Agriculture

Friday,March92012,4:33PM

SystemofRiceIntensification
SRIconceptsandpracticeshavecontinuedtoevolveastheyarebeingadaptedtorainfed(unirrigated)conditionsandwithtransplanting
beingsupersededbydirectseedingsometimes.ThecentralprinciplesofSRIaccordingtoCornellUniversityare:[2]
ricefieldsoilsshouldbekeptmoistratherthancontinuouslysaturated,minimizinganaerobicconditions,asthisimprovesrootgrowthand
supportsthegrowthanddiversityofaerobicsoilorganisms
riceplantsshouldbeplantedsinglyandspacedoptimallywidelytopermitmoregrowthofrootsandcanopyandtokeepallleaves
photosyntheticallyactiveand
riceseedlingsshouldbetransplantedwhenyoung,lessthan15daysoldwithjusttwoleaves,quickly,shallowandcarefully,toavoid
traumatorootsandtominimizetransplantshock.

LandMetrics
 1.GrossCroppedArea(GCA)=NetSownArea(NSA)+Areasownmorethanonce.
2.CroppingIntensity=GCA/NSA.
3.NetIrrigationIntensity=NSAIrrigated/NSA.
4.GrossIrrigationIntensity=GCAIrrigated/GCA.
5.OperationalLandHolding(OLH)=LandOwnedLandLeasedOut+LandLeasedIn.

ClassificationofFarmers

1.LandlessLabor:OLH=0hectares.
2.MarginalFarmer:OLH(0,1]hectares.
3.SmallFarmer:OLH(1,2]hectares.
4.MediumFarmer:OLH(2,10]hectares.
5.LargeFarmer:OLH>10hectares.

1.CommercializationofAgriculture
FactorsResponsible

1.utilitarians,theirfreetradepolicy,economiccolonializationofIndiaasitbecamearawmaterialsupplier.
2.CashbasedeconomyencouragedbycoupledwithhugeLRdemand.
3.Breakdown of selfsufficiency of villages. Indian economy became closely interlinked and also linked with
internationalmarkets.NeedtobalancetradeofChinaledtocultivationofopium.
4.Developmentofmeansoftransportlikerailways,Suezcanal.
5.Coercivepracticesfollowedbybackedbylegislations.capital.

PatternofCoA

1.Itwasacoerciveprocessandexploitative.
2.It involved plantations where land was owned by planter and labor was hired. It also involved indigo type
cultivationwhereacontractwassignedwiththepeasant.
3.Itinvolvedregionaldevelopmentonly.Onlysomepocketsweresuitableforsomecrops.
4.Thecropswerecultivatedkeepingneedsinmind.ThecultivationofIndigodeclinedafterthesyntheticdye
cameup,opiumgrewtill1900thendeclineasChinastoppedimportingopium.DuringUScivilwar,cultivation
ofcottonwaspumpedup.WheatexportbegantoincreasetoanditwasproducedinareasinMaharastra
despitenotbeingastaplecropintheregion.BengalricewasexportedtoChina,SEAsia.

Q.Discusstheprocessofforcedcommercializationofagricultureunderthecolonialrule.(2009,II,20)
Impact

1.Volatilitykilled.Widespreadpoverty.Coercion.griponIndiaincreased.
2.Famines,agriculturalindebtedness.
3.Revolts,growthofnationalism.

2.LandTenureSystem
PreSystem

1.Landwasownedbythetillersolongashepaidrevenue.Thezamindarwasonlyarevenuecollectorandhad
nopolice/judiciarypowers.
2.Land was not tradable mainly because (a) Consent of village community was needed and it generally didn't
come for village outsiders. (b) Pressure on land was not so much. (c) Social factors where association with
landwasconsideredamarkofrespect.

System

1.PSmadezamindartheLLandgavehimjudiciary/policepowers.Hecouldevictapeasant@willandoften
did so as pressure on land had increased substantially. So peasant didn't make any investment in land.
Zamindar also didn't make an investment as his zamindari rights could be withdrawn on nonpayment of
revenue.
2.RecklessRenting:Duetohigherpressureonlandandcombinedpowersinthehandofzamindar,hebeganto
extractmuchhigherLRoverandabovewhatwaspayable.
3.AbsenteeLLism:Itdevelopedanditledtofurtherexploitationofpeasantryashehadtopayhigherrentsto
feedallthemouthsintherevenuechain.
4.AgricultureIndebtedness:IncreasedduetohighLRdemand.Sincelandcouldn'tbepledgedassecurity(as
theownerwaszamindar),personaljewelryandevenbondedlaborwaspledged.Theinstitutionalcreditwas
virtuallynil.
5.~57%landwasunderPS,38%underryotwariand5%undermahalwarisystem.
6.tenantswereof3types(a)Occupancytenantswhohadsecurityoftenure,inheritablerightsandcouldclaim
compensationfromLLforanyimprovementonland.(b)Tenantsatwill,and(c)Subtenants.

3.LandReforms
Reforms

1.Zamindariabolitionacts:Allstatespassedantizamindariactsinastaggeredwayandinpaperzamindariwas
abolished.EveninRyotwariandMahalwariareas,moneylenderzamindarswereabolished.
2.Tenancyregulation:Toputaceilingonrentpayable,tomakesureevictionsdon'ttakeplaceexceptasperlaw
andintheeventofevictionforpersonalcultivation,atleastaminimumlandisleftwiththetenant.
3.LoanWaivers:Allprincipal/interestduestomoneylenderswerewaived
4.Landceiling:Therewere2roundsofreformslegislationsonein50sandotherinearly70s.
5.Consolidatingscatteredlandholdings:

Drawbacks
 1.Landceilingacts:Therewasoftenalongdelaybetweentheintroduction,passageandnotificationofanAct.
Thisdelaywasusedbyzamindarstoexploittheloopholesandevadethelaws.Theymadebenamitransfers,
transferedlandinthenamesofothermembersofahouseholds,firedtheirtenants(theactshadaprovision
that land will belong to the person cultivating it for x years). Further, these Acts often had complicated
provisions leading to inefficient implementation. By 1992 only 2 mha land which is < 2% was declared as
surplus and distributed among 4.76 mm peasants. This is amazing in a country where over 57% of the
cultivated land was under zamindars and 38% under ryotwari. In J&K 17.5% of total cultivated land was
distributedlikethis,inWBengal6.5%andinAssam5%.Inallotherstatesitwasnegligible.WestBengals
share of total surplus land distributed was almost 20% of the allIndia gure although the state accounts for
onlyabout3%ofIndiasland.Thelandceilingswereoftenfixedveryhigh.Nationalguidelinesproposed12,
18and30acresrespectivelyforirrigatedlandwith2crops,irrigatedlandwith1cropanddrylandrespectively.
Major states like UP had 18, 27 and 45 respectively, Bihar had 18, 25 and 45 respectively, Haryana,
MaharashtraandMPhad18,27and54respectively,Rajasthanhad18,27and175respectively,Punjabhad
17, 27 and 51. Only W Bengal and Kerala had it below the proposed limits. Even today bottom 62% land
holdingsaccountfor19%ofareaundercultivationwhilelargest6%accountfor37%area.
2.Tenancylaws:Verydifficulttoimplementduetofailureoflandceilingactsandconsequentpressureonland.
Decline in tenancy led to eviction of tenants and rise in landless labor as it contained a provision of self
cultivation of land.@ the eve of reform ~50% of the area was under tenancy which has come down to 15%
nowastenancieshavegoneunderground.Thismeansalossofaccessto35%tothetenants.MoreoverinUP
andWBengalsharecropperswerenotevenconsideredtobetenants!Therewerenoprovisionstocheckthe
voluntarysurrenderofland.1stFYPproposedaceilingof25%butPunjab,Haryana,TNandAP(variesfrom
3040%inthesestates)havenotobservedthislimit.Moreoveritisuseless.By1992ownershiprightshad
beenconferredupon11mmtenantsonsome6mhaoflandwhichis<4%ofcultivatedarea.Even97%ofthis
landwasconfinedtoAssam,Gujarat,HP,Karnataka,Kerala,MaharashtraandWBengal.ItsonlyinWBengal
and Kerala that peasants received some meaningful benefits. W Bengal and Kerala accounted for 12% and
23%respectively,of the total number of tenants conferred ownership rights (or protected rights) up to 2000,
despitebeinghometoonly7%and2.3%percentofIndiaspopulationrespectively.
3.Zamindari abolition laws: Their biggest flaw was they could obtain land for 'personal cultivation' which was
defined loosely to include personal supervision by the zamindar or any member of his family! They were
allowed to evict tenants to get land for personal cultivation till the ceiling and in the names of their family
membersbeyondtheceiling.
4.Consolidation of land holdings: On the national scale only 1/3rd of the consolidable area has been
consolidated.PunjabandHaryanahavebeenabletocompletethetask.Somestateshavenotevenbegun.A
common complaint is rich peasants get the best lands while small peasants get marginal lands. So a major
arearulewasproposedi.e.peasantwouldbegiventheholdingwheremajorityofhislandwasthere.Butit
furtherledtoevictionoftenantsasthelandlordwillfinditmoresuitedforpersonalcultivation.

IndirectEffectsofLandReforms

1.Reduction of absentee ownership: There are enough studies to indicate that the quantum of absentee
ownership in 70s was much less serious than in 50s. Absentee ownership had reduced much more in
unirrigated areas than in irrigated areas. The transfer of land under the forewarning impact of tenancy and
ceilinglegislationtotheresidentcultivatorswasonamuchlargerscaleindryareas.
2.Thegreedofthebiglandownerswaskeptincheck.
3.Collapseoffeudalstructure.
4.Itledtoincreaseinlandlesslaborasformertenantsweredrivenout.
5.Rich peasants preferred to avoid wage related disputes with the new labor and thus preferred more
mechanization.

21stCenturyLandReformsPC

1.Femaleempowerment.
2.Proownertenancylaws.

Ghatak(2007)Conclusions

1.Overall, land reforms seem to have had a negative effect on agricultural productivity. However there
isconsiderablevariationacrosstypesoflandreformsandacrossstates.
2.Decomposing by type of land reform, the main driver for this negative effect seems to be landceiling
legislation. In contrast, the effect of tenancy reform, averaged across all states, turns out to be insignicant.
However,inWestBengal,oneofthefewstateswhere tenancylawswereimplementedrigorously,the negative
relationshipbetweenlandreformandproductivityisabsent.
3.Finally,tenancyreformseemstohaveincreasedtheinequalityof operational holdings in India if we exclude
WestBengal,whichsuggeststhatinanticipationofthenewtenancylegislation,landlordscouldbeengagingin
evictionoftenantsinstates,otherthanWestBengal,wheretenancyreformhadbeenpoorlyimplemented.

BesleyBurgess(2000)Conclusions

1.Tenancyreformsarenegativelycorrelatedwithagricultureproductivitybuthelpinreducingpoverty.
2.Consolidationpositivelyaffectsproductivitybuthasnoimpactonpoverty.
3.Ceilinghavenosignificanteffectonproductivityorpoverty.
4.Intermediaryabolitionleadstopovertyreductionbuthasnoimpactonproductivity.
5.Landreformshavehadpositiveimpactonagriculturewages.

Q.EvaluatethetrackrecordoflandreforminIndiainitsvariousaspects,bringingoutinterstatedifferences.How
wouldyouinterpretthisrecord?(2009,II,60)
4.AgriculturalIssues
StructuralChangesinAgriculture
1.ContributiontoGDP,Employment,PCE:ContributionofagriculturetoGDP=13%in201112(downfrom30%
in1991and55%in195051).Contributionofagriculturetoemployment:52%in201112(downfrom70%in
195051 and 57% in 199091). Within the rural economy however, the share of nonagriculture income has
increased. Experience from BRICS shows that 1% growth in agriculture is 23x more effective in removing
poverty than a 1% growth in other sectors.Agriculture growth has remained well below GDP growth. From
195051 to 201112, its growth rate is 2.7%. From 195051 to 198081 the growth has been 2.3% and from
198081 to 201112 the rate has been 3.1%. In pre GR phase (195051 to 196768) agriculture growth was
2.5%vs3.7%overallGDPgrowth.Duringphase1and2ofGR(196768to198081)agriculturegrowthwas
2.4%vs3.5%overallGDPgrowth.Duringphase3(198081to199091)agriculturegrowthwas3.5%vs5.4%
overallGDPgrowth.Agriculturegrowthwas4.8%in8thPlan(overallGDP@5.7%),2.5%in9th(overallGDP
@6.6%),2.5%in10th(overallGDP@7.8%)and3.2%in11thPlan(overallGDP@7.8%).Notonlyisitless,
itisalsomorevolatile.Thecoefficientofvariationingrowthis1.6inpast1decadewhichis6xtheCVofGDP
growth.Agricultural heavyweights like Punjab, UP, W Bengal etc. have stagnated with 22.5% growth rates.
StateslikeGujarat,RajasthanandOdishashowmuchhighergrowthrates(78%)since200405.

2.
3.SizeofOperationalLandHoldings:in197071,itwas2.28ha,in199091itwas1.55haandin200506itwas
1.23ha.Proportionofmarginalholdingshasincreasedtoo.Currently,65%OHLaremarginal,18%small,16%
medium,1%large.In196061small+marginalhouseholdsaccountedfor52%oftheholdings.Thecombined
impactofloweringincomeandsmallerOHLsisadiversificationintoalliedactivitieslikehorticulture,livestock
andfisheries.In1951,theratioofcultivatinghouseholdstototalruralhouseholdswas75%whichhasdropped
drastically.Thedroppedoutsarenowlandlessagriculturallabor(>50%now)orinotheralliedactivities.One
of its causes is fragmentation of land which makes holding land economically unviable. The subdivision of
landholdings has led to a decline in average size of land holding and more cultivators become small and
marginalfarmers.Aseconomicandsocialforcespushmorepeopletowardsthelandlessspectrum,theirland
isbeingboughtbylargefarmerswhoarebecominglarger.
4.ChangingCroppingPatterns: All major coarse grains show a decline in area under cultivation except maize
where productivity has gone up as well. Area under pulses, fruits and vegetables and oilseeds has risen at
their cost. In terms of productivity, introduction of Bt cotton has improved productivity by 70% since its
introductionin2002.Oilseedsandcoarsecerealsareothercropstoshowgoodproductivityincrease.Pulses,
wheatandricehoweverhavestagnatedinproductivity.
5.ChangingSectoralComposition:DecliningrelativeincomesandsmallerOHLshaveforceddiversificationinto
livestock,horticultureandfisheries.Therelativeshareoflivestockintotalagricultureproductionhasgoneup
from20%in1991to25%in200910,horticulturefrom16%in1991to20%in200910andfisheriesfrom3%
to5%.Horticultureandlivestockisgoingtodrivetheagriculturegrowthinnextphasegiventhehighvalueof

the commodities. An interesting feature is that while

marginal farmers hold higher proportion of livestock, landless labor virtually don't own any livestock. Their
livestock was dependent on grazing in the commons and with the decline of the commons their livestock
 holdings declined as well. Studies indicate that the marginal impact of livestock growth on poverty is higher

thanthemarginalimpactofcropcultivation.
6.Integrationwiththeworld:Thereformsin1991ledtoliberalizationoftradeanddevaluationofexchangerate.
Asaresult,agriculturegotmoreintegratedwiththeworld.TradeinagriculturetoGDPagriculturehasgoneup
from 5% in 199091 to 13% in 201011. In 1970s it was 3%. But this is still low compared to overall trade's
shareof50%inoveralleconomy.Agricultureexportsasapartoftotalexportshasalsobeendecliningfrom
45% in 196061 to 31% in 198081 to 8% now. Indian exports were $24 bio whereas imports were $11 bio
givingasurplusof$13bio.Cotton,marineproducts,oilmeals,basmatiriceandsugararemainexports.Main
imports are vegetable oils, wood and pulses. Horticulture exports were $1 bio, spices $1.4 bio (Vietnam is
leaderinpepper,Guatemalaincardamom,Chinainchili).Thishasledtohighervolatilityinoutputpricesata
timewheninputpricesaresteadilyincreasing.
7.Changing demand patterns: With rising income, per capita demand for cereals is going down and that for
horticulture,livestockandpulsesisgoingup.Clearlytheyshouldbethethrustareasforfuturegrowth.
8.Growingroleofprivatesector:Shareofpublicinvestmentintotalagriculturalinvestmenthasgonedownfrom
50% in 1980s to 20% now. The Green revolution of 1960s was driven by public sector but this time the Bt
CottonandhybridMaizehavecomefromprivatesector.Privatesectorisincreasinglygoingtocontribute,so
rightkindofincentiveandregulatorystructureneedstobeframed.
9.Changesinproductivity:Studiesindicatethatwhileoutputperhectareincreasedby~60%between105051
to 197980, output per worker remained stagnant in the same period. Similarly while in 1980s the yields in
foodgrainsgrew@2.7%,thecorrespondinggrowthin90swasonly1.4%.Riceyieldswentupfrom1tphain
196061to1.7tphain199091to2.1tphain200910.Wheatyieldswentupfrom0.85tphain196061to2.3
tphain199091to2.8tphain200910.Pulsesyieldswentupfrom0.54tphain196061to0.58tphain1990
91to0.63tphain200910.Oilseedsyieldswentupfrom0.5tphain196061to0.8tphain199091to1tpha
in200910.

Statistics

1.Agriculturegrowth:2.5%in201112,7.0%in201011.In1980sitwas3%,in8thPlanitwas4.8%,in9thand
10thPlansitwas2.5%.11thPlanhadagrowthof3.2%.
2.FoodGrains:230MT,Rice:100MT,Wheat:90MT,Coarsecereals:40MT
3.Pulses:18MT.Areasown:target=17mha.
4.Cotton:35millionbales(of170kgeach),Jute:11mmbales(of180kgeach).
5.Oilseeds:30MT.
6.Sugarcane:350MT.
7.Fruits:95MT,Vegetables:135MT.

CroppingPattern

1.Rice:Productivityincreasedfrom1.9tphain200405to2.3tphain201112.Growthrate:1.36%in199091to
200001,1.47%from200001to201011
2.Wheat:Area:26mhain200405to29mhain201112.MSPincreasedfromRs.640perquintalin200405to
Rs.1285perquintalin201112.Productivityincreasedfrom2.6tphain200405to3tphain201112.Major
increaseinproductivityinHaryana,PunjabandUP.Yieldgrowthwas2.87%between199091to200001and
0.73%between200001to201011.
3.Coarsecereals:Area:29mhain200405to27mhain201112.Productivity:1.1tphain200405to1.6tphain
201112.UP,MaharashtraandKarnatakahaveshownmaximumincreaseinproductivity.
4.Pulses: Area: 23 mha in 200405 to 25 mha in 201112. Productivity: 0.58 tpha in 200405 to 0.63 tpha in
201112. MSP increased by 30%, budgetary allocation up 4x in this period for pulses. Accelerated Pulses
Production Programme (A3P) is a part of NFSM and it seeks to promote new production and protection
technologiesin1000clustersof1000haeach.Ithasaepestsurveillanceprogrammeaswelltocontrolpests
anddiseases.
5.Oilseeds:Area:27mhain200405to27mhain201112.Productivity:0.9tphain200405to1.2tphain2011
12.
6.Sugarcane:Area:4mhain200405to5mhain201112.Productivity:70tphain201112.
7.Cotton:Area:9mhain200405to12mhain201112.Productivity:0.3tphain200405to0.5tphain201112.

Investment
Trends&Composition

1.GCFinagriculturetototalGCFrangedbetween1114%in1980s,711%in1990sandinlastfewyearshas
been68%.Asa%ofGDP,itwas1.9%in199091butisnow3.3%.
2.AmoreimportantindicatorisGCFagriculture/GDPagriculture.Thisincreasedform7%in1stFYPto11%in
5th FYP. Since then it declined till 8th FYP to 9%. But from 1991 onwards, a thrust has been there by
government to increase GCF agriculture and today it stands @ 21%. This partly explains the increase in
growthin11thFYP.
3.Publicinvestment'sshareintotalagriculturalinvestmenthasgonedownfrom50%inearly1980sto30%in
199091to20%now.Privateinvestmentrespondsbettertoincentivestructuresinagricultureandhencethere
isaneedtobringreformsintheincentivestructureofagriculture.Publicinvestmentasa%ofagricultureGDP
was5% in 1980s andfellto1.8%in200001butroseagainto3.7%in200607.Butatthesametimepublic
investment is needed to develop basic infrastructure which can then crowd in private investment. Private
investment is mostly undertaken in farm level and small activities and can't replace public investment. No
canals are built via PPP! Moreover only few progressive states have benefitted from private investment and
thishasincreasedinterstatedisparities.
4.InvestmentinagricultureR&Disonly0.3%ofagricultureGDPasagainst0.7%indevelopingcountriesatlarge
and23%indevelopedcountries.IntheinitialyearsofGR,itincreasedbutthenstagnatedin1980sandhas
sincefallen.
 5.Agriculturalcredithasgoneupmanifoldsinpastdecade,butithasgotitsownissues.

BharatNirman(2005)

1.Toconnectalhabitationswith>1000population(500inhills/tribalareas)withallweatherroads.
2.Tocreate10mhaadditionalirrigationpotential.
3.Toconstruct6mmruralhouses.
4.Toprovidepotablewatertoallhabitations.
5.Toprovideelectricitytoallvillages.
6.Toconnectallvillageswithtelephone.

RIDF(1995)

1.ItsobjectivewastoprovidefundtothestategovernmentsandPSUstoenablethemtocompletedelayedrural
infrastructureprojects.
2.ButitsresourcesarecontributedbybankswhichmayfallshortoftheirPSLtargets.Buttheyfindthisabetter
wayoflendingthanlendingdirectlytothefarmerandstillbeabletomeetPSLtargetsandhencetheyhave
beendivertingfundstothis.SoRIDFisnotanyadditionalsourceoffunding.
3.StategovernmentshavebeengenerallyreluctanttoborrowfromRIDFasitsratesarehigh.Disbursementhas
beenonly60%sofar.

Q.Analyzetherecenttrendofgrosscapitalformationinagriculture.Hasit,doyouthink,beenresponsibleforthe
sluggishgrowthrateinagriculture?(2011,II,30)

Q."DecliningpublicexpenditureinagricultureislargelyresponsiblefordecelerationingrowthinthissectorinIndia."
Criticallyexaminethevalidityofthisstatement.(2010,II,20)
Irrigation
Trends&Composition

1.Nearly 80% of public investment and 50% of private investment goes into irrigation projects. As a result the
croppingintensityhasgoneupfrom118in197071to140in200809.
2.Butnotonlyisthereagapbetweenirrigationpotential(140mha)andirrigationpotentialcreated(110mha)but
alsobetweenirrigationpotentialcreatedandutilized(85mha).ThusGCAirrigatedhasincreasedfrom17%in
195051 to 45% in 201112. Irrigation utilized is measured on the basis of gross irrigated area and not net
irrigatedarea.Cultivablelandisreportedonthebasisofnetsownarea.
3.Further groundwater is a major source of irrigation which has been overexploited. Thus there is a need for
institutionalreforms,developingsmallerirrigationprojectsandrightincentivestructures.Onethingwhichcan
be useful is to separate agricultural and domestic phases in villages so as to provide more electricity to
domesticphases.
4.Smallandmarginalfarmersvslargefarmers:Areaunderirrigationformarginalfarmershasgoneupfrom40%
in198081to44%in199091and51%in200001.Forsmallfarmersitwas33%in198081to36%in1990
91to39%in200001.Forlargefarmersitwasonly16%in198081to22%in199091to31%in200001.
5.Interstatedisparities:Interstatedisparitiesinareaundersurfaceirrigation(asaproportionoftotalcultivated
area)areconsiderablylowerthandisparitiesintheareaundergroundwaterirrigation.Moreovertheproportion
ofareaundersurfaceirrigationhasprogressivelydeclinedovertheyears.Duetohigherdisparitiesinground
waterirrigationanditsrisingsharetheoverallirrigationareadisparitieshavebeenrisingovertheyears.UP
hashighestgrossirrigatedarea(utilized)of19mhafollowedbyPunjab(7.7mha)andRajasthan(7.3mha).
Punjab has highest irrigation intensity (gross irrigated area / net cultivable land area) of 183 followed by
Haryanaof148followedbyUPof98.

Challenges

1.Despitelargeinvestmentsthough,irrigatedareaservedbycanalshasnotincreasedsignificantlyinthepast
decade. A large number of major as well as medium projects have been going on for 3040 years without
completion whereas the normal gestation period is 15 to 20 years for major projects and 510 years for
mediumprojects.Therewasaspilloverof553projectsintothe11thFYPfrompreviousFYPsandmorethan
halfofthesewerestartedbyStategovernmentswithouttheapprovalofthePCandhencearenoteligiblefor
centralassistance.Severalhaverunintointerstatedisputes.AIBPwaslaunchedtofundstatescompletethe
incompleteprojects.
2.Gapbetweenpotentialcreatedandutilizedexistsinallstates.Onereasonforthisisthatirrigationpotentialis
calculated on the basis of the volume of water expected in the reservoir divided by a presumed depth of
irrigation required for a presumed cropping pattern. However, the total water available is often less than
assumedduetofaultyprojectdesigns,fastersiltationetc.Thereisalsoawidespreadtendencyforthosenear
theheadworkstoappropriatemuchlargeramountofwatershiftingtowaterintensivecropsleavinglesswater
for tailenders. All these developments are encouraged by lack of coordination across agencies and
departments, and the inadequate or complete absence of involvement of water users through Water User
Associations (WUAs). In places like Gujarat and AP where WUAs have been adequately empowered and
providedautonomytheyhavedemonstratedagreatsenseofownershipandtheresultshavebeenpositive.
3.Waterscarcitywillintensifyin future with increase in population and demand for food, and the current water
usepracticescannotbesustainedoverthelongrun.
4.Inefficient water use in irrigation is also leading to environmental degradation via water logging and induced
salinity.
5.Interstateinequalitieshaverisen.Whileinthedevelopedregionsofnorthandnorthwest~95%ofpotentialhasbeentapped,inNEonly25%
hasbeentapped.Ineasternandcentralregionsitis<50%.
6.Theirrigationefficiencyinthesystemsneedstobeupgradedfromthepresentlevelof 35%toabout60%in
thesurfacewatersystemandfrom65%to75%inthegroundwatersystem.Evenariseof5percentirrigation
efficiencycanincreasetheirrigationpotentialby1015millionha.
7.Newmicroirrigationtechnologiesincludedrip andtricklesystems,surfaceandsubsurfacedriptapes,micro
sprinklers,sprayers,microjets, spinners,rotors,bubblers,etc.Despitewidepromotion,onlyabout0.5million
 hacurrentlyareundermicroirrigation.

TheWayForward

1.Modern techniques such as microirrigation, watershed management, rainwater harvesting and groundwater
recharging.
2.Thepublicsectorhasbeenspendingfundstoincreasethenetirrigatedareawithoutcommensuratesuccess.
Thisindicatestheneedfordemandandsupplyorientedreformmeasures.Forthis,amajorexerciseinvolving
reforminwaterdemandmanagementandinthepricingofwaterandpowerareneeded.
3.Major investments in research and development that enhance water use efficiency will be required. R&D
shouldalsohappentowardsgrowingtherightqualityandtypeofagriculturalproduce.Extensionservicestake
thesetechnologiestothefarmersneedtobeencouraged.

Seeds
Trends&InstitutionalFramework

1.The introduction of Bt seeds in maize and cotton have increased their productivity tremendously. The
differencebetweenGreenrevolutionof60sandnowisthatwhileearlier,introductionofseedswasfrompublic
sector,thistimeitisprivatesectorcompanieswhicharedevelopingandsellingseeds.
2.Theorganizedsector(public+private)accountsfor15%ofseeddistribution,restisunorganized.Thusthere
isaneedtoprotectfarmers'rightsaswellastoincentivizeseeddevelopment.
3.TheIndianseedprogrammelargelyadherestoalimitedgenerationsystemforseedmultiplicationinaphased
manner.Thesystemrecognizesthreegenerations,namelybreeder,foundationandcertifiedseeds.

NationalPolicyforSeedDevelopment,2011

1.InordertoharmonizeNPSD,1988withtheNationalSeedPolicy,2002,theformer,has beenrevisedin2011
tostreamlinetheproceduresforimportofseedsandplantingmaterial.
2.As per the revised policy, now a small quantity of wheat or paddy seeds can be imported into the country
fortrialsunderICARoronsuchfarmswhichareaccreditedbytheICAR.Aftertrialandevaluationforonecrop
seasonandsatisfactoryresultstherein,theimportercanapplyforbulkimportofsuchseeds.
3.For coarse cereals, pulses and oilseeds, trial and evaluation can also be done on farms operated by the
importerprovidedtheyfollowtheprocedureandprotocoldeveloped by ICAR, and is under ICAR monitoring
andsupervision.

ProtectionofPlantVarietiesandFarmers'RightsAct,2001

1.TheActprovidesfortheestablishmentofasuigenerissystemfortheprotectionofplantvarietiesandthe
rightsoffarmersontheonehandandtoencouragethedevelopmentofnewvarietiesofplantsontheother.
2.Indianagricultureisdependentuponfarmerproducedseedofvarietiesthatarebothmaintainedandfurther
adaptedtotheirlocalgrowingconditionsbysmallscalefarmers.SoIndiawantedtoacknowledgetherightsof
farmers arising from their contribution to crop conservation and development and the sharing of their
knowledge on adaptive traits. It also wanted to encourage farmertofarmer exchange of new crop/plant
varieties.Soitevolvedasuigenerissystemofplantprotectionwhichallowsfarmerstoimproveandadaptthe
seedinordertomakeitmoresuccessfulinthelocalconditions.
3.TheActsetstherequirementsforplantprotectionasnovelty,distinctness,uniformityandstability.
4.Butthefarmerisentitledtosaveuse,sow,resow,exchange,shareorsellhisfarmproduceincludingseedofa
protectedvariety.HoweverheisunabletosellseedthathasisbrandedwiththeBreedersname.
5.The Act also contains provisions for "benefit sharing" whereby the local communities are acknowledged as
contributorsoflandracesandfarmervarietiesinthebreedingof"new"plantvarieties.
6.ItistheseextraprovisionsgrantingrightstobothbreedersandfarmerswhichmakestheIndiansystemasui
generis method of protection. China and Thailand are other examples of countries that do not implement a
UPOVstyleprotectionsystem.
7.ItcreatesaProtectionofPlantVarietiesandFarmersRightsAuthoritywhichregistersplantvarietiestoprotect
theplantbreeder'srights.

SeedsBill,2004

1.TheSeedsBill,2004aimstoregulatethequalityofseedssold,andreplacestheSeedsAct,1966.Allvarieties
of seeds for sale have to be registered. The seeds are required to meet certain prescribed minimum
standardsofgermination,physicalpurityandgeneticpurity.Transgenicvarietiesofseedscanberegistered
onlyaftertheapplicanthasobtainedclearanceundertheEnvironment(Protection)Act,1986.
2.The Bill exempts farmers from the requirement of compulsory registration. Farmers are allowed to sow,
exchangeorselltheirfarmseedsandplantingmaterialwithouthavingtoconformtotheprescribedminimum
limits.However,farmerscannotsellanyseedunderabrandname.
3.Ifaregisteredvarietyofseedfailstoperformtoexpectedstandards,thefarmercanclaimcompensationfrom
theproducerordealer.TheBillprovidesforsettingupacompensationcommitteethatshallhearanddecide
thesecases.ButtheBilldoesnotspecifywhetherthecommitteeswillbesetupatthenational,regional,state
or district level that decision would determine whether farmers can easily access the compensation
mechanism.

Challenges

1.There is a mismatch between the seed multiplication ratio from breeder seed to foundation seed and from
foundationseedtocertifiedseed,whichneedstobeaddressed.
2.Comprehensiveandauthentic databasesonseedproductionandtradeinIndiabypublicandprivatesectors
asrequiredundertheseedandplantvarietylawsneedtobebuiltup.Theseedchainandthenormsforquality
controlshouldbefollowedwithoutanycompromisesorshortcuts.
3.Forhorticulturecropswhichhavealonggestationperiod,itisimperativetoensurethatonlysuchvarietiesare
importedthataresuitedtoIndianconditions.
 4.In rainfed areas, wastage of seeds due to prolonged dry monsoon spells immediately after sowing is a very
common occurrence. In such a situation maintaining seed diversity is important from the point of view of
reducingrainfallrisks.Therehastobeanassuredavailabilityofasecondbatchofseedsforrepeatsowing.
Droughtresistantseedsneedtobedeveloped.
5.A number of transgenics particularly in cotton and vegetable crops, are sought to be introduced into the
country. The potential loss of production on account of non introduction of transgenics has to be carefully
balancedagainstthedangersthattransgenicsmayposetoecology.
6.Climatechangeconsiderationshavetobekeptinnewseeds.
7.Timely delivery to farmers of highyielding varieties requires big improvements in the system that connects
plantgermplasmcollections,plantbreedingandseeddelivery.Thusincreasedpublicsupportinthisregardis
essential.

Fertilizers
Trends&Composition

1.Fertilizerusehas gone up ~4x from 1991 (70 kgpha to 290 kgpha in 201112)butitstillremainsfarbehind
China (395 kgpha) and Egypt (388 kgpha). Currently India is an importer but it is expected to achieve self
sufficiency in N fertilizers by 2017. Focus is also on enhancing the use of Single Super Phosphate (SSP)
fertilizerwhichcoversbothforPandK.Thisfertilizerisnotimportedatall.TheNPKbalanceisdeteriorating.
Sothegovernmenthasdecidedtomovetoanutrientbasedsubsidyregime.
2.Small and marginal farmers vs large farmers: Marginal farmers' consumption increased from 55 kgpha in
198182to99kgphain199192to175kgphain200102.Largefarmershoweveronlyused27kgphain1980
81 to 54 kgpha in 199192 to 68 kgpha in 200102. In unirrigated area, marginal farmers used 24 kgpha in
198182,58kgphain199192and96kgphain200102.Largefarmershoweveronlyused9kgphain198182
to19kgphain199192to22kgphain200102.
3.Very high variability has however, been observed in fertilizer consumption among the states. While
consumptionis237kgphainPunjaband226kgphainAP,itis81kgphainMP,58kgphainOdisha,48kgpha
inRajasthanand<5kgphainsomeNEstates.
4.Urea:consumptionis30MT,productionis22MT,importsare8MT.Phosphorus(DAP+MOP)consumptionis
14MT,productionis4MT,importsare10MT.NPKconsumptionis11MT,productionis8MTandimportsare
3MT.

MicroandBioFertilizers

1.Recently Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985 has been revised to allow for customized fertilizers including those
fortifiedwithmicronutrientsandalsobiofertilizers.
2.Fivebiofertilizers(rhizobium,azotobacter, azospirillum,phosphatesolubilizingbacteriaandmycorrhizae)and
threeorganic fertilizers(citywaste compost, vermicompost and castor deoiled cake)havebeen included in
theFCOtofacilitatetheirus

FertilizerSubsidies

1.Overallcomposition: Fertilizers: ~50%, Power: ~17%, Irrigation: ~13%. Empirical studies show that marginal
reductioninpovertyandoutputelasticityfromsubsidyislessthanthatfrominvestment.Subsidiescrowdout
theinvestmentaswell.Theymayalsopromoteinefficientmethodslikedistorteduseoffertilizers,electricity.
Sotheyshouldbereplacedbyincreasedinvestment.
2.In1992,governmentfreedupP&Kfertilizers.Thisledtoasharpincreaseintheirpriceandadeteriorationin
the nutrient balance (from 4:2:1 recommended to 10:3:1 in 199697). Subsequently ad hoc subsidies were
givenonP&Kaswelltorestorenutrientbalance.Thenin2011,nutrientbasedsubsidyschemewasstarted
whichisapplicabletoP&Kfertilizers.Asaresultnutrientbalancehasbeenrestoredtorecommendedlevels.
3.Nutrientbasedsubsidymeansgovernmentfixingthesubsidyaccordingtothenutrientcontentofthefertilizer
andreimbursingtheproducerwhosellsatcost(whichisvariable)subsidy(whichisfixed)@aMRPwhichis
~50% of the cost. In addition to P & K, micro nutrients carry additional subsidies. Urea MRP is fixed by the
governmentandprivateproducersarenotreimbursed.Soprivateproductionisalossmakingventure.
4.In201112,$13.5biooffertilizerssubsidiesweregiven(ureagetting$6.5bioandP&Kgetting$7bio).MRPto
farmers covers ~50% of the cost. Budget estimate 201213 put the fertilizers subsidy bill @ $12 bio with a
reduction in subsidy on decontrolled (P & K) fertilizers (urea getting $6.5 bio and P&K getting $5.5 bio).
Subsidybillin201011was$12.5biowithureagetting$4bioandP&Kgetting$8bio.
5.ButasaresultofthesubsidyderegulationtheretailpricesofKandPfertilizershavegoneup~3x.Thereare
also doubts over whether the subsidy is reaching the farmers and hence the government has asked the
manufacturerstofurnishcostandotherdata.ItisarguedthatthePandKarealmostwhollyimportedbutstilla
riseof3xisnotjustifieddespiteINRdevaluation.$priceshaveinfactsoftenedinrecentmonths.Thispoints
tothedealerspocketingsubsidiesandprofits.

NewUreaInvestmentPolicy,2008(AbhijitSenCommitteeRecommendations)

1.Itwasbasedonimportparitypricewithprovisionoffloorandceilingfordeterminingtheproducerspriceof
ureaproducedfromnewinvestments.
2.Itfailedtoattractmuchinvestmentsduetolackofanytransparentgaspricepassthroughmechanism.Gas
pricesaccountfor80%oftheproductioncosts.

NewUreaInvestmentPolicy,2012

1.ItstargetistoattractinvestmentsworthRs35,000croretoincreasedomesticproductionby8MT.
2.Itassurestheinvestorsofa1220%posttaxreturnontheircapitalinvested.Toensurethisreturn,the
governmentwillcovertheentirecostofthenaturalgas.

PowerSubsidies
 1.Studies have found that state boards are able to recover only 10% of the cost of electricity supplied to
agriculture. Rajasthan + Gujarat + maharashtra account for 50% of the total power subsidies while the
southernstatesaccountfor25%.Thisispossiblybecausetheyaremoredependentongroundwater.
2.Farmers would prefer to pay an amount for uninterrupted power rather than having inadequate free power.
AnywaystheshortfallofpowerhastobecompensatedbydieselengineswhichcostRs.12perunit.
3.We need 'smart' subsidies subsidies which are better targeted, differential to keep local variations in mind
(rain fed vs irrigation, small farms vs large farms), better delivery vehicles (like debit input cards where the
farmerisallottedatotalamountandhecanchosethecompositionofsubsidieshimselfwhichwillalsostop
overuseofvitalresourceslikewater).

FarmMechanization
Trends&Composition

1.FarmmechanizationlevelinIndiaisbetween3040%invariousagricultureactivities.Empiricalstudiesshow
stateswithgreateravailabilityoffarmpowerhavehigherproductivity.
2.GreaterdegreeoffarmmechanizationisalsoincentivizedbyMGNREGS.
3.In197172,shareofmanualpower(labor+animals)was63%.In199192itwas27%.in200910itwas13%.
Powerusedperhahasgrownfrom0.4kWin197071to0.9kWin199192to1.7kWin200910(againlow
compared to China and Egypt). But growth rate of farm mechanization has been only 5% p.a. in last 2
decades.
4.Farmmechanizationhasbeenconfinedonlytoafewpeasantsandinalargeway.Coupledwiththefactthat
trendistowardssmallerOHLs,farmmechanizationinIndiamayhitawallunlessreformsareintroduced.
5.Asaresultofreformsandinstitutionalpush,easyavailabilityofformalfinancingandcapitalsubsidyespecially
ontractorspropelledgrowthinfarmmechanization.

FarmMechanizationandClimateChange

1.Climatechangehasnecessitatedaswitchingovertomachineassistedresourceconservationtechniquessuch
aszerotillage,raisedbedplanting,precisionfarming,driporsprinklerirrigation,etc.
2.Farm mechanizationhasnowbecomemorerelevantinmitigatingtheeffectofclimatechangeby readjusting
cropsowingschedules.Forexample,theclimatechangedrivenearlyonsetofsummersinthenorthernstates
hasoftenresultedinwheatyielddroppingby1.5quintalperhectarewitheveryoneweeksdelayinitsplanting
after midNovember. This loss can be averted by sowing wheat early, which is possible only if the previous
paddy crop is harvested mechanically and wheat is planted with zerotill seed drills that do not
requireploughingtheland.

Challenges

1.Structural issues like high procurement cost, adverse economies of scale, lower credit worthiness, etc. have
resultedinanautomaticexclusionofthemajorityofsmallandmarginal farmers in India from the benefit of
farm mechanization. As a result, farm mechanization has developed a stronger bias towards larger land
holdings(NSSO2005).
2.Mechanizingsmallandnoncontiguousgroupoflandsisagainsteconomiesofscaleespeciallyinoperations
likelandpreparationandharvesting.Withcontinuedshrinkageinaveragefarmsize,moreandmorefarmswill
fallintotheadversecategorytherebymakingindividualownershipofagriculturalmachineryprogressivelymore
uneconomical.
3.Moreover,farmmechanizationiscapitalintensiveandthusitremainsbeyondthereachofsmallandmarginal
farmers.Customhiringcentrescouldhavebeenanalternateoption.But,thesecentresneedaminimumscale
forefficientoperationastheactivityiscapitalintensive.Theyalsohavealongergestationperiodduetolower
asset utilization on account of the seasonal nature of agriculture demand. There is a limit to which hiring
centerscanprovideanalternativebecauseofuncertainclimateandlackofinstitutionalarrangements.
4.Higher risk due to uncertain demand and immature market has barred seasoned business entities from
enteringthissegment.Firstgenerationentrepreneurswillingtoestablishthesecentresfaceasignificantentry
barrieronaccountofnonavailabilityoffinancingeitherintheformofventurecapitalorinstitutionalloans.With
thelevelofNPAscontinuingtoremainsignificant,itisunlikelythattherisk perceptionoffinancialinstitutions
willchangeinthenearfuture.Asaresult,thereisvirtuallyacompletemarketfailureinthissegment.
5.Intensiveresearchonfarmmechanizationisalsonotadequateasitisaverycapitalintensiveactivity.

NationalMissiononAgriculturalMechanization(NMAM)

1.Increasingthereachoffarmmechanizationtosmallandmarginalfarmersandtotheregionswhereavailability
offarmpowerislower.
2.Offsetting adverse economies of scale and higher cost of ownership of high value farm equipments by
promotingCustomHiringCentresviaruralentrepreneurshipmodel.
3.Passing on the benefit of hitech, high value and hiproductive agricultural machinery to farmers through
creationofhubsforsuchfarmequipments.
4.Promoting farm mechanization by creating awareness among stakeholders through demonstration and
capacitybuildingactivitiesand
5.Ensuring quality control of newlydeveloped agricultural machinery through performance evaluation and
certificationatdesignatedtestingcentreslocatedalloverthecountry.
AgricultureLabor
Trends

1.Costofcultivationdatashowsthatlaboraccountsformorethan40%ofthetotalvariablecostofproductionin
mostcases.
2.In1881landlesslabornumberedonly7.5mm.In1921theynumbered21mmor17.4%ofthelaborforce.In
1971theywere27%ofthelaborforce.Morethan40%ofruralworkforceand25%oftotalworkforceworks
todayaswageearners.
3.Casualization of agriculture labor force: The proportion of labor in the agriculture labor force has been
constantlyrising(fromabout25%@independenceto40%in1991andhasstayedtheresince).Thisbecomes
 evenworseifweconsiderthedroppingshareofagricultureinGDP.
AgricultureWageImpactofNREGA(2009&2010)

1.AP:58%.
2.TamilNadu:54%.
3.Odisha:57%.
4.Bihar:47%.
5.UP:72%
6.Punjab:46%.
7.MP:72%.
8.Chattisgarh:72%.
9.Maharashtra:53%.
10.J&K:122%.
11.National:24%(allcumulative).

AgricultureWageStatistics

1.Longtermtrend:Studiesshowedthatbefore80s,realwageswerealmoststagnantandinmostcaseswere
belowminimumwages.Between1983and199394dailyrealwagesgrew@3.3%p.a.whilebetween1993
94 to 200405 they grew @ 2.3% p.a. only. Between 199900 to 200405 the rise was 0.6% only. The
inequalitiesbetweenmaleandfemalerateshasbeenrising.
2.During the period 200710, the average cumulative real farm wage rates increased by 16.0% at the all
India level. The growth was the fastest in Andhra Pradesh (42%) and Odisha (33%), Bihar (19%) and Uttar
Pradesh(20%).
3.RuralwagesinKeralawerethehighestinthecountryintherangeofRs.216305during200810,followedby
TamilNadu,AndhraPradeshandKarnatakainthatorderintheSouthernRegion.
4.In the Northern region, Haryana recorded the highest agricultural wages in the range of Rs.121182 during
200810 period followed by Punjab in the range of Rs 110162, and Rajasthan in the range of Rs.105
139.WestBengalandUttarPradeshfollowedinthatorder.
5.SInce mid 1970s inter regional agriculture wage disparities have been declining. This is because a relative
declineinthefoodgrainpriceshashadagreaterimpactonthepurchasingpowerofwageearnersinlower
wageareas.Moreoveragriculturelabormigration,mechanizationofagricultureinhighwageareas,alternate
povertyandunemploymentprogrammesetc.havehadtheirimpactaswell.
6.Duetotheabovefactorsthedisparitybetweenmaleandfemalewageratesisalsodeclining.Thisisbecause
the adoption of farm mechanization technologies in operations traditionally done by women has been low
(becausetheirdemandwashighlyseasonalandintenseoverafewdaysonly).

LandDeterioration
Features

1.Outof141mhaofcultivableland,100mhaisdegraded.Chemicaldegradationaccountsfor20%andwater
erosionfor70%ofthis.20%ofcultivableareaisexperiencingdecliningfertilityand2%waterlogging.3%of
cultivableareaisaffectedbysalinity.
2.Severe soil erosion is defined as 40 tonnes pha. Average soil erosion in India is 16 tonnes pha. Thus
watershedmanagementandsoilconservationprojectsareneeded.
3.Indiansoilsarecarbondeficientduetointensiveuselikeremovalofplantresidueforforage,removalofcrop
residue.
4.Global climate changes like rise in sea level, drop in ground water, decrease in soil carbon will lead to
additionalinfertilityofsoil.

Initiatives

1.UndertheRKVY,manystatelevelschemesforsoiltestingshavebeenlaunchedandinformationdisseminated
topeasants.

WaterManagement
RiverBasinLinkagePlan

1.It consists of 2 components (a) Himalayan Component and (b) Peninsular Component. Bulk of water
movementwillbeinpeninsularcomponent(80%of175bcmwater).
2.TheHimalayanComponentincludesmainlymovementofwaterfromGangabasintowesternIndia.Waterof
Brahmaputra can't be tapped because it is at a lower elevation relative to Ganga basin and Indus can't be
touchedduetointernationaltreaties.

WatershedManagementProjects

1.India'sutilizablewateris1100bcmoutof1900bcmofannualavailability.Outofthiscurrentdemandis650
bcmandprojecteddemandfor2025is800bcm.Duetocompetitionfromothersectors,wateravailabilityfor
agriculturewilldecrease.India'sexistingstoragecapacityis250bcmwhichis~13%ofannualavailability.50
bcmstorageprojectsareunderconsideration.220bcmofgroundwaterisusedforagriculturewhile20bcmfor
domesticandindustrialuse.
2.In2006,ParthasarathyCommitteesubmitteditsreportinwhichitsaidirrigatedagricultureappearstobehitting
aplateauanddryfarmingproductivityneedstobedevelopedviawatershedmanagementprojects.Thusthe
IntegratedWatershedManagementProgrammewasmodifiedandstresswaslaidonmicroprojects.Atarget
for25mhawassetin11thPlanwhichhaslargelybeenachieved.

DairySector

1.Indiaisthelargestmilkproducingnation(120MT)vs54MTin199091andpercapitaavailabilityis275g/day
vs175g/dayin199091.Demandformilkwillbe150MTby2017and180MTby2022.Somilkproduction
 needstoincreaseby6MTperannumwhilecurrentgrowthrateofproductionis4MTperannum.
2.Between198081to198990,milkproductionwasgrowing@5.6%p.a.whileafter1990ithasgrown@4.2%
p.a.only.

Challenges

1.Smallherdsizeandpoorproductivity.Poorartificialinseminationnetwork.Lowqualitybulls.
2.Neglect compared to crop production, inadequate support facilities like credit, government attention.
Encroachmentonpasturelands.
3.Pooraccesstoorganizedmarketsdeprivesfarmersofproperprice.
4.Poorveterinarysetup.

AssistancetoCooperatives

1.Thecentralsectorschemestartedin19992000,aimsatrevitalizingthesickdairy cooperative unions at the

districtlevelandcooperativefederationsattheStatelevel.TherehabilitationplanispreparedbytheNational
DairyDevelopmentBoard(NDDB)in consultationwiththeconcernedStateDairyFederationandDistrictMilk
Union.Thishassucceededinpullingoutmanyunionsfromperpetuallosses.

NationalDairyPlan

1.Phase 1: It focuses nutritional level in fodder, enrichment of straw, availability of loans for dairy farmers,
welfare schemes for dairy farmers, support to women cooperative dairy plants and automation. It was
launched in Anand and invests $450 mm and covers 14 states. It seeks to increase productivity of milch
animalsandprovidebetteraccessoforganizedmilkprocessingsectortodairyfarmers.

Fisheries(BlueRevolution)

1.Indiancoastlineis8100km,EEZ:2mmsq.km(westcoast:0.85mm,eastcoast:0.55mm,A&Nislands:0.6
mm),continentalshelf:0.5mmsq.km.Fisheriescontribute5%ofagriGDPand0.6%oftotalGDP.
2.WBengal(1.5MT)>AP(1MT)>GujaratandKerala(0.7MTeach).
3.In2010,aquacultureproduction:5MT(3rdhighestintheworld),marineproduction:3MT.Perfishermancatch
=2Tperannum.Fisheriesaccountfor~5%ofagricultureproduce.Exportsare$2.5bioandgrowing@10%
p.a.Growthrateofthesectorfrom198081to198990was4.4%whichhassloweddownto3.8%from1990
91.

Challenges

1.Shortageofqualityandhealthyfishseedsandothercriticalinputs.
2.Lackofresourcespecificfishingvesselsandreliableresourceandupdateddata.
3.Inadequateawarenessaboutnutritionalandeconomicbenefitsoffish.
4.Inadequateextensionstaffforfisheriesandtrainingforfishersandfisheriespersonnel.
5.Absenceofstandardizationandbrandingoffishproducts.

TheWayForward

1.Schemes of integrated approach for enhancing inland fish production and productivity with forward and
backwardlinkages.
2.Largescaleadoptionofculturebasedcapturefisheriesandcagecultureinreservoirsandlargerwaterbodies
aretobetakenup.
3.Sustainable exploitation of marine fishery resources especially deep sea resources and enhancement of
marinefishproductionthroughseafarming,mariculture.

Meat&Poultry

1.Eggproductionwasgrowing@8%between198081to198990buthassloweddownto6%sincethen.Total
eggproductionwas61bioin201011.
2.Meatproductionwas5MTin201112,woolproductionisstagnantat42millionkglevelsince199091.

Challenges

1.Maizeavailabilityandcostsinceitisthelargestcosthead.
2.Lackofmarketingintelligence.
3.Lackofveterinarynetwork.
4.Lowskilledmanpowerandlackofadoptionofmodernmethods.

MeasuresTaken

1.Onetimeassistanceisprovidedtopoultryfarms,BPLfamiliesaregivensupporttostartpoultryfarms.
2.NABARDisfinancingapoultryventurecapitalfund.
Fodder
Challenges

1.Amajorityofthegrazinglandshaveeitherbeendegradedorencroachedupon restrictingtheiravailabilityfor
livestockgrazing.
2.Duetoincreasingpressureonlandforgrowingfoodgrains,oilseeds,andpulses,adequateattentionhasnot
beengiventotheproductionoffoddercrops.
3.Diversifieduseofagricultureresidueslikepaperindustry,packaging,etc.wideningthegapbetweenthesupply
anddemandforfodder.
 4.Currentproductionofimprovedfodderseedinthecountryisabout40KTasagainsttherequirementof550
KTtobecultivatedon11mhaarea.

TheWayForward

1.Areliabledatabaseisrequiredforassistinginrealisticplanning.
2.The forest department can play a major role in augmenting fodder production in the country. The degraded
forest areas, mostly under the Joint Forest Management Committees (JFMCs), can be used for assisting
growthofindigenousfoddervarietiesofgrasses,legumes.
3.Productionofseedsofhighyieldingfoddervarietiesneedstobeincreased.Highyieldingfoddervarietiesneed
tobeintroducedthroughoutthecountry,insteadofdualpurposevarieties.
4.Firstandforemost requirement is to enhance area under fodder, whichispossiblebydevelopingcommons.
Improving productivity and coverage of coarse grains and dual purpose crops in rainfed areas is the next
priority. Since the present availability of seeds of high yielding fodder varieties is severely limited, the next
priorityistopromotelargescaleproductionofhighyieldingfodderseedswiththehelpofseedgrowersand
dairyfarmers.Wealsoneedtodoalotoneffectivepostharvestmanagementinterventionssoastoreduce
thewastageofcropresiduesincludingitsenrichmentinquality.

Horticulture

1.From200102,thelandundercultivationhasgoneupfrom16mhato22mhaandproductivityfrom9tonnes
phato11.5tonnespha.
2.TheNationalHorticultureMissionfollowsaclusterapproachandprovidesendtoendsolutions.

Spices

1.Governmenthasestablished2spiceparksinmajorspicegrowingregions(MPandKerala)forpostharvest
processingviscolorsorting,cleaning,packaging,grindingetc.

Debate:Aretenantcultivatorsasefficientasownercultivators?
(a)No

1.Investment Argument: A sharecropper tenant would be unlikely to invest in the land because (a) he would
havetosharethebenefitswiththelandlord.Similarlylandlordsarealsounwillingtoinvestbecausethetenant
will free ride in this case. (b) his tenancy tenure is not fixed and he may be evicted in the next year itself.
Reason(a)canbeovercomeifthereisanagreementonjointsharingofcostsaswell.Butreason(b)remains.
AndthisismadeevenworseduetoIndianlawswhichfavortenantandhencemakeslandlordunwillingtosign
longtermleaseagreements.Thusthereisanurgentneedtoreformtenancylaws.
2.Agricultural Technology Argument: In primitive times, the technology wasn't bent in favor of many fixed
investments and labor was the key factor. So tenancy survived. Under the new technology, the role of fixed
capitalisincreasing.Sothiswilldefinitelybendthebalanceagainsttenancy.

(b)Yes

1.PoolingArgument:Intenancylands,theskillsandknowledgeofboththelandlordandthetenantareapplied
andhenceproductionbetter.Wherecostsharingisagreedto,thecapitalavailableishigheratleastworking
capitalforsureandfixedcapitaltosomeextent.
2.Agricultural Technology Argument: One way out is equipment being owned by landlord and cost shared or
rented to tenant.Another way out is the existence of large rent market for agriculture equipment. This way
fixedcapitalcanbepaidforlikeworkingcapital.

Debate:Aresmallfarmerslessproductivethanlargefarmers?

1.As we can see China has a lower farm size yet the productivity is double that of India. This is a strong
argument in favor of small land holdings. Agriculture growth rate has been higher in China. Coupled with
higher productivities they have led to a much sharper decline in poverty indicating that development in
agricultureismoreeffectiveinreducingpoverty.
1.Productivity per ha: NSSO data conclusively shows that the productivity per hectare decreases with the
increase in size of land holding. The productivity per hectare decreases from Rs. 25K for farm sizes < 0.4
hectare,Rs.19Kforfarmsizesbetween0.4hato1ha,Rs.17Kforfarmsizesbetween1hato2hatoRs.8K
forfarmsizes>10ha(Source:NSSO59thround).Thereasonsarenottoofartoseek.
2.Irrigation:Areaunderirrigationformarginalfarmershasgoneupfrom40%in198081to44%in199091and
51% in 200001. For small farmers it was 33% in 198081 to 36% in 199091 to 39% in 200001. For large
farmersitwasonly16%in198081to22%in199091to31%in200001.(Source:AgricultureCensus)
3.Fertilizer Consumption: Marginal farmers' consumption increased from 55 kgpha in 198182 to 99 kgpha in
199192to175kgphain200102.Largefarmershoweveronlyused27kgphain198081to54kgphain1991
92to68kgphain200102.Inunirrigatedarea,marginalfarmersused24kgphain198182,58kgphain1991
92and96kgphain200102.Largefarmershoweveronlyused9kgphain198182to19kgphain199192to
22kgphain200102.
4.HYVseeds:In200102,72%ofmarginalfarmersusedHYV,68%ofsmallfarmersusedHYVwhileonly47%
oflargefarmersusedHYV.
5.Croppingintensity:Itwas139formarginalfarmers,128forsmallfarmerswhileonly121forlargefarmersin
200102.
 1.CapitalIntensityArgument:Largefarmersareabletoemploymorecapital,hencemoreproductive.
2.IntensiveLaborArgument:Smallfarmersareabletoworkharder,hencemoreefficient.
3.Empirical Studies: They indicate productivity is size independent. Factors that impact productivity are easy
accesstomoderninputs,presenceofsupportinfrastructure,technologyandmarketingsystems.

Debate:HaveintersectoralTermsofTradeimprovedforagriculture?

1.Inflationdatasuggeststhatfoodinflationhasbeenhigherthanthatofmanufacturedgoodsinflation.
2.Butthisisfaultybecauseitdoesn'tcaptureallgoodsandservicesconsumedbyagriculture.
3.Economistsarguethatincometermsoftradearemorerelevant.

AgriculturalReforms
Q. India urgently needs yet another green revolution by infusing modern technologies like ICT and space
technologies and strategic management technologies and strategic management techniques to come up with
demandsidepressuresresultinginpersistentfoodinflationintheeconomy.Doyouagree?(2011,II,30)

InstitutionalReforms
(a)TenancyReforms

1.Currenttenancylawsimpedemodernizationofagriculture.Thenumberofeconomicallyunviablelandholdings
is increasing. But the marginal farmers have to stick to it and can't lease it out because of protenant
legislations.
2.Similarly corporate houses need to get into agriculture, but they can't because of archaic legislations on
tenancy.
3.Femaleempowerment.

(b)MarketingReforms

1.India'sfoodsupplychainishighlyineffectiveandold.Thereareanumberofintermediarieswhoaddlittlevalue
andexploitthepeasantsandconsumers.Theycontrolthemandisandareopposedtomarketingreforms.
2.Peasants get only a fraction of final value. Wastage is 3540%. MSPs are ineffective in most states due to
inadequate capacity of FCI to procure grains as well as corruption in mandis. Storage schemes are being
pursued.APPPschemewillcreate15MTofstoragewhilethebudget201213announcedadditionalstorage
creation of 2 MT. Additional $1 bio is allocated under Rural Infrastructure Development Fund to storage
creation.FCIhasacurrentstoragecapacityof64MT.

(c)InstitutionalCreditReforms

1.Agriculturalcreditneedstobegiveninthenameofthetiller,notthelandowner.

TechnologicalReforms

1.NASlaidstressonHYVseeds,fertilizersandirrigation.
2.MilkRevolution.
3.HorticultureRevolution.

GreenRevolution&CapitalFormationinAgriculture

Chand,Parappurathu(2012)
(a)TrendsinAgricultureGrowth

1.Theaboveanalysissuggeststhatthedecadebeforethegreenrevolutionwascharacterizedbyasteepdecline
ingrowthinGDPagriculture,withgrowthratesplummetingfromcloseto3%inthedecadeending(DE)1960
61tolessthan1%intheDE196869.
2.Thesubsequentperiodwitnessedaturnaroundingrowthwithgrowthratesmovingintherangeof2%to3%
forasustainedperiodofnearlythreedecades,thoughwithoccasionalslumps.
3.Adecelerationofgrowthcameinthelatterhalfofthe1990s,followedbyaquicknutshell,thegrowthseries
clearly establishes a steady increase in the growth rate for three decades after the advent of the green
revolution,followedbyagradualtaperingoffanddeclineafterthemid1990s,whichlastedforadecade.
4.ThiswassucceededbyanunambiguousturnaroundintheyearscoincidingwiththeEleventhFiveYearPlan
(200712).

(b)TrendsinCompositionofAgricultureGrowth

1.Variousphasescanbebrokendowninto(a)Pregreenrevolutionperiod(PGR).(b)Earlygreenrevolution
period(EGR).(c)Periodofwidertechnologydissemination(WTD).(d)Periodofdiversication(DIV).(e)Post
reformperiod(PR).(f)Periodofrecovery(REC)

1.Totalxedcapitalformationinagriculturemovedupwardsfromthemid1960sonwardswhenbothgovernment
andprivatespendingincreasedwiththecommencementofthegreenrevolution.
2.Intheinitialyearsofthisphase,itwasprivatecapitalformationthatreceivedarealimpetus.However,public
investmentpickedupinthemid1970s.
3.TheshareofpubliccapitalformationinGDPagricultureremainedintherangeof3%to4%throughoutthe
1970s,butstarteddippingfromthemid1980s,fallingbelow2%in199697andreachingatroughat1.87%in
200001.
4.Aswithpublicinvestment,privateinvestmentalsoexperiencedadipintheearly1990s.Bothdeclinednotonly
intermsofshareinGDPbutalsoinabsolutetermsduringthisperiod.
5.This led to a perceptible slowdown in agricultural growth, It also supports the assumption that a part of the
decitinpublicinvestmentwastranslatedintoreducedavailability/useofinputsandtherebycontributedtoa
decelerationinoutputgrowth.
6.A plough back in investment during the middle of the rst decade of this century reversed the consumption
patternofprimaryinputs,asevidentfromasubstantialgrowthincertiedseeddistribution(22.93%),renewed
consumption of fertilizers (6.95%) and an increase in area under irrigation (2.18% growth in gross irrigated
area).
 1.InitiallyIndiaimportedfoodgrainsfromUSunderPL480program.Butthesegrainshadstringsattached,so
Indiasoughtfoodgrainselfsufficiency.
2.Earlieragriculturalreformswerereliedupontobringchange.ButtheirimplementationfailedandhenceNew
Agricultural Strategy was adopted to increase food grain production. NAS stressed on technological up
gradation as compared to agrireforms. Stress was laid on fertilizers, irrigation, HYV seeds. For better
adoption,creditwasextendedtocreditworthyfarmers.

Phase1:196672

1.Beforetheintroductionofnewseeds,CACPandFCIweresetup.Then18Ktonsofnewwheatseedswere
imported and distributed in irrigated areas of Punjab, haryana and UP. This was supported by provision of
fertilizers,power,waterandcredit@subsidizedrates.
2.Theeffectwasanincreaseinfoodgrainoutputfrom75MTin196667to105MTin197172andIndiabecame
selfsufficientinfood.
3.GR created a pool of high caste farmers who reaped the benefits and increased their dominance in village
affairsaswell.Soontheygainedpoliticalvoiceandorganizedthemselvestopressfortheirinterests(demand
moresubsidiesetc.).

Phase2:197380

1.Initial debacle: Due to hoarding etc. government decided to take over the wholesale trade of wheat which
provedtobeadisaster.Thereweresuccessivedroughtsaswellandasacombinedeffectwheatproduction
actuallydeclined.Indiahadtoimportfoodgrainsagaininearly70s.
2.Increasingimportanceofsubsidies:Therewastheoilshockaswell.Governmentincreasedfertilizersubsidy
soastopreventariseinthepricesoffertilizers.Retentionpriceschemeinureawasintroduced.Nonfertilizer
subsidybilltooincreasedfrom0.5%ofagricultureGDPin1973to4%in1980.Fertilizersubsidieswere0.4%
in1980.Thiswas1.5%oftotalGDP.
3.Increasinginvestmentingroundwaterirrigationandhigherpowersubsidies:Itssharerosefrom0.5%in1960
to 20% in 1975. This was on account of private investment in tube wells. This led to an increase in power
subsidieswhichroseto~45%oftotalagriculturesubsidiesinearly1980s.
4.Higherproductivity:Theproductionoffoodgrainsinthedecadeincreased@3.1%p.a.andtheyields@2.5%
p.a.

RegionwiseGrowthin 196580 19801990 19902005 Overall

AgricultureGSDP
AllIndia 2.2% 3.4% 1.7% 2.4%
NorthernRegion 3.4% 3.5% 1.6% 2.8%
EasternRegion 1.3% 3.6% 1% 1.8%
CentralRegion 2.1% 3.3% 3.2% 2.7%
SouthernRegion 1.8% 3.4% 0.5% 1.8%

Phase3:198190

1.Spreadandstagnation:ItspreadeastwardsintoWBengalandBiharwhichshowedanincreaseinyieldsof
rice@5%and3.7%respectivelyin80s.Butintheoriginalandotherareastheyieldsstagnatedresultingina
yieldslowdowninbothwheatandrice.
2.Increaseininputsubsidies:Withtheslowdowninyields,inputsubsidieswerefurtherincreasedtomaintainthe
production.From4.4%ofagricultureGDPin1980stheyroseto7.2%in1991andhasstayedtheresince.This
was2%oftotalGDPin1990.
3.Adverse impact of government policies: Despite no direct taxes on agriculture and explicit subsidies, the
overallenvironmentledtoadeteriorationinToTforagriculture.Thiswasduetohighindirecttaxes,favorable
termsandhighprotectionaccordedtoindustryandalsoantiexportbiastowardsagriculture.
4.Investment in R&D: Investment in agriculture R&D is only 0.3% of agriculture GDP as against 0.7% in
developingcountriesatlargeand23%indevelopedcountries.IntheinitialyearsofGR,itincreasedbutthen
stagnatedin1980sandhassincefallen.

Phase4:19912005

1.ImprovingToT: Lowering of protection for industries led to an improvement in ToT for agriculture from 0.9 in
1991 to 1.2 in 2000 (Gulati and Fan, 2008). This increased the profitability of the sector and also increased
investment.Butstillthepoliciesaremostlyinwardlookingandrestrictexports.Butbetween1999to2004the
ToTdeclinedmainlyastheIndianpricesbecamemorealignedtointernationalpriceswhichwerefalling.
2.Diversificationinconsumption:Duetohigherincomes.
 3.Slowdown in productivity growth: Despite this there was a slowdown in the yield growth in foodgrains from
2.7%in1980sto1.4%in1990s.Stagnationinpublicinvestmentisbelievedtobeanimportantfactorforthis.
4.Rainfedvsirrigatedareas:Theslowdownofagricultureproductiongrowthinrainfedareaswashigherthanin
irrigatedareas.ForexampleinPunjabwhereonly3%ofcultivatedareaisrainfedtheagricultureGDPgrowth
fellfrom4%inthe198485:199596periodto2.2%in199596:200405period.InHaryanawhere17%of
cultivatedareaisrainfedtheagricultureGDPgrowthfellfrom4.6%inthe198485:199596periodto2%in
199596:200405period.InUPwhere32%ofcultivatedareaisrainfedtheagricultureGDPgrowthfellfrom
2.8%inthe198485:199596periodto1.9%in199596:200405period.ButinTNwhere50%ofcultivated
areaisrainfedtheagricultureGDPgrowthfellfrom5%inthe198485:199596periodto1.4%in199596:
200405 period. Similarly in Gujarat where 65% of cultivated area is rainfed the agriculture GDP growth fell
from5.1%inthe198485:199596periodto0.5%in199596:200405period.InRajasthanwhere70%of
cultivatedareaisrainfedtheagricultureGDPgrowthfellfrom5.5%inthe198485:199596periodto0.3%in
199596 : 200405 period. Similarly in Maharashtra where 83% of cultivated area is rainfed the agriculture
GDPgrowthfellfrom6.7%inthe198485:199596periodto0.1%in199596:200405period.
5.Smallandmarginalfarmersadoptingnewinputsatahigherratethanlargefarmers:Areaunderirrigationfor
marginalfarmershasgoneupfrom40%in198081to44%in199091and51%in200001.Forsmallfarmers
itwas33%in198081to36%in199091to39%in200001.Forlargefarmersitwasonly16%in198081to
22%in199091to31%in200001.Marginalfarmers'consumptionincreasedfrom55kgphain198182to99
kgpha in 199192 to 175 kgpha in 200102. Large farmers however only used 27 kgpha in 198081 to 54
kgphain199192to68kgphain200102.Inunirrigatedarea,marginalfarmersused24kgphain198182,58
kgphain199192and96kgphain200102.Largefarmershoweveronlyused9kgphain198182to19kgpha
in 199192 to 22 kgpha in 200102. In 200102, 72% of marginal farmers used HYV, 68% of small farmers
usedHYVwhileonly47%oflargefarmersusedHYV.In199697,59%ofmarginalfarmersusedHYV,55%of
smallfarmersusedHYVwhileonly42%oflargefarmersusedHYV.Itwas139formarginalfarmers,128for
smallfarmerswhileonly121forlargefarmersin200102.Thesamefigurewas134formarginal,128forsmall
and116forlargein198182.

Impact

1.Needforpostharvestmanagement:Thenewseedshaveshortermaturingperiod.Thusthefarmerscando
multi cropping. But they also need better storage and post harvest facilities. Multi cropping potential was
effectivelyalandsavingoneandhenceitmadethenewseedsverypopular.
2.Increasedinputs:The new seeds convert more nutrients into the grain. Thus they need more fertilizers and
hencemorewater.Itwasthoughtthatduetohighinputcosts,speciallyofdiggingwellsindryareastheiruse
willberestrictedbythelargefarmersandtheywillincreaseinequality.Butempiricalstudiesshowthatin2001
02inunirrigatedland53%oflandsmallandmarginalfarmersusedHYVseedswhileonly30%oflandunder
largefarmersusedthem.Thecorrespondingfiguresfor199697were37%and25%respectively.Inirrigated
land,88%ofsmallandmarginallandareawasunderHYVin200102while78%oflarge.Thefigureswere
79%and77%respectivelyin199697.
3.Distortioninfarmecology:Sincetheywereheavilydependentonuseoffertilizersandwateratechnologically
optimum mix was needed. But economic signals may be distorted and may not reflect the technological
optimum.Thismaydegradethefarmecology.
4.Declining use of manual power and increase in farm mechanization: The uneven agricultural growth is also
responsibleforit.Areaswithhighlaborsurplussawalargerdeclineinagricultureoutputwhileareaswithlow
laborsurplussawalowerdeclineintheoutput.Thoughlabormigrationhappenedbutthisalsoincreasedthe
farm mechanization. But overall it led to the fall in employment elasticity of agriculture. In many places now
newcostsharingmodelsbetweenthetenantandlandlordhavecomeup.
5.Moreequity:Therelativedeclineoffoodgrainpricesaccruesmorebenefitstolowersegment.Ithasalsoled
tofoodsecuritydespiteloweringemploymentelasticityofthesector.Moreoverthebenefitsofnewtechnology
haveaccruedmoretosmallandmarginalfarmers.
6.Environmental degradation and GR: In India more than the harm done by fertilizers and pesticides it is the
degradation and deforestation of marginal and common land which causes environmental problem. GR has
reduced the pressure on land and empirical studies suggest that deforestation is higher in areas where
penetrationofnewtechnologyislow.
7.Increasedcommercializationofagriculture.Increasedlinkageswithindustry.
8.Degradationofsoil,environmentalimpacts.Freeoil/electricity.

Q."Thesuccessofgreenrevolutionshowstheimportanceofsateinagrariantransformation."Comment.(2009,II,
20)
FarmSuicides

1.Maharastra,MPandAPaccountforhighestnumberoffarmsuicides.
2.Factors increasing suicide likelihood are over dependence on cash crops since their prices are much more
volatileandareoftenriggedatgloballevel.Cashcropsalsoinvolvehigherproductioncosts.
3.OnewaytoreducethesuicidesistoincreaseMSPandmakingiteffective.
4.Governmentwillprovide6monthloanstofarmersunderISSforpostharveststorage.Storageschemesare
beingpursued.APPPschemewillcreate15MTofstoragewhilethebudget201213announcedadditional
storage creation of 2 MT. Additional $1 bio is allocated under Rural Infrastructure Development Fund to
storagecreation.

AgricultureInsurance
NationalAgricultureInsuranceScheme

1.Itseekstoprovideinsurancecovertoallcropsagainstnaturalcalamities.AgricultureInsuranceCompanywas
thenodalagency.
2.Itcovers~25%ofthefarmersbutitislopsidedand~75%oftheoperationsareinfewstatesonly.

WeatherBasedCropInsuranceScheme
 1.Itprovidedprotectionagainstadverseweatherincidences.Itsettledclaimsinquicktime.AICwasthenodal
agency.

RashtriyaKrishiVikasYojana(RKVY)

1.It is a $4 bio scheme and its objective is to increase investment in agriculture to enhance production and
productivity.Thepoorgrowthofagricultureover9thand10thFYPwasseentobeaneffectofpoorinvestment
inagriculture,hencetheneedtoincreaseinvestment.
2.UndertheRKVY,manystatelevelschemesforsoiltestingshavebeenlaunchedandinformationdisseminated
topeasants.BGREI,NFSMandNationalSaffronMissionareapartofit.
3.It incentivizes the states to increase public investment in agriculture. It is a comprehensive scheme and
allocationsaremadetoindividualprojectswhichareapprovediftheysatisfyvariouscriteria.Upto25%ofthe
fundscanbeusedtostrengthenstateagricultureschemes.Itseekstodrawsynergiesbetweendairy,poultry,
fisheriesandagriculture.

BGREI

1.This includes block demonstrations of rice and wheat technologies in a cluster mode approach, promoting
resource conservation technologies, watershed management activities, increased farm mechanization. The
productionofricein7statesundertheschemehasincreasedby21%inlast2years.

NationalFoodSecurityMission

1.Focus was on districts where productivity of wheat, rice, pulses, millets and fodder was lower than national
average.Theaimwastoincreaseproductionthere.Nationallevelaimwastoincreaseproductionofriceby10
MT (achieved), wheat by 8 MT (13 MT achieved), pulses by 2 MT (3 MT achieved) by 2012. It has been
successful.
2.Itstressedonincreasedfarmmechanization,betterinputs,seeddevelopment,technologydemonstrationand
deploymentandmarketingaccess.Itfocusedondistrictswheretheproductivitywas<thestateaveragefor
rice and wheat. For pulses those districts were covered which have the potential for area expansion and
productivityenhancementinpulses.
3.Dedicated Project Management Teams (PMTs) have been provided at district, state and national levels for
implementation. Consultants are provided at each level as a part of PMTs. National, state and district level
monitoringteamsareconstitutedforcontinuousevaluation.
4.Publicity campaigns are organized at the national, state and district level through advertisements in print
media, video clips on mass media, brochures, fairs, exhibitions, street plays, etc. for popularizing the
componentsofmission.
5.Rice:Amajorityofdistrictsoutof139coveredshowedconsistentlyanincreaseinyieldscomparedtothepre
NFSMperioddespitedroughtconditions.Thenumberofdistrictsrecording>20%increaseintheyieldwere
morethanthoserecording<10%increaseinyield.
6.Wheat:A majority of districts out of 141 covered showed consistently an increase in yields compared to the
preNFSM period despite drought conditions. The number of districts recording > 10% increase in the yield
werelessthanthoserecording<10%increaseinyield.
7.Pulses:Outof171districtsamajorityconsistentlyshowedenhancedyieldsdespitedroughtconditions.

NFSMPart2in12thFYP

1.Itwillalsocovercoarsecropsandaimtoincreaseproductionby25MT10MTofrice,8MTofwheat,4MT
ofpulsesand3MTofcoarsecereals.
2.Inadditiontoenhancingtheproductivityinlowproductivityareas,stabilizingtheproductivitygainsinhigh
producingareasisequallyimportant.Accordingly,inthe12thPlanitwillfollowlocationspecific,targetoriented
strategies.
3.Itwillalsopromotecroppingsystemsinplaceofpromotingindividualcrop.Majorcroppingsystemssuchas
ricewheat,ricepulses,maize/milletspulses.Croprotation,intercroppingwillbepromoted.
4.PostharvestmanagementandR&Dwillreceiveattention.

Challenges
(a)NFSM

1.Lackofcooperationfromstates.Bettercoordinationisneededwiththem.
2.SeedReplacementRate(SRR)hasbeentargetedwithoutmatchingtheseedproductionplaninsomeStates.
Thisapproachisboundtodelayadoptionoflatestimprovedvarieties.

(b)ISOPOM

1.A large part of area under these crops is rainfed. There is very high fluctuation in the production and
productivityofoilseedsdueto intermittentdryspellsinKharifseason,insectpestinfestationandaberrations
duetovariousotherfactorsinsomeareasandstates.
2.The prevalence of local poor yielding varieties requires interventions. Drought, pest and insect tolerant or
resistanthybridsandvarietiessuitabletodifferentagroclimaticzonesarerequired.

TheWayforward

1.The future of food security is highly dependent on two important and interrelated factors, first the ability to
succeed and absorb the technology for raising agricultural productivity, and second effecting measures to
successfully adopt to climate change. There is need for an increased, stable, low cost environmentally
sustainablefoodproduction.
2.Inaddition,agricultureneedstobediversifiedtomeetthechangingdietarypreferenceandforrealizinghigher
incomeforthefarmers.
3.SRRlinkedseedproductionplanshouldbedevelopedforeachstate.
4.Approachesshouldbeagroclimaticandregioncentric.
 5.Programmesshouldfocusondominantcroppingsystemratherthanonasinglecrop.Rice,wheatandpulses
basedcroppingsystemsshouldbeconsidered. Themajorcroppingsystemsinclude:ricerice,ricechickpea,
ricewheat,wheat chickpeaandpulseswheat.Suchanapproachwouldpayattentiontocompanion cropsof
thesystemratherthanfocusingononecropwhichinanycaseisdependentonthedurationandpracticesof
theothercrop.
6.R&Dshouldbeencouraged.

NationalMissionforSustainableAgriculture

1.It recognizes the threat climate change poses to the food security of the country. So it seeks to transform
agricultureintoaclimateproofsector.ItisapartofNationalActionPlanonClimateChange.
2.Naturallythefocusisondryfarmingthroughthedevelopmentofdroughtresistantandpestresistantvarieties
anddevelopinginstitutionalcapabilities.ItalsoincludesRADP,CADP.
3.Governmentreportsays1Criseintemperaturewillleadtoafallof6MTinwheatproduction.

RainfedAreaDevelopmentProgram(RADP)

1.RADP has been introduced as a subscheme of RKVY during 201112 with specific focus on small and
marginal farmers by offering a complete package of activities. It follows a cluster approach and seeks to
mitigatetheimpactofweatheronagriculture.
2.Inbudget201213,itwillbemergedwithNationalMIssiononSustainableAgriculture.

CommandAreaDevelopmentProgram

1.Itaimstonarrowdownthegapbetweenirrigationpotentialandirrigatedareaby10mmhectares.

NationalMissiononMicroIrrigation

1.Itseekstoencourageuseofdripandsprinklerirrigationbyproviding60%aidtomarginalfarmersand50%to
generalfarmers.

MacroManagementofAgriculture

1.Itisaschemetoplugthegapsinfundingofvariousprojects.Moneyisgiventothestates.
2.The practice of allocating funds to States/UTs on a historical basis has been replaced by a new allocation
criteriabasedongrosscroppedareaandareaundersmallandmarginalholdings.
3.Thepermissibleceilingfornewinitiativeshasbeenincreasedfromtheexisting10%to20%oftheallocation.
4.Atleast33%ofthefundshavetobeearmarkedforsmall,marginalandwomenfarmers.
5.Active participation of the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) of all tiers would have to be ensured in the
implementationoftheschemeincludingreview,monitoringandevaluationatdistrictandsubdistrictlevel.

AgricultureCredit

IncreasingInfluenceofRuralMoneylendersDespiteRisingFormalAgriCredit

1.Moneylendersprovided70%oftotalruralcreditin1951.Thisproportionfellto17%in1981beforeclimbing
backto30%in2002.
2.Farmersoftenchoosetogotomoneylendersdespitehigherinterestratesbecauseofmoreflexible
repaymentschedules,strictKYCnormsofbanks,provisionofagricreditagainstthetitleortenancy
agreementonlyandfewerrestrictionsonborrowingforconsumption.
3.Thecollapseofmicrofinanceseemstohaveprovidedanothercatalystforthereemergenceofthe
moneylender.

AggregateAgriculturalCreditNumbers

1.ThegovernmenthasfollowedDoublingofAgricultureCreditPolicy(DACP)whereagriculturecredithastobe
doubledevery3yearsstartingfrom200304.
2.Sofarinallyears,targetshavebeenoverachievedwiththeagriculturecreditgrowingfrom$17bioin200304
to $95 bio in 201112. Target for 201213 is $115 bio. But a breakup of these numbers provides a different
story.

IssueswithIndianAgriculturalCreditSetup
InstitutionalBreakup

1.HistoricallycooperativesandRegionalRuralBanks(RRB)havebeenmoresuitedtotheneedsofsmalland
marginalfarmers.
2.In199192,cooperativescontrolled51%ofagricreditflow,scheduledcommercialbanks43%andRRBs5%.
in 201011, share of cooperatives dropped to 16%, scheduled commercial banks to 74% and the RRBs to
10%.

RegionalImbalance

1.SouthIndiaaccountsforjust18.5%ofGrossCroppedArea(GCA)buttakes37.5%oftheagricredit.Central
Indiaontheotherhandsaccountsfor27%oftheGCAwhileagricreditisjust13%.Thiswasthesituationin
 11th 5year Plan and the situation has worsened from the 10th 5year Plan.

Mistargeting

1.CroppingIntensityistheratioofGCAtoNCA.Typicallysmallandmarginalfarmersaremoreintensiveusers
oflandcomparedtotherichfarmers.Againweseeregionsofhighcroppingintensityhavelowerallocationof
agricreditavailable.
2.CroppingholidayinAPisatelltalesignofagriculturecreditgonewrong.Itisgiventoabsenteefarmerswho
useitfornonagriculturalpurposes.
3.67% of agricultural workforce is women but they don't have titles to land, hence can't avail of agriculture
credit.

GovernmentInitiatives

1.Interest Subvention Scheme (ISS) which gives crop loans to farmers up to Rs. 1 lac and 1
yearat7%p.a.+awaiveroffurther3%onthefarmerswithpromptrepaymenthistory.
2.Postharvestloansforupto6monthswillbegiventofarmersunderthesameISS.Thisistoavoiddistress
sale.(Butwherewilltheygetstoragefacilityfrom?)
3.ADWDRS,2008tofreeupbanklinestothesector.
4.ForloansuptoRs.50,000noneedoftheNoDuesCertificate.
5.ForloansuptoRs.1lacnoneedofanysecurity.
6.KisanCreditCards: This helps in providing timely credit. It is like a revolving facility, all paper work done in
beginning and the farmer assigned a credit limit. Banks are now enhancing this card to a chip based card
whichwillbelikeATMandholdlimitandusageinformation.

AgricultureDebtWaiverandDebtReliefScheme,2008

1.Allloansmadebetween1April1997and31March2007anddueon31December2007andunpaidon28
February2008wereeligibleforthescheme.
2.SofartheGovernmenthasspentRs.52kcronit.

YHMalegamCommitteeonMicrofinanceInstitutions
ThiscommitteewasconstitutedbyRBIinwakeoftheMFIdevelopmentsinAP.Itsmainrecommendationsare:

1.MFIstobedesignatedasseparateNBFCtobebroughtunderRBIcontrol.
2.Amargincapof10%forestablishedMFIsand12%forsmallMFIs.
3.Acapof24%ontheinterestchargeable.
4.AborrowercanbeamemberofonlyoneSHG.
5.MFIscanonlycharge3feesforincreasingtransparencyinterest,insurancefee,processingfee.
PDS(after1991)

Trends

1.Procurement:Procurementoperationsofgovernmentwere<5%ofagricultureoutputbeforetheGR.In80s
they rose to 10% and now they have risen to over 15%. This has reduced the fluctuations in average per
capitaavailabilityoffoodgrainsandalsointerstatevariations.
2.RoleofMSP: Higher MSPs for wheat and rice have led to benefits of procurement accruing largely to large
farmersinthesurplusstatesforthesecrops.ButduetolackofFCIoperationsincropsotherthanwheatand
rice and in states other than Punjab, Haryana and UP, MSPs have proved to be largely illusionary. MSP of
wheatandricehasgenerallybeenhigherthanthecostofproductionwhilethatofpulseshasbeenlower.
3.Differential pricing: Before 1997 PDS was universal and followed a uniform pricing model. But then it was
switchedtoTPDSandBPLfamiliesweregivenstock@~67%ofAPL.AntodayaAnnaYojanafamilieswere
given~50%ofBPLprices.Between1997to2002,APLpriceswerequiteclosetomarketprices.HenceAPL
offtake declined and many FPS became unviable. Now nearly 60% of supply goes to BPL and 20% to
Antodaya.
4.Foodstocks:DuetolowerAPLofftakesurplusfoodstocksaccrued(reaching60MTagainst20MTnormof
buffer stocks) till 2002. This increased cost of carrying as well as food subsidy. Then prices for BPL were
reduced further and their ration increased and also exports permitted so that food stocks declined again to
below20MTlevel.Currentlystocksare80MT.
5.Interstatevariations:PDSofftakeasaproportionofpeoplelivingbelowpovertylineislessinpoorerstatesis
comparedtothericherstatesindicatingpoorfunctioningofPDSinthesestates.The4southernstateswith
lowerincidenceofpovertycontinuetoliftaroundhalfofthePDSofftake.
Evaluation

1.RegularityandpredictabilityinopeninghoursoftheFPShelpsinpreventionofdiversionofquotas.
2.Reductionandroundingoffofpriceshashelpedreducedovercharging.
3.TheFPShasahigherdensitythanpostofficesandbanks.
4.PDSisworkingbetterinSouthernstateswhileinBiharitisdysfunctional.
5.SocialmonitoringoftheFPScanimprovethesystem.Alsopayinghighercommissionstothedealercanhelp
inreducingcorruption.
6.FCIcostscanbereducedbymakingitsoperationsdecentralizedi.e.procurementanddisbursementlocally.

GovernmentInitiatives
TargetedPDS(TPDS)

1.SpecialcardsareissuedtoBPLfamilies.Thisschemehasbeenreasonablysuccessful.
2.State governments lift food from FCI in this scheme and the food is sanctioned each month and
liftingperiodis50days.

AntodayaAnnaYojna

1.ItistargetedtopoorestsectionofBPLfamiliesitsanctionsareleaseofriceatRs.3perkgandwheatatRs.2
perkg.

PDSReforms

1.SomestateslikeChattisgarhareparkingthePDSservicesonthesmartcardslikeRSBYrunbythecentral
governmenti.e.thesesmartcardswoulddoubleupasrationcards.Thesecardswillhavealltheentitlements
andrecordthedisbursementforahousehold.Thiscardwouldbeswipedandalsousedwiththumbimpression
oftheuseronthebiometricmachine.Thiswillensureweedingawayofghostbeneficiaries.Theinformation
flow will happen directly with a central server. This also means that the person can get his ration from any
authorizedshopincludingtheprivateshops.Odishaisalsomovingtowardssmartcards.

NationalFoodSecurityOrdinance,2013
Features

Analysis

1.Antifarmer&seriouscompromiseonfoodsecurity
1.Criticism:If68%peoplebuywheatatsuchalowrate,howwillthefarmersgettheirremunerativeprice?
Theywillstartcultivatingsomeothercrop.Thiscouldleadtoaseriousfoodsecurityissueinthenation.
2.Truth:ButiftheBillindeedleadstoalargerprocurementitwillcompelthegovernmenttoraisetheMSP
forgrain.Thiswillbenefitthefarmers.Higherpriceswillencouragethefarmerstocultivatemorewheat.
2.Nationalizationofgraintrade
1.Criticism:Itwillincreasegovernmentprocurementwhichwilldriveoutprivateplayers.Thusitwilllead
tonationalizingthegraintrade.
2.Truth:EvenwithouttheBill,thegovernmentisalreadybuyingabout70milliontonnesplusof
grains.FSBrequiresonlyabout50MTofgrains.Soitcan'tbeblamedforanyadditionalprocurement.
3.Fiscaldeficit
1.Criticism:Itwillincreasefoodsubsidyandhencehigherdeficit.
2.Truth:FSBdoesn'tleadtoanyhigherprocurement.Onthecontrary,itwillincreasetheofftakeand
wouldactuallyreducethesubsidy(salesrealization+reducedcarryingcosts).
4.Issueoffederalism
1.Criticism:PDSisoperatedbystatesbutthenewbillproposesthattheGrievanceRedressalOfficerbe
underCentralcontrol.ThisencroachesuponthefederalcharacteroftheUnion.
5.Lastmileconnectivityissue
1.Criticism:Thelastmileconnectivityhasbeenleftto"localauthorities".Butlocalauthoritiesmean
bureaucracyandtheuseofthetermisacoloniallegacy.Insteaditshouldhavebeenentrustedwith
localselfgovernments.
SalientfeaturesofNFSB

Thesalientpointsoftheordinanceare:

Upto75percentoftheruralpopulationandupto50percentoftheurbanpopulationwillhaveuniformentitlementoffivekg
foodgrainpermonth,athighlysubsidisedpricesofRs.3,Rs.2,Re.1perkgforrice,wheatandcoarsegrains,respectively.

The poorest of poor households would continue to receive 35 kg food grain per household per month under the Antyodaya
AnnaYojnaatsubsidisedpricesofRs.3,Rs.2andRe.1.

Statewisecoveragewillbedeterminedbythecentralgovernment.

The work of identification of eligible households has been left to the states/Union Territories, which may frame their own
criteriaoruseSocialEconomicandCasteCensusdata,iftheysodesire.

Thereisaspecialfocusonnutritionalsupporttowomenandchildren.Pregnantwomenandlactatingmothers,besidesbeing
entitledtonutritiousmealsaspertheprescribednutritionalnorms,willalsoreceivematernitybenefitofatleastRs.6,000for
sixmonths.Childrenintheagegroupofsixmonthsto14yearswillbeentitledtotakehomerationorhotcookedfood,asper
prescribednutritionalnorms.

Thecentralgovernmentwillprovidefundstostates/UTs,incaseofshortsupplyoffoodgrainfromcentralpool.

In case of nonsupply of food grain or meals to entitled persons, the concerned state/UT governments will be required to
providesuchfoodsecurityallowancetothebeneficiariesasmaybeprescribedbythecentralgovernment.

Thecentralgovernmentwillprovideassistancetothestatestowardscostofintrastatetransportation,handlingoffoodgrain
andfairpriceshop(FPS)dealers'margin,forwhichnormswillbedeveloped.

TheordinancealsocontainsprovisionsforreformsinthePublicDistributionSystem(PDS)throughdoorstepdeliveryoffood
grain, application of information and communication technology (ICT) including endtoend computerisation, leveraging
'Aadhaar' for unique identification of beneficiaries, diversification of commodities under the Targeted PDS (TPDS) for
effectiveimplementationoftheordinance.

Theeldestwomaninthehousehold,of18yearsofageorabove,willbetheheadofthehouseholdfortheissueoftheration
card.Iftheeldestwomanisnotavailable,theeldestmalememberistobetheheadofthehousehold.

There will be state and district level redressal mechanism with designated officers. The states will be allowed to use the
existing machinery for District Grievance Redressal Officer (DGRO), State Food Commission, if they so desire, to save
expenditureonestablishmentofnewredressalsetup.Redressalmechanismmayalsoincludecallcentres,helplineetc.

ProvisionshavealsobeenmadefordisclosureofrecordsrelatingtoPDS,socialauditsandsettingupofVigilanceCommittees
inordertoensuretransparencyandaccountability.

TheBillprovidesforpenaltytobeimposedonpublicservantsorauthority,iffoundguiltyoffailingtocomplywiththerelief
recommendedbytheDistrictGrievanceRedressalOfficer(DGRO).

*******************************
ArewepreparedforNFSB

Of these, the most important challenge is to decide the interstate allocation of foodgrain for the Public Distribution System
(PDS). At present, this allocation is arbitrary and is neither based on population nor poverty. Thus, poorer states like Uttar
Pradesh (UP) and Bihar get much less food allotment than their share in poverty, whereas, it is just the opposite for the
Southernstates.ThisiswhyTamilNaduisopposingtheBill.

Secondly, actual distribution cannot begin unless the eligible households are identified. The final results of the Socio
EconomicandCasteCensuswillnotbeavailableforallthestates,especiallythelargerstateslikeUP,BiharandTamilNadu,
untilthebeginningof2014.Further,therehasbeenalotofsecrecyinconductingthesurvey,andpeopleeveninstateslike
Haryana,wherethelistsonpaperhavebeensharedwiththepeopleandfinalised,nooneknowswhetherhe/sheisinorout.
Therecouldbeagreatdealofdisenchantmentandangerwhentheactualdistributionofgrainbegins.

The Bill encourages states to reform the PDS, including doorstep delivery of foodgrain, endtoend computerisation and
leveraging"Aadhaar"(UID)foruniqueidentificationofentitledbeneficiaries.Theprogressisextremelyslow,thoughnotin
allstates.

Lastly, the Central government should discourage the distribution of manufactured "readytoeat" food under the Integrated
ChildDevelopmentScheme(ICDS)sinceitleadstograndcorruptionattheministeriallevel.Unfortunately,thegovernment
hasencouragedsuchtenderingbylayingdowntheminimumnutritionalnormsfortakehomerations,includingmicronutrient
fortification,thusprovidingadangerousfootholdforfoodmanufacturersandcontractors,whoareconstantlytryingtoinvade
childnutritionprogrammesforprofitmakingpurposes.

FoodProcessing(after1991)
Trends

1.Issues:FPIhasbeenplaguedbyfactorssuchaslowpublicinvestment,poorinfrastructure,inadequatecredit
availabilityandhighlevelsoffragmentation.
 2.Highergrowth:TheIndianfoodprocessingsectorshigherrateofgrowthascomparedtotheagriculturegrowth
rateisindicativeofitslowbase,changinglifestyles,tastesandhigherdisposableincomewithconsumers.
3.Requirements: The sector needs huge investments in logistics. It is largely a private sector activity but
governmentshouldprovideneededincentivesforfasterinvestments.
4.Currentpolicyframework:Mostfoodprocessingenterpriseshavebeenexemptedfromindustriallicensingwith
the exception of beer and alcoholic drinks and items reserved for the small scale sector. For
foreign investmentandtechnology,automaticapprovalisgivenevenupto100%foramajorityof processed
foods. The policy initiatives also include sale of 50 percent in the domestic tariff area of agrobased 100
percent EOUs, zero duty EPCG Scheme declaration of the industry as a candidate for priority lending by
banksinterestsubventionscheme@4%interestandopeningupofmegafoodparks.
5.Economicstats:Since200405whileagriculturegrowthhasbeen3.3%,foodprocessingindustryhasgrown
@9.3%.Howeverthegrowthinmeat,fruits,vegetablesetc.isonly7.3%andindairyproductsisonly6.7%.
AsaresulttheFPIoutputnow(200910)forms12%ofagricultureoutputasagainst9%in200405.Inbound
FDI (from 20002011) has been only $2.5 bio which amounts to < 2% of total inbound FDI. The industry
employed1.5mmpeoplein200708.

SchemeforColdChain,ValueAdditionandPreservationInfrastructure

1.The Scheme was approved in 2008 with an objective to provide integrated and complete cold chain
serieswithoutanybreakforperishablesfromthefarmgatetotheconsumerwithacapacityof10MT.
2.TheassistanceundertheSchemeincludesfinancialassistanceof50%subjecttoa maximumofRs10crore.
Butsofartheapprovedprojectsenvisagecreatingacoldchaincapacityofonly0.16MT.

MegaFoodParksScheme(MFPS)

1.It provides for a capital grant of 50% of the project cost with a ceiling of Rs 50 crore to establish food
processing parks. The grant shall be utilized towards creation of common infrastructure in the park. Such
facilitiesareexpectedtocomplementtheprocessingactivitiesoftheunitsproposedtobesetupattheCPCin
thePark.
2.Outof30MegaFoodParksproposedduringtheeleventhfiveyearplan,theMinistryhastakenup15projects
undertheSchemesofar.

SchemeforTechnologyUpgradation,Establishment,ModernizationofFoodProcessingIndustries

1.It gives financial assistance for the setting up of new food processing units as well as technological
upgradationandexpansionofexistingunitsinthecountry@25%ofthecostofplant&machinerysubjecttoa
maximumofRs.50lakhs.
2.Earlier all the applications for such grants were received by the Ministry through the State Nodal
Agencies.TheseapplicationswerethencentrallyprocessedandgrantsdisburseddirectlybytheMinistry.From
200708, the receipt of applications, their appraisal, calculation of grant eligibility as well as disbursement of
fundshasbeencompletelydecentralized.Underthe newprocedure,anentrepreneurorapplicantcanfilean
applicationwiththeneighborhoodBankbranchorFinancialIntuition(FI).TheBankorFIswouldthenappraise
the application and calculate the eligible grant amount as per the detailed guideline given to them by
the Ministry. The Banks and FIs appraise the project and its recommendation for the release of grant is
transmitted to the Ministry through an eportal established for this purpose. After the recommendation and
requisite documents are received from the Bank or FIs, the Ministry sanctions the grant and transfers the
fundsthroughtheeportalitself.
TheWayForward

1.Pricing policies also need to be changed, as linking these with the quality of the produce or a product is
the basis for fixing per unit price, just as fat content in milk higher protein quality/ quantity in wheat better
aromaorcookingqualityinriceandshelflifeoffruitsandvegetables.
2.Policyandlegislationshouldbereformedtoallow processors to purchase their produce requirement directly
fromthefarmers.Intermediariesinthefoodchainlockvalueandaddtothecostoftherawmaterials.
3.Selfhelporcommoninterestgroups,producercompaniesonthemodelofcooperativesshouldbeencouraged
toenhancethebargainingpowerofthefarmersandnegotiateeffectivelywiththeindustry.
4.The Town and Village Enterprises (TVEs) model of China is an excellent example for involving surplus rural
laborinindustrialactivitybyprovidingthemalternativeworkattheirdoorstep.Locationoffoodprocessingunits
should be strategically placed depending upon the raw material availability, labor, product utilization and
domesticand/orexportmarketing.
5.The processing of agricultural raw material generates a sizable amount of utilizable byproducts, commonly
termed as waste. Experimental protocols for converting these into usable secondary or coproducts are
available.Theseneedtobedevelopedintocommerciallyviabletechnologies.

NationalMissiononFoodProcessing(NMFP)

Itwillinclude

1.Schemefortechnologyupgradation/establishment/modernisationoffoodprocessingindustries.
2.Schemeforcoldchain,valueadditionandpreservationinfrastructure.
3.Settingup/modernization/expansionofslaughterhouses.
4.SchemeforHumanResourceDevelopment.
5.Schemeforpromotionalactivities.
6.Creatingprimaryprocessingcentres/collectioncentresinruralareas.
7.Modernizationofmeatshops.

Itwilladdtothedecentralizationofthegovernmentschemesasstateswillhaveasubstantialroleinit.
Objectives:

i.Topromotefacilitiesforpostharvestoperationsincludingsettingupoffoodprocessingindustries.

ii.ToundertakedecentralizationoftheschemessofaroperatedbytheMinistryofFoodProcessing

Industries(MoFPI)inordertotakeintoaccounttherequirementssuitabletothelocalneeds.

iii.Toaugmentthecapacityoffoodprocessorsworkingtoupscaletheiroperationsthroughcapital

infusion,technologytransfer,skillUpgradationandhandholdingsupport.

iv.Tosupportestablishedselfhelpgroupsworkinginfoodprocessingsectortofacilitatethemto

achieveSMEstatus.

v.Capacitydevelopmentandskillupgradationthroughinstitutionaltrainingtoensuresustainable

employmentopportunitiestothepeopleandalsotoreducethegapinrequirementandavailability

ofskilledmanpowerinfoodprocessingsector.

vi.ToraisethestandardsoffoodsafetyandhygieneinordertomeetthenormssetupbyFSSAI.

vii.TofacilitatefoodprocessingindustriestoadoptHACCPandISOcertiicationnorms.

viii.Toaugmentfarmgateinfrastructure,supplychainlogistics,storageandprocessingcapacity.

ix.Toprovidebettersupportsystemtoorganizedfoodprocessingsector.

3.1TheMissionwillbegovernedbytheNationalFoodProcessingDevelopmentCouncil(NFPDC)headedbythe
HonbleMinisterofFoodProcessingIndustriesasitsChairman

CouncilwillbethepolicymakingbodygivingoveralldirectionandguidancetotheNationalMissiononFoodProcessing
(NMFP),andwillmonitorandreviewitsprogressandperformance.TheNFPDCwillmeetatleasttwiceayear.

3.2ToadministertheMission,anExecutiveCommittee(EC)headedbySecretary,M

StateLevelEmpoweredCommittee(SLEC)

4.1.1TocarryoutadministrationoftheStateFoodProcessingMission,aStatelevel

EmpoweredCommittee(SLEC)willbeconstitutedbytheStateGovernmentundertheChairmanshipoftheChief
SecretaryhavingrepresentativesfromotherconcernedDepartments,a

5.FundingPatternofNMFP:ThisschemewillbeimplementedasanewcentrallysponsoredschemeinalltheStates
intheratioof75:25(Govt.ofIndiaandStates)exceptforNorthEasternSta

(i)SchemeforTechnologyUpgradation/Establishment/ModernisationofFoodProcessingIndustries.

(ii)SchemeforColdChain,ValueadditionandPreservationInfrastructureforNonHorticulturalProducts.
(iii)SchemeforModernisationofAbattoirs.
(iv)SchemeforHumanResourceDevelopment(HRD)withthecomponentsof(a)CreationofInfrastructureFacilitiesfor
runningDegree/Diploma/CertificateCoursesinFoodProcessingTechnology(b)EntrepreneurshipDevelopment
Program(EDP)and(c)FoodProcessingTrainingCentre(FPTC).
(v)SchemeforPromotionalActivitiesfor(a)OrganisingSeminar/Workshops(b)ConductingStudies/surveys(c)
SupporttoExhibitions/Fairsand(d)AdvertisementandPublicity.
(vi)SchemeforCreatingPrimaryProcessingCenters/CollectionCentersinruralareas.
(vii)ModernisationofMeatshops.
(viii)ReeferVehicles.
(ix)OldFoodParks.

AgriculturalPricesandMarketing

HorticultureTrains

1.Theyexclusivelycarryhorticultureproducts.Presently,onesuchtrainrunsfromMaharashtratoDelhi,largely
carryingbananas.Theideawastoconnectmajorfruitandvegetableproducingcentreswiththeconsuming
ones.Theyhavespecialrefrigeratedcontainerstoexclusivelymoveperishableitems.
2.But,therehavebeenoperationaldifficultieslikemidpointloadingandunloadinginsuchtrains,whichisnot
possiblecurrentlyasthetrainsrunnonstop.
 3.Fullfledgedtrainsjustcarryingperishableitemsarenotcosteffectiveasallwagonsneedtobefulltomake
thejourneyprofitable.Refrigerationneedsadditionalpowerwhichdrivesupthecosts.Sotheideaofputtinga
fewrefrigeratedcontainersinnormalgoodstrainisbeingproposed.
4.Ripening rooms and precooling chambers need to be installed in the destination and origin point of the
trains.

SugarIndustryDecontrol

1.Freedomtomillsfromsupplyingsubsidizedsugarforstaterunwelfareprogrammes.
2.Quotasystemisalsoabolishedwhichgavegovernmenttheauthoritytodecidetheamountofsugarthatwas
releasedinthemarket.
3.The sugar mills must share 70% of the value of sugar and each byproduct as cane dues payable to the
farmers.
4.ExportandImportpolicyshouldnotbeguidedbydomesticavailability.

IssuesinFoodPricingPolicy

1.IssueswithCACP'swayofsettingMSP
1.Distortionofcroppingpattern:MSPhasbeensethugelyabovecostofproductionforriceandwheat.
This has distorted the cropping pattern and huge surpluses are produced and procured in these two
cropsonly.
2.Distortion of entire market: Other issue is once the purchase price is set above the market clearing
price,thenyouhavetosetthesellingpriceatalowerlevelthanthemarketclearingprice.
2.Howtocorrectthedistortions
1.SincetheMSPsarealreadyfairlyhigh,ureapricesshouldbedecontrolledoratleastraised.Thiswill
alsocorrectthedistortioninthefertilizersmarket.
2.If the stocks of grain are higher than a certain amount, government should clear it by subsidized
domesticsales.
3.Issueswithsubsidizeddomesticsales
1.Therecouldbeatendencytopurchasethegrainatlowerpriceandthereafterexportatahigherrate.
2.Butthatisamatterforthecommerceministrytolookat,notthefoodministry.Thatisamatterabout
trade,notpricingofgrains.Correctwayofdoingthatwillbethroughanexporttax.

Whyhascroppingpatternnotrespondedtoinflationinproteins?

1.Pulses are fundamentally different from cereals and require different set of techniques altogether. They
require more irrigation, more fertilizers etc. As such they are more vulnerable to vagaries of climate and
henceriskier.
2.While the price support in cereals has been backed by procurement operations by the government, pulses
seenosuchlargescaleprocurement.HencegovernmentMSPsremainineffective.
3.As a result of above to factors farmers continue to grow them on marginal lands only and refrain from
investing in high yielding (but expensive) varieties and techniques. So the yields have remained stagnant
from590kgphain90sto600kgphain2000sand700kgphain201112.Rainfedareaaccountsfor56%of
totalcroppedarea,48%oftheareaunderfoodcropsbut77%ofareaunderpulsesand66%ofareaunder
oilseeds.
4.Postharvestwasteinpulsesaswellasfruitsandvegetablesremainshigh.Foodprocessingindustrycovers
only 23% of fruit and vegetable production in India (as against 30% in Thailand and 70% in Brazil). So
farmers are reluctant to follow price signals. Similarly in milk we need an amul in every state as currently
exceptforafewstatesotherstatesarelackinginorganizedmilkprocessing.

Whatneedstobedone?

1.Weneedlargescaleinvestmentsinfoodprocessingandstorage.
2.Weneedtoassureminimumreturns+upsidetothefarmers.
3.Weneedtoenlargegovernmentprocurementoperationsintheseitems.
4.Weneedtoallowprivatecorporatesintheseitemssoastobreakthecurrentmonopolyofprivatetraders.
5.Weneedtodevelopshorttimegrowingvarietiesofpulsessothatitreducesrisksconsiderably.
6.Weneedtosignlongtermprocurementagreementswithothernationsonpulses.Importsinpulsescanbe
financedbyexportsofcereals.
7.Rainfedfarminghaslostoutonfocus.ButICARiscurrentlyspendingbarely13%ofitstotalresearchexpenditureonrainfedfarming
.

DriversofAgriculturePrices

1.Contributionofdifferentcommodities:Inlast2years,Fruits,eggs,fish,meatandmilkhavecontributedmore
than 40% of the food inflation. Vegetables became an important contributor during December 2010 March
 2011andthenagainbetweenAugustOctober2011.Certainothercommoditieslikesugar,edibleoils,spices
havefromtimetotimeplayedanimportantroleintheoverallfoodinflationandthuscommodityspecificfactors
also have a role to play. Prices in India are mainly affected by domestic factors and distortions and
internationalpricesaffectonlyinalimitedandindirectway.
2.Marketdistortions: Market distortions both in retail and wholesale markets. Moreover the prices don't reflect
retail prices paid since retail prices differ from wholesale markets. Moreover, supply responses to demand
hikesareusuallyaffectedwithatimelag.
3.Storagecapacity: India has a total storage capacity of 110 MT out of which public sector capacity is 75 MT,
cooperative sector capacity is 15 MT and private sector capacity is 20 MT. Only five states MP, AP,
Punjab,Maharashtra,andHaryanahavemorethan60%ofthetotalstoragecapacity.Reasonsforlowprivate
sectorresponseincludelackofcredit,longgestationperiod,lackoffrontendmarketingcapabilities.PPPin
infrastructuredevelopmentisbeingpromotedthroughviabilitygapfunding.
4.Changingpercapitaconsumptiontrends: Between 199394 and 200910, cereal consumption in rural areas
fellby16%andby11%inurbanareas.Consumptionoffruitsandvegetablesroseby49%inruralareasand
42% in urban areas in the same period. Consumption of milk rose by 5% in rural areas and 10% in urban
areasoverthesameperiod(between200405and200910milkconsumptionroseby6%inruralareasand
5%inurbanareas).Inruralareas,shareofcerealsintotalfoodconsumptionhasdeclinedfrom38%in1993
94 to 29% in 200910 and in urban areas from 26% in 199394 to 22% in 200910. Pulses has remained
largelyunchangedbetween67%.Milkhasincreasedfrom15%to16%inruralareasandfrom18%to19%in
urbanareas.Edibleoilhasdeclinedbyabout1%/Egg,fishandmeathasgoneupby~1%from5%to6%.
Shareofvegetableshasrisenby2%from9%to11%.
5.Changingcoppingpattern:Between200405and200910,cerealsproductionhasgrown@3.4%p.a.,pulses
production@3.5%p.a.whileoilseeds@4.2%p.a.Whiledemandforcerealsisincreasingatanegligiblerate
demandforother2isincreasingatafasterpace.Between200607and201011,areaunderarhar increased
byaround24%andits productionby25%(indicatingflatyield).Inoilseedshowevertherehasbeenamajor
increase in productivity. In case of groundnut while the area increased by about 6%, the increase in
productionamountedto55%.Similarly,incaseofsoybeantheincreaseinareaby15%resultedinaproduction
increaseby43%.The12thFYPassumesa4%agriculturegrowthwithfoodgrainsgrowth@2%andnonfood
grains@6%.
6.Percapitaavailability:Thepercapitaavailabilityofsomeofthe itemssuchascerealsandpulseshavebeen
decliningresultinginsomepressureontheir prices.Inthecaseoffruitsandvegetables,milk,egg,meatand
fish,priceshavegoneupdespiteanincreaseinpercapitaavailability.Thisisduetoachangingpatterninthe
demand of the households for high value items with increasing income levels. Per capita availability of food
grainsfromhascomedownfrom510gramsperdayin1991to444gramsperdayin2009.
7.RiseinMSPs:In201112,paddyMSPhasbeenraisedby17%toRs.1250,pulsesby33%,cottonby10%,
oilseedsbetween1735%andwheatby15%.ButMSPsarelargelyineffectiveinmoststatesandformost
crops(exceptriceandwheat).
8.Riseinfuelprices:Fuelinflationhasrangedaround15%levelsinpast2yearswhichhasafeedthrougheffect
inagriculture.
9.RiseinGDPandpublicexpendituretargetedtowardspoor(highincomeelasticityforfoodamongpoor).
10.G20Initiatives: G20AgricultureMinistersmeetin2011acceptedadeclarationonactionplanonfoodprice
volatility. It has been decided to focus generally on the following areas: (i)Agricultural production and
productivity (ii) Market information and transparency (iii) International policy coordination (iv) Reducing the
effectsofpricevolatilityforthe mostvulnerableand(v)Financialregulationofagriculturalfinancialmarkets.
Theconcretestepsoutlinedtoachievethesegoalsareasfollows:(i)InternationalResearchInitiativeforWheat
Improvement (IRIWI) (ii)Agricultural Market Information System (AMIS) (iii) The Global Agricultural Geo
MonitoringInitiative(iv)RapidResponseForum(v)AgricultureandFoodSecurityRiskManagementToolbox
and(vi)EmergencyHumanitarianFoodReserves.

PreviousYears

1.200607:Generalinflation:7%.Overallfoodinflation13%.
2.200708:Generalinflation:8%.Overallfoodinflation6%.
3.200809:Generalinflation:2%.Overallfoodinflation8%.
4.200910:Generalinflation:10%.Overallfoodinflation21%.

201011

1.Generalinflation:10%.Overallfoodinflationwas10%.
2.Cereals:Waslowerthangeneralinflationandfellfrom8%inAPril2010to3%inDecember2010and5%in
April2011.
3.Pulses:Washigh@25%inApril2010butfellthroughtheyeartoreach10%inDecember2010andstayed
@5%inApril2011.
4.Horticultureproducts:Fruitinflationremainedoutofcontrol@20%throughtheyearwithoccasionalspikesto
3040% range. Vegetables remained sustained @ sub 10 levels except for a very high spike in December
Januaryperiod.
5.Milk:Itremainedhighin1525%rangethroughouttheyear.
6.Eggs,meat,fish:Itremainedinaveryhighzoneof2040%throughouttheyearwithreaching10%levelonly
towardsApril2011.

201112

1.Generalinflation:Inthe1011%range.Overallfoodinflation:10%.
2.Cereals:Substantiallylowerthanfoodinflation@5%.
3.Pulses:Startedtheyeararound5%butquicklyroseto10%bySeptember2011.
4.Horticultureproducts:Fruitinflationwasinhigh20s40%rangeinthebeginningoftheyearbutbythemiddle
itmoderatedto10%level.Vegetableinflationshowedasustainedrisewithreaching20%levelsbythemiddle
oftheyearfrom10%inthebeginning.
5.Milk:Itremainedcloseto1112%levelthroughouttheyear.
6.Eggs,meat,fish:Ithasremainedin1015%rangethroughouttheyear.
APMCActReforms
ErstwhileAPMCActFramework

1.Each state created controlled market and trade in notified agriculture commodities could happen only in the
market.ThemarketwasmanagedbyAPMC.Buttheseactsdifferedalotevenintheirvitalprovisions.
2.Commodity coverage: The manner of notifying the commodities for regulation varies from State to State. Some
StateslikeAPandHPhaveincludedallthecommoditieswhileothersregulateonlyafew.
3.MarketCommittee:EachstatehasanAPMCtoregulatethemarkets.InTN,onlyoneAPMCisconstitutedforalltheregulated
marketswithinadistrict.
4.AgriculturalMarketingBoards:Agriculturalmarketingboardswereestablishedforexpeditiousexecutionofthemarket
development work. In some States like AP, Odisha and TN they are advisory in nature while in Punjab,
Haryana,Rajasthan,W.B.,KarnatakaandMaharashtraarestatutoryinnatureandhavepowerfulrole.

PerformanceReviewofExistingAPMCActs

1.FunctioningofAPMCs:Themarketingcommitteesdonotallowthetraderstobuyfromthefarmersoutsidethe
specified market yards which adds to the costs. In most states regular elections to APMCs don't take place
and they are superseded by the government. In many others the bureaucrats manage them. Their role has
increasinglycomeabouttobelimitedtocollectionofmarketdues.
2.Lack of geographical coverage: Despite expansion in the number of regulated markets, the area served
per market yard is quite high. The national average is 454 sq. km. The farmers are, therefore, required to
travellongdistancestoreachamarketplace.
3.Lack of amenities in the market: Though the Acts stipulate for the provision of some prescribed facilities
andamenitiesineachmarketyard,inseveralmarkets,thefacilities/amenitiesactuallycreatedarefarfromthe
prescribed norms. With the expansion of production and lack of development in the market there is
considerable congestion, delays, corruption, cut in payments to the farmers and poor quality control. Only ~
7% of the total quantity sold by the farmers is graded. Cold storage is available only for 9% of fruits and
vegetables.
4.Ruralperiodicmarkets:Apartfromtheprimarymarkets,therearethousandsofsmallerruralperiodicmarkets
wheresmallandmarginalfarmersandlivestockownersselltheirproduce.Mostofthemdon'thaveeventhe
basicamenitieslikeshedsforshelterfromsunandrain.
5.Role of rent seeking traders, commission agents etc.: They have organized themselves into strong
associationsanddon'tletnewtradersenterthemarketthuslimitingcompetition.
6.Hightaxes:Marketfeewasinitiallyenvisagedtobereinvestedinthedevelopmentofthemarket.Butnothing
was reinvested and total charges became close to 15% in many states and a source of revenue for the
government.Thetaxesarelevied@multiplepointsaddingtothetransactioncosts.
7.Exploitationofthepeasantandhighwastage:Alltheabovefactorsmeanthatfarmergetsonly2025%ofthe
endpriceandthewastagerateishigh.

ReviewofImplementationofMarketReforms

1.Adoption of provision related to Private markets: The Model Act suggests allows private markets managed
by persons other than APMCs. Only 17 states (AP, NE, Gujarat, Goa, HP, Karnataka, MP ( only direct
purchase),Maharashtra,Odisha(excludingpaddy),Rajasthan,JharkhandandUttarakhandhave enabled it
butruleshavenotbeennotifiedbyall.AndhraPradeshhasformulatedruleswhichstipulatealicensefeeof
Rs 50,000 and minimum cost of Rs 10 crores for setting up of private markets. Some states have
alsoprescribedaminimumdistanceofthesemarketsfromtheAPMCmarkets.Suchstipulationsseverelylimit
theimpact.
2.Provision for Direct marketing: The Model Act provides for granting licenses to processors, exporters etc. for
purchaseofagriculturalproducedirectlyfromfarmers.Only15states(AP,NE,Gujarat,Goa,HP,Karnataka,MP,Maharashtra,Odisha
(excludingpaddy),Rajasthan,JharkhandandUttarakhandhavesofarmadethisprovision.ButAPhasimposedarequirementofa
licensefee(Rs50,000).
3.Provisions for Contract Farming: The Model Act provides for permitting contract farming by registration of
contracts with APMCs and exemption of market fee on such purchases. 20 states have allowed it without
exemptingfrommarketfee.11otherhavealloweditwiththeexemptionfromthemarketfee.Karnatakahasonlyexempted
30%ofmarketfee undercontractfarming.AndhraPradeshrequiresthebuyertorendera bankguaranteefortheentirevalue
of the contracted produce. One of the biggest concerns is that APMC, who is the major market player, is also a
registeringauthorityforcontractfarmingandthearbitrationprocessisnottimebound.
4.Single Point levy of Market Fee: Only 13 States have provided provisions for single point levy of market
fee.However,theratesofmarketfeevarygenerallybetween0.5%to2%.ManystateslikePunjablevyadditionalchargesapartfromthemarket
fee.
5.Commission Agents: The Model Act stipulates prohibition of commission agents . MP, Chattisgarh, Mizoram,
NagalandandSikkhimhaveamendedthe Actandmadetheprovision,itisdoubtfulwhetherthisprovisionwillbeimplementedin
letterandspirit.
6.Establishment of Farmers markets (Direct Sale by the Farmers): The Model Act provides for establishment
ofsuchmarketswherenomarketfeeisleviedonfarmers,thoughsomeservicechargemaybeimposed.Such
markets can be established either by the APMCs or by any person licensed by the APMC for this purpose.
However, long before the
circulationofModelAct,severalStateshadpromotedFarmersMarket.TheseincludePunjab and Haryana
(Apni Mandi), Rajasthan (Kisan Mandi), Andhra Pradesh (Rythu Bazar), Tamil Nadu (Uzhavar Shanthigal),
Maharashtra(Shetkaribazaar)andOdisha(Ksushakbazaar).Thesemarketshavebenefittedbothfarmersandconsumersbutit
hasbeennotedthatwithlapseoftime,smalltradershavetaken overtheplaceoffarmersinmanyofthesemarkets.17
stateshavemadeprovisionsintheirAct.
7.Mandatory utilization of market committee fund for market development: The Model Act provides for
applicationofmarketcommitteefundforpromotionandmodernizationofmarketonly.Outofseventeen States,
whichhaverecentlyamendedtheirActs,threehavenosuchsuggestedprovision.
8.Essential Commodities Act, 1955: State Governments often issue control orders promulgated under the EC
Act adverselyaffectingtradinginagriculturalcommodities.Duetotheuncertainty privateinvestmentinlargescalestorageand
marketing infrastructure has been lacking. Thus is important to make a distinction between an investor and a black
marketer/hoarderintheapplicationoftheECAct,1955.
AlternativeMarketingModels

1.SHGs: SHG based collective marketing. Viable as SHGs have come up under NRLM. They provide
economiesofscaleandcanalsoobtaincreditfrombanks.
2.Modern Terminal Markets: It works under the National Horticulture Mission. It is a hub (main market) and spokes
(collectioncenters)modelinPPPmode.Thereisaprovisionofequityparticipationbyproducerassociations
upto26%.ThisSchemeisreformlinkedandwouldbeimplementedinthoseStateswhohaveamendedtheir
APMCAct.
3.Contractfarming: TheModelActallowed the contract farming sponsor to also provide input and technology support to the farmer. It
mandated the registration of sponsoring companies, recording of the
contractfarmingagreement,indemnityforsecuringfarmerslandand laiddownatimebounddisputeresolutionmechanism.
Contractfarminghasbeen prevalent in various parts of the country for commercial crops like sugarcane, cotton, teaandcoffee,
etc.
4.ITC eChoupal: It seeks to address the constraints faced by the farmer arising out of small and fragmented
farmholding,weakinfrastructure,supplychainintermediariesandthelackofqualityandrealtimeinformation.
ITChassetupsmallinternetkiosksatthevillageleveltoprovidefarmersrealtimemarketinformationrelated
to prices, availability of inputs, weather data and other matters related the farmers. Local level farmers,
called Sanchalak run these kiosks. Online extension services are also provided. It is estimated that ITC
interventioninsupplychainhaspermittedfarmerstoincreasetheirsalesrealizationby1015%.
5.Virtual Markets: Spot exchanges and negotiable warehouse receipt system effect physical delivery of the
goodsandmaythereforeberecognizedasmoreeffectivemarketinginstrumentsfortheprimaryproducers.
Producers can hedge their goods or take pledge loans against the warehouse receipts so that they are not
forcedtoresorttodistresssales.Howevertoday,thespotexchangesseemtobeoperatinginalegalvacuum
asthereisnospecificlawregulatingthem.SomeStateshaveissuedlicensestoSpotExchangesasabuyer
undertheexistingAPMCacts.ThereisaneedforGovernmentofIndiatoenactalegislationtoenablespot
exchangestofunctiononpanIndiabasiswithoutanyconflictwithStateAPMClaws.
6.RythuBazar:Itisaninitiativetocreateinfrastructurefacilitiestoenablefarmerstoselltheirproductsdirectlyto
consumers. Typically,aRythuBazarcovers10to15villages.Transportfacilities,onlineinformationofprices
etc.arealsoprovided.
7.ShetkariBazar: It is another direct marketing model. It helps small farmers with small quantity of perishable
fruitandvegetables.TheShetkariBazarsarelocatedinalldistrictsandaremanagedbyAPMCfromthearea.
Theproducebroughtbyfarmersisnotleviedcess.APMCsgetbankcreditforestablishmentofthemarket.

NewGovernmentInitiatives
MarketResearchInformationNetwork(MRIN)

1.This provides online agriculture commodities market information in the APMC run mandis. Prices as well as
stockinformationisgiven.

GrameenBhandaranYojana

1.Itprovidesasubsidyof25%oftheprojectcosttoallcategoriesoffarmers,agriculturegraduates,cooperatives
andCWC/SWCs.Allothercategoriesofindividualscompanies and corporations are being given subsidy at
15%oftheprojectcost.Sinceinception30MTprojectshavebeensanctioned.

Q.CriticallyevaluatethereasonsforfluctuationsinagriculturalpricesinIndia.Whatwouldthecomponentsofan
optimumagriculturepricepolicyregimeforIndia?

FoodSecurity
FarmSubsidies
MinimumSupportPrices(MSP)
BufferStockandFoodSecurity
TechnologyMissions

MajorCroppingPatterns
IrrigationSystems
DifferentTypes
TransportandMarketingofProduce
IssuesandRelatedConstraints
ETechnologyintheAidofFarmers

AnimalRearing
Economics