A Dhanya Mohanen

‘MARKETING PRACTICES OF RETAIL FISH SELLERS; WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO PRE & POST DEMONETISATION’ By DHANYA A MOHANAN -) PROJECT REPORT Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Bachelor of Science (Hons.) in Co-operation & Banking Faculty of Agriculture COLLEGE OF CO-OPERATION, BANKING & MANAGEMENT KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR-680656 KERALA, INDIA 2017 DECLARATION DECLARATION I hereby declare that this project report entitled ‘Marketing Practices Of Retail Fish Sellers; With Special Reference To Pre & Post Demonetisation’ is a bonafide record of research work done by me during the course of project work and that it has not previously formed the basis for the award to me for any degree/diploma, associateship, fellowship or other similar title of any other University or Society. Vellanikkara Date:- DHANYA A MOHANAN- CERTIFICATES CERTIFICATE Certified that this project report entitled ‘Marketing Practices Of Retail Fish Sellers; With Special Reference To Pre & Post Demonetisation ’is a record of research work done independently by Miss. Dhanya A Mohanan -) under my guidance and supervision and that it has not previously formed the basis for the award of any degree, fellowship or associate ship to him. Vellanikkara Date:- DR. K. N. USHADEVI Professor & HOD Department of Rural Marketing Management College of Co-operation, Banking and Management Kerala Agricultural University Vellanikkara CERTIFICATE We, undersigned members of the Viva-voce Board of Miss. Dhanya a mohanan -), a candidate for the degree of B.Sc. (Co-operation and Banking) agrees that the project report entitled ‘Marketing Practices of Retail Fish Sellers; With Special Reference to Pre & Post Demonetisation’ may be submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the degree. (Chairperson) DR. SUNANDHA .K.A Associate Professor Department of Development Economics College of Co-operation, Banking and Management Kerala Agricultural University Vellanikkara DR. K. N. USHADEVI Professor & Head Department of Rural Marketing Management College of Co-operation, Banking and Management Kerala Agricultural University Vellanikkara (Guide) DR.R.SENDILKUMAR Professor (Argil. Extension) Department of Co-operative Management College of Co-operation, Banking and Management Kerala Agricultural University Vellanikkara (Examiner) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I humbly bow my head with infinite gratitude before the Almighty God for all his blessings, all through my life and above all for the help extended to me through various known and unknown hands during the course of my project work. This project report entitled ‘Marketing Practices of Retail Fish Sellers; With Special Reference to Pre & Post Demonetisation ’is not the product of exclusively my efforts. For the completion of this work I received magnanimous support from many that, a comprehensive acknowledgement is almost impossible. Still I would like to reckon from my inner heart my deep gratitude and indebtedness to… I am highly obliged to Dr. K.N. Usha Devi, Professor & Head (Department of Rural Marketing Management) my esteemed guide, without whose expert guidance, constant encouragement and sincere effort, this project would have remained a dream. No words in my vocabulary would suffice to express my heartfelt thanks and gratitude for her valuable advice suggestions and encouragement throughout my academic career, her personal attention and consideration are also thankfully acknowledged here with. Words are poor vehicles of expression when our deep feelings are involved on words on my vocabulary could suffice to express my heartfelt gratitude to my advisor Dr. Misha Davis, Associate Professor, Dept. of cooperative management, for his valuable and timely advices, encouragement and support provided throughout my academic career. A special word of thanks to Dr. K. A Sunandha Chairperson of viva board, for her valuable suggestions without which my project work would never have been logical. I acknowledge the interest taken by Dr. R Sendil Kumar, Examiner of the viva board, for her constructive criticism and insightful comments made my work more logical. I would like to place on record of my heartfelt thanks to Dr. Shaheena P., Associate Dean, for all the advices, guidance and co-operation given by him as the head of the institution. I remember with much respect and gratitude, the good advices and help of teaches Dr. R. Sendilkumar, Mr. Jacob Thomas throughout my academic pursuit. I owe a deep intellectual debt to, Associate Professor, Department of Cooperative Management, for his leadership and constant efforts to conduct the work experience programme in the most efficient manner. The contributions derived from the valuable records of the library of the College are also duly acknowledged. I wish to express my boundless gratitude to Mr. K.P. Sathyan (Librarian), and all library assistants. I wish to express a special thanks to Prema chechi for their support. I wish to express my thanks to all seniors Hari chettan, Athira chechi beloved junior Reshma Francis and office staffs of CCBM family for their unforgettable attention and support for my academic and personal pursuits. Good friend is a companion for life and I am glad that I got good friends like my Litty, Aseena, Neethu and Julia. I express my heartfelt gratitude to all my friends. Words cannot enunciate the virtuous support and love given by Achan, Amma, Chechi, chettan and Bhaguttan for their long last belief, constant support, Prayers and blessings which helped me to reach where I am today. A word of apology to all those I have not mentioned in person and note of thanks to each and every one who have bless me with their prayers. In this moment I would like to beg a pardon to all those who have ever been hurt, knowingly or unknowingly, by my words or deeds. Needless to say, I solely am responsible for any errors, which may remain……….. DHANYA A MOHANAN- DESIGN OF STUDY AN OVERVIEW OF FISHERIES SECTOR ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION CHAPTER 1 DESIGN OF STUDY 1.1 Introduction The 2030 Agenda sets aims for the contribution and conduct of fisheries and aquaculture towards food security and nutrition in the use of natural resources so as to ensure sustainable development in economic, social and environmental terms. In Indian scenario, Fisheries sector contributes 10.16 million tons (MT) during 2014-15.Kerala occupies the foremost position in marine fish production among the maritime states in India, accounting for about 26 percent of the total landings. Fisheries sector is one of the major productive sectors of Kerala. In the year of 201516, Kerala stands in the 5th position among major fish producing states in India, with an annual production of 7.28 lakh tones. As per the data of during the year 2015-16, fish production in inland sector was 2.11 lakh tones and marine sector accounts for 5.17 lakh tones(Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation, GOI). The total population of fisher folk residing in the state of Kerala is estimated to be 10.02 lakh, which includes 7.712 lakh in the marine sector and 2.304 lakh in the inland sector. Out of this, the number of active fishermen is 2.39 lakh. Nearly 12percent of the fisher folk find their livelihood from allied activities like marketing, repairing nets, fish vending, processing and other fishery related activities. The annual per capita consumption of fish in Kerala is very high (18.5 kg) compared to the national average (5 kg).Fish is an extremely perishable food and the domestic market for fish in Kerala is governed not only by the purchasing power of the consumers but also by their tastes and preference. The domestic market for fish in Kerala is inelastic both in terms of income and price. There are 2703 fish markets in the state which includes 185 whole sale markets, 2518 retail markets and 1126 way side markets. The fishing industry thus makes a sizable contribution to the wealth of the district, and is the main source of income of a large section of the people inhabiting the coastal area. Thus the sustenance and survival of a million poor people depends on the fate of the fishing industry. (Fishery and Aquaculture Statistics, 2014) The sudden announcement to demonetisation the high denomination currency notes of Rs.1000 and Rs.500 sent tremors all across the country. The fisheries sector is one of the hardest hit by the currency crunch triggered by the demonetisation of high denomination 1 notes. Although demonetisation holds huge potential benefits in the medium to long-term, given the scale of operation, it was expected to cause transient disruption in economic activity. The fisheries sector has been particularly hard hit because, starting with payments for fish auctioned at the point of landing, most transactions including payments of wages by boat owners, supply to wholesalers and retailers, etc. is in cash. As business has declined, workers get less work and lower earnings and have had to get into debt to meet their daily expenses. (News Click, 28 Dec 2016) 1.2 Statement of the Problem Demonetisation announced on November 8, 2016 has impacted various sectors of the economy in varying degrees. Because more than 95 percent of total transactions in India are in cash form (Live Mint, 1 Jan 2017) and major contributors by sector to the state’s economy are in the informal or unorganized sector, where cash transactions dominate. 86percent of currency in circulation is in Rs.500 and Rs.1000 notes. Only about 30percent of the Indian population has access to the banking system as per data compiled by the banking division of the finance ministry (2017). In summary, demonetisation has created problems all over the country with people unable to purchase daily essentials and, in many cases, life-saving goods and services. Besides, far greater losses will be incurred by markets predominantly run on cash and the participants such as wholesale markets, retail stores, street-vendors, transportation etc. lost productivity. Fisheries sector is one of the major productive sectors of Kerala. Kerala has a million strong fishing communities of which 2.39 lakhs are active fishermen and the rest their dependents. Thus the survival of a million poor people depends on the fate of the fishing industry. Demonetisation has affected fisheries sector in the city, with business going down by almost 70percent. The supply to various markets has lessened because of payment arrears to laborers, owners and owners to drivers. (The Times of India, 19 December 2016). The small fishermen are affected even more harshly as they depend mostly on day-to-day payments for their catch (The Hindu, 14 November 2016). Thrissur district is one of the biggest fish markets of Kerala. About 90percent of the population eat fish as their staple diet. Oil sardines are used as manure. About 95percent of the total catch is marketed within the district. The district has 18 coastal fisheries villages and three inland fisheries villages. The fishing industry thus makes a sizable contribution to the wealth of the district, and is the main source of income of a large section of the people 2 inhabiting the coastal area. Thus the study proposes to examine the marketing behaviour of retail fish sellers during pre and post demonetisation. 1.3 Objectives:The main objectives of the study were 1.3.1 To analyse the changes in the marketing practices of procurement & sale of fish after demonetisation. 1.3.2 To examine the problems faced and problem solving measures adopted by fish retailers after demonetisation. 1.3.3 To study the effect of demonetisation on the retail fish sellers 1.4 Scope of the study Since post-demonetisation, Kerala’s fisheries sector has been witnessing a diminishing trend in prices especially in the retail market. The present study was intended to analyze the various effects of demonetisation on retail fish sellers. This will help to evaluate the problems and crisis management mechanisms adopted by them and changes that may propose for the future. 1.5 Methodology of the study:1.5.1 Location of the study The study area was confined to the Thrissur Corporation area of Thrissur district. 1.5.2 Period of study The survey conducted during the period March to April- Sample Selection and Operational Definition A sample of 30 retail fish sellers (15 fish retail shops and 15 fish hawkers & peddlers) from Thrissur Corporation area were selected based on Convenience Sampling. 1.5.4 Variables measured Each objective in the study analysed based on the specific variables under consideration. The following variables were selected for the study. 1.5.4.1 Socio-economic Profile of retail fish sellers 3 1.5.4.2 Demand for fish before and after demonetisation 1.5.4.3 Effect of demonetisation on volume of procurement 1.5.4.4 Effect of demonetisation on source of procurement 1.5.4.5 Effect of demonetisation on sale 1.5.4.6 Mode of payment & receipts before and after demonetisation. 1.5.4.7 Effect of demonetisation on price 1.5.4.8 Effect of demonetisation on market logistics 1.5.4.9 Problems faced by fish sellers after demonetisation 1.5.4.10 Measures adopted to address the problem 1.5.5 Data Collection Both primary and secondary data were collected. The primary data were collected from the 30 fish retailers (includes both fish retail shops and fish hawkers & peddlers) from the area of Thrissur Corporation using pre-tested structured Interview Schedule. The research project is analytical in nature. A well-structured questionnaire based on the objectives of study was formulated and using this questionnaire responses were collected from fish retailers. Based on their suggestions some wordings of the questions and their options were added, changed and eliminated. Sequences of some questions were also changed. This process was once again repeated and the questionnaire was once again altered and then finalized for the research study. Secondary data were collected from published materials; articles, journals and newspapers. Relevant information was also collected by way of internet and other sources. 1.5.5 Statistical Tools Used for the Study The collected data were analyzed by following statistical tools. 1.5.5.1 Percent Analysis Percent Analysis was applied to create a contingency table from the frequency distribution and represent the collected data for better understanding 1.5.5.2 Rank Order Scale 4 To analyze the problems of fish retailers, respondents were asked to rank each problem in the order of preference. After that weightage were given to each rank as follows. For the reasons to preference the first rank a weightage of 9 was given and for the 9 th rank, weightage assigned was 1 and other weightage were between this ranges. 1.6 Limitations  As this study is proposed only in the area of Thrissur Corporation, the result cannot be generalized.  Short span of time.  Personal bias of respondents may be reflected like responses.  The problems and problem solving measures prescribed will be of location specific in nature. 1.7 Chaperization Chapter I - Design of Study Chapter II- An Overview of Fisheries Sector Chapter III- Analysis and Discussion Chapter IV- Summary of Findings and Conclusion 1.8 Review of Literature The study on change in the marketing behaviour of fish seller’s pre & post demonetisation will be incomplete without a review of literature. An attempt is made to relate literature available in this matter from all possible sources and presented here are the selected one. Kurien (1980) found that the fishermen faced mainly two problems related to fish marketing. Firstly lack of a proper mechanism controlled by the fishermen to determine fair prices for their fish and secondly the inability on the part of fishermen to collect from the fish distributors the legitimate dues accruing to them from sales transaction. Kurien (1982) opined that compared to other states, the infrastructural development for internal fish marketing in Kerala is very poor and ignored. So what we need is not the concerned effort to increase fish production, but to distribute the catch fairly in the most efficient manner. 5 Kamat(1989) observed that the cost of finance in fisheries is very high and disproportionate to the risk involved and that the development of the fishermen is possible only if they are provided with institutional structures adequately and responsive to their needs. Marine Fisheries Research and Management (2000) this study indicates that the catch rates of almost all types of fishing units operating along Kerala Coast have declined drastically during the last decade. Although the Intensity of operations of some of the. Traditional fishing a technique like shore seine and a few specific types of gillnets declined substantially in the inshore belt; there is a steady increase in the motorised and mechanised fishing units. The enhanced utilization of the inputs and the decline in the catch rates further led to the increase in the cost of production of marine fish. However, the general Increase in the price of the fish and fishery products both in the national and international markets helped the survival of this vital sector in Kerala. Garnier, Klont and Plastow (2003) opined that the consumers’ preferences and interests are always of the foremost importance for aqua culturists, leading to an improvement of aqua cultural techniques and producing food, which is considered by the consumer as attractive and acceptable. In this frame, the fish consumer constitutes an important link between supply and demand. The knowledge of his preferences might catalytically contribute in the improvement of the terms of production and fish distribution, and the quality of the cultivated species and their processed products (e.g. development of know-how and technical infrastructure, increase of production). Finally, the agricultural food industries, including fish farming and agricultural science, must not avoid the debate, since consumers are expected to be more involved in a dialogue concerning issues that affect their lives. Batzios, Moutopoulos, Arampatzis and Siardos (2005) Sensitivity on fish freshness issues", profession, age, education level and Gender are the variables of higher importance. Male consumers and/or elder consumers are more sensitive than others. In general, consumers’ sensitivity on fish freshness issues or on marketing issues as well as their attitude on basic reasons for choosing fish as a food in their family are significantly affected by criteria such as sex, marital status, age, profession, education level, place of residence etc. Soumyendra and Ruma (2007) conclude that income inequality in some of these cases, although low has been found to be coexistent with low literacy and low income earning opportunities. The latter phrases need to be replaced by higher terms for all alike. Poor literacy and lack of training have in many cases hindered the adoption of improved 6 technology. Changing the environment along with the mind-set of the players coupled with supportive role of the facilitator will achieve the goal of improvement in the socioeconomic status of the fisherman community. Ambili (2008) Fishermen mean the person who engaged mainly in fishing and related activities for their livelihood. They are very close to nature and element of great risk to life make him as superstitious as he is generous and care free. The greatest asset of fishermen in Kerala is their accumulated Knowledge about the fish, fish habits, waves, currents and stars. They have a tradition of learning by doing, handed over from generation to generation. Ganesh Kumar, Datta, Joshi, Katiha, Suresh, Ravisankar, Ravindranath and MukthaMenon (2008) domestic fish marketing holds a huge potential, it is still highly unorganized and unregulated in India. It has long been neglected for various reasons and serious efforts have not been made on marketing of fishes as compared to its production. The improvement in fish marketing system and distribution would not only reduce the demand-supply gap of fishes across country, but would also contribute to food and nutritional security of a vast majority of resurgent middle income population. Fish marketing starts with the auction system which is highly unorganized and unregulated in most states of India. NwabuezeA. A and Nwabueze E.O(2010) in their study on problems of fresh fish marketing in Oshimili, Nigeria recommends the creation of enabling environment to encourage more people to go into aquaculture in order to beat the problem of seasonality in fish supply. The socio-economic characteristics considered showed that females were more of retailers than Wholesalers while males were more of wholesalers. Transportation is the major constraint in fresh fish marketing in the area. Most fresh fish sellers in the L.G.A. travel long distances by road. According to Back ground paper on Fisheries, Kerala State Planning Board (2011) the distribution sector consists of a large number of small vendors especially women vendors. They handle 70 percent of the fish landed in the coast of Kerala at different stages through the fish marketing channels. Among them, there are men carrying fish on bicycles and women as head loads. They take the fish to the sub-urban and rural markets. Even though Kerala has a fishable area as large as that of the land surface of the state. The contribution of the fisheries sector to the net domestic product of the state in 1983 formed only about 4 percent of the total. Though the Net State Domestic product of the state has increased, the share of fisheries sector has declined from 1.87 in 1997 to 1.62 in 2003-04. Amita, Singh and Ayatulla (2014) conclude that the fishermen engaged in fish culture and fishing activity they range the age group 40 to 54 years and their education 7 either nil or up to primary level. The number of family members of the fishermen was ranges 6-10. The transportation of fish is carried out by the bicycle in the bucket along with the ice. The consumer mostly prefer Rohu, Catla, and Grass carp first and then after other carps. Income of fisherman was near about Rs.60000 –Rs.100000 annually. On the basis of study we can conclude that the fishermen are interested to continue but there are many social and economic problems among them for survive in future. Addis, Kidanie and Meseret (2015) concludes that post-harvesting and major Related Problems of Fish Production, Fisheries and Aquaculture Journal Post-harvest fish lose is the discard of fish after harvest and causes the loss of potential income. It is because of poor processing techniques, animal predation and insect infestation, inadequate packaging and storage and discarding of the fish at sea etc. Many factors affect this loss. Among these factors are: long transport, lack of preservation, high ambient temperature, species of fish, lack of market and long storage time. These factors determine the occurrence of many types of Postharvest fish loses. These lose are classified as; lose in nutritional value, physical lose, quality lose, market force lose, lose due to traditional processing, lose during distribution and storage, and lose due to insect infestation. Josephine (2015) opined that the problems of fishermen need to be solved and prospects could be improved by the society by increasing its quality of services. It results in the enhancement of level of satisfaction of fishermen towards the society. The earnings could be increased by providing cheaper inputs, financial assistance, accident benefit scheme and insurance facilities. The problems faced by the fishermen could be solved easily and the prospects of fish marketing are gradually increasing by various steps taken by the society as well as the Government. John Joseph(2015) recommended that the excess workforce in the fishery sector can be diversified for alternate livelihood activities after providing skill training with capital assistance and ensure adequate manpower and infrastructure to Government health centres, Awareness for active participation of fishermen in decentralized governance system are the measures to improve the quality of life of fishermen community. Chandasudha Goswami and Zade (2015) India as a whole has diverse ecological and climatic conditions, case studies on various fish production systems help identifying suitable culture practice for selected environmental conditions Although it is blessed with favourable geographic and climatic conditions needed for developing fishery, but yet modern methods of enterprise development is necessary. By undertaking a systematic empirical process on the dynamics of fisheries development limitations can be overcome 8 and growth can be enhanced. Assam or North East India also can play a major role in fish production through introduction of modern technology. Jasbin and Radhika R (2016) opined that the problems of fish marketing need to be solved by the Government and the co-operative society by increasing its quality of services. It results in the enhancement of level of satisfaction of fishermen towards the society. The role of co-operative fisheries in the provision of various services to the fishing community is considered remarkable. The infrastructure facility like storage facility, transportation facility, etc. should be improved so that the quality of the product can be maintained to the maximum. Demonetisation:Geeta (2016) shows that initially the demonetisation effects on market were painful but this also instigate the shopkeepers and consumers to adopt cashless means such as paytm, debit card use, internet banking to buy goods. Indian consumers will strives ToL learn new ways of cashless transactions. Ritu and Mehta (December 2016) concluded that Small and rural retailers, who generally visit wholesale markets for procurement of goods, could not do so for want of sufficient funds of acceptable denomination. The all new Rs.2000 is creating more scare among small businessmen because they do not know where to get the change for the same. Small and marginal business owners narrated tales of cashlessness that has drastically reduced their business. All said that there were fewer buyers and those who come to purchase also carry the newly-minted Rs.2000 currency notes. Committee to study the impact of demonetisation on the state economy of Kerala, GOK- Kerala State Planning Board, Interim report (December 2016) find that the fisheries sector in Kerala relies heavily on cash transactions at every level. The bidders (wholesale buyers) obtain their supplies at auctions of the catch at harbours and pay the required amount to the boat owners and operators who use the money to meet their various expenses. The bidders are not able to carry out business in high volumes as the amount that one person can withdraw from banks has been restricted. The expected price for the fish is not realized as the fish are sold to the bidders for cash rather than to the highest bidder, who often offers to pay by cheque or against credit. There is a fall in market value of the fish. On an average fish worth Rs.1000 are sold for Rs.800. Those who generally buy fish for Rs.50, 000 are now making total bids of Rs.10, 000 to Rs.15, 000. Payments are made to the people who are at the harbour with cash, and boat owners are unwilling to sell fish for a deferred payment. The owners have to transact with different sets of people and as they change every day, they do not accept credit. 9 CHAPTER 2 AN OVERVIEW OF FISHERIES SECTOR Faced with one of the world’s greatest challenges – how to feed more than 9 billion people by 2050 in a context of climate change, economic and financial uncertainty, and growing competition for natural resources – the international community made unprecedented commitments in September 2015 when UN Member States adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The 2030 Agenda also sets aims for the contribution and conduct of fisheries and aquaculture towards food security and nutrition in the use of natural resources so as to ensure sustainable development in economic, social and environmental terms. Meeting the ever-growing demand for fish as food in conformity with the 2030 Agenda will be imperative, and also immensely challenging. 2.1 Fisheries Sector in the World- An Overview Growth in the global supply of fish for human consumption has outpaced population growth in the past five decades, increasing at an average annual rate of 3.2 percent in the period-, double that of population growth, resulting in increasing average per capita availability . Table2.1 Top 10 largest Fish Producing Country in the World Rank Country Production (In Tons) 1 China 49,467,463 2 Peru 9,416,285 3 India 6,318,639 4 Indonesia 5,578,573 5 USA 5,360,597 6 Chile 5,028,358 7 Japan 4,819,046 8 Thailand 3,743,564 9 Vietnam 3,367,853 10 Russia 3,305,749 Source: FAO, 2016 10 China has played a major role in this growth as it represents more than 60 percent of world aquaculture production. Global total capture fishery production in 2014 was 93.4 million tons, of which 81.5 million tons from marine waters and 11.9 million tons from inland waters. For marine fisheries production, China remained the major producer followed by Indonesia, the United States of America and the Russian Federation. Table2.2 World Fisheries and Aquaculture Production and Utilization Year 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Production Capture 90.2 89.1 93.7 91.3 92.7 93.4 Aquaculture 55.7 59.0 61.8 66.5 70.3 73.8 Total - Utilization Human consumption - Non-food uses 22.0 20.0 24.7 20.9 21.4 20.9 Population (billions) 6.8 6.9 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 Per capita food fish supply (kg) 18.1 18.5 18.6 19.3 19.7 20.1 Source: FAO, 2016 In 2014, 46 percent (67 million tons) of the fish for direct human consumption was in the form of live, fresh or chilled fish, which in some markets are the most proud and highly priced forms. The rest of the production for edible purposes was in different processed forms in dried, salted, smoked or other cured forms, prepared and preserved forms, and in frozen form. Freezing is the main method of processing fish for human consumption, and it accounted for 55 percent of total processed fish for human consumption and 26 percent of total fish production in 2014. World per capita apparent fish consumption increased from an average of 9.9 kg in the 1960s to 19.7 kg in 2013, with preliminary estimates for 2014 and 2015 pointing towards further growth beyond 20 kg In addition to the increase in production, other factors that have contributed to rising consumption include reductions in wastage, better utilization, improved distribution channels, and growing demand linked to population growth, rising incomes and urbanization. Although annual per capita consumption of fish has 11 grown steadily in developing regions (from 5.2 kg in 1961 to 18.8 kg in 2013) and in lowincome food deficit countries (from 3.5 to 7.6 kg), it is still considerably lower than that in more developed regions, even though the gap is narrowing. In 2013, per capita apparent fish consumption in industrialized countries was 26.8 kg. Import and Export of Fish and Fishery Products All Over the World Globally, in the same year, fishery trade represented more than 9 percent of total agricultural exports and 1 percent of world merchandise trade in value terms. China is the main fish producer, but also the largest exporter of fish and fishery products since 2002, although they represent only 1 percent of its total merchandise exports. China’s imports of fishery products are also growing, making it the world’s third-largest importing country since 2011. Norway, the second major exporter, posted record export values in 2015. Trade in fish and fishery products is largely driven by demand from developed countries, which dominates world fishery imports, although with a declining share (73 percent of world imports in 2014). Table2.3 Top Ten Exporters and Importers of Fish and Fishery Products Countries 2014 (In US$ millions) China 20980 Norway 10803 Viet Nam 8029 Thailand 6565 USA 6144 Chile 5854 India 5604 Rest of world total 70346 Source:-FAO, 2016 World trade in fish and fishery products has grown significantly also in value terms, with exports rising from US billion in 1976 to US$148 billion in 2014, at an annual growth rate of 8percent. Trade increased again by 7 percent in 2013 and by 6 percent 2014. The decline was mainly in value terms, with traded volumes registering a decrease of only 2–3 12 percent compared with 2014. Since 2014, imports to the Russian Federation have also been affected by its trade embargo on fish imported from certain countries. However, the primary underlying cause of the 10 percent decline in world fishery trade in value terms has been the strengthening of the US dollar against other currencies, particularly those of major seafood exporters such as the EU, Norway and China, which could partly reflect reduced exchange rate elasticity. World trade in fish and fishery products has expanded significantly in recent decades, rising by more than 245 percent in terms of quantity from 1976 to 2014. These quantities represent a significant share of total fish production, with about 36 percent exported in the form of different product forms for human consumption or non-edible purposes in 2014 reflecting the sector’s degree of openness and integration into international trade. 2.2 Fisheries Sector in India Indian fisheries and aquaculture is an important sector of food production, providing nutritional security to the food basket, contributing to the agricultural exports and engaging about fourteen million people in different activities. With diverse resources ranging from deep seas to lakes in the mountains and more than 10 percent of the global biodiversity in terms of fish and shellfish species, the country has shown continuous and sustained increments in fish production since independence. Table 2.4 Indian Fisheries- A Profile Indian Fisheries Global position 3rd in Fisheries 2nd in Aquaculture Contribution of Fisheries to GDP (percent) 1.07 Contribution to Agriculture GDP (percent) 5.17 Per capita fish availability (Kg.) 9 Annual Export earnings (Rs. In Crore) 33,441.61 Employment in sector (million) 14 Source: Dept. of Animal Husbandry, Dairying &Fisheries, GOI (2017) Constituting about 6.3 percent of the global fish production, the sector contributes to 1.1 percent of the GDP and 5.15 percent of the agricultural GDP. The total fish production of 10.07 million metric tons presently has nearly 65 percent contribution from the inland sector 13 and nearly the same from culture fisheries. Paradigm shifts in terms of increasing contributions from inland sector and further from aquaculture are significations over the years. India is the 3rd largest producer of fish with 4.96 percent of total Global Marine Production (193,598.31 MT) and 5thposition among fish exporting countries. The value of output from fisheries sector during 2014-15 was Rs. 1, 22,775 crore which is about 0.9percent to the National Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and 5.17percent to the Agriculture GDP (Annual Report 2015-16, Dept. of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries , Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, GOI). Among the maritime states in India, Andhra Pradesh stands 1 st in fish production with an annual production of 19.644 lakh tons in the year of 2014-15. Table 2.5 Top 10 Fish producing states of India (2014-15) States Fish Production( In tons) Andhra Pradesh - West Bengal - Gujarat 809932 Tamil Nadu 697612 Kerala 632256 Karnataka 613241 Maharashtra 548746 Uttar Pradesh 494265 Bihar 479800 Odisha 439856 Source: - : Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation, Govt. of India (2016) As per the statistics of MPEDA, during 2015-16 export earnings from the sector registered at Rs- crore and export aggregated to 945892 tons which is lower compared to previous years. In Indian fisheries, inland fisheries have emerged as a major contributor to the overall fish production in the country. Inland fisheries presently have a share of 64.07percent in total fish production of the country. The total fish production during 2014-15 is at 10.16 million tons (MT) with a contribution of 6.51 million tons (MT) from inland sector. The fish production during 2014-15 increased to 10.16 million tons 14 (provisional) registering a growth of 6.18percent over previous year. During the year 201415, percentage annual growth rate of fish production in India is 5.20percent (Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation, GOI). In 2015, India has less than 1percent of total fish imports all over the world. The fisheries sector is a sunrise sector with varied resources and potential, engaging over 14.50 million people at the primary level and many more along the value chain. In India there are five main fishing harbours such as Mangalore, Kochi, Chennai , Vishakhapatnam and Raichak . The Institutional Framework for the Promotion and Management of the Sector The Ministry of Agriculture of the Government of India has a Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying, and Fisheries with a Division of Fisheries as the nodal agency. This agency is responsible for planning, monitoring and the funding of several centrally sponsored developmental schemes related to fisheries and aquaculture in all of the Indian States. Most of the states possess a separate Ministry for Fisheries or else it remains within the Ministry of Animal Husbandry. All states have well-organized fisheries departments, with fisheries executive officers at district level and fisheries extension officers at block level, who are involved in the overall development of the sector. However, the administrative structure at state levels varies from state to state. Centrally sponsored schemes like the 422 FFDAs cover almost all districts in the Country and the 39 BFDAs in the maritime districts have also contributed to aquaculture development. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research located within the Department of Agricultural Research and Education, which in turn is within the Indian Ministry of Agriculture, has a Division of Fisheries, which undertakes the R&D on aquaculture and fisheries through a number of research institutes. There are about 400 KVK’s (Farm Science Centers) in the Country, operated through State Agricultural Universities, ICAR Research Institutes and NGOs, most of which also undertake aquaculture development within their scope of activities. The MPEDA functioning under the Ministry of Commerce, besides its role in the export of aquatic products also contributes towards the promotion of coastal aquaculture. Many other organizations and agencies also support or conduct R&D in the subject include the departments of Science and Technology; departments of Biotechnology, University Commission, NGOs and private industry. 15 2.3 Fisheries Sector in Kerala Kerala, the green ribbon shaped maritime state on the west cost of peninsular India, is blessed with a coastline of 590 km, a continental shelf area of 40000 sq.km, extensive interconnected brackish water lakes and estuaries. Fisheries sector is one of the major productive sectors of Kerala. Kerala stands in the 5th position among major fish producing states in India, with an annual production of 7.28 lakh tons in the year of 2015-16. The marine resources of Kerala are obtained from a coastline of 560km. The state has a geographical area of 388635km .The Kerala coast popularly known as Malabar Coast from very early times, provides one of the richest fishing zones in the world. The State has a fish worker population of about 10 lakhs. The density of population in the coastal area is 2168 persons per Km2, whereas the state average is 859. Marine fishery has a prominent place in the economy of Kerala. It is the only source of livelihood of more than 8 lakh marine fishermen and out of this, more than two lakhs of active fisher folk are engaged in fishing along the coastline, who inhabit in 222 marine villages. The fisheries sector provides occupation to about 3.86 lakh people directly and much more indirectly, making it a significant employment providing sector of the state. The coast of Kerala constitutes approximately 10 percent of India’s total coastline. The coast line of 560km and the Exclusive Economic zone (EEZ) extends up to 200 nautical miles far beyond the continental shelf, Which covers an area of 218536 sq. km provide opportunities in traditional fishing in inshore waters from ages .The continental shelf area is 39139 sq. km the area within the 18 m depth range accounts for 5000 sq. km. Annual Fish production in Kerala The marine potential of Kerala is enormous and only a small part of it is currently being exploited. In Kerala the marine waters offer a very lucrative fishery, south-west monsoon coupled with north-westerly winds and the oceanic currents cause upwelling along the coast which brings the nutrient rich deep waters to the surface, with flourishing primary production and followed by a good fishery. Kerala coast has major fisheries of the shrimps, cuttle, fish, sardines, mackerels, anchovies, soles sharks, rays etc. On an average of 6.02 lakh tons of marine fish is produced annually by the state. 16 Table 2.6 Annual Fish Production in Kerala Year Fish production(In lakh MT) Inland Marine Total 2011-12 1.40 5.53 6.93 2012-13 1.49 5.31 6.80 2013-14 1.86 5.22 7.06 2014-15 2.02 5.24 7.26 2015-16 2.11 5.17 7.28 Source: Directorate of Fisheries, Kerala As per the data of Directorate of Fisheries during the year 2015-16, fish production in inland sector was 2.11 lakh tons and marine sector accounts for 5.17 lakh tons. The marine fish production in Kerala has tended to fluctuate while the inland fish production has showed signs of improvement from-. Marine fish production has decreased from 5.24 lakh tons in 2014-15 to 5.17 lakh tons in 2015-16.Inland production has been increasing during the recent years. During 2015-16, the share of inland fish production in the total fish production of the state was 29 percent. Kerala has not utilized its potential in Inland fishing. Kerala has over 7 per cent of the water bodies in the country, but its share in Inland fishing is lower than that of many other states. The aquatic biodiversity and fish wealth of Kerala sustain more than 10 lakh fisher folk and supports numerous additional activities including commercial fishing, aquaculture, biotechnology applications, tourism, education and recreation. The total population of fisher folk residing in the state of Kerala is estimated to be 10.02 lakh, which includes 7.712 lakh in the marine sector and 2.304 lakh in the inland sector. Out of this, the number of active fishermen is 2.39 lakh. Nearly 12percent of the fisher folk find their livelihood from allied activities like marketing, repairing nets, fish vending, processing and other fishery related activities. Kerala occupies the foremost position in marine fish production among the maritime states in India, accounting for about 26 percent of the total landings. Out of the EEZ of 2.2 million km for India, 36,000 sq. km is adjacent to the Kerala coast. Kerala’s coastline accounts for over 10 percent of the coastline of the country, including 222 fishing villages in the marine and 113 fishery villages in the inland sector. The fish catches from Kerala coast include more than 300 different species, the commercially important are forty only. Prominent among them are Sardine, Mackerel, Seer fish, Pomfretand Prawn. The annual per 17 capita consumption of fish in Kerala is very high (18.5 kg) compared to the national average (5 kg). Table 2.7 District Wise Fish Production in Kerala (2015-16) Sl District No Coastal Active Length Fishermen (Km) Production ( In million tons) Marine Inland 1 Thiruvananthapuram 78 499929 63518 5562 2 Kollam 37 25863 108686 19757 3 Pathanamthitta - 199 - 3525 4 Alappuzha 82 42820 44388 34930 5 Kottayam - 4894 - 12308 6 Idukki - 182 - 3536 7 Ernakulum 46 26188 80394 38951 8 Thrissur 54 6809 21057 26781 9 Palakkad - 481 - 22064 10 Malappuram 70 34504 59920 6831 11 Kozhikode 71 23805 93443 3124 12 Wayanad - 0 - 2273 13 Kannur 82 6825 23254 4787 14 Kasaragod 70 10667 22085 23333 Total 590 233126 516745 210762 Source: Kerala Fisheries Statistics, Kerala Fishermen Welfare Fund Board (2015-16) An analysis of the figures of District wise fish production in Kerala shows that the district of Kollam is the leading producer of Marine fish followed by Kozhikode and Ernakulum. These 3 districts together contribute more than 50 per cent of the total marine fish production in the state. Alappuzha, Thrissur and Palakkad are the leading districts in the case of inland fish production occupying the first, second and third positions respectively. If 18 we look at total fish production, the leading producer is the district of Alappuzha followed by Ernakulum and Kozhikode respectively. Export of Marine Products from Kerala Table 2.8 Export of marine products from Kerala Year Quantity percent share of (in MT) all India 2011-12 155714 18 2012-13 166399 18 2013-14 165698 17 2014-15 166754 16 2015-16 149138 16 Source: Directorate of Fisheries, Kerala Kerala has made vital contributions in the export of marine products from the country. During 2015-16, export of marine products from Kerala was 1, 49,138 tons valued at 4644.42 crore. It was 16percent of share of all India export of fisheries products. Compared to the previous fiscal, a decline has been recorded in the quantity and value of Exports The Government of Kerala has so far completed construction work of 14 fishing harbours and the works of 10 fishing harbours are progressing. The completed fishing harbours include Thankassery, Neendakara, Kayamkulam, Munambam, Beypore, Puthiyappa, Chombal, Moplabay, Azheekal, Ponnani, and Thottappally. The On-going Fishing Harbours works include Vizhinjam, Chethi, Arthungal, Chettuvai, Thanur, Koyilandi, Vellayil, Thalai, and Manjeswaram. During 2015-16, Cheruvathur fishing harbour was commissioned in the month of August. However, some additional works are pending. During 2016-17, Plan support was extended to Fishing Harbours like Arthungal, Vellayil, Thanoor, Manjeswaram, and Koyilandi. In Kerala there are 7 fishing harbours such as Thoppumpady, Munabam, Puthiyappa, Sakthikulagara, Beypore, AzheekkalandThottapilli. A recent survey conducted by the Department of Fisheries has shown that there are 2703 fish markets in the state which includes 185 whole sale markets, 2518 retail markets and 1126 way side markets. Marketing and Marketing channels in Fisheries Sector The domestic fish marketing system in India is neither efficient nor modern and is mainly carried out by private traders with a large number of intermediaries between producer and consumer, thereby reducing the fisherman’s share in consumer’s rupee. Physical facilities and infrastructure in all types of fish markets are far from satisfactory (FAO, 2001). Some of the problems in fish marketing include high perishability and bulkiness of material, high heterogeneity in size and weight among species, high cost of storage and transportation, 19 no guarantee of quality and quantity of commodity, low demand elasticity and high price spread (Ravindranath, 2008). Gupta (1984) and Srivastava (1985) had studied the marketing of fish and fishery products in India, wherein they had analyse price variations among species across states and had identified infrastructural bottlenecks in efficient marketing system. Rao (1983) had emphasized that an efficient fish marketing system could eliminate some of the depressed pockets of malnutrition by supplying fish at reasonable prices to people living on subsistence level. A marketing system for fish includes transportation to and from the market, handling, storing, packaging, sorting, merchandizing, etc. An efficient marketing system enables the consumer to obtain fresh fish fresh at a reasonable price. Total cost of marketing fish includes all costs incurred by different types of intermediaries in the chain from producers to ultimate consumer .Domestic markets and distribution of fish is dominated by a large number of intermediaries. All fish traded internally and for export pass through private channels. Fish distribution usually involves four levels such as Primary markets, Secondary markets, higher secondary markets and City. The fish marketing the following channels are usually followed (i) Producer – Retailer – Consumer (ii) Producer - Retailer - Wholesaler – Consumer (iii) Producer- Commission agent- Wholesaler- Retailer- Consumer (iv) Producer- Wholesaler – Commission agent – Retailer – Consumer (v) Producer – Commission agent – Wholesaler- Commission agent – Retailer- Consumer The price behaviour of fish is mainly characterized by wide fluctuation at all stages of transaction in the marketing chain, which results from the highly perishable nature of fish and the high variation in its short run supply. Price is determined by the interaction of demand and supply at producing centres, primary markets and consumer markets. The fish marketing there has been no regulation even in major market, which initially helps the middlemen. So interference of middlemen is one of the problems faced by the fisheries sector. The intermediaries or middlemen play very important role in marketing. They incur different levels of marketing channels .The method of disposal of fish is by auction. As soon as the boat reaches theharbour the catch is handed over to the auctioneer and it is his responsibility to auction the fish and make payments to the boat ownergetsa commission usually about 5percent for his service. Some of auctioneers advance loans to boat owners to get the write of auctioning and if the loan is comparatively bigger amount, he gets a higher commission of about 10percent. The packing is done in bamboo basket or plastic boxes by putting fish and dice almost in equal proportion in alternate layers. Then the packed baskets 20 or boxes will be loaded in the truck or tempos to carry towards the distant markets. Auto vans are mostly used for transportation to nearby markets and cycles for street vending or house to house selling. Organizations and Agencies in the Fisheries Sector of Kerala Fisheries sector plays an important role in the economy of the state by way of generating income and employment to the people. However, the Socio-Economic conditions of the fisher folk in the state are pitiable when compared to the general sections of the population. For the welfare of fishermen the following agencies are introduced:1. Kerala Fishermen’s Welfare Fund Board (KFWFB) Kerala fisherman’s welfare fund board (KFWFB) is a statutory board constituted by the Government of Kerala under the provisions of the Kerala fisherman’s welfare fund act 1985. Its headquarters is at Thrissur. 2. Kerala State Cooperative Federation for Fisheries Development Limited fisheries Development Limited (MATSYAFED) Kerala state cooperative federation for (MATSYAFED) is a two tier co-operative federation with 654 primary fishermen’s Development Welfare Co-operative Societies-340 in marine sector, 183 in the inland sector & 131 women’s co-operatives. 3. Agency for Development of Aquaculture, Kerala (ADAK) The Agency for development of aquaculture, Kerala (ADAK) was established in 1989 as an autonomous agency to implement various aquaculture development activities. The head office is at Thiruvananthapuram and the Regional Offices are at Kannur, Alappuzha &Ernakulum. 4. Fisheries Resource Management Society (FIRMA) Fisheries Resource Management Society (FIRMA) is an autonomous body for the development of fisheries sector in Kerala & to review & evaluate all fishery development management & conservation programmes under fisheries & build up appropriate contacts with other research & development agencies in the country. 5. National Institute of Fisheries Administration and Management (NIFAM) 21 The National Institute under the Department of fisheries is meant for organizing short term training programmes to fisheries officers, fishermen, fish farmers & social workers. 6. Fish Farmers Development Agency (FFDA) To promote fish training & to overcome constraints in respect of extension, training & financing of fresh water aqua culture development programmes. Chief Executive Officer is the District officer. Major Developmental Programmes in Kerala The Plan schemes of the Government under Fisheries sector can broadly be classified into the following categories –  Marine fisheries development  Inland fisheries development  Extension, Training & service delivery  Modernization of markets and value addition  Social Security to fishermen  Development of Fishing Harbours and management  Scheme for the Fisheries University  Coastal Area Development 2.4 About Thrissur District Fishery in Thrissur is one of the traditional industries in the city. The long stretch of coastline has facilitated the fishing industry of Thrissur. The inland water bodies are also rich with various species of fish. A large number of people of the city earn their livelihood by fishing and fishing related industries. Thrissur district is one of the biggest fish markets of Kerala. About 90percent of the population eats fish as their staple diet. Oil sardines are used as manure. About 95percent of the total catch is marketed within the district. The district has 18 coastal fisheries villages and three inland fisheries villages. The fishing industry thus makes a sizable contribution to the wealth of the district, and is the main source of income of a large section of the people inhabiting the coastal area. Thus the sustenance and survival of a million poor people depends on the fate of the fishing industry. There are seven major fishing centres in the district such as Azhikode, Nattika, Vadanappilli, 22 Kadappuram, Blangad, Puthenkadappuram and Chettuva. There is a Shrimp hatchery at Azhikode. Majority of the population eat fish as their staple diet. The traditional fishermen of Thrissur have four main castes. They are Marakkan, Aryan, Valanand and Mukkuvan. The overview of the fisheries sector highlights the importance of this sector in the economic development of the country .The demonetisation affected this sector just like other sectors in the economy. However the studies related to the impact of demonetisation on fisheries sector is very rare. Therefore an analysis with respect to how demonetisation affected either positively or negatively was done in chapter three. 23 CHAPTER 3 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION This study entitled ‘Marketing Practices of Retail Fish Sellers; With Special reference to Pre & Post Demonetisation’ is a detailed approach on the problems faced and problem solving mechanisms adopted by fish retailers after demonetisation and the changes in the marketing practices related to procurement & sale of fish after demonetisation. The study was based on primary data collected from a sample of 30 fish sellers including both licensed retailers and petty road side sellers belonging to Thrissur corporation area. The data were analysed with the help of statistical tools such as percent analysis and rank order scale. In this chapter the marketing behaviour of fish sellers before and after demonetisation was analysed in the following heads: 3.1 Socio-economic characteristics of retail fish sellers 3.2 Marketing practices in the sale and procurement of fish 3.2.1 Procurement pattern 3.2.2 Sales pattern 3.2.3 Cost and price factors 3.3 Problems faced and Problem solving measures adopted by fish retailers after demonetisation 3.3.1 Problems faced by fish retailers 3.3.2 The type of problems faced by fish retailers 3.3.3 Problem solving measures adopted by fish retailers after demonetisation 3.4 Effect of demonetisation on the retail fish sellers 3.1 Socio-economic characteristics of retail fish sellers Socio-economic status is the measure of economic and social prospects of individuals. It indicates the social position of an individual with respect to demographic features such as age, Gender, education, income and religion etc. Analysis of socio-economic characteristics shows combined total measure of a person work experience and of an individual's or family’s economic and social position in relation to others. 24 3.1.1 Demographic features of retail fish sellers Table 3.1 Demographic features of respondents Age No: of Respondents Percentage < 30 5 17 30-60 15 50 >60 10 33 Total 30 100 Gender No: of Respondents Percentage Male 27 90 Female 3 10 Total 30 100 Educational Qualification No: of Respondents Percentage Illiterate 1 3 Up to 10th 20 67 Plus two 9 30 Total 30 100 Religion No: of Respondents Percentage Hindu 7 23 Christian 20 67 Muslim 3 10 Total 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data Table 3.1reveals that 50 percent of the respondents were in the age group of 30 to 60 years. Only 17 percent respondents were aged below 30 years and 90 percent were males and remaining coming under the category of females. It might be inferred that fish retailing is dominated by males than females. About 67percent have education up to 10th standard. Only 30 percentages of the respondents were studied up to plus two. It shows that educated individuals are not much interested in fish selling. With regard to the religion of sample respondents, more than 50 percent of the respondents were from Christian community followed by Hindus (23 percent). 25 3.1.2 Category and years of experience of the fish sellers Table 3.2 presents experience of both licensed and un-licensed fish retailers. Table 3.2 Category and years of experience of the fish sellers Category of respondents No: of sellers Percent Licensed retailers 15 50 Road side petty sellers(un-licensed) 15 50 Total 30 100 No: of years No: of sellers Percent Less than 20 16 53 20-40 6 20 More than 40 8 27 Total 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data FIG 3.1 Experience in Fish Selling More than 40 27% Less than 20 53% 20-40 20% Regarding the category of respondents, out 30 sample retail fish sellers from Thrissur corporation area includes 15 licensed retailers (50 percent) and 15 un-licensed road side petty sellers (50 percent). It is clear that more than 50 percent of the fish sellers have experience of less than 20 years and next 27 percent were having wide experience of more than 40 years. So it can be inferred that majority of the sellers were having less than 20 years of experience in fish retailing. 26 3.1.3 Average Monthly Income Income is another important economic variable which determines the economic status of the respondents as well as the standard of living of the sellers. Table3.3Average monthly income of retail fish sellers Average Monthly Income No: of sellers Percent Less than Rs.5000 9 30 Rs.5000-Rs.10000 11 37 Rs.10000-Rs.20000 9 30 More than Rs.20000 1 3 Total 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data Percentage of no: of sellers FIG 3.2 Average Monthly Income- 30 37 30 3 Average income Table3.3 helps us to understand that 97 percent of the sellers were earning average monthly income below Rs.20000. Those with average monthly income more than Rs.20000 come to meagre i.e. only 3 percent. It is also clear that only one retailer had income more than Rs. 20000. That is selected retailers were living with poor economic standard. 3.2 Marketing practices in the sale and procurement of fish In order to evaluate the changes in the marketing practices of retail fish sellers the variables such as procurement pattern, selling pattern and cost & price factors during pre and post demonetisation period were surveyed and analysed as follows. 27 3.2.1 Procurement pattern Procurement is an important variable to study the marketing practices of fish sellers. It includes the information regarding source of procurement, quantity of procurement, mode of payment and frequency of payment of the sellers. It can directly affect the income generating capacity of the sellers. 3.2.1. (A) Source of procurement The fish retailers are depending on more than one source for purchase of fish. The key intermediaries in fish marketing i.e. wholesaler, auctioneer, and the private agencies are act as their main source of procurement. Source of procurement of fish by selected respondents are given below. Table 3.4 Source of procurement of fish Source of procurement No: of sellers Percent Wholesalers 14 47 Directly from the auctioneers 9 30 Through auction 6 20 Private 1 3 Total 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data FIG 3.3 Source of Procurement 3% 20% Wholesalers 47% Directly from the auctioneers Through auction 30% Private Table 3.4 revealed that majority of the sellers are mainly depends on wholesalers as their source of purchase of fish. About half of the sellers (50 percent) procured raw fish mostly from the auctioneers and through auction. Indication is that retailers depend on 28 wholesalers and auctioneers as their main source of fish purchase and demonetisation had no effects on source of procurement. 3.2.1. (B) Quantity of procurement Quantity of procurement of the retail fish sellers depends on the factors such as availability, cost incurred, demand and quantity of fish sold out in a day. Quantity of fish purchase is always having a positive relation with quantity of sale and profit of fish sellers. Table 3.5 Quantity of fish purchase per day before and after demonetisation Average quantity of fish Before Demonetisation After Demonetisation purchase per day No: of sellers Less than 50 Kg No: of sellers Percent Percent - - 17 57 50-100 Kg 18 60 7 23 100-200 Kg 3 10 4 13 200-400 Kg 9 30 2 7 More than 400 Kg - - - - 30 100 30 100 Total Source: Compiled from primary data FIG 3.4 Average Quantity of Fish Procurement 60 50 40 30 Before demonetization 20 After demonetization 10 0 Less than 50 Kg 50-100 Kg 100-200 Kg 200-400 Kg More than 400 Kg Table 3.5 helps to understand that before demonetisation majority of the sellers (60 percent) are purchased 50-100 kg of fish per day on an average. Remaining 40 percent stands at the range starting from 100 kg to 400 kg. None of them purchased fish above 400 kg even before demonetisation. After demonization, there was a shift of majority (57 percent) from 29 50-100 kg to less than 50 kg. There is considerable reduction in the purchase of 200-400 kg fish by 23 percent. Therefore we can infer that demonetisation had a negative effect on the quantity of fish purchased by fish sellers. 3.2.1. (C) Mode of payment Mode of payment can be considered as an indication of preference of retail fish sellers towards different kind’s payment systems. The collected modes of payments are given in the Table 3.6. Table 3.6 Mode of payment by the fish sellers before and after demonetisation Mode of payment Before Demonetisation After Demonetisation No: of sellers Percent No: of sellers Percent Cash 27 90 14 47 Credit - - 1 3 Cheque 1 3 3 10 Both Cash and credit - - 9 30 Both Cash and cheque 2 7 2 7 Both Credit and cheque - - 1 3 e -Payment - - - - Total 30 100 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data FIG 3.5 Mode of Payment 90 47 30 3 Cash Credit 3 10 Cheque Before demonetization 7 0 Cash and credit 7 Cash and cheque 0 3 Credit and cheque 0 e -Payment After demonetization Table 3.6 revealed that 90 percent of the sellers were used cash payment system before demonetisation and but it reduced to almost half (47 percent) after demonetisation. 30 Remaining 10 percent were used both credit and a combination of cash and cheque for the payment. Immediately after demonetisation, system of payment were seems to be scattered among the combinations of cash, credit and cheque. There was minor progress in the usage of cheques and none of them were used e-payment mechanism even after demonetisation. It might be an indication of irregularity in the income pattern of sellers after demonetisation. 3.2.1. (D) Frequency of payment The frequency of payment shows the regularity in the income received by the retailers in a day. All the respondents were used payment on daily basis, once in two days and once in a week Table 3.7 Frequency of payment by the fish sellers before and after demonetisation Frequency of payment Before Demonetisation After Demonetisation No: of sellers No: of sellers Percent Percent Daily 24 80 8 27 Once in two days 3 10 6 20 Once in a week 3 10 3 10 No specific system of payment - - 13 43 30 100 30 100 Total Source: Compiled from primary data FIG 3.6 Frequency of Payment Before demonetization After demonetization 27 20 10 43 80 10 10 13 0 Daily Once in two days Once in a week no specific payment system Table 3.7 depicts the response of sellers towards frequency of payment. About 80 percent of the sellers were used with daily payment mechanism before demonetisation. But 31 after demonetisation the majority of them was does not go for any particular payment mode. Reduction in the daily payment by 53 percent indicates the irregularity in the cash payments during demonetisation period. That is demonetisation negatively affected the frequency of payment to suppliers. 3.2.2 Selling pattern The fish retailers are the ultimate members in the marketing channel who sold fish directly to target customers. Selling pattern is yet another variable to study the marketing practices. It includes time of sale, mode of transportation used, number of daily customers, quantity of fish sold, daily sale of fish in value, frequency of receipts and average profit margin earned by them. The study of selling pattern is an indication of marketing efficiency. 3.3.2. (A) Time of sale Time of sale is an important for the sellers, because it affects the volume of sales achieved by the sellers. It seems to be varied among both sellers of retail outlets and unlicensed road side sellers. Table 3.8 Time of sale of fish sellers Time of sale No: of sellers Percent Morning 10 33 Evening 15 50 Throughout the day 5 12 Total 100 30 Source: Compiled from primary data Percentage of Number of Sellers FIG 3.7 Time of Sale No: of sellers Morning Evening Throughout the day Table 3.8 shows out that about 15 fish retailers (50 percent) were followed sale during evening time. About 33 percent of sellers opted sales during morning. Only few of the 32 sellers (12 percent) sold the fish throughout the day. It means that majority of the sellers got maximum sales at evening time. This practise weren’t change by them even at the time of demonetisation. 3.3.2. (B) Mode of transportation A basic and important factor in fishing industry is the transportation, which contributes majority of marketing cost. It is necessary to transport fish from market to ultimate customer. For transporting the fish, availability of cheap means of transport are limited. Table 3.9 Mode of transportation used for the procurement Mode of transportation No: of sellers Percent Head load 14 47 Petty-auto 16 53 Total 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data It is clear from the Table 3.9 more than 50 percent of the sellers depend on petty-auto as their mode of transportation .Remaining 47 percent depends on head-loaders on daily wage basis. Demonetisation could not make any kind of change on mode of transportation used by them. 3.3.2. (C) Average number of customers The number of customers is an important element which determine selling pattern of sellers. It will directly help them to improve their sales and income earned by them. Table 3.10 No: of average daily customers before and after demonetisation No: of average Before Demonetisation daily customers No: of sellers Percent After Demonetisation No: of sellers Percent Less than50 4 13 27 90 50-75 18 60 3 10 75-100 8 27 - - Total 30 100 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data 33 FIG 3.8 Average Number of Daily Customers before demonetization Percentage of Sellers 100 After demonetization 90 80 60 60 40 20 27 13 10 0 0 Less than 50 50-75 75-100 The Table 3.10 revealed that before demonetisation for 60percent of respondents sellers were get average number of customers per dayfrom50 to 75 in number and 27 percent sellers accounts to 50-75 customers. But after demonetisation 90 percent of the sellers were get less than 50 customers in hand and none of them get more than 75 customers per day. It means there is huge loss of customers after demonetisation and paralysed the sale turnover of sellers after demonetisation. 3.3.2. (D) Average quantity of fish sold The quantity of fish sold is an element of volume of sales and income received by the sellers. The number of customers and quantity of fish sold are closely related dependent variables in fish selling. Table 3.11 Average quantity of fish sold per day before and after demonetisation Average quantity of Before Demonetisation fish sold per day No: of sellers Percent After Demonetisation No: of sellers Percent Less than 50 Kg 12 40 24 80 50-100 Kg 10 33 1 3 100-200 Kg 3 10 4 13 200-400 Kg 5 17 1 3 Total 30 100 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data 34 Percentage of sellers FIG 3.9 Average Quantity of Fish Sold Per Day 80 40 33 10 3 Less than 50 Kg 50-100 Kg 17 13 3 100-200 Kg Before demonetization 200-400 Kg After demonetization Table 3.11 helps us to understand that majority of the sellers (60 percent) could attain average sale of more than 50 Kg of fish before demonetisation. But only it reduced to 20 percent after demonetisation and the majority (80 percent) of the sellers had sales of less than 50 kg, indicates that there is considerable reduction in the quantity of fish sold. 3.3.2. (E) Average daily sale of fish (In value) Average daily sale in value is the expression of sum total of all receipts earned by the sellers before deducting all the payments in money terms. It shows the total amount of money able to handle by the sellers after sale in a day. Table 3.12 Average daily sale of fish (In value) before and after demonetisation Average daily sale of Before Demonetisation fish (In value) No: of sellers After Demonetisation Percent No: of sellers Percent Less than Rs.5000 6 20 24 80 Rs.5000- Rs.10000 19 63 1 3 Rs.10000- Rs.20000 - - 2 7 More than Rs.20000 5 17 3 10 Total 30 100 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data Table 3.12 helps us to understand that before demonetisation majority of the sellers (63 percent) had an average daily sale of value between Rs. 5000-Rs. 10000. Out of 30 sellers 35 only 17 percent could be able to generate sale of more than Rs. 20000. After demonetisation majority of the sellers (80 percent) shows a tremendous decline in the average daily sale of less than Rs. 5000. That is only 20 percent were able to generate sales above Rs. 5000. The result revealed that demonetisation had a declining effect on daily sale of fish. 3.3.2.( F) Mode of Receipts There exist a large number of options for enabling various payment channels and electronic modes for payments/receipts. Mode of receipts can be considered as an indication of preference of both sellers and customers towards different kinds of payment systems. Table 3.13 Mode of receipts by the fish sellers before and after demonetisation Before After Demonetisation Demonetisation Mode of receipts No: of sellers Percent No: of sellers Percent Cash 21 70 9 30 Credit 8 27 9 30 Cheque 1 3 1 3 Both Cash and credit - - 9 30 Both Credit and cheque - - 2 7 e -Payment - - - - 30 100 30 100 Total Source: Compiled from primary data FIG 3.10 Mode of Receipts Before Demonetization After Demonetization 70 30 27 30 30 3 Cash Credit 3 Cheque 0 0 7 Both Cash and Both Credit and credit cheque 0 0 e -Payment 36 Table 3.13 revealed that 70 percent of the sellers were get cash receipts before demonetisation and it reduced to almost half (30 percent) after demonetisation. Remaining 30 percent were received both credit and cheque in return of sales. During demonetisation, system of payment scattered to the combinations of cash, credit and cheque. There was minor progress in the usage of cheques and none of them were used e-payment mechanism even after demonetisation. It might be an indication of irregularity in the income pattern of sellers and it directly affected the payment system of sellers seriously. 3.3.2. (G) Frequency of Receipts Frequency of receipts earned by the sellers is the indication of regularity in the cash received by the sellers even after sales. The volume of sales could not indicate that seller’s capacity to earn cash immediately after selling. And it is directly shown the purchasing power of customers. Table 3.14 Frequency of receipts of sellers before and after demonetisation Frequency of Receipts Before Demonetisation After Demonetisation No: of sellers No: of sellers Percent Percent Daily 19 63 2 7 Once in two days 3 10 6 20 Once in a week 3 10 5 17 Once in a month - - - - Daily and once in two 5 17 12 40 - - 2 7 - - 3 10 30 100 30 100 days Daily, once in two days and Once in a week Once in a week and Once in a month Total Source: Compiled from primary data Table 3.14 depicts the response about frequency of receipts of the fish sellers. Before demonetisation all the respondents were received payment on daily basis, once in two days 37 and once in a week. It is noticeable that more than half of the receipts (63 percent) were on daily basis. After demonetisation daily receipts shows a considerable reduction to 7 percent. So it can be inferred that after demonetisation sellers had faced difficulty to receive money from customers due to lack of purchasing power and also decline the flow of funds. 3.3.2. (H) Average profit margin per day Profit margin is the net difference between all receipts and payments directly show the profit earning capacity of the sellers after the complete sale of inputs at the end of the day. Table 3.15 Amount of average profit margin per day before and after demonetisation Amount of average Before Demonetisation profit margin per No: of sellers After Demonetisation Percent No: of sellers Percent day Less than Rs.500 - - 19 64 Rs.500 - Rs.1000 20 67 6 20 Rs.1000- Rs.1500 1 3 4 13 More than Rs.1500 9 30 1 3 Total 30 100 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data Percentage of Sellers FIG 3.11 Average Profit Margin Per Day 80 64 67 60 30 40 20 20 13 3 0 3 0 Less than Rs.500 Rs.500 Rs.1000 before demonetization Rs.1000 Rs.1500 More than Rs.1500 after demonetization From the Table 3.15it is clear that before demonetisation all the sample sellers were able to generate profit margin more than Rs.500. But after demonetisation, there was 38 tremendous decline in the profit margin and only 36percent was able to attain more than Rs.500. That is demonetisation resulted the considerable reduction in the profit generation capacity of sellers. 3.3.2. (I) Satisfaction towards sales during demonetisation Satisfaction of the sellers towards sales during demonetisation is important for the study as it is a measure of how the act of sudden demonetisation of high value currencies in a particular night can meet or surpass the expectation. For this purpose satisfaction of sellers rated in a 5 point Likert scale. Table 3.16 Satisfaction towards sales during demonetisation Satisfaction towards sales during demonetisation No: of sellers Percent Very unsatisfied 20 67 Un-satisfied 7 23 No opinion 3 10 Total 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data FIG 3.12 Satisfaction towards sales during demonetisation percentage of sellers 80 70 67 60 50 40 Percentage 30 23 20 10 10 0 Very unsatisfied Un-satisfied No opinion Table 3.16 shows out that 90 percent of the sample retailers were not at all satisfied with the sales during demonetisation. Next 10 percent does not opined about sales at that time. In total majority of the respondents were not favours the demonetisation on sales. 39 3.2.3 Analysis of Cost and price factors Cost and price of inputs is important variable to study. Both variables are the constituents of profit margin. Cost analysis entails the review and evaluation of the separate cost elements and the proposed profit of a sellers’ cost proposal. Price Analysis is the process of examining and evaluating a proposed price without evaluating its separate cost elements or proposed profit. 3.4.1 Extra cost factors during demonetisation The Table 3.17 presents opinion of respondents to know whether any extra costs incurred by them with respect to purchase of fish, marketing, Storage and transportation due to demonetisation. Table 3.17 Extra cost factors during demonetisation Particulars No: of sellers Percent Purchase of fish 21 70 Transportation 15 50 Storage 24 80 Marketing 15 50 None 6 20 Source: Compiled from primary data Table 3.17 shows out that during demonetisation majority of the fish retailers have to pay extra costs in purchase of fish and storage (ice). About half of the sellers had extra payments on transportation and marketing. Only 20 percent of the sample respondents could overcome these extra cost factors during demonetisation i.e. sudden announcement of demonetisation leads to the incidence of extra costs and negatively affect the income generation capacity of sellers. 3.4.2 Factors considered for price setting The final price for a product might be influenced by number of factors, which can be categorized into two main groups’ internal factors and external factors. Respondents opinion regarding the major factors of price setting are given in table 3.18. 40 Table 3.18 Factors considered for price setting by the fish sellers Factors considered for price setting No: of sellers Percent Cost incurred 30 100 Competitors price 30 100 No: of buyers 28 93 Price offered by the buyer 27 90 Fish quality 28 93 Location of sale 28 93 Demand for fish 29 97 Rent 14 47 Source: Compiled from primary data Table 3.18 shows out that almost all fish sellers consider cost incurred, competitor’s price, no: of buyers, price offered by the buyer, fish quality, location of sale and demand for fish. Only 47 percent of the respondents considered rent as criteria for price setting i.e., licensed retailers have to pay rent for the rooms hired by them. 3.3 Problems faced and Problem solving measures adopted by fish retailers after demonetisation An analysis of the problems faced and problem solving measures adopted by the retail fish sellers are presented below. 3.3.1 Problems faced by fish retailers Fish marketing is the movement of fish from producer to consumer and to any process meant to preserve or change the nature of the original product (fresh fish). In fish marketing, the retailers involved are subject to certain problems which they have to face while carrying out their work. In the study area, most of the fish retailers are marginal and small. For the purpose of the study respondents are asked to rate the listed problem based on its importance and based on the scores obtained the problems are ranked. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 3.19. 41 Table 3.19 Problems faced by retail fish retailers Sl Particulars Total Rank Score No 1 Competition from other sellers 182 4 2 Price fluctuations 166 5 3 Problems related to purchase & sale 199 3 4 Problems related to demand 233 2 5 Problems related to customer relationship 84 9 6 Problems related to payment & receipts 240 1 7 Transportation problems 124 7 8 Storage problems 98 8 9 Inadequate market knowledge 41 10 10 Lack of government support 151 6 Source: Compiled from primary data From the Table 3.19 it can be observed that problems related to payment& receipts, demand, purchase & sale, competition from other sellers and price fluctuations are the major problems faced by the fish retailers. Competition from other sellers and Price fluctuations were the next higher problems sort out by the sellers. Lack of government support was another serious issue among them. Out of ten, problems related to transportation, storage, customer relationship and inadequate market knowledge were meagre. 3.3.2 The type of problems faced by fish retailers After analysing the various problems faced by the fish retailers an attempt was also made to analyse the type of problem under each problem head. This section also analysed the specific problems faced by the retailers after demonetisation. 42 Table 3.20 Type of problems faced by fish sellers during fish marketing Sl Problems Types of problems respondents No 1 No: of Competition from other sellers Coincides area of sale 20 67 Influence of credit sale** 20 67 7 23 11 37 22 73 Low price charging** 23 77 Over pricing of suppliers** 23 77 22 73 22 73 19 63 22 73 22 73 16 53 Area of sale 22 73 Quantity of sale** 23 77 22 73 Threat from un-authorized retailers No: of sellers 2 Price fluctuations Low price offered by the buyer** 3 Percent Problems related to Irregular source of purchase & sale procurement Variations in the quantity of procurement** Inadequate availability of fish Problems related to payment to the supplier** Negative approach of supplier** Poor credit availability from the supplier** Reduction in the profit margin** 43 4 Problems related to demand 5 Problems related to customer relationship 6 Problems related to payment & receipts Approach of buyers 20 67 Loss of customers** 20 67 More credit sale** 22 73 Inadequate demand** 30 100 Fluctuations in demand** 30 100 Quarrelling 3 10 Shift to other sellers** 23 77 Bargaining 15 50 Delay in payment** 22 73 29 97 10 33 1 3 3 10 3 10 4 13 4 13 Forced to accept old notes** 4 13 Lack of funds 4 13 Over charging** 17 57 17 57 Difficulty to use the currency of Rs. 2000** More receipts using old notes** More receipts using higher denominations** Difficulty to get changes for higher denominations** Difficulty to use old Rs. 500 note** Refusal to accept old notes** Non-availability of new notes** 7 Transportation problems Lack of transportation availability 44 Payment problem** 18 60 11 37 Poor quality 4 13 Lack of storage inputs 20 67 Overpricing of inputs 22 73 23 77 21 70 21 70 No credit availability for payment** 8 9 Storage problems Inadequate market Lack of communication with knowledge other sellers Variations in price fixation 10 Lack of government Lack of support for providing support inputs at subsidized rates and credit at the time of demonetisation ** Source: Compiled from primary data ** indicates the specific problems in fish selling during demonetisation period Table 3.20clearly outline the type of problems faced by the fish sellers. In comparison, the type of problems related to payment& receipts, purchase & sale and demand were the major problems responded by the sellers. Related to the problems in purchase and sale variations in the quantity of procurement (73 percent), payment problems to supplier (73 percent), poor credit availability (53percent), quantity of sale (77 percent), reduction in the profit margin (73 percent), loss of customers (67 percent), approach of buyers (67 percent) and more credit sale (73 percent) were affected by more than half of the respondents. With respect to payment and receipts, the sellers had to face major problems such as delay in payment (73 percent), difficulty to use currency of Rs.2000 (97 percent) and minor problems of more receipts using old notes or higher denominations, refusal to accept old notes, non-availability of new notes, forced to accept old notes and lack of funds (each 13 percent) etc. while analysing problems related to demand, both inadequateness (100 percent) and wide fluctuations in demand (100 percent) seems to be serious among all the respondents. About 70 percent of the respondents opined that lack of government support for providing inputs at subsidized rates and credit at the time of demonetisation was a serious problem. 45 After demonetisation sellers were faced other problems such as influences of credit sale (67 percent) and wide price fluctuations due to low price offered by the buyer(73 percent) and over pricing of suppliers (77 percent).While analysing transportation problems, overcharging (57 percent) and payment problems (60 percent) were higher immediately after demonetisation. And It had been conclude that more incidence of specific problems indicates that demonetisation were foster the problems in fish selling before demonetisation. 3.3.3 Problem solving measures adopted by fish retailers after demonetisation Table 3.21 lists out the measures adopted by the sample respondents to tackle the problems faced by them. Table 3.21 Problem solving measures adopted by the fish sellers Particulars Sl No: of percent respondents No 1 Reduction in the profit margin ** 20 67 2 Reduction in the quantity of sales** 7 23 3 Avail credit facility from supplier 7 23 4 Compromised on quality of fish purchased 5 17 5 Unsold fish was iced and kept for next day 3 10 More credit sale to daily customers** 3 10 7 Promoted credit sale ** 24 80 8 Payment using cheque** 8 27 9 Accept old Rs. 500 notes** 1 3 10 Payment to suppliers are done only after the complete 9 30 5 17 6 sale of fish** 11 Reduction in the quantity of purchase** Source: Compiled from primary data ** indicates the problem solving measures in fish selling during demonetisation period 46 The retailers had to face many problems from procurement to sale of fish. They have also undertaken some solving measures to solve the problems. Out of 11 solving measures listed, majority of the sellers responded that they have used the promotion of credit sale (80 percent) and reduction in the profit margin (67 percent) specifically after demonetisation period. About 30 percent of the respondents opined that payment to suppliers are done only after the complete sale of fish and acceptance old notes of Rs.500 and Rs.1000 solved payment problems up to certain extent. The result reveals that, 17 percent of sellers have reduced the quantity of purchase to a minimum and they have also compromised on the quality of fish purchased. About 10 percent of the respondents have gone for icing the unsold fish of each day and sold fish to daily customers for credit. Only 3 percent accepted old Rs.500 notes for avoiding loss of sale. About 27 percent of the sellers shifted to cheque payment and none of them used epayment even after demonetisation. Table 3.22 Opinion about demonetisation Opinion about demonetisation No: of respondents percent Very un-satisfied 15 50 Un-satisfied 14 48 No opinion 1 2 Total 30 100 Source: Compiled from primary data FIG 3.13 Opinion about demonetisation 2% Very un-satisfied 48% 50% Un-satisfied No opinion 47 Table 3.22 revealed that about half of the respondents (50 percent) were very satisfied and next 48 percent were un-satisfied with effects of demonetisation. So it can be concluded that 98percent of the respondents are not at all satisfied with demonetisation. 3.3 Effect of demonetisation on the retail fish sellers The analysis revealed marketing practices of procurement & sale of fish before and after demonetisation, problems faced by retail fish sellers during the post demonetisation period throw light on the effect of demonetisation on them. From the study, it is clear that the sudden announcement of demonetisation hardly affected the procurement & selling pattern, cost &price factors and mode of payment & receipts. And it is submitted in the following sub-heads. A. Effect of demonetisation on the pattern of procurement & sale: Demonetisation had a negative effect on the quantity of fish purchased by fish sellers. The result revealed that, there was considerable reduction of 57 percent from 50-100 kg to less than 50 kg in the average quantity of fish purchase. (Table 3.5).  Regarding the number of customers, there was a huge loss of customers from more than 50 to less than 50 by 77 percent after demonetisation. So it can be concluded that demonetisation paralysed the sale turnover of sellers (Table 3.10).  Majority of the sellers (80 percent) could not attain average sale of more than 50 Kg of fish after demonetisation which indicates that there is considerable reduction in the demand of fish among customers (Table 3.11).  The analysis revealed that demonetisation had a declining effect on daily sale of fish. That is only limited number of sellers (20 percent) were able to generate sales above Rs. 5000(Table 3.12).  Demonetisation reduced the profit generation capacity of about 90 percent of sellers to a minimum of Rs.1000.( Table 3.15) B. Effect of demonetisation on payment and receipts: Regarding the frequency of payment of sellers, there were remarkable reductions in the daily payment by 53 percent. So indication is that irregularity in the cash receipts negatively affected the suppliers too.(Table 3.7)  The system of payment were seems to be scattered among the combinations of cash, credit and cheque. There was minor progress in the usage of cheque (10 percent) and none of them were used e-payment mechanism even after demonetisation (Table 3.6). 48  Regarding the frequency of receipts after demonetisation daily receipts shows a considerable reduction from 63 percent to 7percent. That is sellers had faced difficulty to receive money from customers due to lack of purchasing power and disturb the channel of flow of funds. (Table 3.14).  After demonetisation the mode of cash receipts reduced by 40 percent and shifted to the combinations of cash, credit and cheque. Cheque payments show a gradual rise of 7 percent. It might be an indication of irregularity in the income pattern of sellers and can be concluded that sudden change in the payment system affects the sellers seriously (Table3.13).  After demonetisation, there was tremendous decline in the profit margin to less than Rs.500 by 64 percent and only 36 percent was able to attain more than Rs.500.so demonetisation leads to problems regarding receipts &payments and in turn reduced the profit margin (Table3.15). C. Effect of demonetisation on cost and price  The study reveals retail fish sellers incurred some extra cost with respect to purchase of fish, transportation, storage, and marketing after demonetisation (Table 3.17).  Costs and competitors price are the major factors of price setting by the fish sellers (Table 3.18). CONCLUSION Fish consumption seems to be increasing all over the world. Fish and fish products are becoming popular among the population. The above analysis throws light on the effect of demonetisation at fish retailers. There are many problems faced by retail fish sellers related to fish marketing. Problems related to payment& receipts, demand, purchase & sale, competition from other sellers, price fluctuations and transportation were seems to be serious problems faced by the fish retailers and it becomes worse at the time of demonetisation. Lacks of government support also raise the hardships during that time. The Supply of fish has registered a dip in economy primarily because there was low demand due to the liquidity crunch. The smaller sellers were affected even more harshly as they depend mostly on dayto-day payments for their sales. 49 CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION Fisheries sector is one of the major productive sectors of Kerala. Kerala has a million strong fishing communities of which 2.39 lakhs are active fish retailers and the rest their dependents. Thus the survival of a million poor people depends on the fate of the fishing industry. The sudden announcement to demonetisation the high denomination currency notes of Rs.1000 and Rs.500 create problems all over the country. The fisheries sector is one of the major sectors affected by the currency crunch triggered by the demonetisation of high denomination notes. In this situation to understand the retailers’ response to demonetisation is needed to analyse the changes in marketing practices in that scenario. The study entitled ‘Marketing practices of retail fish sellers ;With Special reference to Pre & Post Demonetisation’ is a detailed approach on the problems faced and problem solving mechanisms adopted by fish retailers after demonetisation was carried out with the objectives of identifying the problems and problem tackling measures of retail fish sellers after demonetisation in comparison with monetization period. And understand the changes in the marketing practices of procurement & sale of fish after demonetisation. To analyse the objective mentioned, a sample of 30 retail fish sellers (15 fish retail shops and 15 fish hawkers & peddlers) from Thrissur Corporation area were randomly chosen. The collected data were analysed using appropriate statistical tools like percent analysis and rank order scale. The major findings and emanating conclusions are summarized in the succeeding sections. 4.1 FINDINGS  Socio-economic profile of the fish retailers revealed that majority of the sellers had experience less than 20 years. Regarding the age, 50 percent are aged between 30 to 60 years.  Majority of the respondents (90 percent) were males and 67 percent of them are educated up to 10th standard. Only limited numbers of the respondents were educated up to plus two.  The study results shows that majority of the respondents are Christians (67 percent) and 97 percent of the respondents have average monthly income below Rs.20000. 50 4.1.1 Marketing practices of retail fish sellers after demonetisation  Majority of the retailers opted wholesalers as the source of procurement of fish followed by the auctioneers. No change is noticed after demonetisation with respect of source of procurement.  Before demonetisation quantity of fish purchased was 50-100 kg of fish per day which reduced to less than 50 kg after demonetisation.  Before demonetisation cash payment was the important mode of payment. Whereas after demonetisation both cash and credit payment become important.  Majority of the sellers were practiced daily payment mechanism before demonetisation. Whereas there was no specific payment system after demonetisation.  Evening (50 percent) and morning (33 percent) where the most opted time of sale by the fish sellers. And there is no change in time of sale after demonetisation.  Both before and after demonetisation 50 percent of the sellers depend on petty-auto and head-loaders as their major modes of transportation.  There is a considerable reduction in the average daily customers after demonetisation.  The analysis shows a noticeable difference in the average quantity of fish sold before and after demonetisation (both in terms of value and quantity).  Mode of receipts by the fish sellers was shifted from cash transaction to both cash and credit transaction after demonetisation.  Before demonetisation, majority of the sellers received daily payments whereas after demonetisation it extended to once in two days.  Before demonetisation average profit margin of the majority of the retailers reduced to less than Rs.500 from Rs.500-Rs.1000. 4.1.2 Specific problems after demonetisation and measures adopted to solve the problems During demonetisation, the sellers had to face specific problems such as: High variations in the quantity of purchase and sale of fish.  Problems related with payment to supplier and receipts from customers.  Price fluctuations due to overpricing of suppliers and low price offered by the buyer.  Reduction in the profit margin.  Difficulty to get change of small denomination for higher denomination of Rs.2000.  Non-availability of new notes of Rs.500 and Rs.2000. 51  Inadequate and fluctuating in demand.  More credit sale.  Irregular number of customers.  Shift of customers from one seller to another due to influence of credit sale.  Problems related to overcharging and payment to avail transportation facility.  Lack of government support. Measures adopted to address the problems listed below: Reduction in the profit margin.  Promotion of credit sale to daily customers.  Reduction in the quantity of procurement and sale.  Suppliers are paid after the complete sale of fish.  Acceptance of old notes.  Shift to cheque payment system. 4.1.3 Effect of demonetisation on the retail fish sellers  Demonetisation had a negative effect on the quantity of fish purchased by fish sellers.  Demonetisation paralyses the sale turnover of sellers.  There is considerable reduction in the demand of fish among customers.  The analysis revealed that demonetisation had a declining effect on daily sale of fish. i.e. only limited numbers of sellers (20 percent) were able to generate sales above Rs. 5000.  Demonetisation reduced the profit generation capacity of sellers about 90 percent to a minimum of Rs. 1000.  Demonetisation reduced the average daily customers.  The system of payment and receipts affected due to demonetisation on the daily payment system shifted to no specified payment system. 52 4.2 CONCLUSION The analysis and findings of the study throws light on the changes in the marketing practices of retail fish sellers during post demonetisation. The study highlights the problems and problem solving measures adopted by them and its effectiveness at that time. Study also revealed out the dissatisfaction of fish retailers towards demonetisation was dull. The findings also underline the fact that there are many problems faced by retail fish sellers from procurement to sale of fish. Problems related to payment& receipts, demand, purchase & sale, competition from other sellers, price fluctuations and transportation are the common problems responded by the fish retailers. And it becomes worse at the time of demonetisation. The result also indicates that governmental and other institutional support to recoup the economic status of fish sellers is insufficient. Demonetisation is considered as a stepping stone to convert the economy to cashless economy. Therefore a, long term solution to be evolved by inculcating the habit of using digital payment systems like bank cards (Debit / Credit / Cash / Travel / Others) e-wallets, POS machines etc. Government should take measures to create awareness regarding the usage of e-payment options to recoup with the similar situation in future. Because in future there is no option other than going for e-payment mode. The government support may be extended to the fish retailers to recoup in the situation at least at the time of crisis. As a whole we could able to conclude that an immediate intervention is not practically feasible in the present scenario. The gradual changes in the prospects of fish marketing through various steps taken by the Government could solve the issues. 53