💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (July Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS3-06.Storage, transport and marketing of Agricultural produce and issues and related constraints

  • Give reforms a chance

    Agri-bill passed by the Parliament resulted in the protest from farmers from several states. The bills have also been challenged on the legal footing as well. This article explains how the bills will benefit the farmers and also examines the legal basis used for their passage.

    States trying to nullify the agri bills passed by Parliament

    • Parliament has passed three bills on agriculture reform. This has evoked protests, largely in Punjab and Haryana.
    • Taking recourse to Article 254 of the Constitution, the Punjab government has passed its own bills to nullify some provisions of the central acts.
    • Similar action by the Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan governments seems to be on the anvil.

    Legal justification for Parliament passing the laws related to agriculture

    • The Constitution has placed agriculture on the state list.
    • Various petitions have also been filed in the Supreme Court claiming that the central laws infringe upon the jurisdiction of state governments.
    • However, it is the Centre which decides and announces support prices for major crops for the entire country.
    • It also decides issues such as bank loan waivers.
    • International agreements and multilateral trade in agricultural products also fall in the Union government’s domain.
    • Agricultural and dairy products, in fact, had a prominent role in India not joining the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).
    • Entry 33 in the concurrent list limits the power of states in agriculture, by empowering both governments to legislate on production, trade and supply of a range of agricultural foodstuffs and raw material.

    Use of Article 254 to bypass Central law

    • The Punjab bill has set in motion the process of states taking refuge under Article 254 to pass their own pieces of legislation.
    • All state bills that seek to nullify central acts have to be approved by the President after they have received the consent of the governor of the state.

    Way forward

    • Reformist chief ministers and astute policy planners should grab this opportunity and encourage investment in private infrastructure to create supply chains and give the farmer the benefit of demand-led prices.
    • They should also take appropriate action to create institutional mechanisms, such as farmer producer organisations or aggregators, to ensure greater farmer participation.

    Conclusion

    It would be in the interests of the farming community and state governments to give the much-delayed reform measures a fair chance by giving them access to competitive purchases, affording better prices.

  • Politics and economics of farm bills

    Reforms in agriculture have been overdue. But the passage of farm bills by the Parliament has evoked opposition from several stakeholders. However, the passage of bills by the Punjab Assembly is the first from any State Assembly. The article explains how politics dominates agriculture reforms and its implications for economic growth.

    States trying the negate the farm bill passed by Parliament

    • By passing its farm bills, Punjab has become the first state to legislate to negate impact of legislation enacted by Parliament last month.
    • Other states like Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh, could follow suit soon.
    • Notwithstanding whether President Ram Nath Kovind gives his assent to the state bills that undermine the central ones, the important issue is to determine how much of this conflict is about economics aimed at helping farmers and how much sheer politics.

    Issues with Punjab’s farm bills

    • Punjab’s farm bills prohibit private players from buying wheat and paddy below the MSP even outside the APMC markets.
    • It doesn’t apply to other crops, say maize, cotton, pulses and oilseeds that are under the ambit of the central MSP system.
    • The point is that this pertains only to wheat and paddy.
    • The bill could even have been extended to milk and vegetables by declaring local MSPs for them, but it didn’t do that.
    • Because the state government knows full well that it will create a fiasco in agri-markets, which might boomerang on it politically.
    • Law for wheat and paddy will not help farmers as the Centre already buys more than 95 per cent of Punjab’s wheat and paddy at MSP through the Food Corporation of India (FCI) and state procurement agencies.

    Economic roots of politics over MSP: Lessons from the past

    • Demand that MSP be made a legal instrument (rather than indicative) actually exhibit deep distrust of the private sector and markets.
    • In1972 government announced that the wholesale trade in wheat and rice (paddy) will be taken over by the government as traders were being unscrupulous in not giving farmers their due MSP and manipulating prices.
    • The first marketing season of the government takeover of wholesale wheat trade, in 1973-74, saw a major fiasco.
    • Market arrivals dropped, and wheat prices shot up by more than 50 per cent. It was a bitter lesson.

    Long overdue reforms in agriculture

    • Economic reforms in 1991 took some time to yield results, but, by the 2000s, India was taking 7 per cent.
    • But even the 1991 economic reforms bypassed agriculture marketing reforms.
    • It was only in 2003, a model act on agri-marketing was circulated to the states.
    • But that model act did not go far enough.
    • From 2004 to 2014 government did not pursue any major agri-marketing reforms.
    • In food government enacted the National Food Security Act in 2013, giving 5 kg wheat or rice to 67 per cent of the population at Rs 2/kg and Rs 3/kg.
    • A high-level committee (HLC) under Shanta Kumar was formed in 2014 to restructure the grain management system.
    • The committee suggested major changes, including cash transfers in the public distribution system, and overhauling the FCI’s operations and free markets to make the system more efficient.
    • But the government could not undertake bold reforms, except some marginal tinkering of labour rules in the FCI.

    Conclusion

    The COVID-19 crisis opened a window of opportunity to reform the agri-marketing system. The government grabbed it — this is somewhat akin to the crisis of 1991 leading to de-licensing of industry. Patience and professionalism will bring rich rewards in due course, not noisy politics.

  • [pib] Asafoetida (Heeng) cultivation in Himalayan Region

    Farmers of the remote Lahaul valley in Himachal Pradesh are taking up cultivation of asafoetida (Heeng) to utilize vast expanses of waste land in the cold desert conditions of the region.

    Try this PYQ:
    Q.Which one of the following reflects back more sunlight as compared to other three?
    (a) Sand desert
    (b) Paddy crop land
    (c) Land covered with fresh snow
    (d) Prairie land

    Asafoetida cultivation in India

    • Asafoetida is one of the top condiments and is a high-value spice crop in India.
    • Raw asafoetida is extracted from the fleshy roots of Ferula assafoetida as an oleo-gum resin.
    • Although, there are about 130 species of Ferula found in the world, but only Ferula asafoetidais the economically important species used for the production of asafoetida.

    Why cultivate it?

    • Heeng is not cultivated in India.
    • Government data states that India imports about 1,200 tonnes of raw heeng worth Rs 600 crore from Iran, Afghanistan and Uzbekistan.

    Regions for its cultivation

    • Asafoetida best grows in dry and cold conditions.
    • The plant can withstand a maximum temperature between 35 and 40 degree, whereas during winters, it can survive in temperatures up to minus 4 degree.
    • During extreme weather, the plant can get dormant.
    • Regions with sandy soil, very little moisture and annual rainfall of not more than 200mm are considered conducive for heeng cultivation in India.

  • Farm Bills latest step in sequential freeing up of farm sector

    The recently passed agri bills seek to expand the choices and opportunities available with the farmers and will help in increasing their income.

    Diversified product segment

    • The Minimum Support Price (MSP) evolved as a mechanism to guard farmers against supply and demand shocks in the cereals segment. 
    •  Now, however, farmers and agricultural producers have diversified their product segments, cereals no longer dominate production.
    • In the last decade itself, India has witnessed tremendous change in the GVA composition of the agri-sector.
    • The share of crops has decreased from 65.4% in 2011-12 to 55.3% in 2018-19, projected to further fall to 45.6% in 2024-25.
    •  In the same period, value add of livestock and fishing & aquaculture is steadily increasing, as are the total value outputs of sub-segments like horticulture, milk and meat.
    • With differentiated production strategies that are less reliant on cereals and more on other segments, farmers are accruing better incomes.
    • By diversifying their produce, they are moving away from one-crop risks.

    Government schemes and policies

    • Keeping farmers dependent on subsidies and restricted by APMCs, and acts like the Essential Commodities Act wasn’t in the nation’s long-term interests.
    • Recognising this, the government has been making sequential changes in the system.
    • It started with the introduction of the National Agriculture Market (e-NAM) to facilitate online trading of agri-produce.
    • Then PM-KISAN was introduced to provide minimum income support to nine crore marginal farmers, at Rs 6,000 annually.
    • The KISAN credit card with an allotment of a total of Rs 2 lakh crore credit to maintain larger workforces and implements during harvest season is helping farmers plan and organise their harvests better.
    • The Rs 1 lakh crore Agri Infrastructure Fund as part of Atmanirbhar Bharat Abhiyan will help by the creation of agri-infrastructure.

    Need for structural changes

    • The government recently passed three agri-bills, these are:-
    • 1) The Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce Bill.
    • 2) Farmers Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill.
    • 3) Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill.
    • They enable farmers the freedom to diversify their crops and produce, which reduces mono-crop dependence and increases income avenues.
    • They can also now sell their produce anywhere, to the highest bidder across the country.
    • The farmers are no longer are they required to go to the mandis where they are subject to middlemen and layers of bureaucracy.
    • Contract farming enable farmers them to boost the value-add of their products via contracts and assured procurement by the food processing industries.
    • Retaining the MSP system means the government is underwriting the whole network for certain crops to ensure farmers receive assured income for those crops.

    Focusing on the export market

    • The passage of agri bills gives India the long-awaited opportunity to orient its agriculture sector towards export markets.
    • By catering to just the Indian economy, the exposure is hardly $3 trillion ; instead, export-orientation caters to an $82 trillion global economy —a 27x expansion.
    • India’s agri exports in 2018 were at $38.5 billion.
    • India can comfortably triple this by providing infrastructure for grading, sorting, and supply chain distribution.

    Conclusion

    The farm Bills are liberating farmers at a pivotal juncture, the nation and farmers have a generational opportunity here to break out of a 70-year sectoral stagnation and aim bigger.

    Source:-

    https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agri-reforms-farm-bills-latest-step-in-sequential-freeing-up-of-farm-sector/2107611/

  • Lessons from Bihar’s abolition of its APMC system for farmers

    The article analyses the results of complete abolition of APMC in Bihar in the context of current protest against the agri bills.

    Context

    • Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, 2020 has been a source of anger among farmers.
    • By allowing unregulated trading areas beyond APMC mandis, the law seeks to remove intermediaries from agricultural trade and raise price realization for farmers.

    Excessive politicization of APMCs

    • APMC’s excessive politicization has resulted in cartelization and price-fixing.
    • For this reason, there have been several attempts at reforming their functioning.
    • Easier licensing norms, the removal of entry and exit barriers and computerization and transparency have been introduced in most APMC markets.
    • However, the Bihar government decided to abolish the APMC system altogether in 2006.

    Analysing the impact of abolition of APMC in Bihar

    • It was hoped that abolition would ensure better prices for farmers of the state and attract large sums of private investment.
    • Before their abolition, Bihar had 95 market yards, of which 54 had infrastructure such as covered yards, godowns and administrative buildings, weighbridges, and processing as well as grading units.
    •  With no revenue to maintain it, that infrastructure is now in a dilapidated condition.
    •  A study by the National Council for Applied Economic Research reported increased volatility in grain prices after 2006.
    • Most of the farmers surveyed reported high storage costs at private warehouses.
    • Farmers this year in Bihar received lower price for maize compared to the farmers in states with APMC.

    Lessons from Bihar

    • The Bihar experiment has important lessons for future marketing reforms in agriculture.
    • The benefits of these reforms will only accrue to farmers if they are accompanied by private investment in creating the physical infrastructure and institutional mechanisms needed to allow for greater participation of farmers.
    • The record of states on attracting private investment isn’t much better.

    Conclusion

    By only attempting to shift trade away from APMC to non-APMC areas, without a regulatory framework, the new law is unlikely to ensure better price realization for farmers.

  • Putting farmers first

    The faremers have been protesting against the agri bill. This article explains the rationale behind the bill and how it could help the farmers.

    Challenges Indian agriculture face

    • Indian agriculture has been characterised by fragmentation due to small holding sizes, weather dependence, production uncertainties, huge wastage and market unpredictability.
    • This makes agriculture risky and inefficient with respect to both input and output management.

    Recent steps to help farmers

    • The  government has taken various steps in this direction, for example-
    • The implementation of the Swaminathan committee’s recommendation regarding fixing MSP at least 50 per cent profits on the cost of production.
    • Increasing the agri budget by more than 11 times in the past 10 years.
    • Establishing e-NAM mandis.
    • An Agriculture Infrastructure Fund of Rs 1 lakh crore under the Atmanirbhar Bharat Package, the scheme for the formation of 10,000 FPOs, etc.

    What the agri bills seek to achieve

    • The bills will create an ecosystem where farmers and traders enjoy the freedom of choice of sale and purchase of farming produce.
    • This freedom of choice will help to facilitate remunerative prices to farmers through competitive alternative trading channels.
    • This will promote barrier-free inter-state and intra-state trade and commerce of farming produce outside the physical premises of markets notified under state agricultural produce marketing legislation.
    • The farm bills also lay the ground of a legal framework for fair and transparent farming agreements between farmers and sponsors.
    • This framework will facilitate greater certainty in quality and price, adoption of quality and grading standards, linkage of farming agreements with insurance and credit instruments and also enable the farmer to access modern technology and better inputs.
    • These recommendations have been made by the Swaminathan Committee, which suggested the removal of the mandi tax, creation of a single market and facilitating contract farming.

    Safeguard in the bill

    • The bill have several safeguards such as the prohibition of sale, lease or mortgage of farmers’ land and farmers’ land is also protected against any recovery.
    • Farming agreements cannot be entered into, if they are in derogation of the rights of a sharecropper.
    • Farmers will have access to flexible prices subject to a guaranteed price in agreements.
    • The sponsor has to ensure the timely acceptance of delivery and payment of produce to farmers and farmers’ liability is limited to only the advance received and cost of inputs provided by the sponsor.
    • Disputes will be resolved through a Conciliation Board, to be constituted by the sub-divisional magistrate (SDM), failing which an aggrieved party may approach the concerned SDM for the settlement of the dispute.

    Consider the question “What are the changes introduced by the two recent bills passed by the government related to agri markets and contract farming how will these changes be helpful to the farmers?”

    Conclusion

    These farm bills will bring transformative changes in our agricultural sector and reduce wastage, increase efficiency, unlock value for our farmers and increase farmers’ incomes.

  • Understanding the opposition of farmers to agriculture Bills

    The article analyses the issue of farmers opposition to the three agricultural bills.

    Context

    • Farmers have been protesting against the three bills related to agriculture.
    • These three Bills are-
    • 1) The Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, 2020
    • 2) The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill, 2020.
    • 3) The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill, 2020.

    What are the aims of the bills?

    • The Bills aim to do away with government interference in agricultural trade by creating trading areas outside the structure of Agricultural Produce Market Committees (APMCs).
    • One of the bills aims at removing restrictions of private stockholding (under Essential Commodities Act 1955) of agricultural produce.
    • One of the bills deals with the regulation of contract farming.

    Issues with the Bills

    • The government has failed to hold any discussion with the various stakeholders including farmers and middlemen.
    • The attempt to pass the Bills without proper consultation adds to the mistrust among various stakeholders including State governments.
    • Farmer organisations see these Bills as an attempt to weaken the APMCs and eventual withdrawal of the Minimum Support Prices (MSP).
    • Farmers in Punjab and Haryana have genuine concern about the continuance of the MSP-based public procurement given the large-scale procurement operations in these States.

    Understanding the role of APMC

    • APMCs do play an important role of price discovery essential for agricultural trade and production choices.
    • The middlemen are a part of the larger ecosystem of agricultural trade, with deep links between farmers and traders.
    • The preference for corporate interests at the cost of farmers’ interests and a lack of regulation in these non-APMC mandis are cause for concern.
    • To understand the role of APMC, consider the example of Bihar.
    • After Bihar abolished APMCs in 2006, farmers in Bihar on average received lower prices compared to the MSP for most crops.
    • Despite the shortcomings and regional variations, farmers still see the APMC mandis as essential to ensuring the survival of MSP regime.

    Conclusion

    The protests by farmers are essentially a reflection of the mistrust between farmers and the stated objective of these reforms.

  • Agricultural reform bills introduced in Parliament

    Farmers in Punjab and Haryana have been protesting against three ordinances promulgated by the Centre back in June this year.  After the Monsoon Session of Parliament began this week, the government has introduced three Bills to replace these ordinances.

    Try this PYQ:

    The economic cost of food grains to the Food Corporation of India is Minimum Support Price and bonus (if any) paid to the farmers plus:

    (a) Transportation cost only

    (b) Interest cost only

    (c) Procurement incidentals and distribution cost

    (d) Procurement incidentals and charges for godowns

    What are these ordinances?

    The ordinances included:

    • The Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Ordinance, 2020;
    • The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Ordinance, 2020; and
    • The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020 (It is the Bill replacing the third that has been passed in Lok Sabha)

    The cause of discontent

    • While farmers are protesting against all three ordinances, their objections are mostly against the provisions of the first.
    • Their concerns are mainly about sections relating to “trade area”, “trader”, “dispute resolution” and “market fee” in the first ordinance.

    What is a ‘trade area’, as mentioned in the Bill?

    • Section 2(m) of The Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Ordinance, 2020 defines “trade area” as any area or location, place of production, collection and aggregation.
    • It includes (a) farm gates; (b) factory premises; (c) warehouses; (d) silos; (e) cold storages; or (f) any other structures or places, from where the trade of farmers’ produce may be undertaken in the territory of India.
    • In effect, existing mandis established under APMC Acts have been excluded from the definition of trade area under the new legislation.
    • The government says the creation of an additional trade area outside of mandis will provide farmers with the freedom of choice to conduct trade in their produce.

    Why are farmers protesting?

    • The protesters say this provision will confine APMC mandis to their physical boundaries and give a free hand to big corporate buyers.
    • The APMC mandi system has developed very well as every mandi caters to 200-300 villages.
    • But the new ordinance has confined the mandis to their physical boundaries.

    What is ‘trader’ and how is it linked to the protests?

    • Section 2(n) of the first ordinance defines a “trader” as “a person who buys farmers’ produce by way of inter-State trade or intra-State trade or a combination thereof.
    • Thus, it includes processor, exporter, wholesaler, miller, and retailer.
    • According to the Ministry of the Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare, “Any trader with a PAN card can buy the farmers’ produce in the trade area.”
    • In the present mandi system, arhatiyas (commission agents) have to get a licence to trade in a mandi.
    • The protesters say arhatiyas have credibility as their financial status is verified during the licence approval process.

    Why does the provision on ‘market fee’ worry protesters?

    • Section 6 states that no market fee or cess or levy, by whatever name called, under any State APMC Act or any other State law, shall be levied in a trade area.
    • Government officials say this provision will reduce the cost of the transaction and will benefit both the farmers and the traders.
    • Under the existing system, such charges in states like Punjab come to around 8.5% — a market fee of 3%, a rural development charge of 3% and the arhatiya’s commission of about 2.5%.
    • By removing the fee on trade, the government is indirectly incentivizing big corporates.

  • Redefining a farmer

    The article analyses the issues of multiple definitions of a farmer. The issues of ownership as a criterion for being a farmer and its impact on tenant farmers in discussed.

    Is land ownership right criterion

    • Traditionally, land ownership is a mandatory criterion for availing benefits under various agricultural schemes in India.
    • Laws governing land leasing operate at different levels across India.
    • The Model Agricultural Land Leasing Act, 2016 was introduced to formalise land leasing.
    • However, except a few States, a majority of State governments have not extended the scope of the Act to farmers.
    • According to the 2015-16 agricultural census, about 2.65 million operational holdings are either partially or wholly leased.

    How this impact tenants

    • The impact of agrarian distress is felt disproportionately by tenant farmers.
    • The tenant farmer incurs the costs and faces the risks, while the owner receives the rent, subsidies and other support.
    • The lessees do not benefit from loan waivers, moratorium and institutional credit, and are forced to be at the mercy of moneylenders.
    • The distress is reflected in the fact that tenant farmers account for a majority of farmer suicides reported in the NCRB data.

    Multiple definitions of farmers

    • There are multiple definitions for a ‘farmer’ in official data published by the Government of India.
    • The population census defines ‘cultivators’ as a person engaged in cultivation of land either ‘owned’ or held in kind or share.
    • The 59th round of the Situation Assessment Survey (SAS) of farmers also stresses on ‘possession of land’ either owned or leased or otherwise possessed for defining ‘farmers’.
    • Delinking of land as the defining criterion for a ‘farmer’ was done in the 70th round of SAS carried out by the NSSO.
    • The 70th Round of NSSO refined the definition of a farmer as one who earns a major part of the income from farming. 

    Conclusion

    Access to land as a policy instrument in bringing about equitable growth of rural economies needs no further emphasis. However, until the time ‘land to the tiller’ remains just wishful thinking, adopting a broader definition of a ‘farmer’ is a short-term solution to ensure inclusive and sustainable growth.

  • Making agricultural reforms successful

    The article analyses the issues with the reforms in the agricultural marketing policies.

    Recent reforms in agricultural marketing

    • The 3 recent reforms in agricultural marketing bring major changes in policy.
    • The removal of restrictions under the Essential Commodities Act (ECA) should help attract private investment in agriculture.
    • The two new ordinances are expected to enable inter-State trade and promote contract farming, thereby providing a large number of options to farmers.

    Concerns that need to be addressed

    1) Policy credibility problem

    • The first problem is ‘time-inconsistency’ problem or the policy credibility problem.
    • This situation arises when a decision maker’s preferences change over time in such a way that the preferences are inconsistent at different points in time.
    • Because the policy signals are not very clear in the last few years as relates to agricultural marketing, as we will see below.
    • This clarity of clear signal is reflected in rollout of multiple schemes: e-NAM, PM-AASHA, PM-KISAN.
    • In 2016, the electronic national agricultural market (e-NAM) was launched with a lot of fanfare.
    • States needed to amend their respective Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) Acts.
    • Several States could not or did not carry out these amendments and the e-NAM proved to be far less effective than desired.
    • As a result, the government reverted back to public price support by launching an ambitious programme, PM-AASHA, in September 2018.
    • The programme was confined to pulses and oilseeds to limit the fiscal costs.
    • However, the initial budgetary outlay did not match the level of ambition of the programme.
    • In addition to the PM-AASHA programme, two Model Acts were formulated by the Central government in 2017 and 2018 to promote agricultural marketing and contract farming in States.
    • States were required to legislate these Model Acts.
    • However, progress has been tardy and many States have not adopted the Model Acts.
    • This uninspiring performance of PM-AASHA necessitated a more radical and direct approach.
    • Thus evolved the PM-KISAN, a direct cash transfer programme, in the interim Budget of 2019-2020 (February 2019).
    • This programme involved a fixed payment of ₹6,000 per annum to each farm household with a budgetary outlay of ₹75,000 crore.
    • The frequent flip-flops in farm policy — from a market-based e-NAM to a public funded PM-AASHA and now back to market-based measures — may not inspire much confidence in the minds of private investors about the continuance of the present policies.

    2) Centre-State and State-State relations

    • Recent Ordinances were passed by the Central Government using the constitutional provisions but the implementation of the same vests with the States.
    • Also, inter-State trade involves movement of goods across the State boundaries.
    • Thus, coordination between the Central and the State governments, and also among various States becomes crucial.
    • Also, the States must have faced several problems in legislating and implementing the earlier Model Acts.
    • Thus, the Centre must engage with the States about these constraints in order to iron out the potential problems in the implementation of the ordinances.

    3) Multiple market failures and the resultant inter-linkage of rural markets

    • Absence or failure of credit and insurance markets may lead a farmer to depend upon the local input dealer.
    • This, in turn, may tie him to these intermediaries and constrain his choice of output markets.
    • Similarly, the widespread restrictions on land leasing in many States lead to an inefficient scale of production.
    • Thus, reforms in the output market alone are not sufficient.
    • Reforms in output must be supplemented and complemented with the liberalisation of the lease market and better access to credit and insurance markets.

    Consider the question “What are the reform measures taken by the government to deal with the issues in the agricultural marketing by farmers? What are the concerns with such measures?”

    Conclusion

    In conclusion, consistency in policy, collaborative approach and complementary reforms are necessary for the success of the recent agricultural market reforms.

    Back2Basics: Agricultural reform

    Read in detail about the 3 reforms form here-

    Agri reforms and way forward