The stark observation made in the Economic Survey of 2015-16
that “Indian agriculture, is in a way, a victim of its own past success
– especially the green revolution”, shows the dark reality of
the agriculture sector at present and the havoc that has been wreaked by
the green revolution.
 |
| Image courtesy : Wikipedia |
The green revolution, which is often characterised by the
introduction of high-yielding variety of seeds and fertilisers,
undoubtedly increased the productivity of land considerably. But the
growth in the productivity has been stagnant in recent years, resulting
in a significant decline in the income of farmers. There have also been
negative environmental effects in the form of depleting water table,
emission of greenhouse gases, and the contamination of surface and
ground water. Needless to say, the agriculture sector is in a state of
distress, which is severely affecting peasants and marginal farmers, and
urgent policy interventions are required to protect their interests.
The government has responded to the problem by constituting a panel,
which will recommend ways to double the income of farmers by 2022. While
this may be an overtly ambitious target, if we want to boost stagnated
agricultural growth a shift has to be made, as finance minister Arun
Jaitley said in parliament, from food security of the nation to income
security of the farmers. However, there are many hurdles that have to be
crossed if we want to achieve this objective.
The first major barrier to overcome is declining productivity. Data
from 2013 reveals that India’s average yield of cereal per hectare is
far less than that of many countries (including several low income
countries), but the difference is huge when compared to China. For
instance, our average yield per hectare is 39% below than that of China
and for rice this figure is 46%. Even Bangladesh, Vietnam and Indonesia
fare better than India in case of rice yield. Further, there is a huge
inter-regional variation; the wheat and rice yield from Haryana and
Punjab is much higher than from the other states.
In order to cross the declining productivity barrier there is a need
to herald a rainbow revolution by making a shift from wheat-rice cycle
to other cereals and pulses. Since wheat and rice coupled with other
crops are backed by minimum support prices (MSP) and input subsidy
(whether water, fertiliser or power) regime, there is a huge incentive
for the farmers in the irrigated region of Northwest India to grow these
crops.
These crops are not only input intensive, but also have negative
environmental consequences in the form of depleting water table and the
emission of green house gases. The policy response to this problem has
always been to disincentivise farmers from growing these crops by making
meagre enhancements in the MSP. However, this is not sufficient and has
to be complemented with huge investment in public infrastructure. For
example, due to the rice milling industry in Haryana and Punjab, there
is now a proper established market in place for different varieties of
rice that also incentivises farmers to cultivate paddy. Until such a
marketplace is not created for other cereals and pulses, farmers are
unlikely to make a shift to cereals and pulses.
The second major barrier is the scarcity of two major resources for
agriculture – cultivable land and water. While the cultivable land per
person is declining because of the fragmentation of farms due to rising
population, India also has much less per capita water as compared to
other leading agrarian countries. This problem exacerbated because India
has been exporting virtual water embedded in crops, which is marked by
its feature of non-replenishment. Once it is exported, it cannot be
recovered. According to a report
by Prashant Goswami and Shiv Narayan Nishad, in 2010, India exported
about 25 cu km of water embedded in its agriculture exports, which is
about 1% of the available water every year.
Given this scenario, it is time to make a shift to micro irrigation
so that the efficient and judicious use of scarce water resources can be
made. A study conducted by the National Mission for Sustainable
Agriculture on micro irrigation in 64 districts of 13 states (Andhra
Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Maharashtra,
Odisha, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Sikkim, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand),
reveals that there were significant reductions in the use of water and
fertiliser but the yield of crops increased up to 45% in wheat, 20% in
gram and 40% in soybean. However, high initial costs deter farmers to
adopt this technology. While big farmers can easily avail this
technology, the government should consider giving subsidies to small
farmers to boost the adoption of this technology.
Further, as A. Vaidyanathan notes,
due to populist politics charges, the prices of electricity and diesel
oil are far below the actual cost and hence there is over exploitation
of groundwater. While Vaidyanathan recommends water charging at actual
costs, this may be not possible in the present scenario because of the
sensitive nature of the issue and also because of its direct bearing on
farm productivity and farmers’ income.
Opening up of the markets
The National Agricultural Policy of 2000
stated that private sector participation will be promoted through
contract farming and land leasing arrangements to allow accelerated
technology transfer, capital inflow and assured market for crop
production. However, there has not been any significant participation by
the private sector in agriculture.
One of the major factors that has deterred private players from
entering the agricultural sector is the long pending reform of wholesale
markets, which are regulated by the Agriculture Produce Management
Committee (APMC) Act. The AMPC forces the farmers to sell their produce
in government-controlled marketing yards. While the objective of APMC
was to regulate markets and increase market yards, it has acted as a
major obstacle to private investment.
In 2003, however, the central government mooted a model APMC, but as
noted by the task force on agriculture constituted by NITI Aayog, this
has not been implemented by many states in east India. Therefore, to
increase private sector participation in agriculture, it is imperative
to remove these entry barriers.
Further, although the government has launched the National
Agriculture Market, which provides farmers an electronic medium to sell
their produce anywhere in India, it is yet to be seen whether farmers
can actually derive benefits from this platform.
R&D is the future
One of the major barriers to boosting farm productivity is the lack
of new technologies and major breakthroughs. While the National
Agriculture Research System played a major role in the green revolution,
in recent years there hasn’t been any major breakthrough in research.
One of the main reasons for this is the lack of financial resources.
If we compare the data of the percentage of agricultural GDP spending
on research and development in Asia, then the figures are revealing.
While India spent 31% of its agricultural GDP on research and
development in 2010, in the same year China spent almost double than
amount. Even our neighbour Bangladesh spent 38% of its agricultural GDP
on research and development in that year. As a result of this resource
crunch there has not been diffusion of new agricultural innovations and
practices that is critical for enhancing farm productivity.
Further, there is a lack of interest of students in pursuing research in agriculture. As the Economic Survey
notes, even in states where agriculture is relatively more important
(as measured by their share of agriculture in state GDP), agriculture
education is especially weak if measured by the number of students
enrolled in agricultural universities. There has also not been any major
contribution from the private sector towards research and development.
Government should thus woo private players by giving them incentives to
play a major role in agricultural research and development.
Many have cast doubts over the ambition of government to double the
income of farmers by 2022. As Ashok Gulati, former chairman of
Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices notes, doubling of real
incomes of farmers would be a “miracle of miracles”, as it would imply a compound growth rate of 12% per annum. Further, IndiaSpend is
also skeptical of government ambition as their analysis shows that
after adjusting for rising costs, an Indian farmer’s income effectively
rose only 5% per year over a decade (2003-2013). All this, in many ways,
paints a bleak picture of future of Indian agriculture. If we however
want to save the future of our farmers and permanently cure the ills of
Indian agriculture, major policy interventions have to be made at the
earliest.
-By
Vishavjeet Chaudhary is an assistant professor, and Gursharan Singh is an agriculturist and law student at O.P. Jindal Global University.
Courtesy : thewire.in
No comments:
Post a Comment