught

up in the last 5 years with MP’s productivity.

B. Mandi Analysis

Arrival trend of Ginger in MP-


Production (%)

2013 2914.93 352282 0.83%

2014 4115.28 372474 1.10%

2015 5704.26 336821 1.69%

2016 9564.85 325429.58 2.94%

2017 9672.45 372637.8 2.60%

Total 31971.77 1759644.38 1.82%

14.0814.96

17.2516.00 16.09

4.80 4.73 5.126.46 6.08

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

18.00

20.00

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Productivity (Mt/Ha)

99

Price Trend

2017 price trend- Wholesale prices monthly






2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 3000 3000 1600 1500 1200

Modal 5000 4000 2500 2000 1500

Maximum 6000 6000 3000 2500 2000

01000200030004000500060007000

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year



12621106

1207 11991390 1390

1923 19232058 2058 1990 1990

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500


Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Mnthly Prices Trend- Ginger- Rs./Quintal- 2017

100

Mandi Insights 1- Mandis in MP have 1.82% arrival for Ginger of total production.

2- The production has almost remained the same but the arrivals & the percentage

contribution of production coming to mandis has increased.

3- Ginger reaches the Mandis as well as most of it is sold outside Mandis directly to


4- The prices have dipped in Mandis in MP in the last 5 years as arrivals have increased.

5- The 2017 price trend of wholesale prices is shown to view the seasonality factor for

price fluctuations. As we see the prices are lower in Jan to June and more from July to

December.

6- The key mandis for Ginger in MP are Bhopal, Indore & Jabalpur mandi in Bhopal,

Indore & Jabalpur district and they constitute more than 97% of the total arrivals in

MP.

7- MP has 3 key Mandis that have Ginger arrivals in the last 5 years.

C. Exports

Forecasted Surplus in MP (in MT)



2017-18 379423.74 351460.21 57943.17 293517.04

2018-19 386333.26 357860.49 59026.30 298834.19

2019-20 393368.60 364377.33 60129.68 304247.65

2020-21 400532.06 371012.84 61253.69 309759.16


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 12 Lac MT for Ginger in MP which


Indian Exports of Ginger

Year Product Value (Rs. Lacs) Qty (MT) Avg Value per kg

2016-17 Ginger- Neither

Crushed not

Ground

20879.01 29948.81 69.72

2017-18 16033.97 23475.43 68.30

2016-17 Ginger- Crushed or

Ground

7240.42 3538.66 204.61

2017-18 7257.84 3764.43 192.80

2016-17 Ginger Oil

2419.66 27.75 8719.50

2017-18 2434.18 38.27 6360.54

101

2016-17 Ginger Oleoresins

5276.32 234.31 2251.85

2017-18 5322.10 264.85 2009.48

Insights

1- The average price for exported Ginger with value addition is considerably more on average

than the modal price available in Mandis. This means that there is huge profit for exports with

value addition.

2- Ginger is in demand in various forms hence processing is necessary and MP can take


3- Major export of Ginger is in the form of Ginger- Neither Crushed not Ground, Ginger-

Neither Crushed not Ground.

4- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Ginger.

Ginger export potential


MT

Exports forecast


2017-18 102731 27543 3.73

2018-19 104592 30297 3.45

2019-20 106487 33327 3.20

2020-21 108416 36660 2.96

If we assume only 35% of the surplus is used for exports, yet the surplus is much more than

all Indian Ginger exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Ginger exports and can highly


quality.

Top importing Nations from India for Ginger

Ginger- Neither Crushed nor Ground

Country


per kg

2017-

18 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-18

% 2016-2017 2017-2018

2017-18

%

MOROCCO 2268.32 5381.14 33.56% 1589 4419 18.82% 122

BANGLADESH

PR 5501.05 2602.59 16.23% 19890.74 12548.45 53.45% 21

U S A 1478.01 1467.58 9.15% 641.15 659.8 2.81% 222

SPAIN 3893.44 935.38 5.83% 2670.4 807.55 3.44% 116

U ARAB EMTS 568.99 836.3 5.22% 507.72 933.68 3.98% 90

102

SAUDI ARAB 1222.98 774.07 4.83% 884.11 656.4 2.80% 118

GERMANY 743.47 408.53 2.55% 181.65 86.36 0.37% 473

NEPAL 597.44 373.07 2.33% 396.34 296.9 1.26% 126

YEMEN

REPUBLC 332.71 276.41 1.72% 236.45 256.5 1.09% 108

U K 353.33 267.62 1.67% 155.93 168.92 0.72% 158

Total top 10 16959.74 13322.69 83.09% 27153.49 20833.56 88.75% 64

Total 20,879.01 16,033.97 100.00% 29,948.81 23,475.43 100.00% 68

Insights

1- Only 28% of Ginger in terms of value is being exported just in Asian countries in the

Middle East & South East Asia.

2- Bangladesh imports 53.45% of Ginger which in turn means that we can exclusively

meet their demand as it would be transported through land.

3- Germany, UK & USA are high paying countries hence we can try and increase our

export contribution to these countries.

4- Ginger- Crushed or Ground fetches a better value than fresh Ginger we should try and

increase our share in this products market.

5- Ginger net exports has decreased by 20% in terms of value in 2017-18 from 2016-17

& quantity by 20%.



Top 5 exporting nations of Ginger in the world- (Competitors)- (2017 Data)-

1- Total exports in 2017- 89649033 Kg 2- Total Export Value in 2017- 122654895 US $

41.1%

12.9%10.4%

6.4%

4.8%

24.3%

Contribution to total global exports of Ginger in the world

Peru

India

Indonesia

Brazil

Germany

Others

185

124

91 8968

58

0

50

100

150

200

Per Kg export value of Ginger in Rs.

103

Top 5 importing nations of Ginger in the world (2017 Data)-



Insights-

1- India leads Ginger production in the world yet it is ranked 2nd in world exports having just

12% of the total world exports.



3- The top 3 importing countries US, Japan and Pakistan have nearly 49% of the total

imports. India has negligible share of this in US and Germany and it has a very low share

in UK. If these markets are tapped, exports can rise significantly.

4- Also the import price in these countries is more than 2 times which can be a huge benefit

for exports in India.

Top 3 Re-exporting nations of Ginger in the world (2017 Data)-


USA 70.60% 125

Jordan 13.96% 74

Canada 5.23% 316




Top 3 Re-importing nations of Ginger in the world (2017 Data)-


UK 99.89% 72




20.1%

16.3%

12.1%7.5%

5.4%

38.6%

Contribution to total global imports of Ginger in the world

USA

Japan

Pakistan

Germany

UnitedKingdomOthers

151

10690 86 84

52

020406080

100120140160

Per Kg import value of Ginger in Rs.

104

Insights- 1- USA and Jordan, Canada are the largest re-exporters with 89% of the total re-exports.

2- UK is the only major re-importers but it has low share in exports.



105

CORIANDER SEEDS

Indian Rank in Orange Production in the world- 1st (Anise, Badian, Fennel,

Coriander)



Production statistics of Coriander-


2012-13

Mad

hya Pradesh 158.96 192.33

India 543.2 634.21

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 182.93 251.98

India 469.13 490.63

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 149.42 288.21

India 558.08 655.92

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 249.1 351.05

India 667.9 828.05

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 275.76 387.43

India 699 1064

2012-17 Total Madhya Pradesh 1016.17 1471

India 2937.31 3672.81

1.211.38

1.93

1.41 1.41.17

1.051.18 1.24

1.52

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year


MP India

106

Production Insights- 1- India ranks first in Coriander, Anise, Badian and Fennel production in the world.

2- MP has a very good share in the Indian production with high production of coriander

and is ranked 3rd in India in terms of Area.

3- MP also has good production of Coriander leaves but we have majorly worked on

Coriander seeds in this report as they are exported more.

4- Coriander production in MP is around 35-45% of the Indian production which is

huge.

5- The area of production in India in the last 5 years has increased by 28.66% for

coriander while for MP, it has increased by 73.48%.



increase in area.

7- The productivity of India and MP has increasing in the last 5 years and MP’s

productivity is a bit higher than the Indian productivity.

B. Mandi Analysis

Arrival trend of Coriander in MP-


Production (%)

2014 129314 251980 51.32

2015 133363 288207 46.27

2016 171574 351051 48.87

2017 223834 387428 57.77

Total 932977 1470999 63.42%

Price Trend- Coriander

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 4000 5000 5002 5001 3575

Modal 5000 6656 7600 5910 4200

Maximum 5800 8370 9500 6580 4800

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year



107

2017 Price Trend- Wholesale prices


Key Districts Key Mandis Arrival %

Guna Guna 34.73%

Neemuch Neemuch 11.14%

Guna Kumbhraj 10.54%

Mandsaur Shamgarh 8.66%

Neemuch Manasa 6.40%

Mandi Insights

1- Mandis in MP have a very high arrival % for Coriander as compared to other

horticulture crops.

2- The production and arrivals both are increasing in MP.

3- More than half of Coriander seeds reach the Mandis.

4- The prices are almost stable in the last 5 years.

5- The key mandis for Coriander seeds are Guna and Kumbhraj mandi in Guna

district, Neemuch and Manasa mandi in Neemuch and Shamgarh mandi in

Mandsaur.

6- Over 50 Mandis have orange arrivals in MP in the last 5 years which is a

considerable number.

Coriander seeds come to the mandis all across the year but the peak

arrival occurs in February, March, April and May months.

5529

4151

5298 5298

4706

42183886 3872 3751 3751

4619 4619

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000


Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Monthly Prices Trend- Coriander- Rs./Quintal- 2017

108

C. Exports

Forecasted Surplus of Coriander seeds in MP



2017-18 440977 408786 85376 323410

2018-19 489903 454140 86972 367169

2019-20 538829 499494 88597 410897

2020-21 587755 544849 90253 454595


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 15.5 Lac MT for Coriander seeds in

MP which can be used for processing and exporting till 2021.

Indian Exports of Coriander seeds


per kg

2016-17 Coriander seeds-

Neither

crushed/Ground

20,120.24 23071.06 87.21

2017-18 18809.92 27071.63 69.48

2016-17 Coriander seeds-

Crushed/Ground

10,163.67 8796.94 115.54

2017-18 9390.1 9591.92 97.90

2016-17 Coriander seed Oil

463.13 14.11 3282.28

2017-18 251.81 8.56 2941.71

Insights 1- The average price for exported Coriander seeds is higher than the modal price for

seeds uncrushed and not grounded and more than 1.5 times for crushed and ground

seeds in Mandis. This means that there is profit for exports.

2- Coriander seed oil can also be exported and it has a high price of about 30 times of

coriander seeds. This is a very good opportunity for exports.

3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Coriander seeds.

Coriander seeds export potential in MP-


MT

Exports forecast


2017-18 113194 36664 308.74%

2018-19 128509 40330 318.64%

2019-20 143814 44363 324.18%

2020-21 159108 48799 326.05%

109

If we assume only 35% of the surplus is used for exports, the surplus is higher than all

Indian coriander seeds exports.

This shows that MP can be a significant player in coriander exports and can


quality.

Top 10 importing Nations of Coriander seeds- Neither crushed Nor

ground from India-

Country


Value per

kg 2017-18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

Malaysia 10356 8207 43.63% 11931 11639 42.99% 71

UAE 1676 1935 10.29% 2338 3044 11.24% 64

Nepal 699 1508 8.02% 886 2615 9.66% 58

Saudi Arabia 1147 1252 6.65% 1656 2311 8.54% 54

UK 1124 969 5.15% 1094 1037 3.83% 94

Oman 797 604 3.21% 860 806 2.98% 75

Singapore 506 422 2.24% 614 618 2.28% 68

USA 937 744 3.96% 596 575 2.12% 129

Pakistan 242 245 1.30% 367 568 2.10% 43

Qatar 284 318 1.69% 378 477 1.76% 67

Total top 10 11769 16205 86.15% 20719 23689 87.51% 68

Total 20210 18810 100% 23071 27072 100% 69

Insights

1- Almost half of seeds in terms of value is being exported just in Malaysia, hence

we can prioritize Malaysia as our major Export partners for oranges.

2- We can exclusively meet the demand of Nepal and Pakistan as it would be

transported through land and transportation would be cheap.

3- USA and UK are high paying countries hence we can try and increase our

export contribution to these countries which is currently low.

4- Coriander seeds net exports value dropped by 6.93% in 2017-18 but in quantity

it rose to 17.34%.

5- New markets should be explored to keep demand and prices stable so that it

doesn’t shock local market with excess supply.

110

Top 10 importing Nations of Coriander seeds- Crushed or ground

from India-

Country


Value per

kg 2017-18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

South Africa 2082 1548 16.48% 2135 1801 18.78% 86

UK 1554 1456 15.50% 1461 1568 16.34% 93

USA 1144 1449 15.43% 710 1103 11.50% 131

UAE 1390 1080 11.50% 1444 1284 13.39% 84

Saudi Arabia 599 638 6.79% 434 647 6.74% 99

Australia 597 489 5.21% 427 415 4.33% 118

Qatar 320 466 4.96% 312 533 5.56% 87

Kuwait 332 306 3.26% 241 286 2.99% 107

Malaysia 231 289 3.07% 168 307 3.20% 94

Oman 219 200 2.13% 146 153 1.60% 130

Total top 10 8468 7919 84.33% 7477 8097 84.41% 98

Total 10164 9390 100% 8797 9592 100% 98

Insights

1- Almost 60% of the crushed seeds in terms of value is being exported just in 4

countries in South Africa, UK, USA and UAE. Hence we can prioritize these

countries as our major Export partners for oranges.

2- USA, Australia and Oman are very high paying countries hence we can try and


3- Crushed seeds of coriander exports dropped by 7.62% in terms of value but rose by

9.04% in terms of quantity in 2017-18.

Top 10 importing Nations of Coriander Oil from India-

Country


Value per

kg 2017-18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

USA 61.4 42.2 16.76% 4.2 3.4 39.60% 1245

Mexico 43.9 41.2 16.35% 0.8 0.9 9.93% 4844

Australia 14.4 23.8 9.46% 0.7 0.5 5.84% 4764

Canada 4 13.6 5.38% 0.1 0.4 4.56% 3474

Colombia 9.1 7.9 3.13% 0.5 0.4 4.44% 2074

Poland 15.6 13.7 5.45% 0.3 0.4 4.44% 3613

Ireland 28.2 14.9 5.91% 0.4 0.4 4.21% 4131

111

Thailand 34.1 13.4 5.32% 0.7 0.4 3.74% 4184

Vietnam 3.9 12 4.76% 0.1 0.3 3.27% 4279

France 6.1 9.5 3.76% 0.1 0.3 2.92% 3792

Total top 10 220.8 192.1 76.28% 7.9 7.1 82.94% 2705

Total 463.1 251.8 100% 14.1 8.6 100% 2942

Insights

1- Coriander oil has a high export price so there should be focus on exporting it.

2- 40% of oil is being exported to USA, Mexico and Australia and hence we should

prioritize them. Also Mexico and Australia pay a lot for oil which can be highly

beneficial.

3- Coriander oil net exports dropped a lot in 2017-18 and which means that we need to

find the cause of this slump in demand for Indian oranges and rectify it.

4- Currently the exports by volume is less as compared to seeds.

Top 5 exporting nations of Coriander seeds in the world

(Competitors)- (2017 Data)-



Top 5 importing nations of Oranges in the world (2017 Data)-

20.1%

15.8%

13.7%7.8%5.2%

37.3%

Contribution of total global exports of Coriander seeds in the world

India

Russia

Italy

Bulgaria

Ukraine

Others

7669

49

3224 24

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Italy India GlobalAverage

Bulgaria Russia Ukraine

Per Kg export value of COriander seeds in Rs.

14.3%

11.7%

6.9%

4.9%

4.7%

57.5%

Contribution of total global imports of Coriander seeds in the world

Malaysia

India

Indonesia

Japan

Egypt

Others

108

8273

6148

36

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Per Kg import value of Coriander seeds in Rs.

112



Insights-

1- India ranks 1st in Coriander production in the world and it also ranks 1st in

Coriander seeds export in the world having a major share of 20% exports.

2- India has a bit high per Kg export value than the global average in 2017-18.

3- India also ranks 2nd in imports. Malaysia, Indonesia, Japan and Egypt also have

a good share in imports and India can focus to export in these countries where

currently we export almost negligible to them.

4- Also Japan, Malaysia and Egypt pay a higher price for imports than our export

price which can lead to profits.

Top 3 Re-exporting nations of oranges in the world (2017 Data)-

Country % of Total Re-exports Re-export value- Rs./Kg

USA 65.64% 195

Jordan 14.77% 63

Canada 9.26% 258




Top 3 Re-importing nations of oranges in the world (2017 Data)-

Country % of Total Re-imports Re-import value- Rs./Kg

Canada 49.43% 112

Russia 26.36% 204

Canada 15.47% 234




Insights-

1- USA, Jordan and Canada are the largest re-exporters with more than 90% of

the total re-exports. The re-export price is much more than the export price.

2- Canada and Russia are the major re-importers. Russia also has a high share in

exports. The re-import value is also very high.

113

RED CHILLY

Indian Rank in Red Chilly Production in the world- 1st



Production statistics of Red Chilly-


2012-13 Madhya Pradesh 140.77 127.5

India 880.48 1338.31

2013-14 Madhya Pradesh 119.63 466.2

India 840.09 1864.77

2014-15 Madhya Pradesh 119.21 501.58

India 808.06 1974.15

2015-16 Madhya Pradesh 103.71 371.44

India 842.72 1759.39

2016-17 Madhya Pradesh 98.54 303.63

India 853.54 2264.13


India 4224.89 9200.74

0.91

3.904.21

3.583.08

1.52

2.22 2.442.09

2.65

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Year


MP India

114


1- India is a major producer for Red Chilly being the first in the world and MP has

a significant share in India’s production with many districts producing Red

Chilly.

2- Red Chilly production in MP is around 20% of the Indian production.

3- The area of production in MP has decreased by 30% in last 5 years while for

India it has decreased by 3.06%.

4- Yet, the production for MP has increased by 138.13% in the last 5 years while

for India it has increased by 69.18%.

5- The productivity of MP has significantly risen by 240.2% in 5 years while for

India it rose by 74.52%. This may be due to the favourable climatic situations

in MP for Red Chilly.

B. Mandi Analysis

Arrival trend of Red Chilly in MP-


Production (%)

2013 67037 127502 52.58%

2014 65509 466200 14.05%

2015 83560 501581 16.66%

2016 5507 371435 1.48%

2017 9544 303626 3.14%

Total 231158 1770344 13.06

Price Trend

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Minimum 2450 3000 3000 3577 3600

Modal 5000 5000 4500 3700 4300

Maximum 6000 7500 7200 3750 5300

010002000300040005000600070008000

Pri

ce-

Med

ian

Year



115

2017 Price Trend- Wholesale Prices



Khargone Sanawad 70.02%


Dhar Dhamnod 9.33%

Mandi Insights 1- Mandis in MP have no patterns for arrivals of Red Chilly.

2- The arrivals have decreased a lot in 2016 and 2017.

3- A lot of Red Chilly does not reach the Mandis as majority of it is sold outside Mandis


4- The price fluctuations in Mandis are less in MP in the last 5 years.

5- The key mandis for Red Chilly in MP are Sanawad mandi in Khargone district, Indore

mandi in Indore district and Dhamnod mandi in Dhar district. They compromise

91.8% of the total arrivals in MP.

6- The price trend graph of 2017 is shown to depict the seasonality factor in price

fluctuations. We see that the prices are high in January, February and March and they

decrease in April, May and June. The prices go up again in July and August and from

September they come down.

7- Only 13-15 Mandis have Red Chilly arrivals in MP in the last 5 years which is a very

low number.

Red Chilly comes to the mandis all over the year but the key months for arrivals

in MP are December, January, February and March.

8211 8211 7931

4194 3956 3956

7465 7465

49424397

51174749

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000


Pri

ce

Month

Wholesale Mnthly Prices Trend- Garlic- Rs./Quintal- 2017

116

C. Exports Forecasted Surplus of Red Chilly in MP



2017-18 344014 321619 91097 230522

2018-19 325782 304574 92800 211773

2019-20 310367 290162 94535 195627

2020-21 297014 277678 96302 181376


methodology.

As we can see there is high surplus above 8 Lac MT for Red Chilly in MP which


Indian Exports of Red Chilly


per kg

2016-17 Chilly Powder

45,137 31,349 144

2017-18 38,899 34,931 111

2016-17 Chilly Seeds

2,137 1,824 117

2017-18 3,584 5,724 63

Insights

1- The average price for exported Chilly powder is around 3 times on average than

the modal price available in Mandis and for the chilly seeds, it is 2 times. This

means that there is huge profit for exports. 2- Red Chilly is in demanded more in processed forms and MP can take advantage of

it by encouraging SME’s and processing units.

3- Food and logistics parks in MP should help in exports of Red Chilly.

Red Chilly export potential in MP-

Year MP Surplus- 35% MT Exports forecast MT MP Surplus over Indian

exports MT

2017-18 80682.5422 34931.08 2.30976375

2018-19 74120.7015 38424.188 1.92901152

2019-20 68469.5083 42266.6068 1.61994334

2020-21 63481.6612 46493.2675 1.3653947


much more than all Indian Red Chilly exports.

117

This shows that MP can be a significant player in Red Chilly exports and

can highly increase Indian exports too by tapping the right markets and


Top 10 importing Nations of Chilly powder from India-

Country


Value per

kg 2017-18

2016-

2017

2017-

2018 2017-18 %

2016-

2017

2017-

2018

2017-18

%

UAE 11507 9361 24.48% 10090 10756 21.87% 87

USA 6998 5961 15.59% 3267 3745 7.61% 159

UK 3548 2934 7.67% 1781 1913 3.89% 153

Saudi Arabia 2475 1995 5.22% 1451 1343 2.73% 149

Indonesia 1580 1975 5.17% 1293 2190 4.45% 90

South Africa 2115 1823 4.77% 1116 1358 2.76% 134

Qatar 2235 1676 4.38% 1543 1443 2.93% 116

Tunasia 1373 1333 3.49% 1063 1212 2.46% 110

Oman 1217 1232 3.22% 644 829 1.69% 149

Kuwait 1106 877 2.29% 734 653 1.33% 134

Total Top 10 34155 29166 76.28% 22983 25442 51.73% 115

Total 44366 38234 100% 52761 49181 100% 78

Insights

1- 30% of Chilly powder in terms of value is being exported just in 2 countries in

the UAE and USA, hence we can prioritize these countries as our major Export

partners for Red Chilly. Also USA pay a very high price which is beneficial for

India.

2- USA, UK, Saudi Arabia, Oman and South Africa are high paying countries

hence we can try and increase our export contribution to these countries.

3- Red Chilly net exports has dropped by 13.82% in 2017-18 from 2016-17 which

means we need to find the cause of this slump in demand for Indian Chilly

powder and rectify it.

4- New markets should be explored to keep demand and prices stable so that it

doesn’t shock local market with excess supply.

Top 5 countries who import Chilly seeds from India- Iran, Korea,

USA, Vietnam and Mexico

Due to unavailability of world export data, we could not do the world

analysis

118

Crop Infrastructure Requirements

The key crops identified by us for exports from MP need the following infrastructural

changes & upgrades.

Fruits

119

Vegetables

120

Potential products which are being exported-19

Potential products which are being exported export from various crops

Guava

Guava Fresh/Dry

Garlic

Garlic Fresh/Chilled

Onion

Onion Fresh/Chilled

Guava

Prepared/Preserved

Dehydrated Garlic

Powder Onion Preserved

Orange

Orange Fresh/Dry Dehydrated Garlic Flakes Onion Dried

Orange

Prepared/Preserved Dried Garlic Onion Seeds

Orange Squash Garlic Oleoresin

Potato

Potato Fresh/Chilled

Orange Pulp Garlic Oil Potato Frozen

Orange oil

Chilly Red

Chilly Red Potato Prepared

Preserved

Banana Banana Fresh/Dry Chilly Seeds Potato Dried

Banana Plantains Chilly Powder Potato Flour

Mango

Mango Fresh/Dry

Ginger

Ginger Fresh/Dry Potato Flakes

Mango sliced Ginger

Bleached/Unbleached Potato Starch

Mango Pulp Ginger Powder

Tomato

Tomato Fresh/Chilled

Mango Flour Ginger

Crushed/Uncrushed Tomato Seeds

Mango Kernel Ginger Oil Tomato Chutney/Paste

Mango Oil Ginger Grass Oil

Mango Pickle Ginger Oleoresins Tomato

Prepared/Preserved

Mango Chutney

Coriander

seed

Coriander Powder Tomato Diced

Mango Jam and Jellies Coriander Seeds

Crushed/Uncrushed Tomato Juice

Mango Squash Coriander Seeds Oil Tomato Ketchup

Mango Juice

Green

Chilly

Green Chilly

Green

Peas

Peas Dried

Pomegranate Pomegranate fresh Chilly seeds Peas Shelled

Pomegranate seeds Peas Frozen


http://commerce-app.gov.in/eidb/Default.asp

121

Organic Agriculture

The National Program on Organic Production (NPOP) denotes organic agriculture as “a

system of farm design and management to create an eco system, which can achieve

sustainable productivity without the use of artificial external inputs such as chemical

fertilizers and pesticides”.

Codex Alimentarius Commission argues that the “organic agriculture is holistic production

management system, which promotes and enhances agro – eco system health, including

biodiversity, biological cycle and soil biological activities”.

Organic products are now very much in demand in the world so if MP increases its

focus on organic production, we can improve exports by a large share.

Indian Scenario for organic agriculture-20

India has 50.85% of total organic farm land of whole of Asia but it is still only 0.8% of the

total agricultural land in

Indian Yearly portion of organic farm land out of the total land under cultivation

20 https://statistics.fibl.org/

122

One of the significant developments in the Indian organic sector during the past year has been

the recognition of Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) by the government at the policy

and implementation levels. Recently, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India

(FSSAI) launched an “Indian Organic Integrity Database” to help consumers verify the

authenticity of organic food. It has also introduced a common logo for organic foods with the

tagline “Jaivik Bharat.” The database and the associated portal verify the authenticity of the

organic produce – certified by either third-party systems or Participatory Guarantee Systems

(PGS). This development brings more small and marginal farmers within the ambit of

certified organic markets. In addition to the 1.5 million organic hectares certified through the

third-party systems, there are over 200’000 hectares certified under PGS.

The scope for certification of organic farm produce is far beyond this. It is estimated that at

least 18 million hectares in the North-eastern region of India are traditionally organic, and so

are many other farms managed by tribal populations and those in totally rain-fed areas. For

instance, Sikkim, in the Northeast of India, is heavily mountainous and there is little

farmland. Because most of these areas are very poor, farmers have little access to chemical

inputs. It has therefore been easy for Sikkim to become fully organic.

The challenge is to recognize these products, which do not have any certification, as organic

in the markets. PGS is one step in this direction.

The other major step is the declaration of entire states and districts as organic by prohibiting

the use of chemicals through effective regulations. Sikkim, a state in Northeast India, with a

cultivated area of 56’000 hectares, has been declared as organic. Arunachal Pradesh and

Mizoram, two other states of Northeast India, are on the path to follow this suit. Similarly,

Kasargode, a district of Kerala state in Southern India, has drafted a roadmap leading to

become an organic district.

There is a rising demand for organic produce in the domestic and international markets. The

export of organic products is estimated to triple by 2020, and the domestic market is also

showing a similar trend. Presently, about one fifth of the total third-party certified organic

produce is exported, while the rest is sold mainly in large cities in India. The PGS-certified

products are sold almost entirely within the country. India is among the key players in the

organic sector globally, with the largest number of certified organic producers in the world

and an ever-growing market for organic produce.

The Government of India has implemented the National Programme for Organic Production

(NPOP). The national programme involves the accreditation programme for Certification

Bodies, standards for organic production, promotion of organic farming etc. The NPOP

standards for production and accreditation system have been recognized by European

Commission and Switzerland for unprocessed plant products as equivalent to their country

standards. Similarly, USDA has recognized NPOP conformity assessment procedures of

accreditation as equivalent to that of US. With these recognitions, Indian organic products

duly certified by the accredited certification bodies of India are accepted by the importing

countries.

123

Indian Statistics in organic production-21

Oilseeds Organic production

Oilseed is the only category where India is in top 10 producers of organic

commodities being exported.

Of the oilseeds, Soyabean oilseeds constitutes 50% of the total exports.

As MP is the leading producer of soyabean in MP, focus on organic farming for

soyabean can highly increase its share in exports.

Organic Exports

The total volume of export during 2015-16 was 263687 MT.

The organic food export realization was around 298 million USD.

Organic products are exported to European Union, US, Canada, Switzerland,

Korea, Australia, New Zealand, South East Asian countries, Middle East, South

Africa etc.

Oil seeds (50%) lead among the products exported followed by processed food

products (25%), Cereals & Millets (17%), Tea (2%), Pulses (2%), Spices (1%),

Dry fruits (1%), and others.

MP’s scenario for organic agriculture-

Among all the states, Madhya Pradesh has the largest area under organic

certification followed by Himachal Pradesh and Rajasthan.

MP has 10% of organic farming in terms of land under cultivation of Indian

organic farms.

MP Government has developed a brand called ‘MP Organic’ to boost demand

for organic products based out of MP.


124

World scenario of organic agriculture22


126

MP Mandi Analysis23

MP has a total of 257 regulated Mandis which have arrivals of various commodities

covered under the APMC act of crops.

Our focus is majorly on Horticulture crops being produced in MP and how they are

being traded through various mandis in MP. Horticulture crops are not part of the

APMC act.

We have kept focus on mandis as they can be established to be a primary source

of procurement for horticulture crops being exported from India. This need is

from both the sides of supply & demand.

A lot of infrastructural requirement is needed for horticulture crops to be exported

through mandis as they are perishable products.

We have analysed the current scenario of mandis and areas where we will have to

work upon to make mandis a primary source of exports procurement.

Introduction-

1. There are 257 regulated mandis in MP which are divided under 7 divisions and 51

districts.

2. Out of these 257 mandis in MP, only 132 mandis have horticulture arrivals in 2017-

18.

3. The total arrival in these 132 mandis in 2017-18 for fruits, veg and spices was

3316630.79 tonnes.

23 http://mpmandiboard.gov.in/ http://agmarknet.gov.in/

37, 28%

19, 15%

19, 14%

24, 18%

3, 2%

25, 19%

5, 4%

Total Number of Mandis in MP under each zone

Ujjain

Indore

Bhopal

Gwalior

Sagar

http://mpmandiboard.gov.in/

127

4. Mandis are classified into 4 grade types numbered 1 to 4-

Analysis of arrivals of Horticulture arrivals in MP mandis

The following graph shows the arrivals of Major crops in mandis in MP from 201-14

to 2017-18.

The total arrival in five years is 132853377 Mt.

We can see that wheat has almost 50% arrivals followed by Soyaben at 12% and

Paddy at 11%. These 3 are the major crops in MP as per arrivals.

Horticulture is at 10% and it includes all fruits, vegetables and spices arrivals.

As compared to agriculture crops, horticulture crop’s arrivals are very less.

Commodities such as wheat, paddy & soyabean individually outperform horticulture

arrivals.

32, 24%

27, 20%

22, 17%

51, 39%

No. of Mandis Grade Wise

Grade 1

Grade 2

Grade 3

Grade 4

45%

12%11%

10%

6%

4%12%

Total MP Mandi Arrivals- 2013-2017

Wheat

Soyabean

Paddy

Horti- F,V,M

Chickpea

Corn

others

128

The following graph shows the share of each division to the total arrivals from 2013-

14 to 2017-18.

Ujjain, Indore and Bhopal zones constitute 80% of the total arrivals. There are 75 out

of 132 mandis in these regions. (56.82%)

Gwalior, Sagar, Jabalpur and Reva zones have 43.18% (57) of the 132 mandis but

they constitute only 20% of the arrivals which is less than the arrivals of Indore alone.

Reva has 5 mandis but constitutes only 0.37% of the arrivals while Sagar has only 3

mandis yet has 7% of the arrivals. Also Jabalpur has 25 mandis yet has only 4% of the

arrivals.

Indore & Ujjain Divisions make up for 70% arrivals hence key infrastructure

should be developed here in first phase.

Arrival trend in Mandis24


10%

34%

36%

9%

7%4% 0.37%

Division wise arrivals in MP- 2013 to 2017

Bhopal

Indore

Ujjain

Gwalior

Sagar

Jabalpur

Rewa

2033 2091

2492

2920

3317

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

Tho

usa

nd

Mt

Horticulture Arrivals

129

Horticulture arrivals have increased by 65% from 2013-14 to 2017

Horticultural arrivals has increased over a period of 5 years but they are still a

significantly small portion of production.

This plot shows the fluctuations in arrivals due to seasonality in mandis.

This is also a key reason causing price fluctuations.

Technological intervention can increase arrivals and stabilize them.

Top 5 mandis in MP for Horticulture crops25-


Arpil,17

May,17

June,17

July,17

Aug,17

Sept,17

Oct,17

Nov,17

Dec,17

Jan,18

Feb,18

March, 18

Series1 20.57%13.04% 4.99% 5.06% 3.48% 3.46% 6.12% 10.40%12.17% 7.98% 5.25% 7.47%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

%

Month

Monthly Horticulture arrivals(2017-18)

546.8

311.29 294.17251.03

185.47

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Indore Burhanpur Mandsaur Bhopal Neemuch

Horti-Arrival(2017-18) (‘000 MT)

130

These top 5 Mandis constitute a major share in arrivals of about 47.91% of the total

arrivals out of the 132 horticulture mandis.

The major mandi for horticulture in MP is Indore with 16.49% arrivals.

All these 5 mandis are connected to E-Nam and have the required infrastructure.

These major horticulture mandis may not be the major mandis for agriculture crops.

There are 18 mandis having arrivals consisting just 1% to 4% of the total arrivals.

109 mandis have arrivals of less than 1% out of 132 mandis.

E-National Agriculture Market

Electronic National Agriculture Market (E-NAM) is envisioned as a unified national

electronic market bringing interconnectivity to markers across the country. The

diffusion of E-NAM is through Organizations and intended through change in policy.

The diffusion will be faster if the desired policy changes are made in the organization

followed by change management in organizations. Three organizational characteristics

will affect the rate of diffusion of technology in markets, desire for change

(motivation and ability), innovation-system fit (compatibility) and assessment of

implications (observability). E-NAM for agriculture marketing can be regarded as

technology which will bring a social change in markets. The social change in

relationships and networks that work between buyer and seller as they exist in

traditional markets will change as the technology enabled E-NAM is adopted in

agricultural markets. Successful adoption /diffusion will depend on easing the

adoption barriers that can be categorized as technological and organizational.

131

E-Nam Mandis- Development phases

These changes are very important for strong backward linkages with farmers.

The major advantage of E-Nam is better infrastructure and better market connectivity.

This will increase quality of crops, increase storage and create more demand without

any geography barrier.

Current E-Nam scenario in MP

We see that majority of the mandis are not connected to E-nam due to lack of

infrastructure which needs to be improved in MP.

69%

23%

8%

MP Mandis E-Nam

Non E-namMandis

E-nam MandiPhase 1

E-nam MandiPhase 2(Proposed)

132

Phase 1 mandis are functional with upgrades being provided as per E-Nam

norms.

Phase 2 Mandis are proposed by Mandi Board MP Government to the central

government.

Digital Transactions in MP for all crops for E-Nam mandis-26

1. MP to a large extent has shifted to digital transaction in mandis from traditional

methods which makes it more convenient for non-local buyers to participate in

the market.

2. MP has outperformed India in digital transactions, which is a positive sign for

the mandis.

Post-harvest Technologies:

Post-harvest management practices are not being practiced much in MP or India because farmers do

not see much of a value addition to their process due to these practices. Also, PHM is expensive and

practiced majorly by big traders and very large land holders.

Precooling Good temperature management is the most effective way to reduce post-harvest losses and

preserve the quality of fruits and vegetables. Products harvested from hot fields often carry field heat

and have high rates of respiration. Rapid removal of field heat by precooling is so effective in quality

preservation that this procedure is widely used for highly perishable fruits and vegetables. Currently

used precooling methods include room cooling, forced-air cooling, water cooling, vacuum cooling and

package icing

Room cooling is a relatively simple method, which needs only a refrigerated room with adequate

2626 Mandi Board Madhya Pradesh

3%

34%

63%

Madhya PradeshDigital Transaction Data Reported (From 01/01/2013 to 31/12/2017)

Cheque Amount

Cash Amount

DigitalTransaction

18%

30%52%

IndiaDigital Transaction Data

Reported (From 01/01/2013 to

31/12/2017)

Cheque Amount

Cash Amount

DigitalTransaction

133

cooling capacity. The produce is packed in containers, which are loosely stacked in the cooling room,

leaving enough space between containers for each one to be exposed to circulating cold air. The rate of

cooling is rather slow compared to other methods of cooling, because the heat inside each container

needs to be transferred to the surface of the container by means of conduction before being carried away

by the refrigerated air. It may take hours or even days to cool a product, depending on what kind of

product it is, the size and nature of the container, and the temperature and velocity of the circulating air.

Forced-air cooling is a more rapid way of using air to cool produce. Cold air is forced to flow through

the inside of each container, so that it carries away heat directly from the surface of the produce rather

than from the surface of the container. The airflow is produced by creating a pressure difference between

the two perforated sides of each container. The containers are stacked inside a covered tunnel with an

exhaust fan at one end. Highly perishable and high-value products such as grapes, strawberries and

raspberries may be cooled in less than an hour using this method.

Hydro cooling is a rapid and less expensive method. Produce is exposed to cold water by means of

showering or dipping. The required cooling time is often a matter of minutes. However, not all kinds of

products tolerate hydro cooling. Hydro cooled products inevitably have a wet surface, which may

encourage decay in some kinds of produce.

Vacuum cooling is the most efficient way to cool leafy vegetables, particularly headed ones such as

head lettuce, cabbage and Chinese cabbage. The produce is placed inside a vacuum tube in which air

pressure is reduced. When the pressure is lowered to 4.6 mm Hg, water “boils” off at o 0°C from all

over the leaf surface. The boiling effect draws heat for vaporization, and hence cools the produce. The

cooling time is usually in the order of 20 to 30 minutes. Unfortunately, the equipment needed for

vacuum cooling is very expensive, and may not be a good choice for small-scale farming systems.

Ice bank cooler is a new development in refrigeration with positive ventilation. In this system ice cool

air is passed through the boxes containing horticultural produce. This facilitates quicker cooling and

large amount of heat is removed in a relatively shorter period. The store maintains a temperature of 0.5

- 0.8oC and relative humidity of 98 percent.

Package icing or top icing is the simplest way of cooling. Adding crushed ice, flake-ice or slurry of ice

in containers can cool the produce. However, this method is not suitable for produce, which is very

sensitive to ice-cold temperatures. Cooling by ice also inevitably wets both the produce and container,

and generates water, which needs to be drained.

Sanitation

Sanitation is of great concern to produce handlers, not only to protect produce against post harvest

diseases, but also to protect consumers from food borne illnesses. E.coli 157:H7, Salmonella,

Chryptosporidium, Hepatitis and Cyclospera are among the disease causing organisms that have been

transferred via fresh fruits and vegetables. Use of a disinfectant in wash water can help to prevent both

post harvest diseases and food borne illnesses.

Chlorine in the form of a sodium hypochlorite solution or as a dry powdered calcium hypochlorite can

be used in hydro-cooling or wash water as a disinfectant. For the majority of vegetables, chlorine in

134

wash water should be maintained in the range of 75-150 pm (parts per million). The antimicrobial form,

hypochlorous acid, is mostly available in water with a neutral pH (6.5 to 7.5). Organic growers must

use chlorine with caution, as it is classified as a restricted material.

Ozonation is another technology that can be used to sanitize produce. A naturally occurring molecule,

ozone is a powerful disinfectant. Fruit and vegetable growers have begun using it in dump tanks as well,

where it can be thousands of times more effective than chlorine. Ozone not only kills whatever food

borne pathogens might be present, it also destroys microbes responsible for spoilage. A basic system

consists of an ozone generator, a monitor to gauge and adjust the levels of ozone being produced and a

device to dissolve the ozone gas into the water.

Hydrogen peroxide can also be used as a disinfectant. Concentrations of 0.5% or less are effective for

inhibiting development of post harvest decay caused by a number of fungi. Hydrogen peroxide has a

low toxicity rating and is generally recognized as having little potential for environmental damage.

Presizing and Storage

For many commodities fruits below a certain size are eliminated manually or mechanically by presizing

belt. Undersized fruits are diverted for processing. The sorting process eliminates cull, overripe,

misshapen and otherwise defective fruit and separates produce by colour, maturity and ripeness classes

.

Grading

Essentially all fruits and vegetables sold in modern markets are graded and sized into two or more

grades according to trade standards. Sophisticated marketing systems require precise grading standards

for each kind of product. More primitive markets may not use written grade standards, but the products

are sorted and sized to some extent.

Typical grading facilities in large packinghouses include dumpers and conveyors. Produce is graded by

human eyes and hands while moving along conveyor belts or rollers. “Electric eyes” are sometimes

used to sort produce by colour. In small scale packing operations, one or a few grading tables may be

enough. Dumping, conveying and grasping can cause mechanical injury to some products. Equipment

should have a smooth, soft surface and dumping and grading operations should be gentle to minimize

injuries.

Many products are sized according to their weight. Automated weight sizers of various capacities are

used in packinghouses. Round or nearly round fruits are often sized according to their diameter, using

automated chain or roller sizers or hand carried ring sizers. An inefficient sizing operation can also

cause significant injuries.

135

Waxing

Food grade waxes are commonly applied to replace some of the natural waxes removed in the washing

and cleaning operations to reduce water loss and to improve appearance. It also provides protection

against decay organisms. Waxing may be done after grading and fungicides may be added to the wax.

Application of wax and post harvest fungicides must be indicated on each container where the

refrigerated storage facilities are not available Protective skin coating with wax is one of the methods

for increasing the storage life of fresh fruits.

Packaging

Packaging of fresh fruits and vegetables has a great significance in reducing the wastage. Packaging

provides protection from physical damage during storage, transportation and marketing. There are

variety of packages, packaging materials and inserts available.

There are two types of packaging. The first is when produce is packed in containers for transportation

and wholesale. The second is when produce is packed into small retail units. Ideal containers for packing

fruits and vegetables should have the following attributes. They are easy to handle, they provide good

protection from mechanical damage, they have adequate ventilation and they are convenient for

merchandising. They should also be inexpensive and easily degradable or recyclable. Many kinds of

containers have been used but the “ideal” is yet to be found. Users often put economic considerations

first is selecting containers. Fancy containers such as fiberboard boxes or wooden or plastic crates, are

often used for high-value products. Inexpensive containers such as bamboo baskets or nylon net sacs

are used for low-priced produce. Methods of packaging can affect the stability of products in the

container during shipping, and influence how much the container protects their quality. In fiberboard

boxes, for example, delicate and high-priced products are often packed in trays, while other products

are simply put in the box in groups.

Prepackaging or consumer packaging generally provides additional protection for the products. It is

also convenient for retailers as well as customers, and therefore adds value to produce. However, over-

use of non-biodegradable plastic trays and wrapping materials, as often seen in modern supermarkets,

which creates an extra burden of waste disposal and damages the environment.

Factors Affecting Storage Life:

Relative Humidity

Transpiration rates (water loss from produce) are determine by the moisture content of the air, which is

usually expressed as relative humidity. At high relative humidity, produce maintains salable weight,

appearance, nutritional quality and flavour, while wilting, softening and juiciness are reduced. Leafy

vegetables with high surface-to-volume ratios; injured produce and immature fruits and vegetables have

higher transpiration rates. High temperatures, low relative humidity and high air velocity increase

transpiration rates.

136

Relative humidity needs to be monitored and controlled in storage. Control can be achieved by a variety

of methods:

1. Operating a humidifier in the storage area.

2. Regulating air movement and ventilation in relation to storage room load.

3. Maintaining refrigeration coil temperature within the storage room.

4. Using moisture barriers in the insulation of the storage room or transport vehicle.

5. Wetting the storage room floor.

6. Using crushed ice to pack produce for shipment.

7. Sprinkling leafy vegetables, cool-season root vegetables and immature fruits and vegetables with

water.

Temperature

Respiration and metabolic rates are directly related to room temperatures within a given range. The

higher the rate of respiration, the faster the produce deteriorates. Lower temperatures reduce respiration

rates and the ripening and senescence processes, which prolong the storage life of fruits and vegetables.

Low temperatures also slow the growth of pathogenic fungi, which cause spoilage of fruits and

vegetables in storage.

Producers should give special care and attention to proper storage conditions for produce with high to

extremely high respiration rates, as these crops will deteriorate much more quickly.

It is impossible to make a single recommendation for cool storage of all fruits and vegetables. Climate

of the area where the crop originated, the plant part, the season of harvest and crop maturity at harvest

are important factors in determining the optimum temperature. A general rule for vegetables is that

cool-season crops should be stored at cooler temperatures (0 to 1.7oC) and warm-season crops should

be stored at warmer temperatures (7 to 13oC).

Freezing injury

Temperatures that are too low can be just as damaging as those too high. Freezing will occur in all

commodities below 0oC. Whether injury occurs depends on the commodity. Some can be repeatedly

frozen and thawed without damage, while others are ruined by one freezing.

Injury from freezing temperatures can appear in plant tissues as loss of rigidity, softening and water

soaking. Injury can be reduced if the produce is allowed to warm up slowly to optimum storage

temperatures and if it is not handled during the thawing period. Injured produce should be marketed

immediately, as freezing shortens its storage life.

Chilling injury

Fruits and vegetables that require warmer storage temperatures (4.5 to 13oC) can be damaged if they

are subjected to near-freezing temperatures (0oC). Cooler temperatures interfere with normal metabolic

137

processes. Injury symptoms are varied and often do not develop until the produce has been returned to

warmer temperatures for several days. Besides physical damage, chilled produce is often more

susceptible to disease infection.

Ethylene

Ethylene, a natural hormone produced by some fruits as they ripen, promotes additional ripening of

produce exposed to it. The old age saying that one bad apple spoils the whole bushel is true. The

damaged or diseased fruits produce high levels of ethylene and stimulate the other apples to ripen too

quickly. As the fruits ripen, they become more susceptible to disease. Ethylene “producers” should not

be stored with fruits, vegetables, or flowers that are sensitive to it. The result could be loss of quality,

reduced shelf life and specific symptoms of injury. Ethylene producers include apples, apricots,

avocados, ripening bananas, honeydew melons, papayas, peaches, pears, plums and tomatoes.

Storage Facilities:

Crops that require different storage conditions will need three different

storage facilities.

• Cold Storage (temperatures 0 to 2.2oC)

• Cool Storage (temperatures 4.5 to 13oF)

• Warmer storage (temperatures 13 to 15.6oF)

A recording thermometer can be helpful in determining whether storage facilities are maintaining ideal

conditions and are not fluctuating. A maximum/minimum thermometer could be substituted. Relative

humidity also should be monitored with a hygrometer.

Controlling and monitoring temperature and relative humidity will enable a grower to maintain

optimum storage conditions for maximum storage life of the crop and to minimize crop damage from

chilling, freezing or high temperature injuries and water loss from the crop.

Air-Cooled Common Storage

This is widely used for storing horticultural products, particularly those that have good keeping quality

even without a precise low temperature. However, its use is generally limited to cool seasons in

temperate and sub-tropical regions, or high altitude areas where there are low ambient temperatures at

night. An ideal storage room is adequately insulated and has a good ventilation control system, which

draws cool air inside during night and keeps warm air out during the day.

Refrigerated Storage

Refrigerated storage is a well-established technology widely used for storing horticultural crops all over

the world. Its application is limited only by cost and benefit considerations. Essentially, all crops can

138

benefit by being stored at a suitable low temperature, which extends the storage life and preserves

quality.

Many horticultural crops have storage life spans ranging from less than one month to several months

when refrigerated. Therefore, refrigerated storage can be used continuously only if different crops with

different harvesting seasons can share the facility. There are other important reasons why this method

is not used in many tropical and sub-tropical countries, where refrigeration is needed most. The initial

investment cost is too high and its energy consumption too large for many countries.

Hydro baric Storage

In this system the horticultural produce is kept in a vacuum-tight and refrigerated container and the air

is evacuated by vacuum pump to achieve desired low pressure. The low pressure retards ripening by

decreasing respiration. However this is more expensive method.

Controlled Atmosphere Storage (CA)

The fresh horticultural produce consumes oxygen for respiration and releases carbon dioxide and

ethylene. The ethylene further enhances ripening. Reducing oxygen and increasing carbon dioxide can

increase the shelf life. In CA storage the levels of CO2, O2 and N2 in the storage room are monitored.

CA storage combined with refrigeration reduces respiration and delays yellowing and quality changes.

However the tolerance of individual varieties of horticultural crops needs to be considered.

Transportation

Inland transportation of horticultural crops is usually by rail or by truck. Overseas transportation is by

sea or by air. A limited amount of high-valued produce is sometimes transported overland by air. The

basic requirements for conditions during transportation are proper control of temperature and humidity

and adequate ventilation. In addition, the produce should be immobilized by proper packaging and

stacking, to avoid excessive movement or vibration. Vibration and impact during transportation may

cause severe bruising or other types of mechanical injury.

Refrigerated containers and trailers are more often used for long distance shipping, whether by sea, rail

or truck. Shipping by refrigerated trucks is not only convenient, but also effective in preserving the

quality of product. However, both the initial investment and the operating costs are very high. Another

possibility is insulated or properly ventilated trailer trucks. Precooled products can be transported

through well-insulated non-refrigerated trucks for up to several hours without any significant rise in

product temperature. There are considerable cost savings without any sacrifice of quality if trucks are

only insulated, rather than refrigerated, for short-distance shipping. If the product is not precooled or if

the shipping distance is long, a ventilated truck is a better choice than an insulated truck without

ventilation and without refrigeration. Ventilation alone does not usually provide a uniform cool

temperature, but it may help dissipate excessive field heat and respiration heat, and thus avoid high

temperature injury.

139

Recommendations

1. Initially processing units for export orientation should be established for key products

like onion, garlic and guava on a pilot basis and then all crops should be promoted.

2. To boost horticulture export from MP, the first Centre for Perishable Cargo (CPC)

at Devi Ahilyabai Holkar Airport, Indore Madhya Pradesh will act as a positive step

in this direction. CPC is proposed to have five cold rooms with each one having

capacity of 10 MT, including two units maintaining 0-15 degree Celsius temperature

for vegetables, fruits, flours, meat and dairy products.

3. Products like Oils, essential oils, juices, pulp, seeds which are high value products

from horticulture can be prioritized to be exported from Indore CPC. These products

sell in the international markets at a very high price.

4. The countries which either pay a very high value or import in large quantities

should be targeted for exports for each crop.

5. Since the horticulture producers are heavily dependent on the domestic market, many

times overproduction lead to low price and that ultimately results in a loss to the

farmers, hence storage facilities established by state government should be made

available to farmers on pay per use basis.

6. To avoid overproduction of selected varieties in a particular district or region,

development of a mixed cropping pattern can be implemented along with the

linkage of production with processing and organized marketing in order to eliminate

flooding of the local market and falling prices during peak seasons. Horticulture

experts may advise farmers on this aspect to avoid such situation.

7. A major obstacle is the low mandi arrivals of horticulture crops. If mandis are to be

made a platform for procurement for exports, the arrivals should be increased in them.

For this, steps need to be taken.

8. There is an all-round realization at every level that quality production of

International standard is the watchword for survival now. Consequently, the

processors, small or big, have to take steps to improve quality about the selection of

raw materials, use of fertilizers, storage conditions, etc. Side by side steps would also

be required to upgrade hygienic and sanitary conditions of the workers, plant and

machinery so as to ensure quality of the finished product. There should be greater

emphasis to invest in research and development and product innovation so as to

remain competitive in world market

9. Presently most of the cold storage are setup by private entities and add layers of

mediators between these facilities & producers, which in turn reduces farmer’s share

in the profits. FPOs should be promoted to deal directly with such establishments &

they should also be promoted & preferred when a project for PHM is being

considered under MIDH.

10. The established cold storages can’t give an effective protection to horticulture

produce. Therefore, government should give financial incentives to establish multi-

chamber/ multi- product cold storage and for the existing cold storage, adequate

finance should be made available at a concessional rate of interest so that they can be

upgraded for multi-product storage.

140

11. To increase value addition, small sized processing units should be installed and

promoted. This will save post-harvest losses and increase profitability of farmers too.

Processing of fruits and canning of vegetables can multiply their value 50 to 500

times and open up prospects for huge international market. At present only a fraction

of total fruits and vegetables produced in the country are being processed.

12. Government should consider giving financial assistance to purchase refrigerated

vehicles or procure at on a concessional rate. This will ensure quality of the

exportable produce. The State Government is already preparing a District Horticulture

action plan for boosting production, that includes measures for PHM but none for

export activity.

13. A price analysis of value added products of our focus crops that are being exported

would clearly point to the products that are to be focused upon for exports. Processing

units could be established for them.

14. For meeting Sanitary & Phytosanitary requirements, labs are required to be

commissioned by the state government in accordance with the article IV of

International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) to meet the legal obligations of the

member countries.

15. Approximately 70 FPOs are proposed in the DHPs of all districts of MP, if these

FPOs are strengthened, they can increase farmer’s income by exporting their produce

without intermediates and have a bigger share in profits.

16. These FPOs should be the focal point of government intervention with targeted

solution packages for FPOs which have adequate number of partner farmers. A policy

needs to be developed keeping in mind the whole supply chain, from farm to market.

Interventions should be planned & provided wherever there is a need.

17. Since states technical capability to prevent post-harvest losses of horticulture produce

is limited, therefore, there should be strong network between farmers and

researchers of the horticultural advanced countries so that MP farmers can also

take advantage of their technical advancement. For this purpose, a Horticulture

Information Centre (HIC) should be established in every district where horticulture

production is substantially high. Teachers and scientists from nearby agriculture

universities, should frequently visit this centres to inform and interact with the

farmers, so that they become aware of cost effective method to prevent post-harvest

losses. In addition, as a short term measure – because there is a huge knowledge gap

between farmers and researchers - an awareness campaign should be taken up by the

respective state governments in collusion of national horticulture board, so that

farmers of the remote rural areas may become aware of the post-harvest loss

prevention technologies.

18. The above mentioned HICs should also provide information about the domestic

markets as well as opportunities in the export market. They should also provide

information about the type and quality of the produce in demand in the international

market. To have access the international market on a large scale and to explore full

potential of world market, new initiative in packaging and marketing are required. In

addition, to foray into the international market, farmers will have to discard use of

prohibited pesticides and for this purpose, information about the standards prevailing

in the western countries & our major trade partners should be available to farmers.

141

19. In addition, it is suggested that APEDA which has its offices/representatives in many

countries may also look after export promotion of fresh fruits, spices, vegetables and

processed products.

20. Since infrastructure is in a very bad shape in both states and it can’t be improved in a

short span of time, on the line of export processing zone, horticulture processing

zones could be established.

21. But last and most important precondition of growth of industry in MP, is law and

order situation. In absence of congenial business environment, no subsidies and

incentives can work. Therefore, law and order situation should be improved first.

142

EXPORT STANDARDS REQUIRED FOR EACH

CROP27

27 http://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/codex-texts/list-standards/jp/

http://www.unece.org/trade/agr/standard/fresh/ffv-standardse.html

http://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/codex-texts/list-standards/jp/

http://www.unece.org/trade/agr/standard/fresh/ffv-standardse.html

143

FRUITS

STANDARD FOR GUAVAS – WTO

1. DEFINITION OF PRODUCE - This Standard applies to commercial varieties of guavas

grown from Psidium guajava L., of the Myrtaceae family, to be supplied fresh to the

consumer, after preparation and packaging. Guavas for industrial processing are excluded.

2. PROVISIONS CONCERNING QUALITY

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS

In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the

guavas must be:

- whole;

- sound, produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it unfit for consumption is excluded;

- clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter;

- practically free of pests affecting the general appearance of the produce;

- practically free of damage caused by pests;

- free of abnormal external moisture, excluding condensation following removal from cold storage;

- free of any foreign smell and/or taste;

- firm;

- practically free of bruising.

The guavas must have reached an appropriate degree of development and ripeness in accordance with criteria proper to the variety and to the area in which they are grown.

The development and condition of the guavas must be such as to enable them:

- to withstand transport and handling; and

- to arrive in satisfactory condition at the place of destination.

CLASSIFICATION

Guavas are classified in three classes defined below:

1. “Extra” Class

Guavas in this class must be of superior quality. They must be characteristic of the variety

and/or commercial type. They must be free of defects, with the exception of very slight

superficial defects, provided these do not affect the general appearance of the produce, the

quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package.

2. Class I

Guavas in this class must be of good quality. They must be characteristic of the variety and/or

commercial type. The following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do

not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and

presentation in the package:

144

slight defects of colour or shape;

slight defects on the skin due to rubbing and other superficial defects such as sunburns,

blemishes and scabs not exceeding 5% of the total surface area. The defects must not, in any

case, affect the pulp of the fruit.

3. Class II

This class includes guavas which do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes, but satisfy the minimum requirements specified in Section 2.1 above. The following defects, however, may be allowed, provided the guavas retain their essential characteristics as regards the quality, the keeping quality and presentation:

- defects in shape and colour;

- defects on the skin due to rubbing and other defects such as sunburns, blemishes and scabs not exceeding 10% of the total surface area.

The defects must not, in any case, affect the pulp of the fruit.

3- PROVISIONS CONCERNING SIZING

Size is determined by the weight or maximum diameter of the equatorial section of the fruit,

in accordance with the following table:

Size Code Weight (g) Diameter (mm)

1 > 450 > 100

2 351 - 450 96 - 100

3 251 - 350 86 - 95

4 201 - 250 76 - 85

5 151 - 200 66 - 75

6 101 - 150 54 - 65

7 61 - 100 43 - 53

8 35 - 60 30 - 42

9 < 35 < 30

4- PROVISIONS CONCERNING TOLERANCES

Tolerances in respect of quality and size shall be allowed in each package for produce not

satisfying the requirements of the class indicated.

QUALITY TOLERANCES

1- “Extra” Class

Five percent by number or weight of guavas not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting

those of Class I or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.

145

2- Class I

Ten percent by number or weight of guavas not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting

those of Class II or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.

3- Class II

Ten percent by number or weight of guavas satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor the

minimum requirements, with the exception of produce affected by rotting or any other deterioration

rendering it unfit for consumption.

SIZE TOLERANCES

For all classes, 10% by number or weight of guavas corresponding to the size immediately

above or below that indicated on the package.

5- PROVISIONS CONCERNING PRESENTATION

UNIFORMITY

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only guavas of the same origin, variety

and/or commercial type, quality and size. The visible part of the contents of the package must be

representative of the entire contents.

PACKAGING

Guavas must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used inside

the package must be new28, clean, and of a quality such as to avoid causing any external or internal

damage to the produce. The use of materials, particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade

specifications is allowed, provided the printing or labelling has been done with non-toxic ink or glue.

Guavas shall be packed in each container in compliance with the Recommended International Code

of Practice for Packaging and Transport of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 44-1995).

Description of Containers

The containers shall meet the quality, hygiene, ventilation and resistance characteristics to ensure

suitable handling, shipping and preserving of the guavas. Packages must be free of all foreign matter

and smell.

6- MARKING OR LABELLING

CONSUMER PACKAGES

In addition to the requirements of the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged

Foods (CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:

28 For the purposes of this Standard, this includes recycled material of food-grade quality.

146

Nature of Produce

If the produce is not visible from the outside, each package shall be labelled as to the name of the

produce and may be labelled as to name of the variety.

NON-RETAIL CONTAINERS

Each package must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the same side, legibly and

indelibly marked, and visible from the outside, or in the documents accompanying the shipment.

Identification

Name and address of exporter, packer and/or dispatcher. Identification code (optional)29.

Nature of Produce

Name of the produce if the contents are not visible from the outside. Name of the variety or

commercial type (optional). 6.2.3 Origin of Produce

Country of origin and, optionally, district where grown or national, regional or local place name.

Commercial Identification

- Class;

- Size (size code or minimum and maximum weight or diameter in grams or mm,

respectively); - Net weight (optional).

Official Inspection Mark (optional)

7- CONTAMINANTS

7.1 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum levels of the Codex

General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CODEX STAN 193-1995).

7.2 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum residue limits for

pesticides established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.

8- HYGIENE

It is recommended that the produce covered by the provisions of this Standard be prepared and

handled in accordance with the appropriate sections of the Recommended International Code of

Practice – General Principles of Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969), Code of Hygienic Practice for

Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 53-2003), and other relevant Codex texts such as Codes of

Hygienic Practice and Codes of Practice.

The produce should comply with any microbiological criteria established in accordance with the

Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods (CAC/GL 21-

1997).

29 The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the name and address.

However, in the case where a code mark is used, the reference “packer and/or dispatcher (or equivalent abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark.

147

STANDARD FOR ORANGES– WTO

1- DEFINITION OF PRODUCE

This Standard applies to commercial varieties of oranges grown from Citrus sinensis (L.)

Osbeck, of the Rutaceae family, to be supplied fresh to the consumer, after preparation and

packaging. Oranges for industrial processing are excluded.

2- PROVISIONS CONCERNING QUALITY

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS

In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the oranges

must be:

- whole;







- free of damage caused by low and/or high temperatures;

- free of damage caused by frost;

- free of signs of internal shrivelling;

- practically free of bruising and/or extensive healed-over cuts.

2.1.1 The oranges must have reached an appropriate degree of development and ripeness account

being taken of the characteristics of the variety, the time of picking and the area in which they are

grown.

The development and condition of the oranges must be such as to enable them:



Oranges satisfying these requirements may be “degreened”. This treatment is permitted only if the

other natural organoleptic characteristics are not modified.

2.2 MATURITY CRITERIA

The maturity of oranges is defined by the following parameters:

- Colouring;

- Minimum juice content, calculated in relation to the total weight of the fruit and after extraction of the juice by means of a hand press.

148

2.2.1 Colouring

The degree of colouring shall be such that, following normal development, the oranges reach their

normal variety colour at their destination point, account being taken of the time of picking, the

growing area and the duration of transport.

Colouring must be typical of the variety. Fruits with a light green colour are allowed, provided it does

not exceed one-fifth of the total surface area of the fruit.

Oranges produced in areas with high air temperatures and high relative humidity conditions during

the developing period can be of a green colour exceeding one fifth of the total surface area, provided

they satisfy the criteria mentioned in Section 2.2.2 below.

2.2.2 Minimum Juice Content

- Blood oranges 30%

- Navels group 33%

- Other varieties 35%

- Varieties Mosambi, Sathgudi and Pacitan

with more than one-fifth green colour 33%

- Other varieties with more than one-fifth green colour 45%

2.3 CLASSIFICATION

Oranges are classified in three classes defined below:

2.3.1 “Extra” Class

Oranges in this class must be of superior quality. In shape, external appearance, development and

colouring, they must be characteristic of the variety and/or commercial type. They must be free of

defects, with the exception of very slight superficial defects, provided these do not affect the general

appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package.

2.3.2 Class I

Oranges in this class must be of good quality. They must be characteristic of the variety and/or

commercial type. The following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do not affect

the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the

package:

- slight defect in shape;

- slight defect in colouring;

- slight skin defects occurring during the formation of the fruit, such as silver scurfs, russets,etc.;

- slight healed defects due to a mechanical cause such as hail damage, rubbing, damage from handling, etc.


2.3.3 Class II

This class includes oranges which do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes, but satisfy the

minimum requirements specified in Section 2.1 above. The following defects, however, may be

allowed, provided the oranges retain their essential characteristics as regards the quality, the keeping

quality and presentation:

149

- defect in shape;

- defect in colouring;

- skin defects occurring during the formation of the fruit, such as silver scurfs, russets, etc.;

- healed defects due to a mechanical cause such as hail damage, rubbing, damage from handling, etc.;

- rough skin; - superficial healed skin alterations;

- slight and partial detachment of the pericarp.


3. PROVISIONS CONCERNING SIZING

Size is determined by the maximum diameter of the equatorial section of the fruit, in accordance with

the following table:

Size Code Diameter (mm)

0 92 – 110

1 87 – 100

2 84 – 96

3 81 – 92

4 77 – 88

5 73 – 84

6 70 – 80

7 67 – 76

8 64 – 73

9 62 – 70

10 60 – 68

11 58 – 66

12 56 – 63

13 53 – 60

Oranges of a diameter below 53 mm are excluded.

Oranges may be packed by count. In this case, provided the size uniformity required by the Standard

is retained, the size range in the package may fall outside a single size code, but within two adjacent

codes.

150

Uniformity in size is achieved by the above mentioned size scale, unless otherwise stated, as follows:

(i) for fruit arranged in regular layers in the package, including unit consumer packages, the maximum difference between the smallest and the largest fruit, within a single size code or, in the case of oranges packed by count, within two adjacent codes, must not exceed the following maxima:

Size Code Maximum difference between

fruit in the same package in mm

0 to 2 11

3 to 6 9

7 to 13 7

(ii) for fruit not arranged in regular layers in packages and fruit in individual rigid packages for direct sale to the consumer, the difference between the smallest and the largest fruit in the same package must not exceed the range of the appropriate size grade in the size scale, or, in the case of oranges packed by count, the range in mm of one of the two adjacent codes concerned.

(iii) for fruit in bulk bins and fruit in individual non-rigid (nets, bags) packages for direct sale to the consumer, the maximum size difference between the smallest and the largest fruit in the same lot or package must not exceed the range obtained by grouping three consecutive sizes in the size scale.

4. PROVISIONS CONCERNING TOLERANCES

Tolerances in respect of quality and size shall be allowed in each package for produce not satisfying

the requirements of the class indicated.

4.1 QUALITY TOLERANCES


Five percent by number or weight of oranges not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting


4.1.2 Class I

Ten percent by number or weight of oranges not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting


4.1.3 Class II

Ten percent by number or weight of oranges satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor the



Within this tolerance, a maximum of 5% is allowed of fruit showing slight superficial unhealed

damage, dry cuts or soft and shrivelled fruit.

4.2 SIZE TOLERANCES

For all classes, 10% by number or weight of oranges corresponding to the size immediately above

and/or below that indicated on the package.

The 10% tolerance only applies to fruit whose diameter is not less than 50 mm.

151

5. PROVISIONS CONCERNING PRESENTATION

5.1 UNIFORMITY

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only oranges of the same origin, variety

and/or commercial type, quality and size, and appreciably of the same degree of ripeness and

development. The visible part of the contents of the package must be representative of the entire

contents. In addition, uniformity of colouring is required for “Extra” Class.

5.2 PACKAGING

Oranges must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used inside




Oranges shall be packed in each container in compliance with the Recommended International Code


5.2.1 Description of Containers


suitable handling, shipping and preserving of the oranges. Packages must be free of all foreign matter

and smell.

5.3 PRESENTATION

The oranges may be presented as follows:

(a) Arranged in regular layers in the package. This form of presentation is mandatory for “Extra” Class and optional for Classes I and II;

(b) Not arranged in packages. This type of presentation is only allowed for Class I and II;

(c) In individual packages for direct consumer sale of a weight less than 5 kg, either made up by number or by weight of fruit.

6. MARKING OR LABELLING

6.1 CONSUMER PACKAGES



6.1.1 Nature of Produce

If the produce is not visible from the outside, each package (or lot for produce presented in bulk)

shall be labelled as to the name of the produce and may be labelled as to the name of the variety

and/or commercial type.

6.2 NON-RETAIL CONTAINERS




152

6.2.1 Identification



Name of the produce if the contents are not visible from the outside. Name of the variety and/or

commercial type (optional)32. 6.2.3 Origin of Produce


6.2.4 Commercial Identification

- Class;

- Size code for fruit presented in accordance with the size scale or the upper and the lower limiting size code in the case of three consecutive sizes of the size scale;

- Size code (or, when fruit packed by count fall under two adjacent codes, size codes or minimum and maximum diameter in mm) and number of fruit, in the case of fruit arranged in layers in the package;

- If appropriate, a statement indicating the use of preservatives; - Net weight

(optional).

6.2.5 Official Inspection Mark (optional)

7. CONTAMINANTS





8. HYGIENE

8.1 It is recommended that the produce covered by the provisions of this Standard be prepared and





8.2 The produce should comply with any microbiological criteria established in accordance with the


1997).


However, in the case where a code mark is used, the reference “packer and/or dispatcher (or equivalent

abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark. 32 The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the variety.

153

STANDARD FOR BANANAS – WTO

1. DEFINITION OF PRODUCE

This Standard applies to commercial varieties of bananas grown from Musa spp. (AAA), of the

Musaceae family, in the green state, to be supplied fresh to the consumer, after preparation and

packaging. Bananas intended for cooking only (plantains) or for industrial processing are excluded.

Varieties covered by this Standard are included in the Annex.


2.1 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS

In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the bananas

must be:

- whole (taking the finger as the reference);

- sound, produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it unfit for consumption is

excluded;




- free of abnormal external moisture, excluding condensation following removal from cold

storage, and bananas packed under modified atmosphere conditions;


- firm;

- free of damage caused by low temperatures;

- practically free of bruises;

- free of malformation or abnormal curvature of the fingers;

- with pistils removed;

- with the stalk intact, without bending, fungal damage or desiccation.

In addition, hands and clusters must include:

- a sufficient portion of the crown of normal colouring, sound and free of fungal contamination;

- a cleanly cut crown, not bevelled or torn, with no stalk fragments.

2.1.1 The development and condition of the bananas must be such as to enable them:

- to reach the appropriate stage of physiological maturity corresponding to the particular

characteristics of the variety;


- to arrive in satisfactory condition at the place of destination in order to ripen satisfactorily.

154

2.2 CLASSIFICATION

Bananas are classified in three classes defined below:


Bananas in this class must be of superior quality. They must be characteristic of the variety and/or

commercial type. The fingers must be free of defects, with the exception of very slight superficial

defects, provided these do not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping

quality and presentation in the package.

2.2.2 Class I

Bananas in this class must be of good quality. They must be characteristic of the variety. The

following slight defects of the fingers, however, may be allowed, provided these do not affect the

general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package:

- slight defects in shape and colour;

- slight skin defects due to rubbing and other superficial defects not exceeding 2 cm2 of the total

surface area.

The defects must not, in any case, affect the flesh of the fruit.

2.2.3 Class II

This class includes bananas which do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes, but satisfy the


allowed, provided the bananas retain their essential characteristics as regards the quality, the keeping


- defects in shape and colour, provided the product retains the normal characteristics of bananas;

- skin defects due to scraping, scabs, rubbing, blemishes or other causes not exceeding 4 cm2 of

the total surface area.

The defects must not, in any case, affect the flesh of the fruit.


For the purposes of sizing bananas of the Gros Michel and Cavendish sub-groups, the length of the

fingers is determined along the outside curve from the blossom end to the base of the pedicel where

the edible pulp ends and the diameter is defined as the thickness of a transverse section between the

lateral faces. The reference fruit for measurement of the length and grade is:

- for hands, the median finger on the outer row of the hand;

- for clusters, the finger next to the cut section of the hand, on the outer row of the cluster.

The minimum length should not be less than 14.0 cm and the minimum grade not less than 2.7 cm.


Tolerances in respect of quality and size shall be allowed for produce not satisfying the requirements

of the class indicated.

155



Five percent by number or weight of bananas not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting


4.1.2 Class I

Ten percent by number or weight of bananas not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting


4.1.3 Class II

Ten percent by number or weight of bananas satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor the

minimum requirements, with the exception of produce affected by rotting, major imperfections or any

other deterioration rendering it unfit for consumption.

4.2 SIZE TOLERANCES

For all classes, 10% by number or weight of bananas not satisfying the requirements as regards

sizing, but falling within the size immediately above or below those indicated in Section 3.


5.1 UNIFORMITY

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only bananas of the same origin, variety,

and quality. The visible part of the contents of the package must be representative of the entire

contents.

5.2 PACKAGING

Bananas must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used inside




Bananas shall be packed in each container in compliance with the Recommended International Code




suitable handling, shipping and preserving of the bananas. Packages must be free of all foreign matter

and smell.

5.3 PRESENTATION

- The bananas must be presented in hands and clusters (parts of hands) of at least four fingers.

Bananas may also be presented as single fingers;

- Clusters with no more than two missing fingers are allowed, provided the stalk is not torn but

cleanly cut, without damage to the neighbouring fingers;

- Not more than one cluster of three fingers with the same characteristics as the other fruit in the

package may be present per row.


156



In addition to the requirements of the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of

Prepackaged Foods (CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:














- Bananas in fingers (when appropriate);

- Class;

- Net weight (optional).


7. CONTAMINANTS





8. HYGIENE








abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark.

157



1997).

STANDARD FOR MANGOES – WTO


This Standard applies to commercial varieties of mangoes grown from Mangifera indica L., of the

Anacardiaceae family, to be supplied fresh to the consumer, after preparation and packaging.

Mangoes for industrial processing are excluded.



In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the mangoes

must be:

- whole;


excluded;




storage;


- firm;

- fresh in appearance;

- free of damage caused by low temperatures;

- free of black necrotic stains or trails;

- free of marked bruising;

- sufficiently developed and display satisfactory ripeness.

When a peduncle is present, it shall be no longer than 1.0 cm.

2.1.1 The development and condition of the mangoes must be such as to enable them:

- to ensure a continuation of the maturation process until they reach the appropriate degree of

maturity corresponding to the varietal characteristics;



In relation to the evolution of maturing, the colour may vary according to variety.

158

2.2 CLASSIFICATION

Mangoes are classified in three classes defined below:


Mangoes in this class must be of superior quality. They must be characteristic of the variety. They

must be free of defects, with the exception of very slight superficial defects, provided these do not

affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the

package.

2.2.2 Class I

Mangoes in this class must be of good quality. They must be characteristic of the variety. The

following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do not affect the general

appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package:

- slight defects in shape;

- slight skin defects due to rubbing or sunburn, suberized stains due to resin exudation (elongated

trails included) and healed bruises not exceeding 3, 4, 5 cm² for size groups A, B, C respectively.

2.2.3 Class II

This class includes mangoes which do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes, but satisfy the


allowed, provided the mangoes retain their essential characteristics as regards the quality, the keeping


- defects in shape;

- skin defects due to rubbing or sunburn, suberized stains due to resin exudation (elongated trails

included) and healed bruises not exceeding 5, 6, 7 cm² for size groups A, B, C respectively.

In Classes I and II, scattered suberized rusty lenticels, as well as yellowing of green varieties due to

exposure to direct sunlight, not exceeding 40% of the surface and not showing any signs of necrosis

are allowed.


Size is determined by the weight of the fruit, in accordance with the following table:

Size Code Weight (in grams)

A 200 - 350

B 351 - 550

C 551 - 800

The maximum permissible difference between fruit in the same package belonging to one of the

above mentioned size groups shall be 75, 100 and 125 g respectively. The minimum weight of

mangoes must not be less than 200 g.

159






Five percent by number or weight of mangoes not satisfying the requirements of the class, but

meeting those of Class I or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.

4.1.2 Class I

Ten percent by number or weight of mangoes not satisfying the requirements of the class, but

meeting those of Class II or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.

4.1.3 Class II

Ten percent by number or weight of mangoes satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor the

minimum requirements, with the exception of produce affected by rotting, marked bruising or any

other deterioration rendering it unfit for consumption.

4.2 SIZE TOLERANCES

For all classes, 10% by number or weight of mangoes in each package are permitted to be outside

(above or below) the group size range by 50% of the maximum permissible difference for the group.

In the smallest size range, mangoes must not be less than 180 g and for those in the largest size range

a maximum of 925 g applies, as follows:

Size Code Normal Size

Range

Permissible Size Range ( < 10% of fruit/package exceeding

the normal size range )

Max. permissible

difference between

fruit in each package

A 200 – 350 180 – 425 112.5

B 351 – 550 251 – 650 150

C 551 – 800 426 – 925 187.5


5.1 UNIFORMITY

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only mangoes of the same origin, variety,

quality and size. The visible part of the contents of the package must be representative of the entire

5.2 PACKAGING

Mangoes must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used inside




Mangoes shall be packed in each container in compliance with the Recommended International Code



160



suitable handling, shipping and preserving of the mangoes. Packages (or lot for produce presented in

bulk) must be free of all foreign matter and smell.



In addition to the requirements of the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of

Prepackaged Foods (CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:






indelibly marked, and visible from the outside, or in the documents accompanying the shipment. For

produce transported in bulk these particulars must appear on a document accompanying the goods.








- Class;

- Size (size code or weight range in grams);

- Number of units (optional); - Net weight (optional).


7. CONTAMINANTS







abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark.

161

8. HYGIENE








1997).

STANDARD FOR POMEGRANATE - WTO


This Standard applies to fruits of commercial varieties of pomegranates grown from Punica

granatum L., of the Punicaceae family, to be supplied fresh to the consumer after preparation and

packaging. Pomegranates for industrial processing are excluded.




pomegranates must be:

- whole;

- sound; produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it unfit for consumption is

excluded;

- clean, free of any visible foreign matter;

- free of pests and damage caused by them affecting the general appearance of the produce;


storage;


- free of damage caused by frost;

- free of damage caused by low and/or high temperatures;

- free of sunburns affecting the arils of the fruit.

2.1.1 The pomegranates must have reached an appropriate degree of development and ripeness in

accordance with criteria proper to the varieties and to the area in which they are grown.

162

The development and condition of the pomegranates must be such as to enable them:



2.2 CLASSIFICATION

Pomegranates are classified in three classes as defined below:


Pomegranates in this class must be of superior quality. They must be characteristic of the variety.

They must be free of defects, with the exception of very slight superficial defects, provided these do

not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in

the package. 2.2.2 Class I

Pomegranates in this class must be of good quality. They must be characteristic of the variety. The

following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do not affect the general


- slight defects in shape;

- slight defects in coloring;

- slight skin defects including cracking.

The defects must not, in any case, affect the arils of the fruit.

2.2.3 Class II

This class includes pomegranates which do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes, but satisfy

the minimum requirements specified in Section 2.1 above. The following defects, however, may be

allowed, provided the pomegranates retain their essential characteristics as regards the quality, the

keeping quality and presentation:

- defects in shape;

- defects in coloring;

- skin defects including cracking.

The defects must not, in any case, affect the arils of the fruit.


Pomegranate may be sized by count, diameter or weight in accordance with existing commercial

trading practices. When such is the case, the package must be labelled accordingly.

A. When sized by count, size is determined by the number of individual fruit per package.

B. Pomegranate may be sized by diameter (the maximum diameter of the equatorial section of each

fruit).

The following table is a guide and may be used on an optional basis.

163

Table A - Diameter

Size Code Diameter (mm)

1 A ≥81

2 B 71 – 80

3 C 61 -70

4 D 51 – 60

5 E 40 – 50

C. Pomegranate may be sized by weight (the individual weight of each fruit).

The following table is a guide and may be used on an optional basis.

Table B - Weight

Size Code Weight (g)

1 A ≥ 501

2 B 401 - 500

3 C 301 - 400

4 D 201 - 300

5 E 125 - 200




4.1 QUALITY TOLERANCES 4.1.1 “Extra” Class

Five percent by number or weight of pomegranates not satisfying the requirements of the class, but


4.1.2 Class I

Ten percent by number or weight of pomegranates not satisfying the requirements of the class, but


4.1.3 Class II

Ten percent by number or weight of pomegrantes satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor

the minimum requirements, with the exception of produce affected by rotting or any other

deterioration rendering it unfit for consumption.

164

4.2 SIZE TOLERANCES

For all classes, 10% by number or weight of pomegranates corresponding to the size immediately

above and/or below that indicated on the package.


5.1 UNIFORMITY

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only pomegranates of the same origin,

variety, quality and size (if sized). Sales packages may contain mixtures of varieties of different colors

and sizes provided they are uniform in quality and for each variety concerned, its origin.

The visible part of the contents of the package must be representative of the entire contents.

5.2 PACKAGING

Pomegranates must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used

inside the package must be new37, clean, and of a quality such as to avoid causing any external or

internal damage to the produce. The use of materials, particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade


Pomegranates shall be packed in each container in compliance with the Code of Practice for

Packaging and Transport of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 44-1995).



suitable handling, shipping and preserving of the pomegranates. Packages must be free of all foreign

matter and smell.



In addition to the requirements of the General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods

(CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:



produce and may be labelled as to name of the variety, class, size (if sized) expressed in accordance

with any one of the following methods: count, size code and range, size range.







Name of the produce if the contents are not visible from the outside. Name of the variety (where

appropriate).

37 For the purposes of this Standard, this includes recycled material of food-grade quality. 38 The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the name and address.


165

6.2.3 Origin of Produce



Class;

Size (if sized) expressed in accordance with any one of the following methods:

o Count,

o Size code and

range, o Size

range.

Net weight (optional).


7. CONTAMINANTS

7.1 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum levels of the General

Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CODEX STAN 193-1995).



8. HYGIENE


handled in accordance with the appropriate sections of the Code of Practice – General Principles of

Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969), Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables

(CAC/RCP 53-2003), and other relevant Codex texts such as Codes of Hygienic Practice and Codes

of Practice.

8.2 The produce should comply with any microbiological criteria established in accordance with

the Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods

(CAC/GL 21-1997).

166

STANDARD FOR CUSTARD APPLE- WTO

Minimum Requirement:

Custard apple shall be-

1. firm, sound and clean, fresh, uniform size & of the same origin, variety with same degree of

maturity and development characteristics to the variety; and

2. free from any visible foreign matter, bruising, abnormal external moisture, foreign smell,

damage caused by pests or by low and high temperature.

Criteria for Range:

S.No Tradable Parameters Range-I Range-II Range-III

1 Quality Superior Very Good Good

2 Colour, shape & Size

(according to

characteristic of the

variety)

Uniform Semi- Uniform Reasonably Uniform

3 Defects allowed slight skin

defects

(blemishes,

scars, sunspots)

not exceeding 2

% of the total

surface area

slight skin defects

(blemishes, scars,

scrapes, scratches,

sunspots) not

exceeding 5 % of

the total surface

area.

1.small healed surface

scars, not likely to impair

significantly the

appearance or conservation

of the fruit.

2.skin defects (i.e.

scratches, scars, scrapes

bruises and blemishes) not

exceeding 10 % of total

surface area.

4 Range tolerances 5 % of fruits

falling in range

– ‘2’

10 % of fruits falling

in range –‘3’

Range tolerances : 15 % of

fruits with minimum

requirements

PROVISIONS CONCERNING QUALITY


In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the custard

apples must be:

- whole;





167



- firm;

- practically free of bruising.

2.1.1 The custard apples must have reached an appropriate degree of development and ripeness in

accordance with criteria proper to the variety and to the area in which they are grown.

The development and condition of the custard apples must be such as to enable them:



2.2 CLASSIFICATION

Custard apples are classified in three classes defined below:


Custard apples in this class must be of superior quality. They must be characteristic of the variety

and/or commercial type. They must be free of defects, with the exception of very slight superficial



2.2.2 Class I

Custard apples in this class must be of good quality. They must be characteristic of the variety and/or

commercial type. The following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do not affect

the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the

package:

slight defects of colour or shape;

slight defects on the skin due to rubbing and other superficial defects such as sunburns,

blemishes and scabs not exceeding 5% of the total surface area.


2.2.3 Class II

This class includes custard apples which do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes, but satisfy

the minimum requirements specified in Section 2.1 above. The following defects, however, may be

allowed, provided the custard apples retain their essential characteristics as regards the quality, the

keeping quality and presentation:

- defects in shape and colour;

- defects on the skin due to rubbing and other defects such as sunburns, blemishes and scabs not exceeding 10% of the total surface area.


168






Five percent by number or weight of Custard apples not satisfying the requirements of the class, but


4.1.2 Class I

Ten percent by number or weight of Custard apples not satisfying the requirements of the class, but


4.1.3 Class II

Ten percent by number or weight of Custard apples satisfying neither the requirements of the class

nor the minimum requirements, with the exception of produce affected by rotting or any other

deterioration rendering it unfit for consumption.

4.2 SIZE TOLERANCES

For all classes, 10% by number or weight of Custard apples corresponding to the size immediately

above or below that indicated on the package.


5.1 UNIFORMITY

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only Custard apples of the same origin,

variety and/or commercial type, quality and size. The visible part of the contents of the package must

be representative of the entire contents.

5.2 PACKAGING

Custard apples must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used

inside the package must be new39, clean, and of a quality such as to avoid causing any external or

internal damage to the produce. The use of materials, particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade


Custard apples shall be packed in each container in compliance with the Recommended International

Code of Practice for Packaging and Transport of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 44-1995).


The containers shall meet the quality, hygiene, ventilation and resistance characteristics to ensure suitable

handling, shipping and preserving of the custard apples. Packages must be free of all foreign matter and smell.



In addition to the requirements of the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods

(CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:


169


If the produce is not visible from the outside, each package shall be labelled as to the name of the produce and

may be labelled as to name of the variety.


Each package must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the same side, legibly and indelibly

marked, and visible from the outside, or in the documents accompanying the shipment.




Name of the produce if the contents are not visible from the outside. Name of the variety or commercial type

(optional). 6.2.3 Origin of Produce



- Class;

- Size (size code or minimum and maximum weight or diameter in grams or mm, respectively);

- Net weight (optional).


7. CONTAMINANTS

7.1 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum levels of the Codex General Standard

for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CODEX STAN 193-1995).

7.2 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum residue limits for pesticides

established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.

8. HYGIENE

8.1 It is recommended that the produce covered by the provisions of this Standard be prepared and handled in

accordance with the appropriate sections of the Recommended International Code of Practice – General

Principles of Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969), Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables

(CAC/RCP 53-2003), and other relevant Codex texts such as Codes of Hygienic Practice and Codes of Practice.

8.2 The produce should comply with any microbiological criteria established in accordance with the Principles

for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods (CAC/GL 21-1997).



170

Vegetables

Standard for Onion

I. Definition of produce

This standard applies to onions of varieties (cultivars) grown from Allium

cepa L. Cepa Group to be supplied to the consumer in the natural state,

green onions with full leaves and onions for industrial processing being

excluded.

II. Provisions concerning quality

The purpose of the standard is to define the quality requirements for onions after

preparation and packaging.

However, if applied at stages following export, products may show in relation to the

requirements of the standard:

• a slight lack of freshness and turgidity

• a slight deterioration due to their development and their tendency to perish.

The holder/seller of products may not display such products or offer them

for sale, or deliver or market them in any manner other than in conformity

with this standard. The holder/seller shall be responsible for observing

such conformity.

A. Minimum requirements

In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances

allowed, the bulbs must be:

• intact

• sound; produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it unfit for

consumption is excluded

• clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter

• free from damage due to frost

• sufficiently dry for the intended use (in the case of onions for storing, at least the first

two outer skins and the stem must be fully dried)

• without hollow or tough stems

• practically free from pests

• free from damage caused by pests affecting the flesh

• free of abnormal external moisture

• free of any foreign smell and/or taste.

171

In addition, the stems must be twisted or clean cut and must not exceed 6 cm in

length (except for stringed onions).

The development and condition of the onions must be such as to enable them:

• to withstand transportation and handling

• to arrive in satisfactory condition at the place of destination.

B. Classification

The onions are classified in two classes, as defined below:

(i) Class I

Onions in this class must be of good quality. They must be characteristic

of the variety and/or commercial type. The bulbs must be:

• firm and compact

• free from externally visible shoots

• free from swelling caused by abnormal vegetative development

• practically free of root tufts; however, for onions harvested before complete maturity,

root tufts are allowed.

The following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do

not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping

quality and presentation in the package:

• a slight defect in shape

• slight defects in colouring

• light staining that does not affect the outer skin, provided it does not cover more than

one fifth of the bulb’s surface

• superficial cracks in and partial absence of the outer skins, provided the flesh is

protected.

(ii) Class II

This class includes onions that do not qualify for inclusion in Class I but satisfy the

minimum requirements specified above.

The bulbs must be reasonably firm.

The following defects may be allowed, provided the onions retain their essential

characteristics as regards the quality, the keeping quality and presentation:

• defects in shape

• defects in colouring

• traces due to rubbing

• slight marking caused by parasites or disease

• small healed cracks

• slight healed bruising

172

• root tufts

• stains that do not affect the outer skin, provided they do not cover more than half the

bulb’s surface

• cracks in the outer skins and partial absence of the skins over a maximum of one third

of the bulb’s surface, provided the flesh is not damaged.

III. Provisions concerning sizing

Size is determined by the maximum diameter of the equatorial section.

The minimum diameter shall be 10 mm.

To ensure uniformity in size, the range in size between produce in the same

package shall not exceed:

• 5 mm where the diameter of the smallest onion is 10 mm and over but under

20 mm. However, where the diameter of the onion is 15 mm and over but

under 25 mm, the difference may be 10 mm

• 15 mm where the diameter of the smallest onion is 20 mm and over but

under 40 mm

• 20 mm where the diameter of the smallest onion is 40 mm and over but

under 70 mm

• 30 mm where the diameter of the smallest onion is 70 mm or over.

IV. Provisions concerning tolerances

At all marketing stages, tolerances in respect of quality and size shall be

allowed in each lot for produce not satisfying the requirements of the class

indicated.

A. Quality tolerances

(i) Class I

A total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of onions not satisfying

the requirements of the class but meeting those of Class II is allowed. Within

this tolerance not more than 1 per cent in total may consist of produce

satisfying neither the requirements of Class II quality nor the minimum

requirements, or of produce affected by decay.

(ii) Class II

A total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of onions satisfying

neither the requirements of the class nor the minimum requirements is

allowed. Within this tolerance not more than 2 per cent in total may consist

of produce affected by decay.

In addition, a maximum tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of

bulbs showing early evidence of externally visible shoot growth is allowed.

173

B. Size tolerances

For all classes: a total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of onions not

satisfying the requirements as regards sizing is allowed. FFV-25: Onions – 2017

V. Provisions concerning presentation

A. Uniformity

The contents of each package (or lot for produce presented in bulk in the

transport vehicle) must be uniform and contain only onions of the same

origin, variety or commercial type, quality and size.

However, a mixture of onions of distinctly different commercial types

and/or colours may be packed together in a sales package, provided they

are uniform in quality and, for each commercial type and/or colour

concerned, in origin. However, in case of those mixtures uniformity in size

is not required.

The visible part of the contents of the package (or lot for produce presented in

bulk in the transport vehicle) must be representative of the entire contents.

B. Packaging

Onions must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly.

The materials used inside the package must be clean and of a quality such

as to avoid causing any external or internal damage to the produce. The

use of materials, particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade

specifications, is allowed, provided the printing or labelling has been done

with non-toxic ink or glue.

Stickers individually affixed to the produce shall be such that, when removed,

they neither leave visible traces of glue nor lead to skin defects.

Packages (or lots for produce presented in bulk in the transport vehicle) must be

free of all foreign matter.

VI. Provisions concerning marking

Each package41 must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the

same side, legibly and indelibly marked, and visible from the outside.

For onions transported in bulk (direct loading into a transport vehicle)

these particulars must appear on a document accompanying the goods, and

attached in a visible position inside the transport vehicle.

41 These marking provisions do not apply to sales packages presented in packages. However,

they do apply to sales packages (pre-packages) presented individually.

174

A. Identification

Packer and/or dispatcher/exporter:

Name and physical address (e.g. street/city/region/postal code and, if

different from the country of origin, the country) or a code mark officially

recognized by the national authority42 if the country applying such a

system is listed in the UNECE database.

B. Nature of produce

• "Onions" if the contents are not visible from the outside.

• “Mixture of onions”, or equivalent denomination, in the case of a

mixture of distinctly different commercial types and/or colours of

onions. If the produce is not visible from the outside, the commercial

types and/or colours and the quantity of each in the package must be

indicated.

C. Origin of produce

• Country of origin43 and, optionally, district where grown, or national,

regional or local place name.

• In the case of a mixture of distinctly different commercial types and/or

colours of onions of different origins, the indication of each country

of origin shall appear next to the name of the commercial type and/or

colour concerned.

D. Commercial specifications

• Class

• Size expressed by minimum and maximum diameters.

E. Official control mark (optional)

Adopted 1961

Last revised 2010

Aligned with the Standard Layout 2017


However, in the case where a code mark is used, the reference “packer and/or dispatcher (or

175

Standard For Potatoes


This standard applies to early and ware potatoes of varieties (cultivars) grown from Solanum

tuberosum L. and its hybrids, to be supplied fresh to the consumer, early and ware potatoes for

industrial processing being excluded.

Early potatoes are obtained from early varieties and/or are harvested at the beginning of the

season in the country of origin. Early potatoes means potatoes harvested before they are

completely mature, marketed immediately after their harvesting, and whose skin can be easily

removed without peeling.


The purpose of the standard is to define the quality requirements for early and ware potatoes after


However, if applied at stages following export, products may show in relation to the requirements of

the standard:



The holder/seller of products may not display such products or offer them for sale, or deliver or

market them in any manner other than in conformity with this standard. The holder/seller shall

be responsible for observing such conformity.


(a) Subject to the tolerances allowed, the tubers must be:

• of normal appearance for the variety, according to the producing area

• intact, i.e. they should not have had any part removed nor have suffered any damage

making them incomplete



• practically clean

• firm

• free of external or internal defects detrimental to the general appearance of the

produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package, such as:

• brown stains due to heat

• cracks (including growth cracks), cuts, bites, bruises or roughness (only for

varieties of which the skin is not normally rough) exceeding 4 mm in depth

• green colouration; pale green flush not exceeding one eighth of the surface area and

which can be removed by normal peeling does not constitute a defect

• serious deformities

176

• grey, blue or black sub-epidermal stains; exceeding 5 mm in depth in the case of

ware potatoes

• rust stains, hollow or black hearts and other internal defects

• deep common potato scab and powdery potato scab, of a depth of 2 mm or more in

the case of ware potatoes

• superficial common potato scab, i.e. scab spots in all must not extend over more

than a quarter of the surface of the tuber

• frost damage and freezing injuries

• free of abnormal external moisture, i.e. adequately “dried” if they have been washed


In the case of early potatoes, a partial absence of the skin shall not be considered as a defect.

Ware potatoes must be covered with well-formed skin, i.e. the skin has to be fully developed

and mature and cover the whole surface of the tuber.

In early potatoes, no sprouting is allowed. Ware potatoes must be practically unsprouted, i.e.

sprouts may be no longer than 3 mm.

The development and condition of the early and ware potatoes must be such as to enable them:



(b) Each package or lot must be free from waste, i.e. attached or loose earth, detached

growth shoots, extraneous matter.


Size of the tuber is determined by square mesh.

Tubers must be of:

• a minimum size such that they do not pass through a square mesh of:

• 28 mm x 28 mm for early potatoes

• 35 mm x 35 mm for ware potatoes

• 30 mm x 30 mm for long varieties of ware potatoes defined hereafter

• a maximum size such that they pass through a square mesh of 80 mm x 80 mm,

or for long varieties, 75 mm x 75 mm.

Early and ware potatoes exceeding the maximum size shall be allowed, provided the maximum

difference in size between the smallest and the largest tuber is not more than 30 mm and they

are marketed under a specific denomination.

Tubers of a size range between 18 mm and 35 mm can be marketed under the denomination of

"mids" or an equivalent denomination.

Uniformity in size is not compulsory. However, in sales packages up to 5 kg net weight, the

maximum difference allowed between the smallest and the largest tuber must not exceed 30

mm.

177

A variety is considered as long if it is listed as long or long oval in the national list of varieties of the

country where it has been bred.

The sizing requirements do not apply to long varieties of irregular shape (e.g. Stella, Ratte or Pink

Fir Apple).


At all marketing stages, tolerances in respect of quality and size shall be allowed in each lot for

produce not satisfying the minimum requirements.


(a) Tubers not satisfying the minimum requirements shall be allowed:

• 4 per cent by weight of tubers of early potatoes

• 6 per cent by weight of tubers of ware potatoes.

However, within this tolerance, a maximum of 1 per cent by weight of tubers affected by dry or

wet rot shall be allowed.

(b) In addition the following shall be allowed:

• 1 per cent by weight of waste for early potatoes

• 2 per cent by weight of waste, of which a maximum of 1 per cent of attached earth,

for ware potatoes.

B. Size tolerances

A total tolerance of 10 per cent, by weight of tubers, not satisfying the requirements as regards sizing

is allowed.

C. Tolerances of other varieties

2 per cent by weight of other varieties is allowed.


A. Uniformity

The contents of each package (or lot for produce presented in bulk in the transport vehicle) must

be uniform and contain only early or ware potatoes of the same origin, variety, quality, colour of

the skin, colour of the flesh and size (if sized).

The visible part of the contents of the package (or lot for produce presented in bulk in the transport

vehicle) must be representative of the entire contents.

B. Packaging

Early and ware potatoes must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly and to

ensure adequate ventilation.

178

The materials used inside the package must be clean and of a quality such as to avoid causing

any external or internal damage to the produce. The use of materials, particularly of paper or

stamps bearing trade specifications, is allowed, provided the printing or labelling has been done


In the case of early potatoes, special packaging materials (e.g. peat) may be used in

order to better protect the produce during long-distance transport.44 Packages must

be free of all foreign matter.


Each package45 must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the same side, legibly

and indelibly marked, and visible from the outside either printed on the package itself or on a

label secured to the fastening. If the labels are placed inside the packages (string bags), this

should be done in such a way that the indications concerning marking are readable from the

outside.

For early and ware potatoes transported in bulk (direct loading into a transport vehicle) these

particulars must appear on a document accompanying the goods, and attached in a visible

position inside the transport vehicle.

A. Identification


Name and physical address (e.g. street/city/region/postal code and, if different from the country

of origin, the country) or a code mark officially recognized by the national authority3 if the

country applying such a system is listed in the UNECE database.


• “Early Potatoes”, “New Potatoes” or equivalent denomination, or “Ware Potatoes”

if the contents are not visible from the outside

• Name of the variety

• Specific denomination for early and ware potatoes exceeding the maximum size,

where appropriate

• “Mids” or an equivalent denomination, where appropriate.

44 The use of some packaging materials (e.g. peat) is not permitted in some countries. 45 These marking provisions do not apply to sales packages presented in packages. However, they do apply to

sales packages (pre-packages) presented individually.



equivalent abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark, and the code

mark should be preceded by the ISO 3166 (alpha) country/area code of the recognizing country, if

not the country of origin.

179


• Country of origin46 and, optionally, district where grown, or national, regional or

local place name.


• Size (if sized) expressed as minimum size followed by the words “and over” or

as minimum and maximum size

• Optional indications: colour of flesh (e.g., yellow or white), colour of skin,

shape of tuber (round or long) and cooking type (e.g., floury or firm).


Adopted 1961

Last revised 2011


The OECD Scheme for the Application of International Standards for Fruit and Vegetables has

published an explanatory illustrated brochure on the application of this standard. The

publication may be obtained from the OECD bookshop at: www.oecdbookshop.org.

Standard for Tomatoes


This standard applies to tomatoes of varieties (cultivars) grown from Solanum

lycopersicum L. to be supplied fresh to the consumer, tomatoes for industrial

processing being excluded.

Tomatoes may be classified into the following commercial types:

• “round”;

• “ribbed”;

• “oblong” or “elongated”;

• Cherry/cocktail tomatoes (miniature varieties) of all shapes.

46 The full or a commonly used name should be indicated.

180


The purpose of the standard is to define the quality requirements for tomatoes after




• a slight lack of freshness and turgidity;

• for products graded in classes other than the “Extra” Class, a slight deterioration due

to their development and their tendency to perish.

The holder/seller of products may not display such products or offer them for sale,

or deliver or market them in any manner other than in conformity with this

standard. The holder/seller shall be responsible for observing such conformity.


In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed,

the tomatoes must be:

• intact;

• sound, produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it unfit for

consumption is excluded;

• clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter;

• fresh in appearance;

• practically free from pests;

• free from damage caused by pests affecting the flesh;

• free of abnormal external moisture;

free of any foreign smell and/or taste.

In the case of trusses of tomatoes, the stalks must be fresh, healthy, clean and free from all leaves and

any visible foreign matter.

The development and condition of the tomatoes must be such as to enable them:

• to withstand transportation and handling;


B. Maturity requirements

The development and state of maturity of the tomatoes must be such as to enable them to continue

their ripening process and to reach a satisfactory degree of ripeness.

C. Classification

Tomatoes are classified in three classes, as defined below:

181

(i) “Extra” Class

Tomatoes in this class must be of superior quality. They must be firm and characteristic of the

variety.

They must be free from greenbacks and other defects, with the exception of very slight superficial



(ii) Class I

Tomatoes in this class must be of good quality. They must be reasonably firm and characteristic of

the variety.

They must be free of cracks and visible greenbacks.

The following slight defects, however, may be allowed provided these do not affect the general


• a slight defect in shape and development;

• slight defects in colouring;

• slight skin defects;

• very slight bruises.

Furthermore, “ribbed” tomatoes may show:

• healed cracks not more than 1 cm long;

• no excessive protuberances;

• small umbilicus, but no suberization;

• suberization of the stigma up to 1 cm2;

fine blossom scar in elongated form (like a seam), but not longer than two-thirds of the

greatest diameter of the fruit.

(iii) Class II

This class includes tomatoes that do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes but satisfy the


They must be reasonably firm (but may be slightly less firm than in Class I) and must not show

unhealed cracks.

The following defects may be allowed, provided the tomatoes retain their essential characteristics as

regards the quality, the keeping quality and presentation:

• defects in shape and development;

• defects in colouring;

• skin defects or bruises, provided the fruit is not seriously affected;

• healed cracks not more than 3 cm in length for round, ribbed or oblong tomatoes.

Furthermore, “ribbed” tomatoes may show:

• more pronounced protuberances than allowed under Class I, but without being misshapen;

182

• an umbilicus;

• suberization of the stigma up to 2 cm2;

• fine blossom scar in elongated form (like a seam).


Size is determined by the maximum diameter of the equatorial section, by weight or by count.

The following provisions shall not apply to

• trusses of tomatoes;

and are optional for:

• cherry and cocktail tomatoes below 40 mm in diameter;

• ribbed tomatoes of irregular shape; and

• Class II.

To ensure uniformity in size, the range in size between produce in the same package shall not exceed:

(a) For tomatoes sized by diameter:

• 10 mm, if the diameter of the smallest fruit (as indicated on the package) is under 50 mm;

• 15 mm, if the diameter of the smallest fruit (as indicated on the package) is 50 mm and

over but under 70 mm;

• 20 mm, if the diameter of the smallest fruit (as indicated on the package) is 70 mm and

over but under 100 mm

there is no limitation of difference in diameter for fruit equal or over 100 mm.

In case size codes are applied, the codes and ranges in the following table have to be respected:

Size code Diameter (mm)

0 ≤ 20

1 > 20 ≤ 25

2 > 25 ≤ 30

3 > 30 ≤ 35

4 > 35 ≤ 40

5 > 40 ≤ 47

6 > 47 ≤ 57

7 > 57 ≤ 67

8 > 67 ≤ 82

9 > 82 ≤ 102

10 > 102

183



produce not satisfying the requirements of the class indicated.



A total tolerance of 5 per cent, by number or weight, of tomatoes not satisfying the requirements

of the class but meeting those of Class I is allowed. Within this tolerance not more than 0.5 per

cent in total may consist of produce satisfying the requirements of Class II quality.

(ii) Class I

A total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of tomatoes not satisfying the requirements

of the class but meeting those of Class II is allowed. Within this tolerance not more than 1 per

cent in total may consist of produce satisfying neither the requirements of Class II quality nor

the minimum requirements, or of produce affected by decay.

In the case of trusses of tomatoes, 5 percent, by number or weight, of tomatoes detached from the

stalk is allowed.

(iii) Class II

A total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of tomatoes satisfying neither the

requirements of the class nor the minimum requirements is allowed. Within this tolerance not

more than 2 per cent in total may consist of produce affected by decay.

In the case of trusses of tomatoes, 10 per cent, by number or weight, of tomatoes detached from the

stalk is allowed.

B. Size tolerances

For all classes: a total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of tomatoes not satisfying the

requirements as regards sizing is allowed.

184


A. Uniformity

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only tomatoes of the same origin, variety

or commercial type, quality and size (if sized).

The ripeness and colouring of tomatoes in “Extra” Class and Class I must be practically uniform. In

addition, the length of “oblong” tomatoes must be sufficiently uniform.

However, a mixture of tomatoes of distinctly different varieties, commercial types and/or colours may

be packed together in a package, provided they are uniform in quality and, for each variety,

commercial type and/or colour concerned, in origin. However, in case of those mixtures uniformity in

size is not required.


B. Packaging

Tomatoes must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly.

The materials used inside the package must be clean and of a quality such as to avoid causing any

external or internal damage to the produce. The use of materials, particularly paper or stamps bearing

trade specifications, is allowed, provided the printing or labelling has been done with non-toxic ink or

glue.

Stickers individually affixed to the produce shall be such that, when removed, they neither leave

visible traces of glue nor lead to skin defects. Information lasered on single fruit should not lead to

flesh or skin defects.

Packages must be free of all foreign matter.

V. Provisions concerning marking

Each package47 must bear the following particulars in letters grouped on the same side, legibly and

indelibly marked and visible from the outside:

A. Identification


Name and physical address (e.g. street/city/region/postal code and, if different from the country of

origin, the country) or a code mark officially recognized by the national authority48 if the country

applying such a system is listed in the UNECE data base.

47 These marking provisions do not apply to sales packages presented in packages. However, they do apply to

sales packages (pre-packages) presented individually. 48 The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the name and address.


185


• “Tomatoes” or “trusses of tomatoes” and the commercial type, or “cherry/cocktail

tomatoes” or “trusses of cherry/cocktail tomatoes” or equivalent denomination for other

miniature varieties if the contents are not visible from the outside.

• “Mixture of tomatoes”, or equivalent denomination, in the case of a mixture of distinctly

different varieties, commercial types and/or colours of tomatoes. If the produce is not

visible from the outside, the varieties, commercial types and/or colours and the quantity

of each in the package must be indicated.

• Name of the variety (optional).


• Country of origin49 and, optionally, district where grown, or national, regional or local

place name;

• In the case of a mixture of distinctly different varieties, commercial types and/or colours

of tomatoes of different origins, the indication of each country of origin shall appear next

to the name of the variety, commercial type and/or colour concerned.


• Class

• Size (if sized) expressed as

minimum and maximum diameters; or

minimum and maximum weights; or

size code as specified in Section III; or

count followed by the minimum and maximum sizes.


Adopted 1961

Last revised 2017




publication may be obtained from the OECD bookshop at: www.oecdbookshop.org

abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark, and the code mark should be

preceded by the ISO 3166 (alpha) country/area code of the recognizing country, if not the country of

origin. 49 The full or a commonly used name should be indicated.

186

Standard For Peas


This standard applies to peas of varieties (cultivars) grown from Pisum sativum L.

subsp. sativum to be supplied fresh to the consumer, peas for industrial processing

being excluded. According to the type of consumption, peas are classified in two

groups:

• Shelling peas (round peas, wrinkled peas) intended for consumption without

the pod • Mange-tout peas and sugar snap peas intended for consumption with

the pod.


The purpose of the standard is to define the quality requirements for peas after






The holder/seller of products may not display such products or offer them for sale,

or deliver or market them in any manner other than in conformity with this

standard. The holder/seller shall be responsible for observing such conformity.


In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed,

• The pods must be:

• intact; however mange-tout peas and sugar snap peas may have their ends

removed



• clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter (including parts of the

flowers)

• free from hard filaments or films in mange-tout peas and sugar snap peas


• practically free from damage caused by pests

• free of abnormal external moisture • free of any foreign smell and/or taste.

• The seeds must be:

• fresh

187



• normally developed in shelling peas




The development and condition of the peas must be such as to enable them:



B. Classification

Peas are classified in two classes, as defined below:

(i) Class I

Peas in this class must be of good quality. They must be characteristic of the variety


The pods must be:

• fresh and turgid

• free from damage caused by hail

• free from damage caused by heating.

For shelling peas:

• the pods must be:

• with peduncles attached

• well filled, containing at least 5 seeds.

• the seeds must be:

• well-formed

• tender

• succulent and sufficiently firm, i.e., when squeezed between two fingers they

should become flat without disintegrating

• at least half the full-grown size but not full-grown

• non-farinaceous

• undamaged, with no cracks in the skin.

The following slight defects of the pod, however, may be allowed, provided

these do not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the

keeping quality and presentation in the package:

• slight skin defects, injuries and bruises


188

• slight defects in colouring.

For mange-tout peas and sugar snap peas:

• the seeds if present must be small and underdeveloped.

The following very slight defects of the pod, however, may be allowed,

provided these do not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality,

the keeping quality and presentation in the package:

• a very slight defect in shape

• very slight defects in colouring

• very slight skin defects, injuries and bruises.

(iii) Class II

This class includes peas that do not qualify for inclusion in Class I but satisfy the


For shelling peas:

• the pods must contain at least three seeds

• peas may be more developed than those in Class I, but over-mature peas are

excluded.

The following defects may be allowed provided the peas retain their essential


• defects of the pods:

• skin defects, injuries and bruises, provided these are not progressive and there

is no risk of the seeds being affected • some loss of freshness, excluding wilted

pods.

• defects of the seeds:


• a slight defect in colouring

• slightly harder

• slightly damaged.

For mange-tout peas and sugar snap peas:

• the seeds, if present, may be slightly more developed than in Class I.

The following slight defects may be allowed provided the peas retain their essential


• slight defects in shape, including those due to seed formation

• slight defects in colouring

• slight skin defects, injuries and bruises

• some loss of freshness excluding wilted pods.

189


There is no sizing requirement for peas.



At all marketing stages, tolerances in respect of quality shall be allowed in each lot for


(i) Class I

A total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of peas not satisfying the

requirements of the class, but meeting those of Class II is allowed. Within this

tolerance not more than 1 per cent in total may consist of produce satisfying neither

the requirements of Class II quality nor the minimum requirements, or of produce

affected by decay.

(ii) Class II

A total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of peas satisfying neither the

requirements of the class nor the minimum requirements is allowed. Within this

tolerance not more than 2 per cent in total may consist of produce affected by decay.


A. Uniformity

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only peas of the same origin,

variety or commercial type and quality.

The visible part of the contents of the package must be representative of the entire

contents.

B. Packaging

Peas must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly.

The materials used inside the package must be clean and of a quality such as to

avoid causing any external or internal damage to the produce. The use of materials,

particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade specifications, is allowed, provided the

printing or labelling has been done with non-toxic ink or glue.



Each package50 must bear the following particulars in letters grouped on the same

side, legibly and indelibly marked, and visible from the outside:



190

A. Identification


Name and physical address (e.g. street/city/region/postal code and, if different from

the country of origin, the country) or a code mark officially recognized by the

national authority51 if the country applying such a system is listed in the UNECE

database.


• “Shelling peas”, “Mange-tout peas”, “Sugar snap peas” or equivalent

denomination if the contents are not visible from the outside

• “Trimmed”, “Topped and tailed”, or equivalent denomination, where mange-

tout peas and sugar snap peas are presented without the peduncle and/or the

pistil, as the case may be if the contents are not visible from the outside.


• Country of origin52 and, optionally, district where grown, or national, regional or

local place name.


• Class.

Standard for chilli peppers


This standard applies to chilli peppers53 of varieties (cultivars) grown from Capsicum

annuum, C. baccatum, C. chinense, C. frutescens and C. pubescens, to be supplied

fresh to the consumer, chilli peppers for industrial processing being excluded.


The purpose of the standard is to define the quality requirements for chilli peppers after




equivalent abbreviations) » has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark, and the code

mark should be preceded with the ISO 3166 (alpha) country/area code of the recognizing country,

if not the country of origin. 52 The full or a commonly used name should be indicated. 53 Chilli peppers with a minimum pungency of 900 on the Scoville Index. For levels of pungency see

the annex.

191

However, if applied at stages following export, products may show in relation to the requirements

of the standard:


• for products graded in classes other than the “Extra” Class, a slight

deterioration due to their development and their tendency to perish.

The holder/seller of products may not display such products or offer them for sale, or

deliver or market them in any manner other than in conformity with this standard. The

holder/seller shall be responsible for observing such conformity.



chilli peppers must be:

• intact, the stalk and calyx may be missing, provided that the break is clean and the

adjacent skin is not damaged






• fresh in appearance, including stalk and calyx

• firm

• free from damage caused by low and/or high temperatures



The development and condition of the chilli peppers must be such as to enable them:



B. Classification

Chilli peppers are classified in three classes, as defined below:


Chilli peppers in this class must be of superior quality. They must be characteristic of the variety


They must be free from defects, with the exception of very slight superficial defects, provided these

do not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation

in the package. Colour change due to ripening is not considered a defect.

192

(ii) Class I

Chilli peppers in this class must be of good quality. They must be characteristic of the variety and/or

commercial type.

The following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do not affect the general



• slight defects in colouring; colour change due to ripening is not considered a defect

• slight skin defects

• a slightly damaged stalk, if present.

(iii) Class II

This class includes chilli peppers that do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes but satisfy the


The following defects may be allowed, provided the chilli peppers retain their essential characteristics

as regards the quality, the keeping quality and presentation:

• defects in shape

• defects in colouring; colour change due to ripening is not considered a defect

• skin defects

• damaged stalk and calyx, if present

• slight lack of freshness of the stalk and calyx.

• total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of chilli peppers satisfying neither

the requirements of the class nor the minimum requirements is allowed. Within this


B. Size tolerances

For all classes (if sized): a total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of chilli peppers not

satisfying the requirements as regards sizing is allowed.


A. Uniformity

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only chilli peppers of the same origin,

variety or commercial type, quality and size (if sized).

However, a mixture of chilli peppers of distinctly different colours and/or commercial types may be

packed together in a sales package, provided they are uniform in quality and, for each colour and/or

commercial type concerned, in origin. However, in case of those mixtures uniformity in size is not

required.


193

B. Packaging

The chilli peppers must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly.

The materials used inside the package must be clean and of a quality such as to avoid causing any

external or internal damage to the produce. The use of materials, particularly paper or stamps bearing

trade specifications, is allowed, provided the printing or labelling has been done with non-toxic ink or

glue.

Stickers individually affixed to the produce shall be such that, when removed, they neither leave

visible traces of glue, nor lead to skin defects. Information lasered on single fruit should not lead to

flesh or skin defects.



Each package54 must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the same side, legibly and

indelibly marked, and visible from the outside:

A. Identification




applying such a system is listed in the UNECE database.


• “Chilli peppers” if the contents are not visible from the outside

• Name of the commercial type

• “Mixture of chilli peppers”, or equivalent denomination, in the case of a mixture of

distinctly different colours and/or commercial types of chilli peppers. If the produce

is not visible from the outside, the colours and/or commercial types and the quantity

of each in the package must be indicated

• Level of pungency indicated as “mild”, “medium”, “hot” or “extra hot”, as

appropriate.





abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark, and the code mark should be

preceded by the ISO 3166 (alpha) country/area code of the recognizing country, if not the country of origin.

194


Country of origin56 and, optionally, district where grown or national, regional or local place name.

In the case of packages containing a mixture of distinctly different colours and/or commercial types of

chilli peppers of different origin, the indication of each country of origin shall appear next to the name

of the colours and/or commercial type concerned.


• Class

• Size (if sized) expressed as minimum and maximum length (in cm) or as minimum

and maximum diameter (in mm)

• Size code (optional).


Adopted 2013


The UNECE has published an explanatory illustrated brochure on the application of this standard. The

publication may be obtained from the UNECE at:

56 The full or a commonly used name should be indicated.

195

SPICES

Standards for Garlic


This standard applies to garlic of varieties (cultivars) grown from Allium sativum var. sativum L.

to be supplied fresh57, semi-dry58 or dry59 to the consumer, green garlic with full leaves and

undeveloped cloves and garlic for industrial processing being excluded.

The garlic bulbs may consist of several or only one clove (“solo garlic”).


The purpose of the standard is to define the quality requirements for garlic after preparation and

packaging.

However, if applied at stages following export, products may show in relation to the requirements of

the standard:


• for products graded in classes other than the “Extra” Class, a slight deterioration

due to their development and their tendency to perish.

The holder/seller of products may not display such products or offer them for sale, or deliver or

market them in any manner other than in conformity with this standard. The holder/seller shall

be responsible for observing such conformity.


In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the bulbs

must be:

• intact; covered with outer skin






• firm

• free of damage caused by frost or sun

57 "Fresh garlic" means produce with a "fresh" stem and with the outer skin of the bulb still fresh. 58 "Semi-dry garlic" means fresh produce with the stem and outer skin of the bulb not completely dry. 59 "Dry garlic" means fresh produce in which the stem, outer skin of the bulb and the skin surround each clove

are completely dry.

196

• free of externally visible sprouts


• free of any foreign smell and/or taste60.

For dry garlic, if trimmed, the stem length should not exceed 3 cm.

The development and condition of the garlic must be such as to enable them:



B. Classification

Garlic is classified in three classes, as defined below:

(i) "Extra" Class

Garlic in this class must be of superior quality. It must be characteristic of the variety and/or

commercial type.

The bulbs must be:

• of regular shape

• properly cleaned.

The cloves must be compact.

The roots must be cut close to the base of the bulb in the case of dry garlic.

Garlic must be free from defects, with the exception of very slight superficial defects, provided

these do not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and

presentation in the package.

(ii) Class I

Garlic in this class must be of good quality. It must be characteristic of the variety and/or

commercial type.

The cloves must be reasonably compact.

The following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do not affect the

general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in

the package:

slight tears in the outer skin of the bulb • a slight defect in shape.

(iii) Class II

This class includes garlic that does not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes but satisfies the


60 This provision does not preclude a specific smell and/or specific taste caused by smoking in countries or

regions where smoked garlic is considered as a fresh vegetable.

197

The following defects may be allowed, provided the garlic retains its essential characteristics as

regards the quality, the keeping quality and presentation:

• tears in the outer skin or missing parts of the outer skin of the bulb

• staining on the outer skins of the bulb provided it does not cover more than half the

bulb surface

• healed injuries

• slight bruises

• irregular shape

• no more than three cloves, or one fifth of the total number of cloves in a bulb

(whichever is lower) may be missing


Size is determined by the maximum diameter of the equatorial section.

The minimum diameter shall be:

• 45 mm for "Extra" Class

• 30 mm for Classes I and II.

To ensure uniformity in size, the range in size between produce in the same package shall not

exceed:

• 15 mm when the smallest bulb has a diameter of less than 40 mm

• 20 mm when the smallest bulb has a diameter equal to or more than 40 mm.





(i) "Extra" Class

A total tolerance of 5 per cent, by number or weight, of garlic not satisfying the

requirements of the class but meeting those of Class I is allowed. Within this tolerance

not more than 0.5 per cent in total may consist of produce satisfying the requirements

of Class II quality.

(ii) Class I

A total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of garlic not satisfying the

requirements of the class but meeting those of Class II is allowed. Within this

tolerance not more than 1 per cent in total may consist of produce satisfying neither

the requirements of Class II quality nor the minimum requirements, or of produce

affected by decay.

Within this tolerance not more than 1 per cent by weight of bulbs may have cloves with externally

visible sprouts.

198

In addition to this tolerance, not more than 25 per cent, by number or weight, of bulbs showing

slight staining on the outer skin of the bulb, provided it does not cover more than a quarter of

the bulb surface.

(iii) Class II

A total tolerance of 10 per cent, by number or weight, of garlic satisfying neither

the requirements of the class nor the minimum requirements is allowed. Within this


In addition to this tolerance, not more than 5 per cent by weight of bulbs may have cloves with

externally visible sprouts.

B. Size tolerances

For all classes: a total tolerance of 10 per cent by weight of garlic not satisfying the requirements as

regards sizing is allowed.


A. Uniformity

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only garlic of the same origin, variety or

commercial type, quality and size.


B. Packaging

Garlic must be packed in such a way so as to protect the produce properly.

The materials used inside the package must be clean and of a quality such as to avoid causing

any external or internal damage to the produce. The use of materials, particularly paper or

stamps bearing trade specifications is allowed, provided the printing or labelling has been done




Each package must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the same side, legibly

and indelibly marked, and visible from the outside

A. Identification




applying such a system is listed in the UNECE database.



199


"Fresh garlic", "Semi-dry garlic", "Dry garlic" or "Solo

garlic" if the contents are not visible from the outside;

Commercial type ("White garlic", "Pink garlic", etc.);

"Smoked", where appropriate.


Country of origin62 and, optionally, district where grown, or national, regional or local place name.


• Class

• Size expressed as minimum and maximum diameters of the bulbs.


Adopted 1966

Last revised 2016




publication may be obtained from the OECD bookshop at: www.oecdbookshop.org.

equivalent abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark, and the code

mark should be preceded by the ISO 3166 (alpha) country/area code of the recognizing country, if

not the country of origin. 62 The full or a commonly used name should be indicated.

200

STANDARD FOR GINGER- WTO


This Standard applies to the rhizome of commercial varieties of ginger grown from Zingiber

officinale Roscoe, of the Zingiberaceae family, to be supplied fresh to the consumer, after preparation

and packaging. Ginger for industrial processing is excluded.



In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the ginger

must be:

- whole;


excluded;


- practically free of damage caused by pests affecting the general appearance of the produce;

- free of abnormal external moisture, and properly dried if washed, excluding condensation

following removal from cold storage;


- firm;

- free of abrasions, provided light abrasions which have been dried properly are not regarded as

a defect;

- sufficiently dry for the intended use; skin, stems and cuts due to harvesting must be fully dried.

2.1.1 The development and condition of the ginger must be such as to enable it:



2.2 CLASSIFICATION

Ginger is classified in three classes defined below:


Ginger in this class must be of superior quality. It must be characteristic of the variety and/or

commercial type. The roots must be cleaned, well shaped and free of defects, with the exception of

very slight superficial defects, provided these do not affect the general appearance of the produce, the

quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package.

2.2.2 Class I

Ginger in this class must be of good quality. It must be characteristic of the variety and/or

commercial type. The roots must be firm, without evidence of shrivelling or dehydration and without

evidence of sprouting. The following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do not

affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the

package:

201

Amended 2005.

- Slight skin defects due to rubbing provided they are healed and dry and the total surface area

affected not exceeding 10%.

2.2.3 Class II

This class includes ginger which does not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes, but satisfy the

minimum requirements specified in Section 2.1 above. The roots should be reasonably firm. The

following defects, however, may be allowed, provided the ginger retains their essential characteristics

as regards the quality, the keeping quality and presentation:

- skin defects due to rubbing, provided they are healed and dry and the total surface area affected

not exceeding 15%;

- early signs of sprouting (not more than 10% by weight by unit of presentation);

- slight markings caused by pests;

- healed suberized cracks, provided they are completely dry;

- slight traces of soil; - bruises.


Size is determined by the weight of the ginger.

Size Code Weight (grams)

A 300

B 200

C 150






Five percent by number or weight of ginger not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting


4.1.2 Class I

Ten percent by number or weight of ginger not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting


4.1.3 Class II

Ten percent by number or weight of ginger satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor the



202

4.2 SIZE TOLERANCES

For “Extra” Class 5%; and for Class I and Class II, 10%; by number or by weight of ginger not

satisfying the requirements as regards sizing.


5.1 UNIFORMITY

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only ginger of the same origin, variety,

and/or commercial type, quality and size. The visible part of the contents of the package must be

representative of the entire contents.

The weight of the heaviest hand (rhizome) may not be more than twice the weight of the lightest hand

(rhizome) in the same package.

5.2 PACKAGING

Ginger must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used inside




Ginger shall be packed in each container in compliance with the Recommended International Code of

Practice for Packaging and Transport of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 44-1995).



suitable handling, shipping and preserving of the ginger. Packages must be free of all foreign matter

and smell.







produce and may be labelled as to name of the variety and/or commercial type.






63 For the purposes of this Standard, this includes recycled material of food-grade quality. 64 The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the name and address.


203


Name of the produce if the contents are not visible from the outside. Name of the variety and/or




- Class;

- Size (size code or minimum and maximum weight in grams);

- Number of units (optional); - Net weight (optional).


7. CONTAMINANTS





8. HYGIENE








1997).

Standard for Dried Chilli Peppers- UN

204


This Standard applies to whole dried chilli peppers 65 of varieties (cultivars)

grown from Capsicum annuum L., C. baccatum, C. chinense, C. frutescens and C.

pubescens, intended for direct consumption or for food when intended to be mixed

with other products for direct consumption without further processing. This

standard does not apply to whole dried chilli peppers for industrial processing.


The purpose of the standard is to define the quality requirements of whole dried chilli

peppers at the export-control stage, after preparation and packaging.

However, if applied at stages following export, the holder/seller shall be

responsible for observing the requirements of the standard. The holder/seller of

products not in conformity with this standard may not display such products or

offer them for sale, or deliver or market them in any other manner.

A. Minimum requirements 66

In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances

allowed, the whole dried chilli peppers must display the following characteristics:

• intact; however, slight superficial damage is not considered as a defect;

peduncle and calyx may be missing but flesh at the calyx area must be intact,

if present peduncle and calyx must be intact

• sound; produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it unfit

for consumption is excluded;

• clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter;

• sufficiently developed;

• free from living pests whatever their stage of development;

• free from damage caused by pests, including the presence of dead insects

and/or mites, their debris or excreta;

• free from blemishes, areas of discolouration or spread stains in pronounced

contrast with the rest of the produce affecting in aggregate not more than 25

per cent of the surface of the produce;

• free from mould;

• free of abnormal external moisture;

• free of foreign smell and/or taste.

The condition of the whole dried chilli peppers must be such as to enable them:

65 Whole dried chilli peppers presenting a minimum pungency of 900 Scoville index; for levels of

pungency, see annex.

66 Definitions of terms and defects are listed in annex III of the Standard Layout – Recommended

terms and definition of defects for standards of dry (Inshell Nuts and Nut Kernels) and

dried produce

www.unece.org/trade/agr/standard/dry/StandardLayout/StandardLayoutDDP_e.pdf

http://www.unece.org/trade/agr/standard/dry/StandardLayout/StandardLayoutDDP_e.pdf

http://www.unece.org/trade/agr/standard/dry/StandardLayout/StandardLayoutDDP_e.pdf

205

• to withstand transportation and handling;


B. Moisture content 67

Whole dried chilli peppers should have a maximum moisture content in accordance

with the following table:

Commercial type

Maximum

moisture content

in per cent (m/m)

Guajillo, Pasilla

and other

commercial

similar flesh

texture

types having

13.5

Ancho, Mulato

and other

commercial

types having

similar flesh

texture

12.5

Puya

and other

commercial

types having

similar flesh

texture

10.0

De árbol

and other

commercial

types having

similar flesh

texture

9.0

C. Classification

In accordance with the defects allowed in section “IV. Provisions concerning

tolerances”, whole dried chilli peppers are classified into the following classes:

“Extra” Class, Class I and Class II.

The defects allowed must not affect the general appearance of the produce as regards

quality, keeping quality and presentation in the package.

67 The moisture content is determined by the method given in annex I of the Standard Layout –

Determination of the moisture content for dried produce

www.unece.org/trade/agr/standard/dry/StandardLayout/StandardLayoutDDP_e.pdf. The laboratory

reference method shall be used in cases of dispute.

206

D. Colour

Colour classification for whole dried chilli peppers is mandatory for the commercial

types in accordance with the table below:

Commercial

type

Extra Class I Class II

Guajillo Uniform; intense or dark red with no

discoloration

Slight variation in

colour intensity with

no discoloration

Variation in colour intensity including discolouration within the limits of the minimum

requirements

Puya Uniform; intense or dark red with no

discoloration

Slight variation in


no discoloration


requirements

Ancho Uniform; light red to dark red with no

discoloration

Slight variation in


no discoloration


requirements

Mulato Uniform; intense black with no

discoloration

Slight variation in


no discoloration


requirements

Pasilla Uniform intense black with no

discoloration

Slight variation in


no discoloration


requirements

De árbol Uniform intense

red with no

discoloration

Slight variation in


no discoloration


requirements

Others Uniform;

colour

characteristic of the

commercial type

with no

discoloration

Slight variation in


no discoloration


requirements

E. Pungency

Commercial types of whole dried chilli peppers are characterized by pungency in

accordance with the annex. In case of dispute, or when requested, the packer and/or

dispatcher/shipper shall supply information regarding the level of pungency.

207


Size is determined by the length (measured from the apex to the insertion point of the

peduncle at the calyx).

The commercial types are sized in accordance with the following table:

Commercial type Class Length (cm)

Pasilla Extra > 20

Class I > 14

Commercial type Class Length (cm)

Class II

Guajillo Extra

Class I > 10

Class II

Puya Extra

Class I

Class II

Ancho, Mulato Extra

Class I > 7

Class II < 7

De árbol Extra

Class I

Class II

Chipotle Extra

Class I

Class II

Cascabel Extra

Class I

Class II

Habanero, Catarina Extra

Class I

Class II

Piquin (bird eye) Extra

Class I

Class II

Other commercial types are sized in accordance with the existing commercial trading

practices.

Sizing of whole dried chilli peppers is mandatory for “Extra” Class and Class I.


At all marketing stages, tolerances in respect of quality and size shall be allowed in

each lot for produce not satisfying the minimum requirements of the class indicated.

208


Tolerances allowed,

percentage of

defective produce, by

number

or weight

Defects allowed Extra Class I Class II

(a) Tolerances for produce not satisfying the

minimum requirements of which no more than:

Blemishes, stains, discolorations, burns,

scratches, scars,

5

10

15

deformations 2 5 10

Decayed and mouldy produce 0.5 1 2

Damaged by pests 0.5 0.5 1

Living pests 0 0 0

Missing stems and broken

produce (b) Size tolerances, if

sized

5

7

10

For produce not conforming to the size

indicated, in total (c) Tolerances for other

defects

10 10 10

Foreign matter (by weight)

Whole dried chilli peppers belonging to commercial

types other

1 1 1

than that indicated 5 10 10


A. Uniformity

The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only whole dried chilli

peppers of the same origin, quality, colour, size (if sized) and commercial type.

The visible part of the contents of the package must be representative of its entire contents.

B. Packaging

Whole dried chilli peppers must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly.

The materials used inside the package must be clean and of a quality such as to

avoid causing any external or internal damage to the produce. The use of

materials, particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade specifications, is allowed,

provided the printing or labelling has been done with non-toxic ink or glue.

209

Packages must be free of all foreign matter in accordance with the table of tolerances in

section “IV. Provisions concerning tolerances”.


Each package68 must bear the following particulars in letters grouped on the same side,

legibly and indelibly marked and visible from the outside:

A. Identification

Packer and/or dispatcher:

Name and physical address (e.g. street/city/region/postal code and, if different

from the country of origin, the country) or a code mark officially recognized by

the national authority69.


• “Whole dried chilli peppers”

• Name of the commercial type

• Level of pungency indicated as “mild”, “medium”, “hot” or “extra hot”, as

appropriate.


Country of origin70 and, optionally, district where grown or national, regional or local

place name.


• Class

• Size (if sized): expressed as size range or minimum size followed by "and

over"

• Method of drying (optional)

• “Best before” followed by the date (optional).


Adopted 2013

68 These marking provisions do not apply to sales packages presented in packages.

69 The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the name

and address. However, in cases where a code mark is used, the reference “packer

and/or dispatcher” (or equivalent abbreviations) must be indicated in close

connection with the code mark, and the code mark should be preceded by the ISO

3166 alpha country code of the recognizing country, if not the country of origin. 70 The full or commonly used name should be indicated.

210

Annex

Pungency of certain commercial types of whole dried chilli peppers

The following commercial types of whole dried chilli peppers are characterized by

pungency in accordance with the following table.

Level of pungency

Total

capsaicinoids

(μg/g dry weight)

Pungency Intensity

a

(Scoville units )

Examples of

commercial

types

Mild 60 - 200 900 - 3000 Ancho, Mulato,

Pasilla

Medium 201-334 3001 – 5

000

Guajillo,

Cascabel,

Catarina

Medium to hot 335 – 2009 5 001 – 30

000

Puya, De árbol,

Chipotle

Hot 2010 –

6670

30 010 – 100

000

Piquín (Bird Eye)

Extra hot > 6670 > 100 000 Habanero

211

THANK YOU

Contact details- [email protected]

export promotion of horticulture crops in madhya pradesh...horticulture crops in madhya pradesh”...

Documents