Context

In the run-up to the repeal of the three farm laws, the potential cost of MSP to the taxpayers became a matter of debate.

Issue of MSP

• Large variation: Experts and agricultural economists quoted numbers about the cost of MPS.
• There is a large variation in the quoted numbers.
• The enormity of the variance in estimates is astounding.
• No consensus on the number of beneficiaries of MSP: There is also a dissonance between the NSSO data and the administrative data on the number of farmers who enjoy MSP.
• No consensus on a formula to calculate MSP: Further, there is no consensus on the formulae for the calculation of MSP.

Suggestions on land reforms

[1] Reduce high domestic prices

• That India is an agri-surplus country.
• That domestic prices of agri-commodities are often higher than in the international market and therefore, there is a need to bring them down.
• How to achieve cost reduction: Cost reduction can happen either by creating efficiencies by plugging leakages or, by cost-cutting — including reducing farmers’ margins.
• In the recently-reached understanding with the farmers, the government has agreed to constitute a committee on MSP.
• Hopefully, a formula can be arrived at by which costs of domestic agricultural produce can be reduced while ensuring a “remunerative price” for the farmers.

[2] Protecting landholdings

• There is also a need to protect landholdings.
• Farmers’ fears in this regard are not exaggerated.
• Under the erstwhile laws, orders of payment made by an SDM/Collector could be recovered as “arrears of land revenue”.
• While agricultural lands were protected from such recovery, non-agricultural (immovable and movable) assets appeared to be fair game.
• Further, circumstances such as sustenance and payment of debts could force a farmer to sell their agricultural landholdings.
• Large-scale loss of landholdings could lead to their consolidation in the hands of a few.
• This could have the impact of turning the clock back, reminiscent of the Zamindari system.

[3] Need to reconsider the dispute resolution mechanism

• The government should also reconsider the dispute resolution mechanism provided in the erstwhile laws.
• In an MSP driven regime, the government is likely to be a party in any potential dispute.
• Conflict of interest: There will be a direct conflict of interest since the SDM/Collector is an arm of the government.
• Land records are within the jurisdiction of the patwari and tehsildar, who report to the SDM/Collector.
• Fast track courts: It would be advisable to think in terms of fast-track courts, and remove the provision of recovery through arrears of land revenue.
• It would also be advisable to have only one dispute resolution mechanism for all farm laws.

[4] Avoid over-corporatisation without the creation of the requisite efficiencies

• We should not ask our farmers to brave corporatisation without levelling the playing field and enough jobs in the non-agricultural sector.
• Over-corporatisation without the creation of the requisite efficiencies could lead us to become heavily import-dependent, killing the benefits of the Green Revolution.

Conclusion

Perfunctory reforms and those that don’t work for all constituents — corporates as well as farmers — could have long-term deleterious effects for not only the agricultural sector, but the economy as a whole.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now