CHAPTER-4

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS

Table 4.1.1: Gender of the respondents

Gender No. of. respondents percentage

Female 97 64.7
Male 56 35.3
Total 150 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.1: Gender of the respondents

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 35.3% of respondents are in the category
of female, 64.7%respondents are in the category of male.

Inference
64.7% of the respondents are in the category of male.
 Table 4.1.2: Age of the respondents

Age No. of. respondents percentage

20-30 47 31.3
30-40 70 46.7
40-50 26 17.3
Above 50 7 4.7
Total 150 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.2: Age of the respondents

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 31.3% of respondents are in the age
category of 20- 30 years, 46.7% respondents are in 30-40 years, 17.3 % respondents
are in the age category of 40-50 and 4.7 % of the respondents are above 50 years.

Inference
46.7% respondents are in 30-40 years.
 Table 4.1.3: Qualification of the respondents

No. of. respondents percentage

10th 11 7.3
12th 37 24.7
Diploma 77 51.3

Graduate 25 16.7

Total 150 100

Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.3: Qualification of the respondents

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 72.4% of respondents married and 27.6% of
the respondents are not married.

Inference
72.4 % of the respondents are married
 Table 4.1.4: Experience of your employment

No. of. respondents percentage

Less than 1 17 11.3

1-2 60 40
2-4 50 33.3
Above 4 23 15.3
Total 150 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.4: Experience of your employment

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 11.3% of respondents say Less than 1, 40% of
the respondents say 1-2, 33.3% of the respondents say 2-4 and 15.3% of the
respondents get above 4.

Inference

33.3% of the respondents say 2-4

 Table 4.1.5: How long have you been working in this
organization
No. of. respondents percentage
Less than 1 15 15.3
years
1-3 years 28 28.6
3-5 years 36 36.7
5 years and 19 19.4
Above
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.5: How long have you been working in this organization

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 15.4% of the respondents have an
experience of less than 1 year, 28.6% of the respondents have 1- 3years, 36.7%
have 3-5 years of experience and 19.4% of the respondent have 5 years and above
experience.

Inference

36.7% of the respondent’s have 3-5 years of experience

Table 4.1.6: How Can you provide an overview of your supply chain for leather
procurement
No. of. respondents percentage

Raw Material Sourcing 26 26.5

Tanneries 35 35.7

Leather Finishing 25 25.5

Quality Control and Testing 12 12.2

Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.6: How Can you provide an overview of your supply chain for
leather procurement

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 26.5% of respondents say raw materials
sourcing, 35.7% of the respondents say tanneries, 25.5% say leather fishing and
12.2% of the respondents say quality control and testing.

Inference

35.7% of the respondents say tanneries

 Table 4.1.7: How do you ensure the quality and sustainability of the leather used in your
products?
No. of. respondents percentage
Ethical Sourcing 42 42.9
Environmental 20 20.4
Impact
Durability and 30 30.6
Quality
Continuous 6 6.1
Improvement
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.7: How do you ensure the quality and sustainability of the leather used in your
products?

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 42.9% of respondents say ethical sourcing,
20.4% of the respondents say environmental impact, 30.6% of respondents say
durability and quality and 6.1% of respondents say continuous improvement.

Inference

42.9% of respondents say ethical sourcing

 Table 4.1.8: Have you experienced any significant changes in import/export
volumes over the past five years

No. of. respondents percentage

Economic Factors 18 18.4
Trade Policies and 23 23.5
Agreements
Consumer Trends 29 29.6
Environmental and 28 28.6
Ethical Issues
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.8: Have you experienced any significant changes in import/export

volumes over the past five years

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 18.4% of respondents say Economic
Factors, 23.5 % of the respondents say Trade Policies and Agreements, 29.6% of
respondents say Consumer Trends and 28.6% of respondents say Environmental
and Ethical Issues.

Inference

29.6% of respondents say Consumer Trends

Table 4.1.9: What are the most significant challenges you face in importing/exporting
leather?

No. of. respondents percentage

Tariffs 27 27.6
Regulations 22 22.4
Quality control 25 25.4
Environmental and Ethical 24 24.5
Concerns
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.9: What are the most significant challenges you face in importing/exporting
leather?

Interpretation

From the above table it is interpreted that 27.6% of respondents say Tariffs, 22.4% of the
respondents say Regulations, 25.4% of respondents say Quality control and 24.5% of respondents
say Environmental and Ethical Concerns

Inference
27.6% of respondents say Tariffs
 Table 4.1.10: How do you navigate these challenges?

No. of. respondents percentage

Managing Supply Chain 21 21.4
Risks
Financial and Market 29 29.6
Dynamics
Legal and Political 28 28.6
Challenges
Building a Resilient 20 20.4
Business Model
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.10: How do you navigate these challenges?

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 21.4% of respondents say Managing Supply Chain Risks,
29.6% of the respondents say Financial and Market Dynamics, 28.6% of respondents say Legal and
Political Challenges and 20.4% of respondents say Building a Resilient Business Model

Inference

29.6% of the respondents say Financial and Market Dynamics

Table 4.1.11: how will the leather import/export market change in the next five years?

No. of. respondents percentage

Shifts in Global 21 21.4
Production Centers
Impact of Trade 28 28.6
Policies and
Agreements
Changes in Consumer 30 30.6
Preferences and
Market Demand
Increased Demand for 19 19.4
Sustainable and
Ethical Leather Option
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.11: how will the leather import/export market change in the next five years?

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 21.4% of respondents say Shifts in Global
Production Centers, 28.6% of the respondents say Impact of Trade Policies and
Agreements, 30.6% of respondents say Changes in Consumer Preferences and
Market Demand and 19.4% of respondents say Increased Demand for Sustainable
and Ethical Leather Option.

Inference

30.6% of respondents say Changes in Consumer Preferences

 Table 4.1.12: How do international regulations affect your import/export
activities?
No. of. respondents percentage
Customs Duties and 31 31.6
Tariffs
Import/Export 28 28.6
Restrictions and Bans
Product Standards and 24 24.5
Regulations
Environmental 15 15.3
Regulations
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.12: How do international regulations affect your import/export activities?

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 31.6% of respondents say Customs Duties
and Tariffs,28.6% say Import/Export Restrictions and Bans, 24.5% respondents are
Product Standards and Regulations 15.3% respondents are Environmental
Regulations

Inference

31.6% of respondents say Customs Duties and Tariffs

Table 4.1.13: What steps do you take to ensure compliance with international trade laws and
regulations?

No. of. respondents percentage

Develop a Compliance 27 27.6

Program
Utilize Technology and 15 15.3
Software Solutions
Engage with Legal and 26 26.5
Consulting Experts
Obtain Necessary 30 30.6
Licenses and Permits
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.13: What steps do you take to ensure compliance with international trade laws and
regulations?

Interpretation

From the above table it is interpreted that that 27.6 % of respondents say Develop a Compliance
Program,15.3% say Utilize Technology and Software Solutions, 26.5% respondents are Engage with
Legal and Consulting Experts ,30.6 % respondents are Obtain Necessary Licenses and Permits

Inference

30.6 % respondents are Obtain Necessary Licenses and Permits

Table 4.1.14: How do you see the impact of environmental concerns on the leather
industry evolving?

No. of. respondents percentage

Increased 27 27.6
Transparency and
Traceability
Shift Towards 30 30.6
Sustainable Practices
Innovation in Materials 25 25.5
Changing Consumer 16 16.3
Preferences
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.14: How do you see the impact of environmental concerns on the leather
industry evolving?

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 27.6 % get Increased Transparency and
Traceability, 30.6% get Shift Towards Sustainable Practices,25.5 % get Innovation in
Materials,16.3% get Changing Consumer Preferences.

Inference

30.6% get Shift Towards Sustainable Practices

 Table 4.1.15: What are the main types of leather that are imported and exported?
No. of. respondents percentage
Full-Grain Leather 21 21.4
Top-Grain Leather 24 24.5
Genuine Leather 29 29.6
Chrome-Tanned 24 24.5
Leather
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.15: What are the main types of leather that are imported and exported?

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 21.4% of respondents say Full-Grain
Leather ,24.5% say Top-Grain Leather, 29.6% respondents say Genuine Leather,
24.5% respondents are Chrome-Tanned Leather

Inference

29.6% respondents say Genuine Leather

 Table 4.1.16: What are the main factors that affect the price of leather?
No. of. respondents percentage
Quality of the Hide 30 30.6
Type of Animal 30 30.6
Tanning Process 20 20.4
Supply and 18 18.4
Demand Dynamics
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.16: What are the main factors that affect the price of leather?

Interpretation

From the above table it is interpreted that 30.6 % of respondents say Quality of the Hide, 30.6%
say Type of Animal, 20.4% respondents say Tanning Process, 18.4 % respondents are Supply and
Demand Dynamics

Inference

30.6 % of respondents say Quality of the Hide & Type of Animal

 Table 4.1.17: What are the main challenges facing the leather industry?

No. of. respondents percentage

Ethical Concerns 21 21.4
Environmental Impact 26 26.5
Sustainability 30 30.6
Regulatory Pressure 21 21.4
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.17: What are the main challenges facing the leather industry?

Interpretation

From the above table it is interpreted that 21.4 % of respondents say Ethical Concerns, 26.5%
say Environmental Impact, 30.6 % respondents say Sustainability, 21.4 % respondents are
Regulatory Pressure

Inference

30.6 % respondents say Sustainability

 Table 4.1.18: What are the main opportunities for the leather industry?

No. of. respondents percentage

Sustainability 31 31.6
Initiatives
Technological 24 24.5
Innovations
Product 32 32.7
Diversification
Brand 11 11.2
Differentiation
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.18: What are the main opportunities for the leather industry?

Interpretation
From the above table it is interpreted that 31.6 % of respondents say Sustainability
Initiatives, 24.5 % of the respondents say Technological Innovations, 32.7% of
respondents say Product Diversification and 11.2 % of respondents say Brand
Differentiation.

Inference

32.7% of respondents say Product Diversification

Table 4.1.19: What are the main government policies that affect the leather industry?
No. of. respondents percentage
Environmental 17 17.3
Regulations
Trade Policies and 28 28.6
Tariffs
Animal Welfare 32 32.7
Legislation
Labor Laws 21 21.4
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.19: What are the main government policies that affect the leather
industry?

Interpretation

From the above table it is interpreted that 17.3% of respondents say Environmental Regulations,
28.6% of the respondents say Trade Policies and Tariffs, 32.7% of respondents say Animal Welfare
Legislation and 21.4% of respondents say Labor Laws

Inference

32.7% of respondents say Animal Welfare Legislation

 Table 4.1.20: What are the main social impacts of the leather industry?
No. of. respondents percentage
Employment 19 19.4
Opportunities
Worker Health and 38 38.8
Safety
Community Well- 25 25.5
being
Social Inequity 16 16.3
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.20: What are the main social impacts of the leather industry?

Interpretation

From the above table it is interpreted that 19.4 % of respondents say Employment
Opportunities,38.8 % of the respondents say Worker Health and Safety, 25.5 % of respondents say
Community Well-being and 16.3 % of respondents say Social Inequity.

Inference
38.8 % of the respondents say Worker Health and Safety
 Table 4.1.21: What are the main technological developments in the leather industry?
No. of. respondents percentage
Alternative Leather 16 16.3
Materials
Sustainable 29 29.6
Tanning
Processes
Waste Reduction 34 34.7
and Recycling
Automation and 19 19.4
Digitalization
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.21: What are the main technological developments in the leather
industry?

Interpretation

From the above table it is interpreted that 16.3 % of respondents say Alternative Leather
Materials,29.6 % of the respondents say Sustainable Tanning Processes, 34.7 % of respondents
say Waste Reduction and Recycling and 19.4 % of respondents say Automation and Digitalization

Inference
34.7 % of respondents say Waste Reduction and Recycling
 Table 4.1.22: What innovative features or technologies would you like to see in
future leather products?
No. of. respondents percentage
Self-Healing 30 30.6
Leather
Water Saving and 24 24.5
Filtration
Color Changing 22 22.4
and Customization
Eco-friendly 22 22.4
Innovations
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.22: What innovative features or technologies would you like to see in future
leather products?

Interpretation

From the above table it is interpreted that 30.6 % of respondents say Alternative Leather
Materials,24.5 % of the respondents say Sustainable Tanning Processes, 22.4 % of respondents
say Waste Reduction and Recycling and 22.4 % of respondents say Automation and Digitalization

Inference
30.6 % of the respondents say Self-Healing Leather
 Table 4.1.23: Do you consider alternatives to leather (e.g., vegan leather, synthetic
materials)? If so, why?
No. of. respondents percentage
Environmental 28 28.6
Impact
Innovation and 32 32.7
Performance
Cost 25 25.5
Considerations
Consumer 13 13.4
Demand for
Sustainability
Total 98 100
Source: Primary Data

Chart 4.1.23: Do you consider alternatives to leather (e.g., vegan leather, synthetic materials)? If
so, why?

Interpretation

From the above table it is interpreted that 28.6 % of respondents say Environmental Impact,32.7
% of the respondents say Innovation and Performance, 25.5 % of respondents say Cost
Considerations and 13.4 % of respondents say Consumer Demand for Sustainability

Inference
32.7 % of the respondents say Innovation and Performance
 HYPOTHESIS – 1
H0- There is no significant association between the age of the respondents and the
salary of the respondents.

H1- There is a significant association between the age of the respondents and the
salary of the respondents.

CHI- SQUARE - 1

Case Processing Summary

Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
AGE * SALARY 98 100.0% 0 0.0% 98 100.0%

AGE * SALARY Crosstabulation

Count
SALARY
10,000-15,000 15,000-25,000 25,000-35,000 35,000-45,000 Total
AGE 20-25 7 6 2 2 17
26-30 1 5 14 5 25
31-40 3 5 12 10 30
Above 41 1 8 8 9 26
Total 12 24 36 26 98
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymptotic
Significance (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 25.528a 9 .002
Likelihood Ratio 23.108 9 .006
Linear-by-Linear Association 8.460 1 .004
N of Valid Cases 98
a. 6 cells (37.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum
expected count is 2.08.

Inference
 Since p value is 0.02 is less than 0.05. We accept alternative hypothesis and reject
null hypothesis so there is a significant difference between age and age of the
respondents.
 ANOVA – 1

HYPOTHESIS – 2

H0- There is no significant association between the experience of the respondents

and the salary of the respondents.

H1- There is a significant association between the experience of the respondents and
the salary of the respondents.

Descriptives
supplychainforleather
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Minimum Maximum
Less than 1 years 16 2.00 1.095 .274 1.42 2.58 1 4
1-3 years 27 2.37 .926 .178 2.00 2.74 1 4
3-5 years 33 2.42 1.091 .190 2.04 2.81 1 4
5 years and Above 22 2.50 1.102 .235 2.01 2.99 1 4
Total 98 2.36 1.048 .106 2.15 2.57 1 4

ANOVA
supplychainforleather
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 2.643 3 .881 .797 .498
Within Groups 103.857 94 1.105
Total 106.500 97

Inference
Since p value is 0.498 is greater than 0.05. We reject alternative hypothesis and accept null
hypothesis so there is no significant difference between salary and experience of the
respondents.
 CHAPTER-5
FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION

5.1 FINDINGS OF YOUR STUDY

 94.9% of the respondents are in the category of male.

 31.6 % of the respondents are in the age category of 31-40 years.

 72.4 % of the respondents are married

 43.9% of the respondents get 25000-35000

 36.7% of the respondent’s have 3-5 years of experience

 35.7% of the respondents say tanneries

 42.9% of respondents say ethical sourcing

 29.6% of respondents say Consumer Trends

 27.6% of respondents say Tariffs

 29.6% of the respondents say Financial and Market Dynamics

 30.6% of respondents say Changes in Consumer Preferences

 31.6% of respondents say Customs Duties and Tariffs

 30.6 % respondents are Obtain Necessary Licenses and Permits

 30.6% get Shift Towards Sustainable Practices

 29.6% respondents say Genuine Leather

 30.6 % of respondents say Quality of the Hide & Type of Animal

 30.6 % respondents say Sustainability

 32.7% of respondents say Product Diversification

 32.7% of respondents say Animal Welfare Legislation

 38.8 % of the respondents say Worker Health and Safety

 34.7 % of respondents say Waste Reduction and Recycling

 30.6 % of the respondents say Self-Healing Leather

 32.7 % of the respondents say Innovation and Performance

 SUGGESTIONS

 Streamlining customs procedures and embracing automation technologies can expedite

import and export processes, reducing paperwork and costs while improving efficiency.

 Investing in infrastructure development, such as modernizing ports and transportation

networks, enhances the movement of goods, lowers logistics expenses, and bolsters a
nation's competitiveness in global trade.

 Encouraging companies to follow international quality standards and certifications

guarantees the legitimacy of the product, builds consumer trust, and makes it easier to enter
international markets.

 By implementing focused market research and trade promotion initiatives, exporters can
diversify their export markets and reduce their exposure to economic and geopolitical risks,
so improving their trade resilience over the long run.

 Accessible trade financing solutions, such as export credits and insurance, help small and
medium-sized businesses (SMEs) get over financial obstacles and increase their foreign
trade operations.

 Encouraging innovation and the adoption of new technologies in export-oriented businesses

increases output, improves the quality of products produced, and fortifies competitiveness in
international markets, hence propelling sustained export growth.
 CONCLUSION

In summary, a thorough analysis of the import and export of leather reveals a complex
environment influenced by international economic dynamics, legal frameworks, technological
developments, and changing customer tastes. Comprehending the complexities of the
leather trade highlights the significance of promoting sustainable practices, welcoming
innovation, and utilising strategic alliances to effectively manage obstacles and seize
chances in the worldwide marketplace. Through the prioritisation of infrastructure, trade
facilitation measures, and skills development, stakeholders may cultivate a robust and
competitive leather sector that promotes economic growth while simultaneously adhering to
social responsibility and environmental stewardship. Governments, corporations, and civil
society must work together to map out a course for a more dynamic, moral, and sustainable
leather trade environment in the future.

The report also emphasises how important it is to diversify your market in terms of export
markets and product lines in order to reduce the risks brought on by volatile markets and
unstable geopolitical conditions. While addressing environmental concerns, adopting
technology advancements like digital supply chain solutions and sustainable tanning
procedures can improve efficiency and competitiveness. Crucially, the results highlight the
necessity of ongoing investigation, discussion, and cooperation amongst industry participants
in order to tackle new problems and take advantage of fresh chances in the ever-changing
global leather trade environment. Ultimately, the leather sector can prosper in a constantly
changing global economy, providing value to both producers and customers while
maintaining social and environmental standards, by cultivating a strategic and flexible
approach based on sustainability and innovation.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS

Anthony Me Grew. The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to

International Relation, in John Baylis et.al (eds), New York, 2008.

Ashok Jha, Protection of Environment, Trade and India's Leather Exports,

Trade Environment and Sustainable Development: A South Asian
Perspective, London, Macmillan Press Limited, 1997.

Bharucha, Vasantha, The Impact of Environmental Standards and

Regulations, Set in Foreign Markets on lnida's Export, Under hill. M. (eds).
Macmillan Press Limited. London, 1997.

Gadgil. D.R. The Industrial Evolution of India in Recent Times, 1860 - 1939,
New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1982. Gupta. S.P, Statistical Methods,
Sultan Chand & Sons Publications, New Delhi, 1988.

Hari Krishnan, Export Management, Thirupathi Publication, Chennai, 2007.

Harrod. R.F., International Economics, Cambridge Economic Hand Book,
Cambridge Press, Cambridge, 1989.

Jacob Viner, Studies in the Theory of International Trade, London, 1992.

Jinghan. M.L, International Economics, Vrinda Publications, New Delhi, 2001.

Jinghan.M.L., Principles of Economics, Vrinda Publications, New Delhi, 2001.

xlii Kahler Miles, A Text on International Trade, Second Edition, Routledge
Publication, 1999.

Monika Kothar, Export Promotion Measures in India: Role of Institutional

Support, Deep and Deep Publication, New Delhi. 2006.

Murthy. C, Research Methodology. Yrinda Publications. New Delhi, 2009.

Murthy.C, A Text Book of Enviornmental Sciences, Sultan Chand and Sons,
New DeihL 2005.

Myrick Freeman, Robert Haveman, Allen. V. Kneese, The Economics of

Environmental Policy, Jhonliopkins University Press, 1978.
Niranjan.S, Efficiency and Productivity of Leather Industry. Pallavi
Pathippagam, South India Pvt. Ltd., Mettur, 2007. Nohani.B.N., Ecolabelling:

REPORTS AND THESIS

Abla and Jeffrey, Coping with Environmental Constraints on Exports,

Department of Economics, American University in Cairo, Egypt, 1999.

Agriculture and Industry Survey, Ambitious Targets-Infrastructure

Development a Top Priority, Agriculture and Industry Survey, 1994.

Alfred Chatterton, Tanning and Working on Leather in the Madras Presidency,

Madras, 1904, P.P.l8-20.

All India Manufactures Organization, Leather Industry in India AIMO

Monograph, No.l2, The All India Manufactures Organization, Bombay, 1948.

Anbumani.V, Growth and Structure of Small Scale Industries in Coimbatore

District, Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, Bharathiar University, 1985.

Assistant Director, Kadhi and Village Industries, Vel lore - 1, 2008 Central
Leather Research Institute, Annual Industry Report, Chennai, 2007.

Chertri.A.R, Environmental Managemental Management- An Integrated

Approach, Journal of Indian Association from Environmental Management,
Department of Metallurgical Engineering, REC, Srinagar, 1998.

CLRI Report, Capacity Utilization and scope for Modernization and

Technology Up gradation in Indian Tanning Industry, 2005.

CLRI, Report on Capacity Utilization and Scope for Modernization in India

1990. Commissioner, Directorate of Census Operations, Tamil Nadu, 2001 .

Director, District Industries and Commerce, Vellore District, 2008.

Director, District Inspector of Factories, Yell ore- I, 2008. G' Return Report
District Statistical Department, Vellore District, 2001.

Govt. of India Report, Report of the Working Group on Leather and Leather
Goods Industry for the Xth Five-year plan, 2008. liFT Report, Export
Prospects of Leather Products from India, 2007.
Jiyar Das.T. Tanning as a Small-Scale and Cottage Industry, Seminar paper,
CLRl, 1959.