💥Crack UPSC In 1st Attempt | Admission Open | Ultimate Assessment Program 2027/2028
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Agriculture

  • How rice farmers can cut methane and make money off it

    Introduction

    Rice cultivation traditionally relies on continuous flooding, creating anaerobic soil conditions conducive to methane-producing bacteria. Given that over 86% of Indian farmers are small and marginal, scalable, low-cost mitigation practices are essential. Alternate Wetting and Drying (AWD) comes across as a practical solution that reduces emissions without yield loss, supported by empirical data from Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, and Tamil Nadu.

    Why in the News?

    Paddy cultivation contributes 28% of global methane emissions, with methane having 28 times the global warming potential of CO₂ over 100 years. The article highlights a first-of-its-kind, farmer-level implementation in India where Alternate Wetting and Drying (AWD) reduced methane emissions while enabling farmers to earn carbon credits. Unlike earlier mitigation efforts focused only on productivity, this approach integrates climate finance, water conservation, and income generation, marking a structural shift in rice farming practices.

    Why Does Traditional Paddy Cultivation Produce High Methane Emissions?

    1. Continuous Flooding: Maintains 4-5 cm water depth for the first 65 days of the crop cycle.
    2. Anaerobic Conditions: Support methanogenic microbes that decompose organic matter.
    3. Emission Intensity: Methane is 28 times more potent than CO₂ in warming potential.
    4. Global Impact: Paddy cultivation accounts for 28% of global methane emissions.

    What Is Alternate Wetting and Drying (AWD)?

    1. Irrigation Technique: Periodic drying of fields instead of continuous flooding.
    2. Operational Threshold: Irrigation resumes when water level falls to 15 cm below soil surface.
    3. Adoption Window: Implemented after first 20 days of transplantation.
    4. Institutional Support: Promoted by International Rice Research Institute (IRRI).

    How Does AWD Reduce Methane Emissions Without Yield Loss?

    1. Aeration of Soil: Disrupts methane-producing microbial activity.
    2. Water Savings: Reduces irrigation requirement significantly.
    3. Yield Stability: No statistically significant reduction in grain output.
    4. Ancillary Benefits: Lower weed pressure and improved nutrient efficiency.

    What Evidence Supports the Effectiveness of AWD in India?

    1. Field Study: Conducted across 30 sites in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.
    2. Emission Reduction: Methane emissions reduced by 20-40%.
    3. Water Use: Comparable decline in irrigation water requirement.
    4. Scalability: Validated across varied agro-climatic conditions.

    How Are Farmers Monetising Methane Reduction?

    1. Measurement: Acrylic chambers used to quantify methane emissions.
    2. Verification: Samples analysed in accredited laboratories.
    3. Carbon Credits: 1 carbon credit = 1 tonne CO₂ equivalent.
    4. Earnings: ₹1,300-₹7,000 per farmer per season depending on region.
    5. Aggregation Model: Credits pooled and sold to international buyers.

    What Institutional Models Are Enabling This Transition?

    1. Climate Tech Intermediaries: Facilitate monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV).
    2. Carbon Markets: Buyers include energy-intensive global corporations.
    3. Corporate Partnerships: Shell Energy India supported AWD adoption.
    4. Scale: Over 12,000 farmers across 13 states integrated.

    Conclusion

    The article demonstrates that methane mitigation in rice farming is technically feasible, economically viable, and scalable. By linking irrigation practices with carbon markets, AWD represents a paradigm shift where climate action strengthens farm incomes rather than constraining them.

    Value Addition

    Scale of Methane Emissions from Agriculture

    1. Global Share: Agriculture contributes ~40% of global anthropogenic methane emissions.
    2. India’s Context: Agriculture is the largest source of methane emissions in India, exceeding energy and waste sectors.
    3. Paddy Cultivation: Responsible for ~28-30% of global agricultural methane emissions.
    4. Livestock: Enteric fermentation from ruminants contributes ~32-35% of agricultural methane.
    5. Climate Impact: Methane has ~28-34 times higher Global Warming Potential (GWP) than CO₂ over 100 years and ~80 times over 20 years.

    Other Proven Models to Cut Methane Emissions in Agriculture

    1. Direct Seeded Rice (DSR)
      1. Mechanism: Eliminates continuous flooding by sowing seeds directly.
      2. Outcome: Reduces methane emissions by 20-50%.
      3. Co-benefits: Lower water use, reduced labour costs.
      4. Limitation: Higher weed management requirement.
    2. System of Rice Intensification (SRI)
      1. Mechanism: Wider plant spacing, intermittent irrigation, younger seedlings.
      2. Outcome: Reduces methane emissions due to improved soil aeration.
      3. Productivity: Often increases yield with lower input intensity.
      4. Constraint: High skill and labour precision required.
    3. Mid-Season Drainage
      1. Mechanism: Temporary drainage during tillering stage.
      2. Outcome: Interrupts anaerobic conditions, suppressing methanogenesis.
      3. Adoption: Practiced in parts of East Asia and Southeast Asia.
      4. Risk: Needs precise timing to avoid yield stress.
    4. Straw and Residue Management
      1. Mechanism: Avoids incorporation of fresh organic matter in flooded fields.
      2. Outcome: Reduces methane formation from anaerobic decomposition.
      3. Best Practice: Composting or biochar conversion of rice straw.
    5. Biochar Application
      1. Mechanism: Alters soil microbial activity and improves aeration.
      2. Outcome: Reduces methane emissions while enhancing soil carbon storage.
      3. Co-benefit: Improves soil fertility and water retention.
    6. Feed Additives in Livestock (Complementary Model)
      1. Examples: Seaweed-based additives, 3-NOP compounds.
      2. Outcome: Reduce enteric methane emissions by 20-80%.
      3. Status: Pilot-stage in India; commercial use expanding globally.
    7. Market-Based Methane Mitigation Instruments
      1. Carbon Credits: 1 credit = 1 tonne CO₂ equivalent avoided.
      2. Aggregation Models: Smallholder emissions pooled for viability.
      3. Buyers: Energy, aviation, cement, and data-centre industries.
      4. Trend: Shift from voluntary offsets to high-integrity, agriculture-based credits.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2020] What are the major factors responsible for making the rice-wheat system a success? In spite of this success, how has this system become a bane in India?

    Linkage: The article directly addresses the environmental externalities of flooded paddy cultivation, especially methane emissions and water stress, which constitute the “bane” aspect of the rice-based system. 

  • India’s status as world’s rice leader augurs a water crisis

    Introduction

    Rice production has expanded sharply due to assured procurement, rising subsidies, and export demand. However, groundwater-dependent irrigation has become the dominant mode in northern India. Despite strong monsoons in recent years, extraction rates exceed natural recharge. Government classification of aquifers as “over-exploited” or “critical” signals a structural imbalance between agricultural policy and water resource sustainability.

    Why in the News

    India overtook China to become the world’s largest rice producer in 2023, exporting nearly double the quantity compared to the past decade and producing over 140 million tonnes of rice. While this achievement was politically and economically celebrated, it has intensified groundwater extraction in Punjab and Haryana. Borewell depths have increased from 30-40 feet to 80-200 feet, indicating rapid aquifer depletion. Rice cultivation in India consumes 3,000-4,000 litres of water per kg, 20-60% higher than the global average, turning agricultural success into a water sustainability concern of national scale.

    How did India become the world’s largest rice producer?

    1. Production Expansion: Annual rice output exceeded 140 million tonnes, surpassing China in 2023.
    2. Export Growth: Rice exports nearly doubled in the past decade due to global demand and domestic surplus.
    3. Policy Support: Minimum Support Price (MSP) assurance ensured farmer preference for rice cultivation.

    Why is rice cultivation intensifying groundwater stress?

    1. High Water Requirement: Producing one kilogram of rice requires 3,000-4,000 litres of water, exceeding global norms by 20-60%.
    2. Groundwater Dependence: Punjab and Haryana rice farmers primarily rely on borewell irrigation.
    3. Aquifer Depletion: Groundwater levels declined from 30-40 feet to 80-200 feet, indicating unsustainable extraction.

    What role do subsidies play in water over-extraction?

    1. Electricity Subsidies: Free or low-cost power encourages excessive pumping of groundwater.
    2. Price Incentives: Rice prices increased by ~70% over the past decade, reinforcing crop preference.
    3. Input Distortion: Subsidies discourage transition to less water-intensive crops.

    Why are Punjab and Haryana particularly vulnerable?

    1. Irrigation Pattern: Dominant reliance on groundwater over surface irrigation systems.
    2. Weak Monsoon Resilience: Despite strong rainfall, extraction continues beyond recharge capacity.
    3. Critical Classification: Aquifers in both states fall under “over-exploited” or “critical” categories.

    How does groundwater stress threaten food security?

    1. Farmer Costs: Deeper borewells require higher capital and energy inputs.
    2. Production Risk: Aquifer depletion increases vulnerability to weak monsoons.
    3. Systemic Stress: India produces more rice than domestic requirements, amplifying water stress without proportional food security gains.

    What corrective signals are emerging?

    1. Crop Diversification Incentives: Haryana introduced ₹17,500 per hectare subsidy for switching to less water-intensive crops.
    2. Policy Limitation: Incentives are seasonal and lack long-term assurance.
    3. Institutional Recognition: Government data acknowledges unsustainable groundwater extraction trends.

    Way Forward

    1. Crop Diversification
      1. Shift Incentivisation: Expands cultivation of less water-intensive crops such as pulses and oilseeds through multi-year income assurance.
      2. Procurement Reform: Aligns MSP and assured procurement with water-efficient cropping patterns.
    2. Rationalisation of Subsidies
      1. Power Pricing: Reduces indiscriminate groundwater pumping by restructuring free electricity for agriculture.
      2. Input Targeting: Replaces universal subsidies with direct income support decoupled from water use.
    3. Water-Efficient Irrigation
      1. Micro-Irrigation Expansion: Enhances adoption of drip and sprinkler systems to improve water productivity.
      2. Alternate Wetting and Drying (AWD): Reduces water use in paddy cultivation without yield loss.
    4. Groundwater Governance
      1. Aquifer Management: Strengthens block-level monitoring and annual recharge-extraction audits.
      2. Regulatory Enforcement: Restricts borewell depth expansion in over-exploited zones.
    5. Export Rationalisation
      1. Water Footprint Accounting: Integrates virtual water costs into export policy decisions.
      2. Surplus Management: Aligns export volumes with regional water availability.

    Conclusion

    India’s rise as the world’s largest rice producer reflects policy certainty, farmer responsiveness, and export competitiveness. However, the same policy framework has accelerated groundwater depletion in key agrarian states. Without reorienting incentives toward water-efficient agriculture, food security gains risk becoming ecologically unsustainable. Long-term agricultural resilience requires aligning production, procurement, and irrigation policy with groundwater realities rather than output maximisation alone.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2020] What are the major factors responsible for making the rice-wheat system a success? In spite of this success, how has this system become a bane in India?

    Linkage: This question directly links to MSP-led rice expansion, groundwater-intensive irrigation, and subsidy-driven cropping patterns, as highlighted in India’s rise as the world’s largest rice producer.

  • Camellia sinensis

    Why in the News?

    • The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India clarified that a beverage can be legally called tea only if it is derived from the plant Camellia sinensis.

    About Camellia sinensis

    • Belongs to the family Theaceae
    • Commonly known as the tea plant
    • Primary source of green tea, black tea, oolong tea, and white tea
    • Grows as a shrub or evergreen tree
    • Can reach a height of up to 16 metres
    • Widely cultivated on mountain slopes
    • Thrives at altitudes up to 2200 metres

    Required Climatic Conditions

    • Temperature range of 15°C to 23°C
    • Requires a warm and humid climate
    • Needs at least 5 hours of sunlight daily
    • Annual rainfall of 150 to 300 cm, evenly distributed
    • Prefers slightly acidic, calcium free soil
    • Requires porous sub soil
    • Sloping terrain essential for proper drainage

    Global Distribution

    • Cultivated in subtropical and warm temperate regions
    • Native to South east Asia
    • Major tea producing countries include China, India, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Japan, Korea and Malaysia

    Prelims Pointers

    • All true teas come from Camellia sinensis
    • Herbal or flower infusions are not tea under FSSAI norms
    • Tea prefers acidic soils and high rainfall
    • Oxidation level differentiates green, oolong, black, and white teas
    Though coffee and tea both are cultivated on hill slopes, there is some difference between them regarding their cultivation. In this context, consider the following statements: (2010)

    1. Coffee plant requires a hot and humid climate of tropical areas whereas tea can be cultivated in both tropical and subtropical areas. 

    2. Coffee is propagated by seeds but tea is propagated by stem cuttings only. 

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct? 

    (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2

  • Reforming the fertiliser subsidy demands political courage, offers high rewards

    Introduction

    India’s fertiliser subsidy, the second-largest subsidy after food, has expanded rapidly due to rising global energy prices, import dependence, and skewed pricing policies. In 2024-25, the subsidy is estimated to touch nearly ₹2 lakh crore, with projections of ₹2.5 lakh crore in FY26. The article argues not for withdrawal, but for reorientation of subsidies to correct price signals, improve nutrient balance, and enhance productivity while protecting farmers’ incomes.

    Why Fertiliser Subsidy Reform Is Back in Focus

    1. Fiscal Expansion: Fertiliser subsidy projected at ~₹2.5 lakh crore in FY26, compared to ₹1.37 lakh crore allocated to agriculture and farmers’ welfare.
    2. Policy Asymmetry: Urea prices remain fixed and among the cheapest globally, while DAP and MOP prices are decontrolled.
    3. Macroeconomic Risk: Heavy import dependence, ~78% for natural gas, ~90% for phosphatic fertilisers, and near-total dependence for potash, exposes India to global commodity shocks.
    4. Structural Distortion: Price controls undercut the Nutrient-Based Subsidy (NBS) regime introduced in 2010.
    5. Reform Window: Stable growth and low inflation provide a favourable macroeconomic context for politically difficult reforms.

    How Price Controls Have Distorted Nutrient Use

    1. Urea Price Fixation: Urea sold at a fixed price of ~₹242 per 45-kg bag encourages excessive nitrogen use.
    2. NBS Design Flaw: Subsidy linked to nutrient content for P and K, but not applied uniformly to urea.
    3. Skewed Consumption: Farmers over-apply nitrogen while under-applying phosphorus and potassium.
    4. N:P:K Ratio Collapse: National ratio deteriorated to ~10.9:4:1 against the recommended 4:2:1.
    5. State-Level Distortion: Punjab applies ~61% more nitrogen than recommended, underuses potassium by ~89%, and phosphorus by ~8%.

    What Data Reveal About Productivity Outcomes

    1. China Comparison:
      1. Fertiliser use: ~373 kg/ha (China) vs ~182 kg/ha (India).
      2. N:P:K ratio: ~2.6:1.1:1 (China) vs ~10.9:4:1 (India).
      3. Agri-GVA: ~$1.27 trillion (China) vs ~$0.63 trillion (India).
    2. Land Productivity Gap: China generates double India’s agri-GVA despite similar cropped area.
    3. Yield Plateauing: Excess nitrogen creates “lush green fields” but fails to increase yields or grain quality.
    4. Soil Degradation: Imbalanced nutrient use reduces soil organic carbon and long-term productivity.

    Why Nutrient Use Efficiency Remains Low

    1. Low NUE Levels: Estimated at only 35-40%, indicating large nutrient losses.
    2. Atmospheric Losses: Nitrogen escapes as nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas ~278 times more potent than CO₂.
    3. Water Pollution: Nitrate leaching contaminates groundwater, making it non-potable.
    4. Diversion and Leakage: ~20-25% of subsidised urea diverted to non-agricultural uses or smuggled across borders.
    5. Declining Response Ratio: Fertiliser-to-grain response ratio fell from ~1:10 (1970s) to ~1:2.7 (2015).

    What Policy Design Lessons Emerge from China

    1. Per-Unit Land Subsidy: Direct input subsidy on a per-mu basis rather than product-based price control.
    2. Market-Determined Prices: Fertiliser prices allowed to reflect market conditions.
    3. Innovation Incentives: Over 60% fertiliser consumption through complex fertilisers.
    4. Integrated Nutrient Management: Policy steers farmers toward balanced nutrient application.
    5. Outcome: Higher productivity with better nutrient balance despite higher fertilizer intensity.

    What Reform Pathways Does the Article Propose

    1. Gradual Price Decontrol: Phased dismantling of urea price controls.
    2. Direct Income Support: Protects farmers through equivalent cash transfers.
    3. NBS Recalibration: Reduce nitrogen subsidy while increasing support for phosphorus and potassium.
    4. Micronutrient Promotion: Encourages customised blends and soluble fertilisers through fertigation.
    5. Data Integration: Identification of tenant farmers using PM-KISAN data, land records, satellite imagery, and fertiliser sales.

    What Are the Expected Gains from Reform

    1. Fiscal Savings: Estimated annual savings of ~₹40,000 crore.
    2. Resource Reallocation: Redirects funds toward agri-R&D, irrigation, and high-value agriculture.
    3. Income Enhancement: Precision farming and balanced nutrients improve yield quality and farm profitability.
    4. Environmental Protection: Reduces greenhouse emissions and groundwater contamination.
    5. Growth Multiplier: Higher rural incomes stimulate demand for manufactured goods.

    Conclusion

    Reforming the fertiliser subsidy regime is not a question of fiscal retrenchment but of policy correction. By restoring price signals, improving nutrient balance, and protecting farmers through direct support, India can convert a distortionary subsidy into a productivity-enhancing instrument. The challenge is political, but the rewards are structural and long-term.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2014] What are the different types of agriculture subsidies given to farmers at the national and at state levels? Critically analyse the agricultural subsidy regime with reference to the distortions created by it.

    Linkage: The question is directly relevant as it focuses on agricultural subsidies and the distortions arising from their design, a core GS III issue. The article offers concrete evidence of how fertiliser price controls create nutrient imbalance, fiscal stress, and environmental damage, strengthening the critical analysis required in this question.

     

  • Gujarat farmer distress: Where cotton clouds hang heavy

    Introduction

    Gujarat’s cotton farmers are facing acute agrarian distress due to unprecedented rainfall, a sudden collapse in cotton prices, stagnant government procurement mechanisms, and the Union government’s decision to allow duty-free cotton imports. The crisis highlights deep structural vulnerabilities in India’s cotton economy, dependency on global markets, weak domestic safety nets, and uncertain price stabilisation mechanisms.

    Why in the news

    Cotton-growing districts of Gujarat have reported six farmer suicides within one month after heavy October rainfall drastically damaged crops and market prices crashed. This collapse is occurring despite cotton prices having remained high for nearly a decade. This marked a sharp reversal from the earlier trend of price stability and strong export demand.

    Why are cotton farmers in Gujarat facing acute distress?

    1. Heavy rainfall damage: Destroyed standing crops, especially in Saurashtra, forcing farmers like Dhanabhai and Bharatbhai to re-borrow for harvesting, labour, and picking.
    2. Sudden price crash: Prices dropped to ₹7,200-₹8,200 per quintal, down from last season’s ₹10,000-₹11,000, while input costs (seeds, pesticides, diesel) remain high.
    3. High production cost burden: Farmers reported spending close to ₹60,000 per hectare, but market prices provide no recovery of investment.
    4. Delayed government compensation: Farmers received little to no compensation for rain-damaged cotton; most remain outside the formal support system.
    5. Psychological stress: Multiple farmer suicides recorded; families cite inability to repay loans and the shock of unexpected price fall.

    How have policy decisions worsened the crisis?

    1. Duty-free cotton imports: Farmers argue that allowing imports when domestic arrival begins pushes prices further down.
    2. Reduced import duty from 5% to zero: Facilitated cheaper imports from countries like US, Brazil, Egypt.
    3. Timing mismatch: Import duty removal announced just before domestic arrivals, undermining farm-gate prices.
    4. Procurement failure: The MSP of ₹7,750 remains non-functional because ginning mills and traders offer lower prices; many farmers cannot access MSP procurement centres.
    5. GST on ginning industry: Ginning mills flagged 5% GST on textile waste (cotton seed oil cake and kapasiya) as an additional economic burden.

    How are market dynamics affecting farmers?

    1. Export slowdown: India is no longer the world’s top cotton exporter; Bangladesh, Vietnam, Pakistan, and Indonesia have cheaper alternatives.
    2. High transportation costs: Freight charges and rising diesel prices raise processing and movement costs.
    3. Shift in domestic consumption patterns: Mills increasingly depend on cheaper imported cotton, weakening domestic procurement.
    4. Quality concerns: Heavy rain reduced cotton quality, lowering demand from ginning mills.
    5. Ginners’ risks: Ginners avoid MSP procurement because they must sell at a loss in the global market.

    What are farmers demanding from the government?

    1. Immediate ban on cotton imports to stabilise domestic prices.
    2. Higher MSP operations at the farm gate so farmers don’t bear transportation costs.
    3. Real-time procurement centres within villages.
    4. Compensation for rain-damaged crops through central or state intervention.
    5. Market intervention scheme similar to groundnut and mustard procurement to ensure price stabilisation.

    How are traders and mill owners responding to the crisis?

    1. Ginners demand revival packages: They seek reduced GST and logistics support.
    2. Push for long-term cotton policy: Industry requests structural support to modernise ginning infrastructure.
    3. Preference for imported cotton: Imported cotton considered more consistent in quality, impacting local demand.
    4. Call for farm-to-mill ecosystem: Mills argue for direct purchase systems that reduce intermediaries.

    Conclusion

    The cotton crisis in Gujarat reveals a deeper structural challenge in India’s agricultural economy, policy unpredictability, global price sensitivity, inadequate MSP operations, and climate-driven crop volatility. Without strong procurement support, import regulation, and farmer-centric institutional mechanisms, cotton farmers remain exposed to extreme price fluctuations and rising indebtedness. Sustainable stabilisation of the cotton economy requires coordinated action across trade, agriculture, and industry.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2017] What are the major reasons for declining rice and wheat yield in the cropping system? How crop diversification is helpful to stabilise the yield of the crops in the system?

    Linkage: The question links to the article’s theme of monocropping-led vulnerability, as seen in cotton farmers’ distress. It reinforces how diversification stabilises yields and incomes when single-crop systems fail.

  • World Soil Day 2025 

    Why in the news?

    Observed on 5 December each year, World Soil Day 2025 highlights the need to protect soil health amid rapid urbanization. Theme: Healthy Soils for Healthy Cities.

    Objective

    • Raise global awareness on soil degradation
     • Promote sustainable soil management
     • Highlight soil’s significance for food security, water regulation, biodiversity, and climate resilience

    History

    • Proposed by the International Union of Soil Sciences in 2002
     • Supported by FAO and led by the Kingdom of Thailand
     • UN General Assembly declared December 5 as World Soil Day in 2013
     • First official observance: 2014

    Why Focus on Urban Soil

    • Important for stormwater absorption and flood control
     • Helps in temperature regulation in cities (reduces heat island effect)
     • Filters air and water pollutants
     • Supports urban biodiversity
     • Currently threatened by concretization, pollution, and shrinking green spaces

    Global Concerns

    • Takes up to 1,000 years to form a few centimeters of fertile soil

    The black cotton soil of India has been formed due to the weathering of (2021)

    (a) brown forest soil 

    (b) fissure volcanic rock 

    (c) granite and schist 

    (d) shale and limestone

  • Ramban Sulai Honey Gets National Spotlight 

    Why in the News?

    In the 128th episode of ‘Mann Ki Baat’, the Prime Minister highlighted Ramban Sulai Honey from Jammu & Kashmir, noting that the product has gained national recognition after receiving a Geographical Indication (GI) tag in 2021.

    Origin

    • Produced in Ramban District, Jammu & Kashmir.
    • Derived from Sulai (wild basil) plants growing naturally in the Himalayan region.

    Distinct Features

    • Taste & Aroma: Naturally sweet with aromatic floral undertones.
    • Colour: Crystal-clear; ranges from white to amber.
    • Season of Production: Bees forage on snow-white Sulai blossoms from August to October.
    • Nutritional Profile: Rich in enzymes, vitamins, and essential minerals.
    • Medicinal Value: Known for high purity and therapeutic benefits.
    • Superior bee strains native to the region.
    • Ideal climatic conditions, giving higher yields than other honey-producing areas of India.
    • Recognised as the district’s One District, One Product (ODOP).

    What is a Geographical Indication (GI) Tag?

    A Geographical Indication (GI) is a sign used on products that: Originate from a specific geographical region, and Possess qualities, reputation, or characteristics exclusive to that region.

    Key Points

    • GI is a type of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR).
    • Recognized under: Paris Convention and TRIPS Agreement (WTO)

    Indian Legal Framework

    • Governed by the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999.
    • Key provisions:
      • Prevents unauthorized use of GI-tagged names.
      • Valid for 10 years, but can be renewed indefinitely.
      • Provides legal protection and helps preserve traditional knowledge.
    India enacted the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 in order to comply with the obligations to (2018)

    (a) ILO

    (b) IMF

    (c) UNCTAD

    (d) WTO

  • Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana: Rajasthan farmers’ protests on insurance claims

    Why In The News?

    Farmers in Rajasthan’s Churu district held a ‘Kisan Ekta Tractor March’ demanding pending crop insurance claims, fertiliser availability, transparency in the insurance portal, and inclusion of certain crops in PM Dhan Dhanya Yojana. The protest was postponed after government assurances during late-night negotiations.

    About Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY):

    • Launch & Purpose:
      • Launched on 18 February 2016 by the Ministry of Agriculture to provide affordable crop insurance and financial protection against losses from natural calamities, pests, and diseases.
      • Implemented through insurance companies and banks.
    • Objectives:
      • Provide financial assistance for crop loss due to unforeseen events.
      • Stabilise farmer income and ensure continuity in farming.
      • Promote modern agricultural practices.
      • Encourage crop diversification, enhance creditworthiness, and improve agriculture sector competitiveness.
    • Eligibility:
      • All farmers including sharecroppers and tenant farmers growing notified crops in notified areas.
      • Compulsory: Loanee farmers with Seasonal Agricultural Operations (SAO) loans.
      • Voluntary: Non-loanee farmers.
      • Must have insurable interest and valid land ownership/tenure documents.
      • Must not receive duplicate compensation from other sources.
      • Special focus on SC/ST/Women farmers with proportional budget allocation.
    • Benefits:
      • Affordable Premiums:
        • Farmers pay 2% for Kharif, 1.5% for Rabi, and 5% for commercial/horticultural crops.
        • Government provides premium subsidy; pays full premium in NE states, J&K, and Himachal Pradesh.
      • Comprehensive Coverage:
        • Covers natural disasters, pests, diseases, and post-harvest losses (hailstorm, landslide).
        • Excludes losses due to war, nuclear risks, malicious damage, or preventable risks.
      • Timely Compensation:
        • Claims processed within two months of harvest.
      • Technology-Driven Implementation:
        • Uses satellite imaging, drones, and mobile apps for precise loss estimation.
        • NCIP for digital processing; YES-TECH for remote-sensing yield estimation; CROPIC for geotagged crop verification.
    [UPSC 2020] In India, which of the following can be considered as public investment in agriculture?
    1. Fixing Minimum Support Price for agricultural produce of all crops
    2. Computerization of Primary Agricultural Credit Societies
    3. Social Capital development
    4. Free electricity supply to farmers
    5. Waiver of agricultural loans by the banking system
    6. Setting up of cold storage facilities by the governments
    Select the correct answer using the code given below: Options: (a) 1, 2 and 5 only (b) 1, 3, 4 and 5 only (c) 2, 3 and 6 only* (d) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6

     

  • How India’s agri exports posted impressive growth

    Introduction

    Agriculture continues to be a critical pillar of India’s external trade. Despite restrictions on cereals in recent years, India is witnessing robust export performance driven by meat, rice, spices, fruits-vegetables, tobacco, and marine products. Import trends indicate rising edible oil dependence and inflation moderation.

    Why in the News?

    India’s agricultural exports have surged faster than overall merchandise exports, reaching $25.9 billion in April-September 2024, a 25.8% jump over the previous year, compared to a marginal 0.1% rise in total exports. This turnaround comes after a period of contraction due to export curbs (2022-23) on key items like wheat and non-basmati rice. The renewed momentum signals policy success, global demand recovery, and diversification beyond the US market.

    What is driving the recent surge in agri exports?

    1. Policy relaxation: Lifting of post-Ukraine export curbs on wheat, rice, sugar, etc., improved outbound shipments.
    2. Market diversification: Growth in demand from Latin America, Africa, Middle-East reduced dependency on the US.
    3. Production rebound: Normal monsoon boosted availability of sugar, spices, seafood, fruit-veg.
    4. High-value product focus: Marine goods ($4.8 bn), non-basmati rice ($2.85 bn), and cotton ($1.6 bn) led performance.

    Which products are leading the export spike?

    1. Marine products: Largest export category at $4.8 bn Apr-Sep 2024.
    2. Rice (Non-basmati): Strong recovery despite earlier restrictions ( $2.85 bn ).
    3. Buffalo meat & poultry: $2.25 bn & $0.414 bn exports supported by West Asia.
    4. Fresh fruits & vegetables: Jump to $1.49 bn due to tomato, onion shipments.
    5. Sugar & tobacco: Robust global prices drove exports above $0.9 bn and $0.82 bn respectively.

    How have imports behaved during the same period?

    1. Edible oils dominate: $7.3 bn, showing structural import dependence.
    2. Cashew, pulses, fresh fruits: Rising imports due to domestic shortfalls.
    3. Wheat trade flip: Exports rose post-2022 restrictions but imports revived due to domestic price pressures.
    4. India remains a net agri-exporter, but oil imports remain a vulnerability.

    What are the key factors shaping fluctuations in exports?

    1. Geopolitics & tariffs:
      1. US-China trade tensions: Opened new windows for India.
      2. Trump-era duties impacted Indian produce.
      3. Russia war disrupted sunflower oil & grain flows.
    2. Commodity price volatility: FAO Index declined and this led to lower export values for wheat, sugar.
    3. Logistics: Container shortages & high freight (2022-23) stabilised by 2024.

    What are the major challenges ahead?

    1. Export restrictions continue on items like wheat, some rice variants.
    2. Quality & traceability issues: Growing scrutiny by EU/Australia.
    3. Climate shocks impacting horticulture and cash crops.
    4. Overdependence on 2-3 markets for meat, marine products.

    Conclusion

    India’s recent agricultural export growth reflects policy easing, supply recovery, and expanding market access. However, sustaining competitiveness demands edible oil self-reliance, quality upgrades, logistics reforms, and stable export policies. Balanced agri-trade will support farmer income and strengthen India’s role in global food value chains.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2022] What are the main bottlenecks in the upstream and downstream process of marketing of agricultural products in India?

  • [21st November 2025] The Hindu Op-ED: India’s fisheries and aquaculture, its promising course

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2015] Livestock rearing has a big potential for providing non-farm employment and income in rural areas. Discuss suggesting suitable measures to promote this sector in India.

    Linkage: Same as livestock rearing, fisheries are a key allied sector driving rural non-farm jobs, and are in news due to FAO support and Blue Economy reforms. Hence the topic is highly important for both GS I and GS III. 

    Mentor’s Comment

    India’s fisheries and aquaculture sector is undergoing structural transformation under the Blue Revolution, backed by FAO support and national reforms. This article decodes the sector’s growth drivers, emerging challenges, policy transitions, and global relevance. It is formatted to suit UPSC Mains expectations with subheadings, value additions, PYQs, and micro-themes for GS papers.

    Introduction

    India’s fisheries and aquaculture sector has become one of the fastest-growing food-producing systems, contributing significantly to livelihoods, nutrition, exports, and rural economic diversification. Despite record production levels, challenges such as resource overuse, environmental degradation, weak traceability, and constrained market access continue to limit its full potential. FAO’s renewed commitment during World Fisheries Day 2025 highlights the sector’s strategic importance in India’s transition toward sustainable and climate-resilient aquatic food systems.

    Why in the News?

    The FAO issued a renewed commitment to India’s Blue Revolution on World Fisheries Day (21 November 2025), highlighting India’s rapid rise as a global fisheries powerhouse. India recorded 93.2 million tonnes of capture fisheries and a historic 130.9 million tonnes in aquaculture output, making it the world’s second-largest aquaculture producer. This comes at a time when the sector faces overfishing, habitat degradation, climate stress, and traceability gaps, creating a striking contrast between high growth and mounting ecological pressures. New initiatives, Kisan Credit Card inclusion, Matsya Sampada, Climate-Resilient Coastal Fishermen Villages, and private-sector-led compliance, mark a major shift toward science-based, sustainability-linked governance in fisheries.

    India’s Rapid Growth Trajectory

    1. Record production: India produced 93.2 million tonnes (capture) and 130.9 million tonnes (aquaculture), valued at $313 billion.
    2. Rising sectoral significance: Livestock and aquaculture contribute 23 million tonnes of aquatic animals, creating major employment.
    3. Expansion of inland aquaculture: Inland fish farming rose from 12.4 million tonnes (2008) to 17.54 million tonnes (2022).
    4. Private sector innovation: Investments in hatcheries, exports, feed, digital compliance, and environmental standards have strengthened value chains.

    What Drives Current Reforms?

    1. Blue Revolution initiatives: Schemes like PM Matsya Sampada Yojana (PMMSY) expand climate-resilient freshwater and brackish aquaculture.
    2. Governance improvements: New norms integrate digital licensing, KCC inclusion, and seafood traceability.
    3. Market efficiencies: The government introduced measures for safety, credit, and supply chain upgrades.
    4. Coastal resilience: Projects on Climate-Resilient Coastal Fishermen Villages strengthen vulnerable fishing communities.

    How is FAO Supporting India’s Transition?

    1. Decades-long collaboration: FAO supports small-scale fisheries, sustainability frameworks, and policy strengthening.
    2. BOBP support: FAO’s Bay of Bengal Programme (BOBP) supports governance in small-scale fisheries.
    3. BOBLME and ecosystem-based management: Helps India adopt science-backed conservation, monitoring, and climate adaptation.
    4. Harbour modernisation: Technical Cooperation Programme improves fishing harbours like Vanakbara and Nawabandar.

    What Are the Emerging Challenges?

    1. Overfishing and resource stress: Unsustainable catch levels strain marine ecosystems.
    2. Environmental degradation: Water pollution, habitat decline, and climate-induced variability weaken output.
    3. Traceability deficits: Weak monitoring affects export markets and compliance.
    4. Small-scale fishers’ constraints: Limited technologies, market reach, and safety nets restrict livelihoods.

    How Does Sustainability Shape India’s Future Path?

    1. Science-based stock assessment: Enables evidence-driven management.
    2. Co-managed monitoring: Joint monitoring through MCS tools improves compliance.
    3. Digital and climate-ready practices: Enhance safety, transparency, and resilience.
    4. Ecosystem-based aquaculture: Embedded in guidelines for Sustainable Aquaculture.

    Conclusion

    India’s fisheries and aquaculture stand at a decisive inflexion point, high growth backed by technology and institutional reforms but constrained by ecological and market vulnerabilities. The combined push from FAO, national missions like PMMSY, climate-resilient strategies, and private-sector compliance systems can position India as a global leader in sustainable aquatic food systems.