| Abstract |
Kerala, the first state to formulate a startup policy, has actively built a dynamic ecosystem for entrepreneurship. As a result, Kerala is witnessing a surge in innovation and entrepreneurship in various sectors, including agriculture. However, unlike other sectors, agri-entrepreneurship in Kerala requires special attention and support due to the prevalence of small and marginal farmers, declining production and productivity, low profitability etc. <br/>The present study intended to analyse the current policy environment of entrepreneurship development in agriculture in Kerela, characterize different types of institutional support that are available in the public sector for agripreneurship development in the state, identify the factors affecting the effectiveness of entrepreneurship development programmes (EDPs) and, suggest modifications in policy perspectives for improving agripreneurship.<br/>For this purpose, secondary data were collected from policy documents and government proceedings on entrepreneurship development in the state. To explore further, entrepreneurship developmentprogrammes of 13 public sector institutions, which had been supporting agripreneurship during the period from 2019-20 to 2021-22, were also studied, by documenting the particulars of their schemes as well as the experiences and perceptions of their beneficiaries. The sample comprised 200 beneficiaries randomly selected from among those who had initiated enterprises with support from the selected institutions and 50 implementing officers, for a total of 250 respondents.<br/>Analysis of secondary data identified trends in policy shifts, policy dimensions, and typology of support. Structured interview schedules were used to collect primary data like socio-economic and entrepreneurial characteristics, perceptions, and attitudes. Suitable non-parametric statistical tests were employed to analyse the data and delineate the factors influencing the effectiveness of entrepreneurship development programmes. Accordingly, suggestions were made to improve the effectiveness of EDPs.<br/>The study revealed that there had been significant policy shifts to foster agripreneurship from the year 2000 onwards. The initial focus was on technology, followed by a notable emphasis on value addition and infrastructure development, as seen in the Agricultural Development Policy of 2015 and various industrial policy amendments. The 13th Five-Year Plan prioritized agro-processing and value addition, branding, marketing, and market access. Legislations like the Kerala Investment Promotion and Facilitation Act 2018, aiming to attract investments and streamline business processes, were enacted, alongside initiatives to enhance logistics and redress grievances.<br/>The study also showed a progressive policy shift towards promoting value addition, rural employment, and promotion of agro-based enterprises since 2000. Notable initiatives included streamlining approval processes, providing tailored support for small enterprises, and promoting modernization within the agricultural sector. The study identified infrastructure development, financial assistance, innovation management, marketing facilitation and capacity building support as the major dimensions of the policies on entrepreneurship development, which had implications on growth of agripreneurship as well.<br/>A typology analysis of institutional support revealed that agri-enterprises got support for investment, incubation, technology, infrastructure, capacity building, consultancy, research, marketing, and networking to varying digress. However, all the identified institutions invariably provided capacity-building and technical advisory support (100.00%). The results revealed the importance of engaging multiple organisations to foster entrepreneurs during the entire cycle of entrepreneurship development. Institutions, on the other hand, need to expand their capabilities to foster agri-enterpreneurship truly. <br/>Among the different types of assistance provided by institutions, ‘support for the formulation of a unit’ was rated as excellent by 86.50 per cent of respondents. About 57.50 per cent of the beneficiaries rated the adequacy of overall support as medium. As much as 71.50 per cent of the beneficiaries expressed a favourable attitude towards entrepreneurship development programmes in agriculture.<br/>The socio-economic profile of the beneficiaries of EDPs revealed that 34.50 per cent had no agricultural land, indicating the increased interest of peoplefrom non-agricultual backgrounds towards agripreneurship. However, most of the beneficiaries (69.00%) had not attempted any other form of agribusiness diversification.<br/>Profiling of enterprises revealed that 77.50 per cent were micro-enterprises, with more than half (56.50%) of them engage in agro-produce processing. While 60.00 per cent of enterprises targeted only local markets, only 34.00 per cent had provisions for online sales.<br/>The overall effectiveness index (84.55) indicated that EDPs selected for the study and successfully achieved their objectives and delivered positive outcomes for the beneficiaries. Analysis of the entrepreneurs’ perception on the effectiveness of EDPs revealed that the programmes were most effective in empowering them to innovate and take risks.<br/>According to entrepreneurs, the effectiveness of EDPs in agriculture was mainly influenced by factors related to regulations, resources, and knowledge. Conversely, implementing officers prioritized knowledge, follow-up, and regulations as the major factors affecting the effectiveness of EDPs in that order.<br/>The study suggests that EDPs in agriculture should tailor their strategies to accommodate stakeholders’ diverse needs and priorities. The provisions of the EDPs in agriculture are inadequate to foster innovation and growth within the agriculture sector, which calls for a thorough recasting of the programmes regarding content and implementation strategy. To truly unleash its full potential, agripreneurship must be treated as a separate and specialized area, necessitating the formulation of exclusive policies and programmes for extending institutional support to address its unique challenges and opportunities. |
