Rural Marketing: Some Conceptual Issues

Author(s): Mithileshwar Jha

Source: Economic and Political Weekly , Feb. 27, 1988, Vol. 23, No. 9 (Feb. 27, 1988), pp.
M8-M16
Published by: Economic and Political Weekly

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4378168

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Economic and Political Weekly

This content downloaded from

117.239.205.129 on Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:15:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Rural Marketing: Some Conceptual Issues
Mithileshwar Jha

This paper makes an attempt at understanding the concept of rural marketing through conceptualisation based
on literature review and some experimential learning. It aims to (i) develop a framework for understanding rural
marketing, (ii) explore the state of the art based on the framework developed; (iii) examine the contributions
from other.disciplines (economics, sociology, anthropology, etc); (iv) review the literature on the rural situation,
and (v) explore future concerns of rural marketing.

I of values between two or more parties' The other stream of Indian mark-eting
(Kotler45, p 14, slightly modified). We iden- literature focuses on what goes under the ti-
Introduction tify the following five dimensions of tle "rural marketing", interpreted differently
THE concepts 'rural' and 'marketing', transaction: by different authors. It basically covers
(i) Participants (producers, sellers, various aspects of rural markets and
though used very frequently in various
forums, have eluded any precise and non- facilitators, regulators, buyers and con- marketing to the rural consumers, (1, Baig7
sumers) with their utility functions; Balakrishna8, Dass,22 Doshi32,
controversial definition. When we join them,
the resulting concept 'rural marketing' (ii) Products (goods, services and ideas); Gopalaswamy47, Gupta5", Jain56, K
means different things to different persons. (iii) Modalities (place, time and ownership Mathur79, Monga87, Ramanand"'O, Rao
This confusion leads tor-distorted understan- utilities, roles of participants, the and Tagat'04, 114, 115, Sani 116 Sarma and
ding of the problems of rural marketing, organisation of participants, and Rao 7, Sharwat'l25, etc). In this case the
poor diagnosis and, more often than not, terms); focus seems to be on cells C31, C32 and C33.
poor prescriptions. The objective of this (iv) Norms (formal and informal rules Within these cells the focus is limited on a
governing the behaviour of the parti- very narrow range of participants and pro-
paper is to make a modest attempt at under-
cipants and liabilities of the partici- ducts. In fact, one of the earliest uses of the
standing the concept of rural marketing,
through conceptualisation based on the pants); and term rural marketing seems to be by
literature review and some experiential lear- (v) Outcome (satisfaction/dissatisfaction Shah'22, in the reports of a sub-committee,
ning. In order to achieve this objective we of one or more participants and their set up in 1937 by the National Planning
will attempt the following: impact on subsequent transactions and Committee. The focus of this report is on
(i) developing a framework for understan- nature of relationships). the marketing of rural produce mainly 'cash

ding rural marketing; crops' in which it includes all farm produce.

We can combine the two frameworks, the
(ii) exploring the state of the art based on Srinivasan'32, has used the approach sug-
domain of rural marketing and the dimen-
the framework developed; gested in the earlier version of this paper in
sions of transaction (the core concept of
(iii) examining the contributions from other studying transactions in a rural setting in
marketing), to understand the state of art
disciplines (economics, sociology, an- Tamil Nadu with some refreshing insights.
of rural marketing as shown in Figure 2.
thropology, etc); Yet another steam of marketing literature,
(iv) reviewing the literature on rural situa- mainly emerging from the experiences and
tion; and III conceptualisations in the US particularly
(v) exploring future concerns of rural drawn from the experiences of Latin
The State of the Art American, African and Asian countries,
marketing.
throws useful light on various dimensions
In the Indian marketing literature a domi-
II of rural marketing. Excepting a brief
nant theme is agricultural marketing, focus-
reference of one or two such articles, we shall
ing mainly on the marketing of agricultural
A Framework for Understanding not discuss them in this paper.
produce and that of agricultural inputs.
Rural Marketing Conceptually they cover all the three do- Finally, we have indigenous marketing
literature dealing with various dimensions
A simple two dimensional picture of the mains depicted in Figure 1 above. However,
when we expand the framework to that or sub-dimensions of transactions involving
domain of rural marketing may be visualis-
rural marketing (Amte4, Balakrishna9,
ed as the flow of products (goods, services, shown in Figure 2, we find lots of empty
ideas, etc) as shown in Figure 1. In the cells. For example, most of the literature on Bha-ndari 12, Das and Ghosh23, Das24,
agricultural marketing (3, Bhattacharya, Dhillon30, 31, Gaikward37, Ganguiy39,
diagram, cells 1, 2 and 3 seem to represent
Ramesh and Sobhagya'3, Desai 28, Elango Girdhari45, Gopalaswamy 4, Gupta50, 52,
the domain of rural marketing. Before we
and Kartikeyan34 Gaupule and Bhowmik42, Jha57, Kacker and Kacker58, Kapoor60,
develop it further, let us clarify two issues:
Gupta49, Heredia53, Hinge, Pawar and Krishna47, Lahiri68, Mehta82, Moddie85,
(i) we will try to elaborate on the concept
Baber54, Kulkarni66, Maggu73, Malik75, Pandit92, Paul95, Mohan86, Platteav,
'rural' in the following section, and (ii) we
Mamoria76, Moore88, O'Connor9l, Patil Murickan and Delbar96, Puri98,
visualise rural and urban marketing (if it can
and Murlidhatan94, Reddy and Kumar'"0, Ramachandran9, RamaswamyI, Rao and
be defined as such as complementary to each
Saxena, Mathur and Lal"18, Seetharaman Tagat .'% Rao 05, Rao 106, Senguptal 20,
other with a significant overlap intersection),
and Jha 26, Subramanyam'33, Tambad'35, Sengupta121, Shah 123 Subramanyam and
which mainly occurs in cells 2 and 3. The
Tandon 36, and 143) concentrates on cells Prasad'34, Vora'42, Yadava"44, etc) at micro
concept of flow used here is mainly interms
C22, C32 (i e, products) and C23, C33 (i e, or macro level. We are not attempting here
of space but the flow from an organised sec-
the further classification of these in the
tor plant (e g, a fertiliser plant), though modalities). Even in terms of products the
various cells of Figure 2.
located in rural space, would be classified focus is limited to fine grains, cash crops and
under urban to rural flow in our schemata. inputs like fertilisers, pesticides, seeds and We can broadly summarise the weaknesses
Now, in order to explore the state of the farm machinery. It shows a clear bias in of indigenous rural marketing literature as
art of rural marketing, we have to develop favour of those who use modern, high cost follows:
a framework for classification of literature. inputs and produce surplus for urban con- (i) In terms of participants, it- almost
For this purpose, we define the core concept sumption, constituting may be, around 10 ignores the majority of rural popula-
of marketing as transaction, meaning 'trade per cent of the rural population. tion, the rural poor.

M-8 Economic and Political Weekly February 27, 1988

This content downloaded from

117.239.205.129 on Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:15:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 (ii) In terms of products, it concentrates on uncderstanding of rural marketing is in the the rural producer-consumer. Although
tangibles and ignores some of the basic following areas: these disciplines, taken together, cover the
need satisfying 'products' like, health, (i) In identifying basic needs (food health, entire domain of rural marketing, each
education, drinking water, housing and education, housing, etc) and providing discipline has a narrow focus, e g, economics
other products like transportation, definitions and criteria for classifica- focuses more on products and modalities,
labour, land, money, etc. Even in tion (e g, definitions of concepts like sociologists on participants and norms and
tangibles, the focus seems to be ex- poverty, malnutrition, undernutrition, so on.
clusively on economic goods. etc, and classification criteria in terms So far we have developed a framework for
(iii) In terms of modalities, it does not say of economic occupation, size of land understanding the concept of rural market-
much about the criteria for develop- holding, income, levels, etc). (Chanm- ing. We have also reviewed, though very
ment of market centres (except a few bers17, 18 Dantwala2 , Drucker33, briefly, some of the contributions made by
economic studies), roles of various par- Fonseca36, Galbraith38, Lipton71, the existing literature in marketing and other
ties (including regulating agencies) with Ojha9'97, Rao 07, Rostowl", Saxenal9, disciplines to the understanding of this con-
regard to a large array of transactions Singh 27 and 143.) cept. In the following section, we will briefly
and so on. (ii) In providing meaningful data on the present the content of some of the literature
(vi) In terms of norms, it does not say much various quantifiable aspects of rural reviewed in this context.
about the norms of behaviour, liabilities socio-economic situations (2, 16, 20,
of various parties, etc, even with regard Ganguli30, Krishna and Raychow- V
to conventional goods. dhury65, Magrabi74, 97, Rao'07, 113, Rural Scene: As Depicted in
(v) In terms of the outcome, the marketing 131, Vora'42 ,143, Zaidi 45, 147).
literature, in general, is negligent, more
Literature
However, most of the articles are
so, the rural marketing literature. classificatory in nature and do not We will firgt sort-out the issue of rural-
Up to this stage, we were focusing ex- bring out the interrelationships clearly.
urban dichotomy and then proceed to have
clusively on marketing literature. However, a glimpse of rural scene, as presented in the
keeping in view the multifaceted needs of Rural Sociology and Social literature, classified in terms of the five
and socio-politico-economic factors operat- Anthropology dimensions of transaction discussed earlier.
ing on our target group (rural producer-
consumer), and the integrating nature of the Rural sociologists and social an-
RURAL-URBAN DICHOTOMY
marketing discipline, we cannot help seeking thropologists are the two groups, who have
tried to investigate the rural life at micro level have dealt with this topic in
Sociologists
insight from other social sciences, mainly,
in detail. Their observations on rural-urban considerable detail. Taylor and Jones'37
economics, rural sociology, social an-
differences, rural people, rural family, caste provide some insight into the rural social
thropology and economic geography. Know-
ing the breadth and depth of literature ex- system, rural socio, economic, political and organisation:
isting in each of these disciplines, it will be cultural systeua, attitudes and values of rural Ruralised social organisation is a form of
presumptuous to claim even scanning of the people and problems of under-development societal integration whereby all the major
whole literature, however, an attempt is be- can be of enormous help to marketers in social institutions have an agrarian base...
understanding the rural producer/consumer It is one type of social organisation, the
ing made here to review a few apparently
relevant books/articles from each of the and his environment (Broehl'4, Cloke'9, social features of which are primary interac-
above mentioned disciplines. Dasputa25, Desai27, Kuppuswamy67, tion, village living, localisation, isolation,
Loomis72, Nair89, Singhi 129, 130, primary production and distribution of
'IV goods, and reciprocal provision of services
Unnithan' 39, Vidyarthi and Sahai 40,
Contributions from Other Volken '41, Zimmerman 146). We classify (pp 16-17).

Disciplines Anderson and Ishwaran5 summarise the

Khanna and Subramanyam6' and Mathai81
works of urban sociologists in comparing
also in this category because of their domi-
Economics
nant concern. urban man and rural man showing an ur-
Economists' main contribution' to the
ban man as more risk-taking, innovative,
Economic Geography cautious and witty in dealing with others,
FIGURE 1: THE DOMAIN OF RURAL MARKETING
more time-use conscious, less traditionalX
TO One major contribution of this discipline less family bound, etc, compared to a rural
Rural Urban seems to be the understanding of the man (pp 6-7).
development of market centres apart from Desai27, suggests the scheme of differen-
Rural 1 2 the mapping of various economic indicators, tiation shown in TAble 1 (originally advocated
transportation, etc (SaxenaI9, Singh127). by Sorokin and Zimmerman): Gilbert"
From
Apart from these, one cannot ignore the tries to define the concept of 'rural'. "I sug-
roles of other disciplines like psychology, gest in conclusion two constituents of rural:
Urban agricultural economics, etc, in understanding 'capitalist space' in the form of uneven
regional development, and the 'mode of
FIGURE 2: FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING THE STATE-OF-THE-ART primary production' (including the occupa-
tional category), which is distinguished by
Domain of Rural Dimensions of Transaction its direct interaction with the natural en-
Marketing
vironment" (p 609).
Participants Products Modalities Norms Outcome Clokel9 uses variables like, women
population, population change, commuting
out pattern, household amenities, inmigra-
Rural to rural C1l c12 C13 C14 C1 5 tion, population density, population over 65,
distance from 50,000 urban node and oc-
Rural to Urban !C21 C22 C23 C24 C25 cupational structure, to develop an index of
rurality in the context of the United
Urban to rural 231 C33 C34 C35
Kingdom.
(Here, 'C' stands for cell and the Sarma and Rao"17
notations (1,2)divide correspon
the national
respectively.) market in rural and urban markets. Rural

Economic and Political Weekly February 27, 1988 M-9

This content downloaded from

117.239.205.129 on Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:15:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
markets having low population density, -All other places satisfying the following which may have important bearings for rural
unintegrated in terms of communication and criteria: marketing studies are:
physical distribution facilities and urban * Minimum population of 5,000 (i) Out of the 177 million earners in the
markets having high density population nex- * At least 75 per cent of the male work- country, 83 per cent lived in rural
uses.with a developed infrastructure, e g, ing force in non-agricultural pursuits, areas. The rural households had more
metropolitan city and town areas. They fur- and earners per family on the average, as
ther define the din(ensions of rural * A density of population of 400 per compared to the urban households.
marketing in terms of 'population, income square kilometre. (ii) Cultivators and agricultural wage
and eonsumption levels'. earner households constituted 73.2 per
The NCAER study'47 provides an opera- So we get a definition of rural areas in cent of the total in the rural India,
tional definition of urban areas as per 1971 'other-than-those' terms. This study has while their proportion was hardly 6
census: (the same definition has been found some significant differences in the per cent in the urban areas.
retained in the 1981 census also): rural and urban areas in terms of the (iii) The proportion of households report-
- All places with a municipality, corpora- household source of income, income, wealth, ing agricultural income defined with
tion, cantonment, or a notified town investments, savings, etc. Some of the salient an increase in education levels of the
area, findings of this study (published in 1980) chief earners.
(iv) Agriculture was the dominant source
TABLE 1: CRITERIA FOR RURAL-URBAN DIFFERENTIATION of rural income whereas salary was the
major source of urban income.
Criteria Rural World Urban World
(v) During the agricultural year ending
(1) Occupation Totality of cultivators and their Totality of people engaged prin- June 1976, the household sector had
families. In the community are cipally in manufacturing, an income fo Rs 45,158 crore. Rural
usually a few representatives of mechanical pursuits, trade, India, accounting for the three-fourths
several non-agricultural pursuits. commerce, professions, govern- (75 per cent) of the country's popula-
ing, and other non-agricultural tion, contributed two-thirds (66.6 per
occupations. cent) of this income.
(2) Environment Predominance of nature over Greater isolation from nature. (vi) Urban household income (average)
anthropo-social environment. Predominance of man-made was about 1.8 times higher than rural
Direct relationship to nature. environment over natural. household income (average).
Poorer aid. Stone and iron.
(vii) 77 per cent of rural households and
(3) Size of community Open farms or small com- As a rule in the same country
about 47 per cent of urban households
munity, "agriculturism" and and at the same period, the size
had an annual income below Rs 4,800.
size of community are nega- of urban community is much
At the income levels of over Rs 30,000,
tively correlated. larger than the rural com-
two-thirds of the households resided
munity. In other words,
in towns and cities.
urbanity and size of community
(viii) Cultivator households shared 61.1 per
are positively correlated.
cent of rural income while salary ear-
(4) Density of In the same country and at the Greater than in rural com-
population same period the density is lower munities. Urbanity and density ning households shared more than 50
than in urban community. are positively correlated. per cent of the urban income.
Generally density and rurality (ix) The stock of assets (agricultural assets,
are negatively correlated. livestock, house property, business
(5) Heterogeneity and Compared with urban popula- More heterogeneous than rural assets and selected consumer durables)
homogeneity of the tions, rural communiities are communities (in the same time). with the household sector, as on
population more homogeheous in racial Urbanity and heterogeneity are June 1,.1975 was Rs 1,65,000 crore, 84
and psychological traits positively correlated. per cent of this was with the rural
(negative correlation with households.
heterogeneity). (x) The average household investment was
(6) Social differentia- Rural differentiation and strati- Differentiation and stratifi- Rs 917, with urban households having
tion and strati- fication less than urban. cation show positive correlation a higher average-at Rs 1,722 as com-
fication with urbanity. pared to Rs 697 of the rural
(7) Mobility Territorial, occupational and More intensive. Urbanity and households.
other forms of social tnobility mobility are positively (xi) Per capita rural investment in finan-
of the population are compara- correlated. Only in the periods
cial assets was around Rs 28 as com-
tively less intensive. Normally of social catastrophe is the
pared to the urban investment of
the migration current carries migration from the city to the
Rs 213.
more individuals from the country greater than from the
(xii) Urban households with roughly twice
country to the city. country to the city.
the rural income invested on an
(8) System of Less numerous contacts per More numerous contacts. Wider
average eight times more than the rural
interaction man. Narrower area of the area of interaction system per
in financial assets.
interaction system of its man and per aggregate. Prn-
(xiii) Out of the gross savings of the
members and the whole dominance of secondary
household sector (placed at Rs 8,238
aggregate. More prominent part contact. Predominance of
crore), 59.7 originated in rural areas.
is occupied by primary contacts. impersonal casual and short-
Predominance of personal and lived relations. Greater com- (xiv) In rural India, 1 per cent of the
relatively durable relations. -plexity, manifoldedness, super- households at the top income levels
Comparative simplicity and ficiality, and standardised had a share-of 7 per cent of rural in-
sincerity of relations. "Man is formality of relations. Man is come and contributed 17.2 per cent of
interacted as a human person". interacted as a "number" and savings, while 60 per cent of rural
address. households with 34.1 of rural income
accounted for only 10.3 per cent of
Source: P A Sorokin and C C Zimmerman, Principles of Rural Urban Sociology as quoted in rural savings.
A R Desai (ed) Rural Sociology in India, pp 11-12. These differences, though meaningful for

M-10 Economic and Political Weekly February 27. 1988

This content downloaded from

117.239.205.129 on Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:15:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
the prupose for which they are reported, may get the major assistance from other much conspicuous consumption as in the
not have much value for a mark'eter. Maybe, disciplines discussed earlier. At the aggregate towns and cities, between in the humble
crystallising from these studies and using our level we have some picture of rural poor in village one finds love for fine cloth, bangles
own experiences and conceptualisations, we the works of Atal7, Singer (in 14 Broehl), and precious gems. And what is perhaps
can develop more useful dimensions from Galbraith38, Mathai81, Nair89, Rao 103, more important, the desire for land and cat-
the marketers' point of view. Rudra'12 tle and oxcarts, a good match and educa-
Nair89 wonders about their low level of tion for his children, a job for a relative, are
RURAL SCENE: CLASSIFIED IN TERMS OF aspiration, "Five acres on lease is the limit for the villager real desires and express in
THE DIMENSIONS OF TRANSACTION of their aspiration.. .Their demands are these local terms his ambition to improve his
calculated solely on the basis of the fami- position" (15).
Participants
ly's consumption requirements of rice at two Singhi et al'30, in a micro-level (t6 be
Some macro-level data based on various meals a day, one of which is cold and left precise, two village) study try. to explore the
census publications and those presented by over from the previous night. For the time aspirations of rural youth. However, keep-
Zaidi'45 are as shown in Table 2 to 4. being 'at least, they do not want more" ing in view the exploratory nature of study
The age profile of the Indian population (Nair89, p 31). and the small sample, one cannot generalise
(total) as per 1981 census is as shown in She envies (?) their preference for leisure, from this small study. Maybe, we need lots
Table 5. The predominance of the youth "he possesses nothing but poverty, yet a of such micro-level studies (as advocated by
population and its implication for marketers millionaire could not care less" (Nair89, p social anthropologists) to know our target
largely remain unexplored in marketing 47). She fails to understand the strange logic segment, more in a three-dimensional way,
literature. of their faith in god, "who might seem to rather than more numbers above or below
Dantwala2' estimates the number of per-
fail them every day and perhaps many times the controversial poverty line.
sons living below the poverty line (defined a day" (p 84). Mamoria76 provides a simple classifica-
as per capital per month consumption ex- She emphasises on the need for a different tion of different kinds of buyers and sel!ers
kind of orientation in rural programmes,
penditure of Rs 65 and Rs 75 for rural and in a primary market (essentially for
urban areas, respectively, for the year ". . . A community's attitude to work can be agricultural produce) as, "cultivators,
1977-78) at about '306 million in 1977-78- more decisive determinant for raising pro- growers (those who collect the produce of
249 million in rural areas and 57 million in ductivity in Indian agriculture than material other cultivators), landlords, travelling
urban areas'. resources, *or for that matter even agents, village baniya, kutcha arhatia and
Ojha91 estimates the percentage of rural technology" -(Nair89, p 190). She
population under poverty in 1967-68 at acknowledges the diversity in the prevailing
value systems across rural India, "which TABLE 4: PROFILE OF RURAL WORKERS IN
about 70 per cent (of the rural population)
VARIOUS FIELDS
and the figures in Exhibit 12 indicate that determines not only a community's pattern
about 81 per cent of rural population is of production and consumption, of farm Category Yearwise Population
below the monthly per capita expenditure management, marketing and even housing, ( million persons)
class of Rs 75, only about 9 per cent is above but also its primary attitudes and wants" 1971 1981
Rs 100 and less than 1 per cent above Rs 200 (Nair89, p 191). Atal7 emphasises on the
per capita, per month expenditure class. This need "to distinguish between verbalised Cultivators 78.0 93.0
leads to a major question: should marketing values and practised values" (Atal7, p 98). Agricultural labourers 47,0 57.0
confine itself to serving the needs of top 1 He observes, "For instance, vegetarianism, Others 23.4 35.3
per cent, top 9 per cent or the bottom 80 teetotalism, monogamy, taboo against
Compiled from Zaidi
per cent (in terms of the monthly per capita widow remarriage, etc, are the values of the
234.
expenditure class)? Obviously, business/pro- ritually upper stratum of society. The values
fit oriented marketing cannot ignore the top of the lower castes in regard to these aspects TABLE 5: POPULATION PROFILE

brackets, but there is a major role for non- are very close to the western-modern ideal"
Age Group Per Cent of
profit marketing institutions, organisations, (Atal7, p 98).
Population
academicians and even business or profit
Brohel14 quotes Milton Singer (Singer,
sector, for the development of the rural poor, 0-15 years 52
Milton, 'Cultural Values in India's Economic
for bringing him into the mainstream of na- 16-49 years 37
Development', Annals of the American
tional life, if marketing has to play an im- 50-59 years 6
Academy of Political and Social Science,
portant role in economic development as ad- 60 years and above 5
305, 1956, pp 81-91): "Behind the mud walls
vocated by Drucker33, Rostow1l and many Total 100
of an Indian village one will not find as
other eminent scholars.
TABLE 2: PERCENTAGE OF URBAN AND RURAL POPULATION OVER THE YEARS
Das24, Gupta37 38'39, Monga87, Ram-
anand'O?, Ramaswamy'01, Sengupta120"21 Sector Year
and a whole lot of other authors tell us a 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981
lot about the preferences of the high income
segment in the rural areas in terms of Rural 88.8 88.0 86.1 82.7 82.0 80.1 78.7
agricultural inputs, and consumer goods, Urban 11.2 12.0 13.9 17.3 18.0 19.9 21.3
about how to tap this segment and so on.
Source: Zaidi'45, p 227.
The wealth of literature may not be much
but it is there. However, when we turn to the TABLE 3: POPULATION, WORKERS, NON-WORKERS
majority segment (70 per cent to 80 per cent
of rural population), the marketing literature Year Rural (million persons) Urban (million persons)
draws a blank. Is it because even after a Total Workers Non- Total Workers Non-
decade and half of the acceptance of the Population Workers Population Workers
broadened concept of marketing, we treat
1971 439 148.4 290.6 109.0 32.0 77.00
dealing with this segment as 'barefoot 1979 523 176.5 346.5 130.0 38.0 92.0
marketing' or 'cow-dung marketing' (a term 1981 547.4 185.3 362.1 146.9 45.3 101.6
borrowed from economists)?
In fact, in dealing with this segment we Source: Zaidi145, p 229.

Economic and Political Weekly February 27 19RQ M-1l

This content downloaded from

117.239.205.129 on Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:15:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
pacca arhatia" (Mamoria76, p 23). attempt at classification which makes paper and, moreover, they suffer from the
U nnithan'39 classifies rural population generalisations possible, leading to the same biases or weaknesses as discussed
into rural elites, peasants, agricultural development of theory. Shah'22 presents above for traditional products.
workers and tribals (p 405). one of the earlier (1930s) attempts at classi- Let us briefly look at the products which
A comprehensive classification of rural fying rural goods into the following seven satisfy or are supposed to satisfy some of
consumers is provided by Gaikwad37. (This categories: the basic needs of the rural population.
is a modified version of the classification (i) cash crops (cotton, jute, sugarcane, wheat, Rao107 concludes that except for edible
suggested by A R Desai.) He classifies the groundnut, linseed, other oilseeds, rice, oils and milk and milk products, "macro
rural population in the following six tobacco, etc); (ii) vegetables and fruits; availability of food supply, as in 1980, in
categories (Gaikwad37, pp 160-161): (iii) eggs; (iv) milk and milk products; terms of calories is adequate" (p 121).
Category 1: A class of proprietors of land (v) fisheries; (vi) cottage industry goods, and However, he concedes the inequality in the
(comprising of old zamindars, (vii) hides and skins. distribution of food consumption and also
malguzairs, moneylenders and Sarma87 presents another classification that "rural consumption is marked more by
traders with hold over land of 'products of a country' into four broad malnutrition and,nutritional inequality than
and plantation or mine categories: urban consumption" (p 122). A major
owners). (i) local goods and services; (ii) regional challenge for marketers emerges from this
Category 2: A small group of rich farmers goods and services; (iii) national goods and embarrassing truth: "The emerging
(generally belonging to the services, and (iv) world goods and services. marketisation of the economy and commer-
dominant caste of the region). We have other ways of classifying goods cialisation qf agriculture is leading to a
Category 3: A class of small peasants with into convenience, shopping and speciality greater degree of dependence of rural in-
tiny uneconomic holdings. categories (Bucklin'5). Aspinwall6 gives yet come on urban markets and the diversion
Category 4: A class of tenant farmers. another classification in terms of red, yellow of quality foods and a consequent increase
Category 5: A growing class of agricultural and orange goods. Ramond and Assael'02 in ru.rMlmalnutrition. This happened first
labour, and present four product typologies in terms of in respect of edible oils and is now exten-
Category 6: A class of ruined artisans and sifhple-physical, complex-physical, simple- ding to milk and milk products and to some
others. psychological, and complex-psychological. extent also to fruits and vegetables"
He goes on to discuss the profile of these Kotler63 provides a comprehensive (Rao107, p 122). Bhandari12 also raises
groups and their aspirations and need struc- classification of goods, basically dividing similar concerns. Malnutrition, under-
ture. He very insightfully observes, ". . what durable goods, non-durable goods and ser- nutrition and in some cases may be over-
we have is a large mass of individuals and vices into consumer goods and industrial nutrition are realities of life and, wherever
not a large mas.s of consumers. How do we goods and then further dividing these two may be the poverty line, if rural marketing
reach this mass of individuals and motivate in several sub-categories (Kotler63, p 370). involves satisfying the needs of rural popula-
the individuals to become consumers?" The purpose of presenting all these tion, an important task for marketers is to
(Gaikwad37, pp 169-170). This seems to be classification is to build a case for develop- devise ways (products, projects or whatever
the real challenge of rural marketing. The ment of a comprehensive classification it is) for meeting tho challenge of mass
literature on diffusion of innovation may schemata for 'products' falling in the do- hunger and deprivation.
classify them as late majority and laggards, main of rural marketing in order to facilitate Michael Lipton (in Chambers et al'8, p
considering the odds against this segment, the development of a theory of rural 98) puts the food problem in India in a dif-
one should pay tribute to their courage and marketing. ferent perspective. In recent years, and for
perseverance: "Given the formidable hold of the 1980s, it is not adjustments to world
For the traditional products (agricultural
the equilibrium of poverty within which they markets that-as it were-stand between fer-
inputs, consumer goods, etc), there is not
live, accommodation is the optimal solution. tilisers and the food security of poor and
dearth of data and literture. However, even
Poverty is cruel. A continuing struggle to hungry people. Rather it is the lopsided con-
for these goods, the emphasis is mainly on
escape that is continuously frustrated is centration of fertilisers on:
'product approach. George43, Gupta5'52,
more cruel" (Galbraith38, p 62). * a minority even of the districts with
Seetharaman and Jha126 and many other
Rao (Communication and Development: assured irrigation; of 380 districts (289
stress on segmentation and assessment of
A Study of Two Indian Villages, Min- substantially foodgrain dependent), 55 use
needs of these segments, but the major focus
neapolis: University of Minnesota Press, nearly 60 per cent fertilisers, and a fur-
of the bulk of the articles seems to be on
1966) observing the information flow pro- ther 54 use another 20 per cent, it is the
projection of demands, description of
cess in Indian villages classifies villagers into at-risk districts that are least supported
distribution structures and problems with
information indifferents, rumour mongers, by (and possibly, given research and ir-
regards to grading, packaging, weighing
information seekers and information rigation biases, least economic for) fer-
storage and so on. Even for different kinds
carriers.
of fertilisers (it is not a homogeneous com- tiliser use;
Bhandaril2 shows that between 1960 and * larger farms (despite lower levels of farm
modity, as it is generally treated) we do not
1974 the proportion of rural people living productivity of labour use per hectare,
have sufficient marketing literature based on
below the poverty line has actually increased. and on incidence of food crops), perhaps
the needs of the land and the tiller. We do
He emphasises on the need for researching because of lower distribution costs;
not know how a farmer looks at different
the actual consumption preferences and * non-foodgrains and fine grains, as oppos-
types (including compost, blue and green
practices of the poor for the planning to be ed to the coarse grains and root crops
algae, etc) of fertilisers, various brands,
more effective. that, especially in desperate times, provide
package size, and the service that goes (or
Before we move on to the next section on the food of the poorest.
does not go) with it. Amta4, Baig8, Das24,
products, we should be clear that our focus Zaidi'45 provides some useful data on
Monga87, Pandit92, Sengupta'202' and a
is on rural poor, their needs and, therefore, production of foodgrains per head of
host of others persent their views on con-
we will focus on some of the basic neces-
sumer goods marketing in rural areas, some population (TLble 6). So, even for foodgrains
sities, viz, food, health, clothing, housing,
of them taking a descriptive-normative ap- the major problem seems to be the choice
education, irrigation, drinking water, of type and variety, distribution and price
proach. We have another set of 'economic
employment, etc.
studies' on various 'commodities' like, eggs, (Bhandari12, p 168). A related need is that
Products fruits, milk and milk products, fish and so of irrigation. Despite huge investments in ir-
One of the important aspects of develop- on. Any attempt to provide even a glimpse rigation projects, only about 30 per cent of
ment of knowledge in any descipline is the of them will be beyond the scope of this our cropped area is irrigated. The picture

M-12 Economic and Political Weekly February 27, 1988

This content downloaded from

117.239.205.129 on Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:15:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
becomes more dismal when we look at tne ways of establishing distribution network in with and deviance from these norms? Do we
poor utilisation of irrigatiOn facilities with rural markets, suggesting use of rural market need government intervention as an 'equity
huge sunk costs (Gupta50). Is not there a indexes, etc. Krishna64 advocates coverage dispenser' for all fhe transactions between
role for marketing eXperts in designing and of rural markets b1y mail order. Bhandari'2 unequals, if not, what are the alternatives?
running these projects based on the basic gives useful insights on modalities while Volken'41, Levitt70 show some alternatives
principle,f consumer orientation? Similarly, discussing the ability of the poor to pay, ac- in the form of the 'third sector'. the volun-
one can identify the problems of health cessibility and cash availability (p 168). tary organisations.
(Tewari 138, Volken 141) education Srinivasan'32 highlights the importance On the problems related to food, health,
(De'souza29, Galbraith38, Volken141) of periodic markets: "Pulliampatti is on the education, irrigation, etc, understanding of
clothing, housing, drinking water and so on. main road. There is a bus every half an hour these norms become more important. With
All these require proper assessment of needs to Omalur and to Salem. The bus fare is regard to various food items, family plan-
of the people, not in terms of physical in- Rs 1.70 to Salem. And yet, out of the 340 ning practices, education and irrigation we
ventory taking, but in understanding these respondents, 319 reported that they spent 30 have various micro-level studies exploring
needs in the contexts of attitude, values and per cent to 40 per cent of their spending in. some of these norms (Bhandari'2, Gupta5,
beliefs of the people concerned, and design- the previous week, in the periodic markets Volken'41, AtaI7, etc).
ing products to give the desired benefits to in the vicinity" (p 15). Although communi- Broehl'4 comments on the subsistence-
the people, a clear marketing approach (of cation is a part of marketing-mix, the type "business orientation of rural en-
course, the approach has to be literature on rural communication dealing trepreneurs they seem to be content with a
multi-disciplinary). with diffusion of innovation, family plan- small profit as long as it covers their sub-
Modalities ning practices, etc, is too wide and diverse sistence needs, rather than risk their capital
to be covered even briefly here. Maybe, it can in what may be potentially more profitably
We have identified major dimensions of
be dealt.with separately. but probably more risky business ventures'
modalities as various forms of utilities
In terms of modalities for the non-conven- (p 61). He continues, "This same loss
desired and provided by the participants,
tional products, health, education, irriga- minimisation rationale is widespread among
roles and organisation of participants and
tion, etc, we have to scan highly diverse subsistence farmers in developing countries"
terms of transaction (including price, pay-
literature. Marketing literature originating (p 61). He further adds, "He views his daily
ment terms, etc).
from abroad has tried to explore these un- business profit as providing for his bare sub-
For agricultural produce, we have various
conventional terrains. Our indigenous sistence in between times of blackmarket or
classifications of market centres, modes of
marketing literature is yet to venture out of scarcity" (p 62). Srinivasan'32 points at an
auctioning, grading handling, etc (Mamo-
the conventional boundaries. important norm developing in some parts
ria76, Saxena"9, and others). Saxena pro-
"let us keep our money in ouF villages"
vides a two stage classification of market Norms
(p 33).
centres. In the first stage he classifies them We have identified two basic dimensions In terms of liabilities, which we define as
into four categories as market towns, urban under this heading, norms of behaviour and the obligations of various participants, we
markets, rural markets and small village
liabilities. Iq a stratified rural society norms have rich literature in agricultural marketing
markets. In the second stage he further of behaviour of each participant or par- mainly of a descriptive nature. What may
classifies each one of them in terms of ticipating organisations are often well defin-be worth exploring is the 'why' behind the
periodicity, commodity, extent of service ed for any kind of transaction. In the studies non-fulfilment or part-fulfilment of obliga-
area and types of population served. on agricuWtural marketing we find various tions (liabilities) on the part of the majority
Amte4 provides useful comparison of references to unethical practices (Shah122, of participants. Whether we explain it as
distribution costs (refer Exhibit 17) for Kulkarni66, Mamoria76, Lele69, Moore88, 'low level of aspiration' (Nair89) or as 'ac-
various channel combinations for the same
Platteav9, Patil and Murlidharan94), the commodation' (Galbraith38), we are still left
product. He also provides comparative data
main victim of these being poor farmers with a lot of gray area.
on marketing costs, as shown in Table 7.
with small holdings, low holding capacity,
Balakrishna9 suggests some practical Outcome
poor organisation and so on. We have a
If marketing (whether, rural or urban)
whole lot of literature on regulated markets,
TABLE 6: FOODGRAIN PRODUCTION PER HEAD aims at satisfying human needs and wants,
OF POPULATION describing how they function (for different
any measure of the effectiveness and effi-
commodities) the problems faced by various
ciency of marketing would be in terms of its
Year Kilograms Grams groups in these markets and suggesting
outcome. The literature on consumerism and
Per Year Per Day remedial actions. However,' some of the most
societal marketing in US context reflects a
interesting dimensions like, how the norms
1951 138.5 380 growing trend in this direction. Since, the
of behaviour have changed overtime,
1961 187.4 515 broadened concept of rural marketing ad-
whether they are associated with the econo-
1971 197.8 542 vocated in this paper assumes a dual role for
mic power, who decides the norms and the
1981 202.9 555 each participant, that of a buyer and a seller,
who enforce it, what are the rewards and
be it a landlord, artisan or landless labour,
Source: Zaidil45, punishments
p 52, associated
54.with compliance our approach to looking at the outcome of
transaction has to be a systen.s approach,
TABLE 7: MARKETING COSTS IN DEVELOPING NATIONS
where we have to identify various parts of
Product/Commodity Marketing Costs of Percentage of Price Paid by the Consumer the system, their respective utilities, their
Thailand Sri Lanka Korea India inter-relationships and impact on each other
and the impact of the dynamic environmen-
Rice 23 37.50* 33.30 24.00 tal factor on the various components of the
Mat 36 42.86 NA NA system as well as the system as a whole.
Fish 37 50.00 49.00 NA For the majority of rural population, the
Fruits and vegetables 52** 50.00 42.00 27*** outcome of any unconventional transaction,
45... whether it is new agricultural technology,
new food habits, health practices or anything
Notes: * Relates to all cereals except rice.
* Average of five different fruits and vegetables. else, is dominated by uncertainty and it in-
* 27 for fruits and 45 for vegetables. volves 'risk'. Galbraith38 (pp 55-56) puts
this in proper perspective:
Source Amte4, p 222.

Economic and Political Weekly Februarv 27. 1988 M-13

This content downloaded from

117.239.205.129 on Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:15:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 To the family that lives on the margin of sub- We can make an attempt at classifying 8 Baig, M A, 'Guidelines for Urban and
sistence, however, failure means hunger, various concerns of rural marketing, as it Rural Marketing', Indian Journal of
possibly death. So regarded, risk is not ought to be, on a two dimensional Marketing, vol 10, no 5, Jan 1980, pp 3-8.
something to be accepted casually. Among framework, as shown in Figure 3. We get 9 Balakrishna, M, 'Rural Market: End of a
the very poor, risk aversion, as it is called by three different clusters, all falling in Lone Road for the Consumer Marketers?',
economists, is very high-and for reasons quadrants '2' and '3. RM, refers to transac- Decision, 1977.
that are wholly rational. tions involving rural rich, RM2 refers to 10 Beteills, A and T N Madan (ed), Encounter
Exploring whether green revolution has transactions involving slightly better-off and Experience: Personal Accounts of
widened the gap between rich and the poor farmers, artisans, etc, and RM3 refers to the Fieldwork, Delhi: Vikas, 1975.

and whether tractorisation leads to transactions involving rural poor which 11 Bhandari, Labdhi P, Communication for
unemployment or more employment and in- should be our major concern. As of now, Social Marketing: A Study in Fanmily Plan-
the whole transaction (except those involv- ning, Delhi: Macmillan, 1978.
creased productivity is useful, but maybe it
ing some voluntary agencies) in rural 12 Bhandari, Labdhi, P, 'The Poor as Con-
will be more useful to. explore the kind of
marketing, seems to be concentrated in sumers' in David C Korten and Felipe B
green revolution(s) and farm mechanisation
Alfonso (ed) Bureaucracy and the Poor:
that may be more relevant to our rural quadrant '. Can we influence the shift
Closing the Gap, Singapore: McGraw-Hill
context. towards quadrants 2 and 3?
Book Co, 1981, pp 165-177.
If we accept this placement, we have a lot
VI 13 Bhattacharya, K R, Ramesh, B S, and
to learn from the vast literature on rural
Sobhagya, C M, 'Dimensional Classifica-
Rural Marketing: Future Concerns sociology, social anthropology and
tion of Rice for Marketing', Journal of
developmental economics, partly reflected in
Rural marketing, for its role in economic Agricuiltural Engineering, 19, 4, 1982,
the writings of Desai27, Dasgupta25,
development, has earned tributes from pp 69-76.
Ganguli40, Chambers 17,18, Lipton7',
scholars like Rostow"l and Drucker33. The 14 Broehl, Wayne, G, Jr, The Village Entrepre-
Kuppuswamy67, Kanfer and Goldstin59,
brickbats came from scholars like Lipton7' neur: Change Agents in India's Rural
Fonseca36, Volken'41, Betiele and Madan'0,
Development, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard
(p 302): Friedmann35, Galbraith38, Rostowll',
University, 1978.
Within agricultural, emphasis on (and sub- Unnithan' 39, Loomis and Sen72,
15 Bucklin, Louis, P, 'Retail Strategy and the
sidies for) tractors used substantially for in- Zimmerman'46, etc (this list is only
Classification of Consumer Goods' in Ben
efficient haulage-and concentration on illustrative).
animal development as rich man's food M Enis and K K Cox (ed) Marketing
Levitt70 (p 174) has beautifully sum-
rather than -poor man's drought powerS' Classics (2nd ed), Boston: Allyn and
marised the present state (although in a dif-
means thai advances in marketing tend to Bacon, Inc, 1973, pp 236-247.
ferent context): 16 Capital For,nation in Agriculture, New
benefit big farmers producing cash crops for
the towns, rather than small man selling in The patience of the past, which assumed that Delhi, NCAER, 1979.
nearby village markets. in due time the right things would somehow 17 Chambers, Robert, Rural Poverty Un-
finally happen by themselves, no longer perceived: Problem and Remedies,
He further adds (pp 302-303):
works. Now some are impatiently asking too Washington: The World Bank, 1980.
Furthermore, while concentration on
much, in contrast to those who have asked 18 Chambers, Robert et al, Food Policy Issues
transport and storage upon rapidly too little, and society has no choice but to in Low Income Countries, Washington:
perishable goods-fruit, milk, vegetables- do what is right. The World Bank, 1981.
has some justification, it selects the sector
We conclude by emphasising that 'rural 19 Cloke, P, 'Rurality and Change: Some
of agricultural marketing least relevant to
marketers have no choice but to do that is Cautionary Notes', Journal of Rural
rural nutrition, and especially to the rural
poor. Even more clearly than credit,
right'. Even simple commercial logic seems Studies, 3, 1, 1987, pp 71-76.

marketing is a case where rural deprivation to suggest the same. 20 Consumer Purchases of Textiles-1977,
is due less to intra-rural exploitation than to Bombay: Textile Committee, 1978.
urban priorities and urban neglect.. 21 Dantwala, M L, 'Understanding. Poverty

These allegations are not alien to us. The 'Notes and Unemployments', Artha-Jinjnasa,
vol 1, no 2, April-June, 1981.
need is to respond to them in a professional 1 A Pilot Study on Rural Marketing in Tehsil
22 Das, V Mukunda, 'Some Aspects of Rural
way, by admitting our drawbacks, by defen- Khair, District: Aligarh, IIM, Ahmedabad,
Markets in India'. The Economfc Times,
ding our stand logically, and through con- 1978.
May 26 and 27, 1982.
tinuous process of learning (updating our 2 All India Rural Household Survey, vol II,
23 Das, V Mukunda and Ghosh, S R, 'Anand
knowledge, skill and attitude). NCAER, 1965.
Pattern: An Approach to Social Market-
3 A Review of the System of Agricultural
FIGURE 3: CLASSIFICATION OF CONCERNS OF ing'. The Economic Times, April 19 and
Marketing and 7hade, Excerpts from the
20, 1984.
RURAL MARKETING Report of the Task Force on Agricultural
24 Das, V Mukunda, Rural Market for Con-
Marketing and Trfade set up by the Work-
High sumer Durables in India, Anand: Institute
ing Group on Agricultural Price Policy,
of Rural Management, 1985.
Trade and Marketing for VII Five-Year
25 Dasgupta, Biplab, Village Studies in the
Plan.
Third World, vol 1, Delhi: Hindustan
4 Amte, V K, 'Marketing Costs and the
RM1 Publishing Corporation, 1978.
Developing World' in Madhav P Kacker
1 2 26 Dawson, Leslie, M, 'Marketing for Hunman
(ed), Marketing and Economic Develop-
Needs in a Human Future'. Business
ment, New Delhi: Deep and Deep Publica-
RM2 Horizons, vol 23, no 3, June 1980,
tions, 1982, pp 215-240.
Low --High pp 72-82.
5 Anderson, Nels and K Ishwaran, Urban
concern for
Sociology, Bombay, Asia Publishing 27 Desai, A R, Rural Sociology in India,
society
House, 1965. Bombay: Popular Prakashan, 1969.
6 Aspinwall, L V, 'The Marketing Charact- 28 Desai, Gunvant M, Sustaining Rapid
4 3.
eristics of Goods' in Ben M Enis and Growth in India's Fertiliser Consumption
K K Cox (ed) Marketing Classics, Boston: A Perspective Based on Composition of
? v RM3 Use, Washington, DC: International Food
Allyn and Bacon, Inc, 1973, pp 248-257.
7 Atal, Yogesh, 'Roles of Values and Institu- Policy Research Institute, August 1982.
Low tions' in Fonseca (ed). 29 De Sousa, 'Education for Employment' in

M-14 Economic and Political Weekly February 27, 1988

This content downloaded from

117.239.205.129 on Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:15:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Fonseca (ed), Ref 36, pp 128-145. 49 Gupta, A P, Marketing of Agricultural 69 Lele, Uma J, Food Grains Marketing in
30 Dhillon,- G, 'Rural Women in Decision Produce in India, Bombay: Vora and Co, India Private Performance and Public
Making-A Study', Kurukshetra, vol 28, 1975. Policy, London: Cornell University Press,
no 9, February 1, 1980, pp 19-21. 50 Gupta, V K, 'Some Issues in the Manage- 1971.
31 'Distribution of Consumer Articles in ment of Minor Irrigation Projects'. The 70 Levitt, Theodor, The Third Sector: New
Rural Areas through Co-operatives- Executive, vol 4, no 2, October 1971, Tactics for a Responsive Society, New
Some Problems'. The Co-operator, vol pp
17,16-21. York: AMACOM, 1973.
no 11, December 1979, pp 353-354. 51 Gupta, V K, 'An Approach to Rural 71 Lipton, Michael, Why Poor People Stay
32 Doshi, H N, 'Promotion and Advertising Marketing' Indian Journal of Marketing, Poor-A Study of Urban Bias in World
in Rural Marketing' in New Opportunities vol 2, no 5, January 1972, pp 12-20. Development, London: Temple Smith,
in Changing Agriculture, Ahmedabad: 52 Gupta, V K, 'Changing Agriculture and 1976.
CMA (IIMA), 1972, pp 141-150. Marketing of Consumer Goods' in New 72 Loomis, C P and Lalit K Sen, 'Directed
33 Drucker, P F, 'Marketing and Economic Opportunities 'in Changing Agriculture, Social and Cultural Clange in Village In-
Development' in Enix and Cox (ed), Ahmedabad: CMA (IIMA), 1972, dia' in Zimmerman and Duwors (ed)
Marketing Classics (2nd ed), Boston: pp 127-140. Sociology of Underdevelopment, Jaipur,
Allyn and Bocon, 1973, pp 38-47. 53 Heredia, F J, 'System Approach to Fer- Rawat Publications, 1976, pp 223-233.
34 Elango, R and Karthikeyan, S, 'Cost tiliser Marketing'. Fertiliser News, July73 Maggu, Ashok, 'Tractorisation in India:
Analysis of Dairying', Eastern Economist, 1978, pp 3-6. Dispelling Some Myths', Vikalpa, 7, 1,
77(9), 1981, pp 422-424. 54 Hinze, V N, Pawar, J R and Babar, V S, January-March, 1982, pp 45-52.
35 Friedmann, John, 'The Active Com- 'Price-Supply Relations of Important 74 Magrabi, I M et al, 'An Index of Economic
munity: Toward a Political Territorial Welfare of Rural Families', Journal of
Vegetables in a Wholesale Market'. Indian
Framework for Rural Development in Journal of Marketing, 14, 8, 1984, Consumer Research, December 1975,
Asia', Economic Development and pp 28-32. pp 178-187.
Cultural Change, vol 29, no 2, January 55 Hira, N and K Kumar, 'Role of Farm 75 Malik, I1ashila, 'The Decision Making by
1981, pp 235-262. Woman of Dry Farming Tract in Decision Farm Woman Regarding Improved Agri-
36 Fonseca, A J (ed), Challenge of Poverty Making', Indian Co-operative Review, cultural Practices', Indian Journal of
in India, New Delhi: Vikas, 1971. vol 17, no 2, Januiary 1980, pp 103-106. Extension Education, vol 15, no 3-6,
37 Gaikwad; V K, 'A Search for the Rural 56 Jain, B K S, Effective Communication in December 1979, pp 64-69.
Consumer' in New Opportunities in Rural Marketing, Keynote address at the 76 Mamoria, C B and R L Joshi, Principles
Changing Agriculture, Ahmedabad: CMA seminar organised by the Advertising Club, and Practice of Marketing in India,
(IIMA), 1972, pp'159-172. Bombay on March 14, 1981. Allahabad: Kitab Mahal, 1962.
38 Galbraith, J K, The Nature of Mass 57 Jha, B, 'Pricing Decisions in Carpet In- 77 Mathew, M 0 and S Sudalamuthr, 'Con-
Poverty, Cambridge, Harvard University dustry', Indian Journal of Marketing, 14, sumer Motivation with Reference to Rural
Press, J979. 3, 1983, pp 28-32. Industries Products', Indian Journal of
39 Ganguli, A S, The Growing Rural Market 58 Kacker, I and P Kacker, 'Cultural Con- Marketing, vol 11, no 3, November 1980,
in India; Chairman's speech at the annual siderations in Researching the Rural pp 9-12.
general meeting of Hindustan Lever Markets-A Note', Decision, vol 6, no 4, 78 Market Towns and Spatial Development,
Limited, held on June 24, 1983, Bombay: October 1979, pp 439-442. NCAER, '1972.
Hindustan Lever, 1983. 59 Kanfer, F H and A P Goldstein, Helping 79 Mathur, Navin, 'Rural Marketing', Indian
40 Ganguli, B N and D B Gupta, Levels of People Change, New York: Pergamon Journal of Marketing, vol 11, no 8, April
Living in India-An Inter-State Profile, Press, 1975. 1981, pp 3-8.
New Delhi: S Chand and Co, 1976. 60 Kapoor, M C, 'Profile of a Rural Con- 80 Mathur, V B L, 'Serving the Rural Con-
41 Ganguli, Sidhartha, 'Managing a Rural sumer-A Study', Indian Management, sumer', The Cooperator, vol 17, no 4,
Project' Indian Management, vol 21, no 1, vol'l5, no 11, November 1976, pp 7-11. August 15, 1979, pp 77-78.
January 1982, pp 20-21. 61 Khanna, I and Subramaniam, A, 'Lessons 81 Mathai, Ravi J, Rural University: The
42 Gaupale, S P, Sane, S N and Bhowmik, M from Antyodaya for the Integrated Rural Jawaja Experiment in Educational In-
'Evaluatioh of Sales Promotional Mix Development', Vikalpa, 7, 3, July- novation, Bombay: Popular, 1985.
Adopted by Different Pharmaceutical September 1982, pp 227-234. 82 Mehta, A D, 'Rural Market Centres', The
Companies for Their Veterinary Products',62 Kohok, M A, 'Marketing for 123 Million Economic Times, January 9 and 10, 1985.
Indian Journal of Marketing, 13, 5, 1983, Rural Consumers', Indian Journal of 83 Mehta, S C, 'Survey of Rural Tamil Nadu:
pp 6-8. Commerce, vol 26, no 4, November 1973, Consumer Durables-Poor Penetration in
43 George, P S, 'Development of Rural pp 716-722. Villages', The Economic Times, July 1,
Markets in India, Indian Journal of 63 Kotler, Philip, Principles of Marketing, 1973, pp 4, 6.
Marketing, vol 2, no 5, January 1972, New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India, 1982. 84 Michael, U P, 'Determinants of Consumer
pp 9-11. 64 Krishna, M, 'Rural Markets Coverage by Behaviour tn a Rural Based Retail Market-
44 Gilbert, Jess, 'Rural Theory: The Groun- Mail Order Indian Journal of Marketing, An Empirical Study of Foot-Wear Market
ding of Rural Sociology'. Rural Sociology, vol 6, no 1-2, 1974, pp 12-13. in Kolhapur", Decision, vol 6, no 2, April
47 (4), pp 609-633. 65 Krishna, Raj and G S Raychoudhari, 1979, pp 175-186.
45 Girdhari, D G and R D Biradar, 'Dairy 'Trends in Rural Savings and Capital For- 85 Moddie, A D, 'A National Market and
Development: A Marketing Approach', mulation in India, 1950.51 to 1973-74', Growth Centres', in Fonseca (ed), pp 149-
Indian Journal of Marketing, vol xii, 158.
Economic Development and Cultural
no 11, July 1982, pp 11-15. Change, vol 30, no 2, January 1982, 86 Mohan, M, 'Marketing in Rural India',
46 Gopalswamy, T P, Rural Market Environ- Productivity, vol xIx, no 4, January-
pp 271-298.
ment, paper preseitted at the seminar on 66 Kulkarni, K R, Agricultural Marketing in March, 1979, pp 619-631.
Rural Marketing, held at IIM, Bangalore, India, vol I, Bombay: The Co-operators' 87 Monga, J S, 'Rural Marketing Planning
December 12-13, 1983. and Strategy, Indian Journal of Market-
Book Depot, 1951.
47 Gopalswamy, T P, Strategies for Rural ing, vol 2, no 5, January 1972, pp 4-9.
67 Kuppuswamy, B, Communication and
Marketing, paper presented at the Seminar
Social Development in India, New Delhi: 88 Moore, John R, et al, Indian Food Grain
on Rural Marketing, held at IIM, Banga-
Sterling Publishers, 1976. Marketing, New Delhi: Prentice-Hall,
lore, December 12-13, 1983.
1973.
48 Gore, Mrinal, The Rural onsumers: An 68 Lahiri, Sanat, 'Evolving an Effeqtive
Unprotected Lot, Vikalpa, vol 4, no 3, July Strategy for Tahpping the Rural Markets', 89 Nair, Kusum, Blossoms in the Dust: The
1979, pp 245-248. Capital, July 22, 1971, pp 24-28. Human Element in Indian Development,

Economic and Political Weekly February 27, 1988 M-15

This content downloaded from

117.239.205.129 on Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:15:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 London: Gerald Duckworth, 1961. pp 13-22. Vishal Publications, 1974.
90 O'Connor, James J, 'Food Marketing- 109 Reddy, S B, 'Marketing Mix in Cotton 128 Singh, P, 'Failure of Farm Co-operative
Systems Approach to Human Concern'. inMarketing' Indian Journal of Marketing, Marketing Societies', Indian Journal Qf
New Perspectives in Marketing, New 13, 11-12, 1983, pp 15-17. Marketing, vol 6, no 3-4, November-
Delhi, NCAER, 1972, pp 134-139. 110 Reddy C R and Suresh Kumar D V, 'Co- December, 1974, pp 29-33.
91 Ojha, P D, 'A Configuration of Indian operative Marketing in Agricultural 129 Singhi, P M et at, Rural Youthv Education,
Poverty-Inequality and Levels of Living', Development', Indian Journal of Occupation and Social Outlook, Ahmeda-
in Fonseca (ed), ibid, pp 25-47. Marketing, vol 12, no 11, July 1982, bad: CMA (IIMA), 1977.
92 Pandit, S, 'Marketing of Consumer Goods pp 23-24. 130 Singhi, P M, Kaur G and Rai R P, Tele-
in Rural Areas', in New Opportunities in 111 Rostow, Walt W, 'The Concept of National vision and Knowledge-Gap Hypothesis,
Changing Agriculture, Ahmedabad: CMA Market and Its Economic Growth Implica- Ahmedabad: CMA (IIMA), 1982.
(IIMA), 1972, pp 151-156. tion' in Peter D Bennet (ed) Marketing and 131 Six Billions to Feed, Rome, FAQ 1962.
Economic Development, Chicago: AMA, 132 Srinivasan, Viji, 'Rural Marketing: A
93 Pant, S K, 'Price Spread Analysis of Eggs
1965, pp 11-20. Micro-Level Study of Paliampatti Village
in Haldwani City', Indian Journal of
Marketing, 13, 11-12, 1983, pp 18-22. 112 Rudra, A, 'Non-maximising Behaviour of in Omalur Block, Salem District, Tamil
Farmers: Crop Selection", Economic Nadu and of Periodic Markets of Omalur
94 Patil, H N, Kumar, P and Murlidharan,
M A, 'Marketing Margins and Price and Political Weekly, 18, 40, 1983, and Muthanaickmpatti' (preliminary draft

Spread in the Marketing of Alphonso pp 1717-1722. for discussion), New Delhi: Ford Founda-
113 Rural India and the Ford Foundation-A tion, 1983.
Mangoes', Indian Journal of Marketing,
14, 4, 1983, pp 21-24. Programme of Action, New Delhi, The 133 Subramanyam, K V, 'Marketing Fruits:
95 Paul, E J, 'Tht Role of Advertising in the Ford Foundation, 1974. Self-Marketing vs Contracting' Indian

Emerging Rural Markets', in New Oppor- 114 'Rural Marketing: Myth and Reality', Journal of Marketing, 11 (7), 1981,
tunities in Changing Agriculture, Ahmed- Economic and Political Weekly, August 26, pp 13-17.
1978, M 75-M 80. 134 Subramanya, G, Ramakrishna, B and
abad: CMA (IIMA), 1972, pp 173-182.
96 Platteav, J Ph, Murickan, J, and Delbar, 115 Rural Markets-A Critical Link for Small Prasad, S K, 'Handloom Marketing: A
Farmer Development, Excerpts from the Study of Consumer Behaviour', Indian
E, 'Interlinkage of Credit, Labour and
Marketing Relations in Traditional Marine FAO/DSE Asian Regional Evaluation Journal of Marketing, 15, 6, 1985,

Fishing: The Case of Purakkad (Kerala)', Workshop in RMCD Programme, Banga- pp 15-20 and 24.

Social Action, 31 (2), 1981, pp 181-212. lore, India, April 28-May 7, 1980. 135 Tambad, S B, 'Consumer Behaviour: An

97 Profiles of Rural Poverty, Geneva: ILO, 116 Saini, D R, 'Strategy for Rural Marketing Application to Fertiliser Marketing', Fer-
1979. in India', Indian Journal of Marketing, tiliser News, vol 18, no 7, July 1973,

98 Puri, S, 'Rural Families and Decision vol 2, no 5, January 1972, pp 22-25. pp 57-61.
117 Sarma, M T R and T R Rao, 'Problems 136 Tandon, H L S, 'Fertiliser Promotion: A
Making Pattern', Indian Journal of Exten-
sion Education, vol 7, nos 1-2, March-June of Rural Marketing in India' in New Review', Fertiliser News, July 1978,
1971, pp 65-69. Perspective4 in Marketing, New Delhi: pp 19-30.

99 Ramchandran, H, Behaviour in Space NCAER, 1972, pp 1-15. 137 Taylor, Lee and Jones Arthur R, Jr, Rural
Rural Marketing in an Underdeveloped 118 Saxena, H K, Mathur, S C, and Lal, R C, Life and Urbanised Society, New York,
Economy, New Delhi: Concept, 1982. 'Cost of Storage of Wheat at Farmer's Oxford University Press, 1964.
100 Ramanand, V S, 'Product Strategy and Level', Indian Journal of Marketing, 12 138 Tewari, T R, 'Investment in Man: A Survey

Rural Marketing', Indian Journal of (2 and 3), 1981, pp 18-23. of Health Conditions% in Fonseca (ed),
Marketing, vol 2, no 5, January 1972, 119 Saxena, H M, Geography of Transport and pp 116-127.
pp 22-25. Market Centres-A Case Study of Hadaoti 139 Unnithan, T K N, 'Development Processes
101 Ramaswamy, V S, 'Mass Communication Plateau, New Delhi: S Chand and Co. in an Underdeveloped Country', in Zim-
for Rural Marketing', Indian Journal of 120 Sengupta, Subrato, 'Barefoot Marketing: merman and Duwors (ed), Sociology of
Marketing, vol 2, no 5, January 1972, New Perspectives', Indian Management, Underdevelopment, Jaipur: Rawat Publi-
pp 26-31. vol 14, no 1, January 1975, pp 23-24. cations,- 1976, pp 401-418.
121 Sengupta, Subrato, 'The Emergence of 140 Vidyarthi, L P and Sahay B N (ed), Ap-
102 Ramond, C K and Henry Assael, 'An Em-
pirical Framework for Product Classifica- Rural Market for Consumer Products', plied Anthropology and Development in
tion', in Jagdish N Sheth (ed), Models of Calcutta: Clarion Advertising Services, India, New Delhi: National, 1980.
Buyer Behaviour, New York: Harper and 1980. 141 Volken, Henry, Ajoy Kumar and Sara
Row, 1974, pp 347-362. 122 Shah, K T (ed), Rural Marketing and Kaithathara, Learning from the Rural
103 Rao, K G K and Tagat, Ramesh G, Rural Finance, Bombay, Vora and Company, Poor, New Delhi: Indian Social Institute,
Buyer Behaviour-A General Model, 1947. 1982.
123 Shah, B R, Lipton in Rural India, Chair- 142 Vora, M N, 'A Note on Rural Markets in
paper presented at the seminar on Rural
Marketing, held at IIM, Bangalore, man's Speech at the Annual General India'. Ahmedabad: IIM, 1979.
December 12-13, 1983. Meeting of Lipton India. 143 Various technical notes distributed to 'SPA'
104 Rao, K G K and Tagat R G, 'Rural 124 Sharma, B D, 'Administrative Aspects of participants at JIMA on agricultural input
Marketing: A Developmental Approach', Marketing in Tribal Areas", Indian Journal and output marketing.
Vikalpa, 10, 3, July-September, 1985, pp of Public Administration, vol 22 no 3, 144 Yadava, J S, 'Communication Patterns and
315-326. July-September 1976, pp 403-429. New Consumers in Rural India', in New

105 Rao, M K 'Fairs and Festivals-Their 125 Sharwat, S L, 'Ferment and Prospects in Opportunities in Changing Agriculture,
Relevance in Indian Marketing',- Indian Rural Marketing: A Case Study of a Ahmedabad, CMA (IIMA), 1972,
Journal of Marketing, vol 9, no 6, Rajasthan Village, Indian Journal of pp 183-194.
February 1979, pp 3-8. Commerce, vol 26, no 1, 1972, pp 410-417. 145 Zaidi, S S H, Rural India and Malnutri-
106 Rao S L, 'Rural Marketing of Consumer 126 Seetharanman, S P and Jha, Mithileshwar, tion. Implications, Problems and Pro-
Goods', Economic and Political Weekly, Concept of Agricultural Cooperative spects, New Delhi: Concept Publishing,
vol 8, no 34, August 25, 1973, M 77-79. Marketing, Paper presented at the seminar 1982.

107 Rao, V K R V, Food, Nutrition and Poverty on Agricultural Co-operative Marketing, 146 Zimmerman, Carle C, and Richard E
in India, New Delhi: Vikas, 1982. Tamil Nadu Co-operative Union, Madras, Duwors (ed), Sociology of Underdevelop-
108 Reddy, B V K and Rao, G V K, 'Perspec- April 5-6, 1984. ment, Jaipur, Rawat Publications, 1976.
tives and Problems of Coir Marketing', 127 Singh, Jasbir, The Green Revolution in 147 Household Income and Its Disposition,
India-How Green Is It?2, Kurukshetra: New Delhi, NCAER, 1980.
Indian Journal of Marketing, 14 (12), 1984,

M-16 Economic and Political Weekly February 27, 1988

This content downloaded from

117.239.205.129 on Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:15:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms