GS Paper: Agriculture and related issues

Context

• The world’s population will grow to 10 billion by 2050; agricultural land has halved in the last 50 years; 20-40% of crop yield is lost to pests and disease and another 10-25% is lost post-harvest. Take into account geo-political factors like the Ukraine war in account, and food security is a big problem facing mankind. In all this, digital technologies may be the answer to ills in agriculture; vitally, they can help achieve sustainability if we overcome challenges.

Crack Prelims 2023! Talk to our Rankers

Agriculture’s digital drive

• Use of modern technology: Farming is witnessing the use of modern technology for higher productivity and profitability. Today, farmers use digital tools for farm management, financial services, market services, information and much else.
• Smart agriculture use of AI and IOT: ‘Smart agriculture’ uses software for remote sensing, apart from big data, the Internet of Things (IoT) and artificial intelligence (AI). IoT in agriculture comprises sensors, drones and computer imaging integrated with analytical tools to generate actionable insights.
• Use of data and ML: Predictive analytics allows quick decision-making based on information drawn from data mining, data modelling and machine learning (ML).
• Digital adoption of Supply chain: Digital adoption can add value across the entire farm-to-fork (F2F) supply chain, covering the journey from planting to harvesting (of fruits, vegetables, grains, etc) till it arrives on one’s plate. This journey’s stakeholders include farm suppliers, farmers, food processors, traders, retailers and finally end consumers.
• Precision farming: Precision farming helps raise crop yields while minimizing the use of resources. It measures and analyses the needs of different fields and crops to aid waste management, reduce production costs, make optimal use of water and minimize environmental impacts.

The challenges of digital adoption in the Farm to Fork (F2F) supply chain

• Risks concentrated on farmer: For example, all risk is concentrated on the farmer, who is encumbered by the vagaries of weather, selection of profitable products, poor access to crop insurance, etc. We need to provide more value to the farmer in compensation for that burden.
• Trust deficit in the overall functioning of the F2F model: Over time, decision-making in food production, crop marketing, transport, etc, has got heavily concentrated in the hands of large agricultural entities or producers. While production has risen, the democratization of decision-making has suffered.
• Digital inequalities: The sector’s digital transformation is characterized by digital inequalities between large and small farmers, or between high- and low-income countries.
• Challenges in the supplier ecosystem: A fertilizer or agriculture equipment manufacturer may want to help farmers but is handicapped in creating the right ecosystem to provide a holistic solution.
• Capital expenditure a major challenge: Subsistence farmers cannot afford capital expenditure, and other farmers have financial constraints too. This is a major challenge at the farm level.

What binds these supply chain components together?

• Sustainability: which refers to practices that ensure long-term increased farm production and higher income while protecting the environment. Farmers apply inputs to only those parts of the field that need it, improving product quality, reducing input cost, increasing productivity and ensuring environmental sustainability.
• Evolving digital ecosystem: India’s evolving digital ecosystem and high-speed internet are making it possible for agritech startups to utilize AI/ML models.
• Precision techniques: Companies using precision techniques are helping farmers increase yields substantially.
• No middlemen: Due to a rise in online agritech platforms, farmers can now sell their products directly without any middlemen involved and thereby increase their incomes. This also helps create trust and transparency between farmers and consumers.
• Digital access to the market: In India, rising internet use and smartphone penetration has changed the face of agriculture in significant ways already, especially how small and medium farmers operate. It is helping with direct access to markets, thus allowing farmers to retain a higher proportion of the value created.

Current status of Indian agriculture

• While there is large scope for using digital technologies for agriculture in India, various problems must be overcome.
• As of now, the use of farming technology among India’s farmers is low.
• Productivity is also low, given small landholdings and significant overcrowding, which also contributes to our low level of mechanization.
• The absence of agricultural marketing makes farmers depend on local traders and middlemen to sell their farm produce, which is sold at very low prices.

Government Initiatives towards Digital Agriculture:

• AgriStack: The Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare has planned to create ‘AgriStack’ – a collection of technology-based interventions in agriculture. It will create a unified platform for farmers to provide them end-to-end services across the agriculture food value chain.
• Digital Agriculture Mission: This has been initiated for 2021 -2025 by the government for projects based on new technologies like artificial intelligence, blockchain, remote sensing and GIS technology, use of drones and robots, etc.
• Unified Farmer Service Platform (UFSP): UFSP is a combination of Core Infrastructure, Data, Applications, and Tools that enable seamless interoperability of various public and private IT systems in the agriculture ecosystem across the country. UFSP is envisaged to play the following role:
  • Act as a central agency in the Agri ecosystem (like UPI in the e Payments)
  • Enables Registration of the Service Providers (public and private) and the Farmer Services.
  • Enforces various rules and validations required during the service delivery process.
  • Acts as a Repository of all the applicable standards, API’s (Application Programming Interface) and formats.
  • Act as a medium of data exchange amongst various schemes and services to enable comprehensive delivery of services to the farmer.
• National e-Governance Plan in Agriculture (NeGP-A): A Centrally Sponsored Scheme, it was initially launched in 2010-11 in 7 pilot States, which aims to achieve rapid development in India through the use of ICT for timely access to agriculture-related information to the farmers.
  • In 2014-15, the scheme was further extended for all the remaining States and 2 UTs.
• Other Digital Initiatives: Kisan Call Centres, Kisan Suvidha App, Agri Market App, Soil Health Card (SHC) Portal, etc.

Way forward

• The digital revolution is touching every sphere of life and hence it is high time to bring agriculture in its ambit.
• The MoUs to rope in the private sector can help in
  • quicker modernisation of Farms,
  • easier access to various schemes and
  • subject matter knowledge.
• Such practices must be studied in depth via pilot projects and extended to whole India if found successful.

Other Schemes for Farmers National e-Governance Plan in Agriculture (NeGPA): It was initially launched in seven selected States in the last quarter of 2010-11. This Scheme has subsequently been extended to the 2nd Phase to cover all the States and 2 UTs from 2014-15. Aim: To achieve rapid development in India through use of Information & Communication Technology (ICT). It will provide timely access to agriculture related information for the farmers. The possible components for modern management of agriculture are Remote Sensing Geographical Information System Data Analytics Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning and Internet of Things. Under this initiative, one Stop Window-Farmers Portal (www.farmer.gov.in) has been developed for dissemination of information like. seeds variety, Storage Godown, Pests and plant diseases, Best Agricultural Practices, Watershed, Mandi details etc. SMS/mKisan Portal (www.mkisan.gov.in) has also been developed. It will send advisories on various crop related matters to the registered farmers through SMSs. In mkisan. more than 5 crores farmers are registered for receiving crop advisories through SMS. Various mobile applications including KisanSuvidha have also been developed. They facilitate dissemination of information to farmers on the critical parameters viz., Weather, Market Prices, Plant Protection, Agro-advisory, Extreme Weather Alerts, Input Dealers ( of Seed, Pesticide, Fertilizer, Farm Machinery), Soil Health Card, Cold Storage & Godowns, Veterinary Centre & Diagnostic labs, Crop Insurance Premium Calculator This app launched in 2016, has more than 13 lakh downloads. Strengthening/Promoting Agricultural Information System (AGRISNET): It is the scheme for strengthening the IT infrastructure of the Department and its offices. Fund allocated under the scheme is also utilized for making payment to the vendor for sending SMS through mkisan portal.

Source: PIB

What’s New

• Today’s Infographic
• Down To Earth MCQs
• Yojana MCQs
• Down To Earth Summary
• Yojana Summary
• Headlines of the Day
• Previous Year Prelims Question Paper
• Current Affairs Magazine
• UPSC CSE 2022 Prelims Analysis & Discussion
• MONTHLY MCQ CONSOLIDATION
• Daily CA MCQs

Important Links

• Previous Year UPSC Papers
• Economic Survey Summary 2021-22
• Union Budget 2022-23 At a Glance
• Economic Survey
• Toppers Answer Booklet
• Current Affairs Magazine
• MONTHLY MCQ CONSOLIDATION
• NCERTS’s
• YOUTUBE VIDEO PDF’s

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Email Address

Name

Conclusion

• Digital technology in agriculture is designed to support innovation and sustainable farm practices. To ensure its success, all changes must be holistic in their benefits.

Mains question

Q. Digital technologies are highly changing the face of agriculture and thereby farm to fork (F2F) supply chain. Discuss and also highlight the challenges in F2F supply chain.

 

Context

• Two ambitious schemes of the Central government such as Soil Health Card and mandatory neem-coating of urea were supposed to promote balanced use of fertilisers. However, far from weaning farmers from urea, annual consumption of this nitrogenous fertiliser has only risen from 30 to 35 million tonnes (mt) in the last five years.

Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

Rise in the sales of nitrogenous fertilizers

• Rise in sales of not only urea but also DAP: This year, not only have urea sales gone up by 3.7 per cent during April-October over the same period of 2021, it has grown even more, at 16.9 per cent, for di-ammonium phosphate (DAP).
• Sales are not in correct proportion: It has come even as sales of all other fertilisers including complexes containing nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), K (potash) and sulphur (S) in different proportions have fallen.
• Urea and DAP are the dominant choice of Indian farmers: In other words, instead of balanced use of plant nutrients based on soil testing and specific crop requirement, Indian farmers are effectively applying just urea and DAP both high-analysis fertilisers containing 46 per cent N and P respectively.

What are the reasons for increasing use of Urea and DAP Fertilizers?

• The non-urea fertiliser is decontrolled or fixed by the companies: The government has fixed the maximum retail price (MRP) of urea at Rs 5,628 per tonne. The MRPs of other fertilisers are technically decontrolled, but companies have been “told” not to charge more than Rs 27,000/tonne for DAP.
• Informally fixed prices are higher: The informally-fixed MRPs are higher at Rs 29,000-31,000 and Rs 34,000 per tonne for NPKS complexes and muriate of potash (MOP) respectively, but farmers have little incentive to buy at these prices.
• DAP is cheaper to apply: Farmers are reluctant to apply complexes such as 10:26:26:0, 12:32:16:0 and 20:20:0:13 when DAP is cheaper and has 46 per cent P as well as 18 per cent N.
• Price is the primary concern for over micronutrients: The fact that DAP does not contain K, S or other macro and micro nutrients wouldn’t matter to a majority of farmers. For them, choice of fertilisers is primarily a function of prices.
• Subsidies on individual ferlizers are to be blamed: Underpricing of urea (a historical phenomenon) and DAP (recent) is a product of subsidy-induced market distortions, for which the blame lies squarely with the Government.

Ideal ratio for N:P:K and effects of excessive use

• Ideal ratio v/s current NPK ratio: The effects of these the current NPK ratio is about 13:5:1, as against the ideal 4:2:1 would ultimately show up in crop yields.
• Plants will respond poorly: Plants, like humans, will respond poorly to fertilisers if only one or two nutrients are given in excess.
• Disturbs soil health: Excessive use of chemical fertilizers kills all the microorganisms available in the soil, which are so essential for maintaining soil health

What the government can do?

• Changing the subsidy policies: The Government should replace subsidies on individual fertiliser products with a flat per-hectare cash transfer, maybe twice a year.
• E- wallet account for money transfer only to purchase fertilizers: Every farmer can have an e-wallet account into which this money can be credited before the kharif and rabi planting seasons. The e-wallet may be used only for the purchase of fertilisers.
• Maintaining stock of basic fertilizers: The government can maintain a stock of basic fertilisers, including urea and DAP, to ensure no untoward price rise even in a decontrol scenario.

Have you heard? “PM PRANAM” scheme

• In order to reduce the use of chemical fertilisers by incentivising states, the Union government plans a new scheme – PM PRANAM, which stands for PM Promotion of Alternate Nutrients for Agriculture Management Yojana.
• The proposed scheme intends to reduce the subsidy burden on chemical fertilisers.
• This burden if uneased, is expected to increase to Rs 2.25 lakh crore in 2022-2023, which is 39% higher than the previous year’s figure of Rs 1.62 lakh crore.
• The scheme will not have a separate budget and will be financed by the “savings of existing fertiliser subsidy” under schemes run by the Department of fertilisers.

Conclusion

• The compulsions of electoral politics have clearly trumped concerns over soil nutrient imbalances. Price distortions in fertilisers will not help farming in the long run. Govt can offer acreage-based cash transfers.

Mains Question

Q. Despite government efforts to reduce nitrogenous fertilizers, the annual consumption of these fertilizers is increasing. Discuss the reasons and what government can do more?

(Click) FREE1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

Context

• Concerns regarding the recent recommendation for approval for the environmental release of genetically engineered (GE) mustard (“DMH-11 hybrid”) in India. The recommendation was made by the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC).

Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

What is Dhara Mustard hybrid (DMH-11)?

• DMH-11 is a hybrid variant of mustard developed by researchers at The Centre for Genetic Manipulation of Crop Plants, at the University of Delhi.
• It is a hybrid variant that was developed without transgenic technology.
• DMH-11 is a result of a cross between two varieties: Varuna and Early Heera-2. Such a cross wouldn’t have happened naturally and was done after introducing genes from two soil bacterium called barnase and barstar.
• The result is DMH-11 (where 11 refers to the number of generations after which desirable traits manifest) that not only has better yield but is also fertile. DMH-11 is a transgenic crop because it uses foreign genes from a different species.

What are the concerns?

• Not sufficient consideration: The potentially harmful long-term ecological and economic consequences of releasing DMH-11 have not received sufficient consideration.
• Details of trials not made public: Details of the mandatory trials to ensure food and environmental safety which is a prerequisite before environmental release have not been made public.
• A long-term assessment is yet to be done: a detailed long-term assessment of the potential social and economic benefits of using DMH-11, vis-à-vis its potential drawbacks, remains to be made. Without minimizing the importance of the last two aspects, the present note is restricted to highlighting the first aspect.

Examining the central Feature of DMH-11 

• Gene for herbicide resistance (HT): A central feature of DMH-11 is that it carries a gene for herbicide resistance (also termed herbicide tolerance or HT). This fact has not received appropriate consideration.
• Negatives outcomes: The deployment of herbicide-resistant or HT crops has been accompanied by deleterious outcomes in several places including the US, Australia, and Canada (so-called developed countries) as well as Argentina (a developing country).
• Consequences of herbicide resistant weeds: The most well-established harmful consequence has been the spread of herbicide-resistant weeds across large tracts of agricultural land, which can spell disaster for the normal crop.

Critical and technical analysis of DMH-11

• On the use of Basta herbicide: The developers of DMH-11 have stated in their food and environmental safety assessment submission of 2016 that “Although GE mustard hybrid DMH-11 contains the bar gene conferring resistance to the herbicide Basta (phosphinothricin), Basta herbicide is required to be used only by seed producer for hybrid seed production (and) farmers are not required to spray Basta in the hybrid GE DMH-11 for weed control”.
• Certain conditions placed by GEAC for environmental release of DMH-11:
• The GEAC in its recommendation made on October 18 for environmental release of DMH-11 has accepted this position and also placed certain conditions for environmental release.

1. Usage only under control: Usage of any formulation of herbicide is recommended only under controlled and specified conditions exclusively for hybrid seed production.
2. Requires necessary permission: Usage of any formulation of herbicide is not permitted for cultivation in the farmer’s field under any situation and such use would require the necessary permission as per procedures and protocols of safety assessment of insecticides/herbicides by CIB&RC (Central Insecticide Board and Registration Committee).”

• Knowing the facts GEAC ignoring the reports: In other words, GEAC assumes that farmers will use DMH-11 without adding herbicideeven though they know that it carries a gene for herbicide resistance. It ignores the known fact that there have been numerous recent reports in the Indian media of the illegal use of unapproved herbicide-resistant crops, which has been brought to the notice of the government.
• Registers usage on a crop-wise basis is not enough: GEAC has considered the possible use of herbicide with DMH-11 merely as a matter of herbicide usage and referred its approval to the CIB&RC, which registers usage of herbicides on a crop-wise basis. It is not enough for GEAC to merely refer it for chemical registration since the CIB&RC is not the competent body for recommending approval of GM crops.
• HT technology is different from conventional herbicides:

1. On multiple counts, HT technology is qualitatively different from the conventional use of herbicides.
2. They include the levels of herbicide used, which is much higher than in conventional use; its effect on the crop which is engineered to be resistant to the herbicide and thereby to tolerate much higher levels of herbicide and its agro-ecological impact including on agricultural biodiversity and insect populations.
3. The scope of issues connected to use of herbicide with a herbicide-resistant crop places it squarely within the purview of GM regulation (that is, GEAC).

Remarks: Developers Intent may not define how it is likely to be used

• Notwithstanding the statement of the developers and its implicit acceptance by GEAC, DMH-11 does meet the definition of an HT crop.
• The answers to two questions show this. Is DMH-11 herbicide tolerant? Yes. Is it a crop? Yes.
• The intent of the developer on how it is meant to be used does not determine how it is actually likely to be used, especially if that usage appears to confer obvious advantages.
• HT technology involves the use of a herbicide in far higher amounts than conventional herbicide treatments, high enough to kill all weeds in the field, leaving only the engineered crop to grow. Thereby, it replaces all other weed control measures.

Conclusion

• HT may be effective for a few years. But basic evolutionary considerations, as well as experience in other countries, shows that it imposes strong selective pressure for resistant weeds to emerge. They invariably do so in the course of time and spread rapidly. HT offers short-term benefits at the cost of long-term sustainability. Long term assessment is necessary before clearing its way.

Mains Question

Q. GM mustard is often in the news recently. Discuss the advantages and raised concerns over the usage of this new hybrid variety.

(Click) FREE1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

Context

• As per the United Nations’ Food and Agricultural Organization, urban and peri-urban agriculture have a significant role in global food and nutritional security, and so it is seeking to encourage such activities through the Urban Food Agenda.

What is Urban Agriculture?

• Urban agriculture refers to agricultural practices in urban and peri-urban areas. Peri-urban areas are those transitioning from rural land uses (such as for agriculture or livestock production) to urban ones (such as the built environment, manufacturing, services, and utilities), and are located between the outer limits of urban and regional centres and the rural environment.
• Cultivating food and non-food product: Urban agricultural practices are geared towards cultivating or growing a wide range of food and non-food products, and include activities such as rearing livestock, aquaculture, beekeeping, and commercial-scale floriculture.

Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

Urban Agriculture and Technology

• Farming using software: In France, for instance, certain software gives farmers access to cross-referenced information on their smartphones about the weather, spraying dates, seeds, fertilization plans, and regulatory compliance.
• Use of mobile applications: In India and the US, mobile applications can help connect urban growers and local consumers. Technology also helps food growers in precision farming, which involves mapping and monitoring geological and plant data for a field so that inputs can be adapted to suit ultra-localized needs. Local communities can be helpful in the gathering of such data.
• Aeroponics: Aero Farms in Newark, US, builds and operates vertical indoor farms to enable local production at scale and increase the availability of safe and nutritious food. The company uses aeroponics to grow leafy greens without sun or soil in a fully controlled environment. The technology enables year-round production with less water consumption and high yields per square metre.
• Container system: In Paris, a start-up called Agricool grows strawberries in containers across the city. The company retrofits old, unused containers to accommodate LED lights and aeroponics system to grow strawberries year-round. These ‘cooltainers’ are powered by clean energy and use about 90 percent less water than traditional farming activities. This can also create job opportunities for city residents in the agricultural sector.

Urban Agriculture in Indian Cities: Exploring the Potential

• Small area large population: India’s total urban area has been estimated at around 222,688 sq. km, or about 6.77 percent of the country’s geographical area. This small area is home to around 35 percent of India’s population, around 500 million Indians.
• less area to convert into green spaces: If Indian cities were to allocate 10 percent of their geographic space for greens (gardens, playgrounds, public parks and the like), as suggested in the Urban & Regional Development Plans Formulation & Implementation guidelines, this would mean 22,268 sq. km of the total urban area is available to convert into public green spaces.
• Space constraint hinders the urban agriculture: Even if half of this area (111,34 sq. km) were used for urban agriculture instead of parks, gardens, playgrounds, and horticulture, this is a mere 5 percent of all urban area and 0.56 percent of all land under agriculture in the country. This showcases the space constraints that urban agriculture must tackle.

Urban constraints and use of technology

• Raised bed farming: Raised bed farming is the agricultural technique of building freestanding crop beds above the existing soil level. In certain instances, raised beds are covered with plastic mulch to create a closed planting bed. The method helps reduce soil compaction and allows better control of the soil. The planted area also gets protected in case of excess rainfall. This method affords far greater productivity than regular farming.
• Container gardening: Container gardening refers to the practice of growing plants in containers instead of planting them on the ground. Containers could include polyethene plastic bags, clay pots, plastic pots, metallic pots, milk jugs, ice cream containers, bushel baskets, barrels, and planter box bottles. Most vegetables grown in backyard gardens can be grown in containers.
• Aquaponics: A closed-loop aquaponics system is an organic strategy that draws on the strengths of the basic ecological foundations of the nitrogen and carbon cycles. Nutrient-rich fish water is used to fertilise and water plants. This system requires only a few inputs primarily energy and some of the basic plant nutrients.
• The vertical farming: The vertical farming model essentially aims at increasing the amount of agricultural land by stacking many racks of crops vertically, thereby having many levels on the same space of land.
• Rooftop Plant Production: Under rooftop plant production (RPP) systems, food crops can be grown using raised beds, row farming, or a hydroponic greenhouse. Hydroponics is the practice of growing plants in a nutrient solution with or without a soilless substrate to provide physical support. RPP systems maximize the cultivation area with artificial lighting. RPP can be used to grow crops that require higher light intensities and more vertical space.

Conclusion

• Urban agriculture faces several constraints, but each of these can be overcome by adopting a range of technologies, establishing urban agriculture initiatives in peri-urban areas, launching community initiatives in common spaces, and altering planning parameters and city regulations to include urban agriculture as a ULB activity.

Mains Question

Q. What is the urban agriculture? What are constraints in urban agricultural practice and how to overcome those constraints? 

(Click) FREE1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more