Our mistakes don’t kill us but persisting with them can be fatal.’ The government should end its naivety and introspect why farming seems to be imploding when nothing precipitous has happened, is so menacing. To drive a self-realization of sorts; in the pre-budget discussions on agriculture with the Union Minister for Finance, I suggested that the government order a forensic audit of its programs by their beneficiaries. The FM acknowledges the need, but given the bureaucratic obduracy down the decades, this critical audit is bound to get sidestepped. I have pondered for years as to why the FM should be meeting farmer representatives, especially when the budget allocations are made at the specific request of the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmer Welfare. Most of the proposed suggestions are either repeated annually or have no relevance to the budget. I hold no brief for the FM, but I must acknowledge her remarkable patience to engage with critics for hours in these “consultations with farmers and economists” where invariably representatives of agro-industry creep their way in.
It was heartening to learn that the Union Minister for Agriculture and Farmers Welfare met farmer representatives prior to the budget session; the possibly first union minister for agriculture to do so. It cannot not have dawned on the minister that the Indian agricultural research system has consistently failed to meet expectations in terms of closing the yield gap in crop productivity. Part of the blame is the lack of funding support with the tendency to spread the scarce resources thinly over all crop types/classes such that a critical inertia for transformative change is not achieved in any crop. The legacy of ticking all boxes is not tenable and never was. It is simply not worth the effort if we are not candid to ourselves.
To consider three nutritionally vital crops with the potential to double the yield and where India is excessively dependent on imports, we further proposed to the FM; that the government deploy ₹1,000 crores per year on gram/chickpea in pulses and in oilseeds; soyabean (Kharif) and on mustard (Rabi) for eight years. That is the expected time to achieve a research breakthrough. India cannot continue to invest as in the past and expect sharp improvements in agriculture productivity. Nearly 45% of Indians farmers grow only field crops (no horticulture or animal husbandry) and over a decade have witnessed near zero or negative growth rates in value of output. They are distraught and losing the will to live. While problems around marketing of horticulture produce (fruit and vegetables) that are perishable remain obstinately unresolved. Broadly speaking, even a five per cent increase/decrease in production can lead to an inverse 50 per cent fall/rise in farmgate prices. Cognizant of the problem, the government had tried to literally ram through reforms to un-regulate agricultural markets. Since then, the complexities around reforming the sector, governed by the states, by enacting new laws or councils have only increased. Equally so, uniform taxation in the agricultural markets across India (like the GST) will pave the way for improved governance, systems efficiency, mitigation of food inflation & price fluctuations. Lastly and more importantly is the faith that this will ignite entrepreneurial spirits to drive regulated competition to benefit farmers and consumers alike.
The market fees and other charges from horticulture produce collected by all the states vary and collectively amounted to ₹908 crores in 2018-19. As in a dark comedy, the Government of India does not even have the data on revenue collection of later years. Even on a very optimistic level, if the collections doubled over five years, it would not exceed ₹2,000 crores. Short-termism of financially constrained states would make them reluctant to forgo revenue and label such a nudge as an assault on the federal structure of the country. Therefore, Bharat Krishak Samaj proposed a smarter way forward; that the central government or it through the 16th Finance Commission offer to financially compensate the states for five years for the reduction in their fees and charges on horticulture produce to 0.1 per cent. The accruing value of the suggestion cannot be overestimated. A nominal fee should be charged for purely administrative reasons like collecting & mining real-time data. This is in line with the PM’s proclamation of ‘One Nation’ benefits of ‘one nation one tax’.
The stakes for India could hardly be higher, especially when past budget allocations regarding agriculture prove that strategic thinking on the use of land for meeting competing objectives is starkly missing. This has left the nation unprepared to face climate change or make Bharat Viksit. So, even as I am optimistic about India, as far as its farmers are concerned there are reasons to be a pessimist. Wiser people tell me that I should not get anxious because it is not something that I can change. As a farmer, my approach is try and fail, rather than not try at all.
– Ajay Vir Jakhar, Chairman, Bharat Krishak Samaj.
