Role of various factors in sugarcane production

J Agric. Res., 2017, Vol. 55(3): 577-584

www.jar.com.pk
AGRI. EXTENSION
Agriculture Department,
Government of Punjab

ROLE OF VARIOUS FACTORS IN SUGARCANE PRODUCTION

IN SELECTED AREA OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA, PAKISTAN

Faheem Khan*, Muhammad Tahir Ali Shah** and Muhammad Zafarullah Khan*

ABSTRACT
This study was conducted in the Department of Agricultural Extension, Education and
Communication, University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan during the year 2015 to
identify the main factors affecting sugarcane productivity. Two districts i.e. Mardan
and Charsadda of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province were selected for this research study.
Moreover, a multi-stage sampling technique was applied for selection of the samples.
Some 336 sugarcane growers were selected through a multi-stage sampling technique.
Primary data were collected from these growers by a well-designed and pre-tested interview
schedule. Results of study confirmed that educated, young, large size land-holders (6.88
to 8.50 ha) and share cropper growers recorded maximum average yields of 110, 69.07,
124.24 and 93.80 tons per hectare of sugarcane. Moreover, a few growers (cultivated
area 6.88 -8.50 ha) achieved average yield upto 124.24 tons per hectare. Certainly, these
growers have appropriate knowledge about productivity factors. Further, silt loam soil
*Department of Agricultural and fallow sowing method (mono-cropping) was associated with improved sugarcane
Extension, Education and productivity. The silt loam soil and fallow sowing method growers got maximum average
Communication, University of
yields of 75.52 and 83.17 tons per hectare. Similarly, the growers who had knowledge
Agriculture, Peshawar-Pakistan.
**Director Academics, Higher about the benefits of engaging with agricultural extension department and agricultural
Education Commission (HEC), extension agents achieved average yields of 88.39 and 74.21 tons per hectare. In addition,
Islamabad, Pakistan. the sugarcane growers who planted more productive varieties i.e. CPF 246, NCO 310,
Article received on: SPF 213, Mardan 93 and CP 77/400 obtained average yields of 112.18, 107.89, 85.00, 71.00
28/08/2017 and 70.97 tons per hectare, respectively. It was concluded that educated growers were
Accepted for publication: aware of suitable cultivating techniques, appropriate management, proper and timely
13/09/2017 inputs application and other required information.

KEYWORDS: Saccharum officinarum; sugarcane; interview schedule; multi-stage

sampling method; cultivation methods; tenure; soil types; education;
Pakistan.

INTRODUCTION The awareness of comparative significance of

Sugarcane is one of the main cash crops of the influencing sugarcane production factors
Pakistan. It is basically cultivated for sugar and is essential for the sugarcane growers. Once
sugar-related production alongwith inputs for growers are aware of the complexities of growing
paper and board industry. It contributes worth 31 cane there can be programmes for introducing
percent to agriculture and 0.6 percent to GDP. In beneficial alterations in their processes at the
addition, it achieved US$ 171.78 million in sugar micro level. It provides guidelines for the strategy
exports during July-March, 2015. The sugarcane makers for creating plans to improve agricultural
area cultivated decreased by 2.7 percent, which efficiency by modelling using reasonable financial
caused a 7.1 percent decline in production. values at the macro level. Production techniques
Further, calculated average yield of sugarcane such as planting time, soil type, varieties, use
reportedly declined -4.5 percent (1). of inputs and ease of irrigation water have
a significant role in sugarcane production.
Sugarcane production is a multi-dimensional Knowledge of input costs, such as DAP, urea,
procedure and is influenced by numerous factors. irrigation, FYM, costs of seed and labor used for

J. Agri. Res. 2017, 55(3) 577

F. Khan et al.

harvesting were measured and shown to perform Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Table 1). Therefore, these
a positive role in sugarcane production. two districts were selected for this study. Further, a
multi-stage sampling method was applied to select
In view of the declining sugarcane production the representative sample of sugarcane growers
and increasing poverty in sugarcane belt areas, to interview (Table 2). In first stage of using this
Kumari and Nakano (7) examined the impact of technique, two tehsils (the next sub-division below
lease expiry on sugarcane yield, chemical fertilizer district), namely Takhat Bhai from Mardan and
use and newly planted cane areas using micro- Tangi from Charsaddda were selected randomly
level data from Ba Province, Fiji. They compared (Lottery Method) and from each selected tehsil,
tenure security between three tenure types under five union councils (next lower sub-division below
the formal land lease system. They observed that tehsil) were likewise randomly selected. From
lease tenure insecurity has a significant negative each selected union council, one village was
impact on productivity and investment in newly randomly selected. Out of total cane growers of
planted cane when leases are near expiry. On villages only 15 percent of cane growers were
average, Taukei tenants with leases expiring in selected from each selected village (Table 1 and
0–5 years achieve lower productivity, by 6.5–11 Table 2) for interview reaching to a total of 336.
tons per hectare and make less investment in
newly planted cane, by planting on average 0.14– A well designed and pre-tested interview schedule
0.25 hectares less ground, compared to freehold was used in the field by principal researcher to
and state cultivators. collect primary information from sugarcane growers
for two years 2012 and 2013 and secondary data,
The present research aimed to find out main factors mainly production statistics were collected from
in sugarcane production, assess the impacts of authentic published and unpublished sources.
extension departments and agricultural agents in Cane yields for individual growers were the mean
sugarcane production and formulate suggestions of two years’ results. i.e 2012 and 2013, and were
and recommendations for policy makers. calculated by sampling a small area of a cane.
The size of this small area was confirmed by a
MATERIAL AND METHODS provincial government employee (Patwari halqa)
This study was conducted in the Department appointed to the union council base to keep land
of Agricultural Extension, Education and records. He has extensive knowledge about
Communication, University of Agriculture, the land cultivated by the farming community.
Peshawar, Pakistan during the year 2015. The interviews with sugarcane growers were
Sugarcane is mainly cultivated in six districts conducted at a convenient place like the farmer’s
(Mardan, Charsadda, Peshawar, Swabi, Malakand home or Community Centre (Hujra). Computer
and Dera Islamail Khan) in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa programmes such as Excel and SPSS were used
province of Pakistan. However, Charsadda to analyze the primary data.
and Mardan are the main sugarcane districts of
Table. 1 Average area (ha), production (tonnes) and yield of sugarcane (t/ha) in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Districts 2015-16 2014-15

Area Production Yield Area Production Yield
Peshawar 8134 422998 52 11376 568800 50
Charasadda 31115 1442903 46.37 30012 1368221 45.58
Nowshera 5263 270003 51.30 4260 219279 51.47
Mardan 30915 1369273 44.29 30689 1381285 45
Swabi 2253 86783 38.51 1651 64507 39.07
Kohat 133 4631 34.81 117 4074 34.82
Hangu 10 400 40 20 510 25.50
Mansehra 8 194 24.25 7 165 23.57
Haripur 102 3212 31.49 112 3527 31.49
Table Contd…
J. Agri. Res. 2017, 55(3) 578
 Role of various factors in sugarcane production

Malakand 4790 185524 38.73 4780 184497 38.59

Bunir 66 1770 26.81 56 1508 26.92
Dir Lower 46 1425 30.97 50 1222 24.44
D. I. Khan 27787 1647738 59.29 26762 1236136 46.18
Tank 116 2315 19.95 459 8996 19.59
Bannu 550 21840 39.70 845 33305 39.41
Lakki Marwat 298 11880 38.86 106 4074 38.43
Total districts 111586 5472889 49.04 111302 5080106 45.64
Mohmand Agency 210 6850 32.61 306 8236 26.91
Khyber Agency 678 15642 23.07 678 15642 23.07
Peshawar F. R 15 463 30.86 16 467 29.18
Bannu F. R 76 290 3.81 76 290 3.81
D. I. Khan F. R 90 2110 23.44 100 2251 22.51
Total FATA 1069 25355 23.71 1176 26886 22.86
Total K-P 112655 5490503 48.73 112478 5106992 45.40
Source: GOP of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2017.
Table. 2. Selection of multi stage sampling technique

Districts Tehsils UCs Villages 15 % sugarcane growers

Saro Shah Ferozshah 302 (45)
Madey Baba Qutabgargh 224 (34)
Mardan Takhat bhai
Pir Saddi Akbarabad 217 (33)
Mia Issa Miangano Killi 232 (35)
Lundkhawar Gulmera 237 (36)
Koz Behram Dehri Dobandi 200 (30)
Gandhera Payan 180 (27)
Charsadda Tangi
Abazi Tangi Abazi 195 (29)
Hisra Nehri Gumbati 160 (24)
Sherpao Hisara Nehri 289 (43)
Total 2 10 10 2236 (336)
Multi-Stage Sampling Selection Procedure
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION from recognized sources of information.
The data about education level (Table 3) was Additionally, the data showed that government
adopted from an article of Khan and Khan (5) and concerned organizations should train illiterate
which is a part of this research study. It revealed sugarcane growers regarding the application of
that only 100 sugarcane growers out of total new technologies, recommended level of inputs
336 growers were educated. Moreover, these and benefits of high yielding varieties. Khan et al.
educated sugarcane growers achieved maximum (6) observed that mostly 76 percent sugarcane
sugarcane yields upto 110.66 tons per hectare growers were illiterate, while remaining 24
which are approximately double of average percent were literate. Out of literate, 16 percent
yield 63.39 tons per hectare of total growers. sugarcane growers were upto primary and 8
The data show that educated growers were percent had upto a middle level of education. In
using their knowledge about new technologies, addition, literate sugarcane growers in study area
recommended doses of inputs and high yielding of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa had above than middle
varieties and recommended sugarcane cultivating level of education. Tukaew et al., (12) noted
practices to obtain better yields than uneducated that most of 60 percent sugarcane growers had
illiterate growers. Perhaps, these educated completed primary education in Thailand.
growers got suitable information and knowledge

J. Agri. Res. 2017, 55(3) 579

F. Khan et al.

Table 3. Education level and sugarcane yield (t/ha)

Level of education Average yield (t/ha) Number of growers Std. Deviation

Graduate 110.66 4 25.20
Matric (SSC) 98.63 8 39.02
F.Sc/F.A 94.85 5 29.07
Middle 87.60 15 27.89
Primary 61.52 37 22.92
Illiterate 59.96 266 24.30
Post graduate 51.38 1 --
Total 63.39 336 26.66
Source: Khan and Khan (6)

Table 4 was also selected from the research article acres (2.42-4.04 ha) and remaining 7 percent had
of Khan and Khan (6) which is a part of this research grown more than 10 acres (4.04 ha) at Peshawar
study. It described that only 37 sugarcane growers district. Abbas et al. (1) reported that mostly
out of 336 were large land holders having 2.42 to large farmers (> 4.04 ha cultivated area) (52.50
8.50 hectares. This large sized land holders got -84.80%) were aware of recommended sugarcane
maximum average sugarcane yield (124.24 t/ha) production technologies. Among large farmers
as compared with average yield of total growers 20 percent got appropriate information from
(63.39 t/ha). This is because large sized land agricultural extension and research wing while
holders had resources like labour, finance and 10-20 percent approached mass media. Majority
suitable sources of information as opposed to of small growers (70%) was unaware of suitable
small sized land holders. Khan et al. (5) reported sugarcane production technologies. These small
that 63 percent sugarcane growers cultivated growers (< 4.04 ha cultivated area) got information
sugarcane crops in an area below 5 acres (2.02 from fellow farmers and progressive growers.
ha), followed by 30 percent who cultivated 5-10

Table 4. Land size (ha) cultivation with sugarcane yield (t/ha)

Land size Average yield (t/ Number of growers Std. Deviation

ha)
6.88-8.50 124.24 6 22.24
4.45-6.47 89.77 7 39.30
8.90 and above 84.97 2 53.09
2.42_4.04 75.00 22 22.38
Up to 2.02 60.55 299 24.56
Total 63.39 336 26.66
Source: Khan and Khan (6)

The data collected in this study (Table 5) further who got average yield of 63.23 and 61.68 tons per
showed association with sugarcane growers hectare, repectively. Khan et al. (6) noticed that
age and their average yields. It indicated that majority (51%) of sugarcane growers fell in the
56 growers out of total 336 were of age 26 to 35 age group of 31-45 years (young and energetic).
years (young) and these growers got maximum It was observed that these were keenly involved
average yield i.e. 69.07 tons. Forty three growers in farming activities followed by 23 percent in the
were of age 46 to 55 years (old and experienced) age group of 46-55 and 19 percent upto 30 years
and they achieved average yield of 65.36 tons per in Peshawar district of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
hectare. Besides these observations, only a single Tukaew et al. (12) reported that maximum (38.9%)
grower aged more than 55 years (aged and less sugarcane growers were in the age group that
energetic) and remaining overwhelming majority ranged between 41 and 50 years in Thailand
(i.e.236) was of 36-45 years age (middle age) research area.

J. Agri. Res. 2017, 55(3) 580

 Role of various factors in sugarcane production

Table 5. Sugarcane growers age (years) with sugarcane average yield (t/ha)

Age of growers Average yield Number of growers Std. Deviation

26-35 69.07 56 27.56
46-55 65.36 43 24.32
56 and above 63.23 1 --
36-45 61.68 236 26.81
Total 63.39 336 26.66
Source: Field Survey by author 2012 and 2013

Table 6 was also adopted from Khan and Khan (6) (67.18 t/ha). Remaining maximum 141 and 125
as it was a part of this research study. It indicated tenant and owner growers reported average yield
that 24 share- cropper growers, reported maximum of 57.72 and 61.65 tons per hectare, respectively.
average yield (93.80 t/ha) followed by 42 owners These average yields were less than average
cum- tenant (69.8 t/ha) and leaseholder growers yield of 63.39 tons per hectare of total growers.
Table 6. Tenure status of sugarcane growers and average yield (t/ha)

Tenure Status Average Yield Number of growers Std. Deviation

Share Cropper 93.80 24 33.87
Owner cum Tenant 69.82 42 22.56
Lease holder 67.18 4 9.12
Owner 61.65 125 27.42
Tenant 57.72 141 22.13
Total 63.39 336 26.66
Source: Khan and Khan (2015).

The results (Table 7) further showed an Pakhtunkhwa) province. Among these 30 varieties
association of varieties with sugarcane average CP 77/400 was cultivated on approximately 21
yield. It reported that 17, 9, 2, 2 and 64 sugarcane percent area, Mardan 92 on 2.1 percent area,
growers, out of total 336 cultivated sugarcane Mardan 93 on 3.2 percent, CP 44/101 on 2.2
varieties CPF 246, NCO 310, SPF 213, Mardan percent, NCO 310 on 4.0 percent and SPF 213
93 and CP 77/400, with average yield of 112.18, on 0.2 percent area in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. In
107.89, 85.00, 71.00 and 70.97 tons per hectare, addition, sugarcane growers were growing non-
respectively. Most of growers (241) cultivated the recommended and inferior varieties with a ratio
CP77/400 variety and these growers achieved of 1:1 in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. It is reported
average yield of 55.83 tons per hectare. Moreover, by Sugar-Mills (PRSM, BNSM, FRSM, T.B and
only a single grower cultivated CP 44/101 variety CHSM) that sugarcane growers cultivated on an
with average yield of 55 tons per hectare. According average 55.72 percent approved varieties at four
to Majid (9), approximately 30 sugarcane varieties districts i.e. Peshawar, Mardan, Bannu and Dera
are presently cultivated in NWFP (Now Khyber Ismail Khan of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (8).

Table 7. Sugarcane average yield (t/ha) with use of various varieties of sugarcane

Sugarcane Average yield Number of growers Std. deviation

varieties
CPF 246 112.18 17 24.15
NCO 310 107.89 9 20.22
SPF 213 85.00 2 8.48
Mardan 93 71.00 2 5.65
CP77/400 70.97 305 22.72
CP 44/101 55.00 1 --
Total 63.22 336 26.71
Source: Field Survey 2012 and 2013

J. Agri. Res. 2017, 55(3) 581

F. Khan et al.

The results (Table 8) expressed association 37.32 tons per hectare, respectively. Tukaew et
between growers and average yield compared with al. (12) reported that 51.5 percent farmers planted
various soil types. It shows that a large number of sugarcane on silt-loam soil in Thailand which is a
sugarcane growers (i.e.177) cultivated sugarcane medium texture and suitable land for sugarcane
on silt loam land and these growers achieved production. Similarly 38.8 percent farmers
average yield of 75.52 tons per hectare followed planted on clay and 6.7 percent farmers planted
by 109 growers who planted sugarcane on clay sugarcane on sandy loam soil. However, only 3
loam (55.37 t/ha). Remaining 24 and 26 growers percent farmers cultivated sugarcane on lateritic
grew sugarcane on sandy and waterlogged soil soil which is not suitable for growing sugarcane.
and these growers got average yield of 38.53 and

Table 8. Sugarcane average yield (t/ha) in various soils

Types of soil Average yield Number of growers Std. Deviation

Silt loam 75.52 177 27.27
Clay loam 55.37 109 18.19
Water logged loam 38.53 24 10.64
Sandy loam 37.32 26 11.70
Total 63.39 336 26.66
Source: Field survey by author 2012 and 2013

The results further showed that 45 growers, cultivated sugarcane using inter-cropped methods
planted sugarcane on fallow land (mono-crop) and (two crops in a field) and got average yield upto
these growers reported average yield upto 83.17 60.33 tons per hectare.
tons per hectare (Table 9), while 291 growers
Table. 9 Sugarcane average yield (t/ha) with cultivation methods

Sugarcane sowing Std.

methods Average yield Number of growers Deviation
Fallow Land sowing 83.17 45 26.34
Inter Crop Sowing 60.33 291 25.41
Total 63.39 336 26.66
Source: Field Survey 2012 and 2013
The study further disclosed that 44 growers were reported average yield 59.62 tons per hectare.
reported to be knowledgeable about agricultural A research study (1) revealed that relatively
field assistants and these growers achieved more medium farmers (24.3%) paid visits to the
88.39 tons per hectare. (Table 10). Remaining offices of Agricultural Officers while large farmers
maximum 292 growers had no knowledge about (18.5%) and small farmers (1.27%) paid visits to
agricultural field assistants and these growers the offices of AOs at Punjab Province, Pakistan.
Table 10. Knowledge about agricultural extension staff verses sugarcane yield (t/ha)

Knowledge about Average yield Number of growers Std.

agricultural extension (t/ha) Deviation
officers
Yes 88.39 44 34.06
No 59.62 292 23.20
Total 63.39 336 26.66
Source: Field survey by author 2012 and 2013
The data (Table 11) further show that 139 growers, by the majority of growers (i.e. 197) who did not
informed that they knew about agricultural know about agricultural extension department
extension department and these growers got and achieved average yield upto 55.75 tons per
average yield upto 74.21 tons per hectare followed hectare against average yield of total growers

J. Agri. Res. 2017, 55(3) 582

 Role of various factors in sugarcane production

(63.39 t/ha). A research study (11) revealed that units (marlas). Lack or low level of awareness has
more than 60 percent sugarcane growers were been reported as a major constraint towards the
unaware of recommended sugarcane seed adoption of recommended practices in sugarcane
weight and adopted traditional area measurement cultivation in Pakistan
Table 11. Knowledge about agricultural extension department and sugarcane yield
(t/ha)

Knowledge about Sugarcane Number of Std. Deviation

AED* average yield (t/ growers
ha)
Yes 74.21 139 29.388
No 55.75 197 21.582
Total 63.39 336 26.668
Source: Field survey by author , 2012 and 2013, *Agricultural Extension Department

The study revealed that education level was (mono-crop) crop cultivation method provided
observed as one of main concerning factors. It a suitable system for sustainable sugarcane
was found that educated growers achieved higher productivity. Importantly those growers who had
average yields than illiterate growers. Educated knowledge about agricultural extension agents
grower’s management and cultivating practices or agricultural extension departments observed
were better than illiterate growers and this was above average yields regardless of other factors.
the case with all cane growing factors including
timing and variety selection. Similarly, large CONCLUSION
sized landholders got more average yield than It is concluded that educated and trained growers
average yield of total growers. Most probably, were found as knowledgeable about sugarcane
these growers had necessary resources and productivity. Similarly, large sized land cultivators
were financially sound so they purchased the had the resources required for commercial
necessary inputs, high yielding varieties, new sugarcane cultivation and production. Young
machinery and hired labour. Likewise, young growers performed pioneer roles in extension
growers upto 26-35 years age had higher activities and were observed as professional
average yields than total growers. It is evident growers. In addition, fallow land (mono-crop)
that this was a result of these growers being method was a successful and sustainable
energetic, hardworking and keenly professional method of planting as this technique ensures
agriculturists. In addition, share cropper, owner- that sugarcane crop do not compete with other
cum-tenant and lease-holder growers had the crops for available resource like irrigation, air,
highest average production. It is observed that sunlight and soil nutrients. Finally, those growers
these growers were professional and commercial who had knowledge about agricultural extension
agriculturists and younger growers were keen to department and agricultural extension agents
embrace new technologies and varieties. As a obtained higher average yields. This highlights
result, the growers who planted new varieties like the importance of agricultural education through
CPF-246, NCO 310, POJ 213, Mardan 93 and CP extension agents, particularly in the light of poor
77/400 achieved higher yields than other growers. education levels which was shown in the survey as
Certainly, these varieties were developed for a constraint on production regardless of all other
specific environments and soil types. Moreover, variables. In addition, probably tenant growers
silt loam soil is the most fertile land for sugarcane had poor financial condition and less information
crops. On this type of land cultivators got more about new sugarcane production technologies and
average yield than other growers indicating the inputs. So concerned government organizations
importance of soil type. Further, the fallow land should concentrate towards tenant growers.

J. Agri. Res. 2017, 55(3) 583

F. Khan et al.

REFERENCES production of district Peshawar. Int. J. Agric.

1. Abbas, M., S. Muhammad, I. Nabi and A.D. Ext. Rur. Dev., 3(1):149-155.DOT. http://
Sheikh.2003. Farmer extension interaction internationalscholarsjournals.org/journal/
and the dissemination of recommended ijaerdoa/articles/an-assessment-of-main-
sugarcane production technologies in the problems.
central Punjab (Pakistan). In. J. Agric. 8. Kumari, R. and Y. Nakano. 2016. Does land
Boil.2:134-137. lease tenure insecurity cause decreased
2. Anon. 2015. Agricultural Annual Statistical productivity and investment in the sugar
Report of Government of Pakistan. Available industry? Evidence from Fiji. Agri. Res. Econ.
on website. http://www.finance.gov.pk/ 60(3):406-421.
survey/chapters_16/02_Agricultre.pdf. 9. Majid, A, M. 2007. Sugarcane variety
3. Henk, V, D, B. and J. Jiggins. 2007. Investing composition in Pakistan. Pak. Sug. J., XXII
in Farmers-The impacts of farmer field schools (1):1-16.
in relation to integrated pest management. 10. Mazher, A., S. Muhammad, I. Nabi and
World Dev. 35(4):663-686. M. Kashif. 2003. Farmers’ information
4. Jolliffe, D. 2004. The impact of education sources, their awareness and adoption
in rural Ghana: examining household labor of recommended sugarcane production
allocation and returns on and off the farm. J. technologies in the Central Punjab. Pak. J.
Dev. Econ., 73:287- 314. Agri. Sci, 40(3-4):202-206.
5. Kamruzzaman, M. and M. Hasanuzzaman. 11. Muhammad, S., C. Garforth and H. N. Malik.
2007. Factors affecting profitability of 2001. Factors affecting the adoption of
sugarcane production as monoculture and recommended sugarcane technologies by
as intercrop in selected areas of Bangladesh. farmers. Pak. J. Agri. Sci, 38(1-2):78-80.
Bangladesh J. Agrl. Res. 32(3):433-444. DOT: 12. Tukaew, S., A. Datta, P. G. Shivakoti and
http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/bjar.v32i3.545. D. Jourdain. 2015. Production practices
6. Khan, F., and Z.M. Khan.2015. Role of influenced yield and commercial cane
education in enhancing sugarcane yield in sugar level of contract sugarcane farmers in
Mardan and Charsadda districts of Khyber Thailand. Sugar Tech, 18(3):299-308.
Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Sarhad J. Agric. 13. Yang, T, D. 2004. Education and allocative
31(2):123-130. efficiency: household income growth during
7. Khan, Q, A., M. Idrees and F. Aldosari. rural reforms in China. J. Dev. Econ. 74:137-
2016. An assessment of main problems 162.
faced by farming community in sugarcane

CONTROBUTION OF AUTHROS
Faheem Khan Collected primary data, analysed the data and compiled this article
as principal researcher
Muhammad Tahir Ali Shah Directed and guieded in results and discussion as an agriculture
extension specialist.
Muhammad Zafarullah Khan Field specialist and major supervisor in Ph.D. research. Guided and
supported in data collection and report writing.

J. Agri. Res. 2017, 55(3) 584