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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Agriculture

  • The long, bumpy road from ‘drone didis’ to ‘lakhpati didis’

    Why in the news? 

    Efforts of fertilizer companies in supporting a Central government program aimed at training women to operate drones for spraying pesticides.

    Context-

    • This initiative represents a broader trend of encouraging women’s entrepreneurship in India and empowering them to participate in traditionally male-dominated sectors such as agriculture and technology.
    • The involvement of fertilizer companies in funding and facilitating this program underscores the importance of public-private partnerships in driving social and economic development initiatives. 

    Scheme Details-

    Under the Namo Drone Didi scheme, 15,000 women-led Self-Help Groups (SHGs) will receive agricultural drones to assist in crucial tasks such as crop monitoring, fertiliser spraying, and seed sowing.

    Costs to companies-

    • Financial Commitment by Fertilizer Companies: Fertilizer companies such as Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Limited (IFFCO) and Coromandel International Limited (CIL) are shouldering significant costs for the “drone didi” program.
    • IFFCO is investing ₹42 crore to support the training and equipment for 300 drone didis, while CIL is backing another 200.
    • Expense Breakdown: The approximate cost per woman participating in the program is ₹14 lakh. This covers expenses like the drone, four battery sets, a generator, and an electric autorickshaw for transportation.
    • IFFCO has categorized this expenditure as “benefits to farmers” in its financial records.
    • Contribution of Other Companies: Several additional fertilizer companies, including Krishak Bharati Cooperative (KRIBHCO), Indian Potash Limited (IPL), Matix, Indorama India Private Limited, Brahmaputra Valley Fertilizer Corporation Limited, and National Fertilizers Limited, are collectively providing an extra 500 drones.
    • Funding Arrangement: The Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare has agreed to provide financial assistance of up to ₹8 lakh for each set of equipment. The remaining ₹2 lakh is to be sourced by the participating Self-Help Groups (SHGs).

    Farmer trials-

    • Online Portal Enrollment: Haryana’s Agriculture Department, along with fertilizer companies, introduced online enrollment via the Meri Fasal Mera Byora portal to encourage farmers to apply for crop spraying through drones.
    • Subsidized Nano Urea Bottle: Farmers are offered a 1-litre nano urea bottle at ₹100, discounted from the market price of ₹225. This nano urea, when mixed with water, serves one acre.
    • Manual vs. Drone Spraying: Farmers weigh the costs of the manual application, which include subsidized granular urea and labor costs, against the higher charges of drone didis.
    • Viability for Small Landholders: Small landholders express concerns about the affordability and practicality of drone services due to limited financial resources and smaller land holdings.
    • Usefulness of Drones: Drones are seen as more cost-effective for larger plantations like coffee, tea, or sugarcane, rather than smaller-scale agricultural operations.
    • Financial Constraints: Farmers highlight financial constraints, including the inability to afford necessities like housing, education, and farm equipment, which diminishes the feasibility of investing in drone technology.

    The women’s challenges-

    • Fuel Costs:  significant daily expenses (₹500 to ₹600) on fuel to run the generator required to charge the battery sets for the drone, raising concerns about the economic feasibility of the job in the long run.
    • Battery Set Limitations: Each day, exhausts one charged battery set after covering three acres with the drone. This necessitates simultaneous charging of another set in her electric vehicle (EV) to continue her work, resulting in additional time and fuel costs.
    • Economic Viability: Despite the potential earnings mentioned on paper, there are doubts about the economic viability of the job due to high fuel costs, the need for additional assistance, and uncertainties regarding the longevity of the scheme’s benefits
    • Safety Concerns and Need for Assistance: There is safety concerns while operating the drone and the necessity of having an assistant to drive the electric autorickshaw and assist with unloading and handling the heavy drone equipment.
    • Lack of Provision for Helpers: There is no provision for hiring assistants or helpers in the scheme, leading to additional expenses

    Limitation of this scheme- 

    • Current Urea Usage and Subsidy: India uses 3.5 lakh metric tonnes (MT) of granular urea annually, with a significant portion subsidized by the government to make it affordable for farmers. Liquid nano urea, an alternative, is produced in limited quantities.
    • Government’s Vision for Nano Urea Production: The government aims to increase the production capacity of liquid nano urea to reduce dependence on expensive imported granular urea. The goal is to produce 48.5 crore bottles annually by 2026-27.
    • Limitations of Nano Urea: While liquid nano urea can supplement traditional granular urea, it cannot entirely replace it due to specific requirements in different stages of crop growth.
    • Ownership and Earnings Concerns: There are uncertainties regarding the ownership of drones and the distribution of earnings from drone operations among individuals, Self-Help Groups (SHGs), village organizations (VOs), or cluster-level federations (CLFs).
    • Need for Clarity and Coordination: Questions are raised about the lack of clarity on ownership, earnings distribution, and coordination among stakeholders involved in drone operations.
    • Challenges with Previous Proposals: Issues regarding the implementation of previous drone-related schemes, such as the procurement of drones under Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs), and concerns about competition from individual farmers purchasing their drones are highlighted.

    To overcome the challenges outlined regarding drone operations and nano urea production, several measures can be considered:

    • Clarity in Ownership and Earnings Distribution: Establish clear guidelines and agreements on drone ownership and revenue sharing among individuals, SHGs, VOs, and CLFs. Ensure transparency in decision-making processes and consult all stakeholders involved.
    • Enhanced Coordination: Facilitate better coordination among government agencies, agricultural organizations, and drone operators to streamline operations, address concerns, and ensure effective implementation of schemes. Regular meetings, feedback mechanisms, and communication channels can aid in coordination efforts.
    • Capacity Building: Provide training and capacity-building programs for drone operators, farmers, and other stakeholders to enhance their skills in drone operation, maintenance, and data interpretation. This can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of drone-based agricultural activities.
    • Promotion of Nano Urea: Invest in research and development to improve the efficacy and availability of liquid nano urea. Conduct awareness campaigns to educate farmers about the benefits and proper usage of nano urea, emphasizing its role as a supplement to traditional fertilizers.
    • Policy Reforms: Review existing policies related to drone operations, urea subsidy, and agricultural initiatives to address loopholes and inconsistencies. Introduce new policies or amendments to support the expansion of nano urea production and drone technology adoption in agriculture.
    • Collaborative Partnerships: Foster partnerships between government agencies, private companies, research institutions, and farmer groups to leverage expertise, resources, and innovation in addressing challenges related to drone operations and urea production.
    • Monitoring and Evaluation: Implement robust monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to assess the impact of drone-based agricultural initiatives and nano urea production efforts. Collect data on key performance indicators and stakeholders’ feedback to identify areas for improvement and make informed decisions.

    Conclusion-

    The initiative to train women as “drone didis” for agricultural tasks faces challenges of economic viability, ownership clarity, and coordination. Solutions include clear guidelines, capacity building, policy reforms, and collaborative partnerships to ensure sustainable implementation and overcome limitations in nano urea production.

    Mains PYQ-

    Q- The Self Help Group (SHG) Bank Linkage Program (SBLP), which is India’s own innovation , has proved to be one of the most effective poverty alleviation and women empowerment programme. Elucidate.(UPSC IAS/2015)

  • Food factor: On the latest retail inflation data

    Why in the news? 

    • India’s retail inflation remained virtually unchanged at 5.09% in February, even as food prices paid by consumers resurged from 8.3% in January to 8.66% in February.

    Context-

    • Most economists expect inflation to stay in the 5.1%-5.2% range in March as well, which would lift average inflation in the last quarter of this year over the 5% average projected by the RBI

    The primary reason behind the food inflation in February-

    • Vegetable Prices Surge: Vegetables experienced a significant price surge, with a seven-month high pace of 30.25% in February. This spike in vegetable prices contributed significantly to the overall food inflation.
    • Rise in Egg and Meat Prices: Prices of eggs and meat/fish also rose at a faster pace in February compared to January. Eggs witnessed a notable increase from 5.6% to 10.7%, while meat and fish prices rose from 1.2% to 5.2%.
    • Deceleration in Pulses and Spices Prices: While there was a slight deceleration in the inflation rate of pulses and spices compared to the previous year, these items still experienced steep price increases. Pulses inflation stood at 18.5%, and spices recorded a 13.5% increase.
    • Regional Disparities: Food inflation varied across different states, with some states experiencing inflation rates above the RBI’s upper tolerance threshold of 6%. States like Odisha, Telangana, Haryana, and Assam recorded high inflation rates, while others like Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and West Bengal had relatively lower inflation rates.
    • Seasonal Factors and Supply Chain Issues: Seasonal factors, along with supply chain disruptions, could have contributed to the rise in food prices. Factors such as adverse weather conditions, transportation constraints, and supply-demand imbalances may have affected the availability and prices of food items in the market.

    To address inflation-related issues in the short term and long term, several measures can be considered:

    [A] Short-Term Measures:

    Supply-Side Interventions:

    • Increase the supply of essential commodities by releasing buffer stocks, if available.
    • Facilitate faster transportation of perishable goods through streamlined logistics and distribution channels.
    • Establish temporary market outlets to directly connect farmers with consumers, reducing intermediary costs and price hikes.

    Import Policies:

    • Relax import restrictions on essential food items to augment domestic supply and stabilize prices.
    • Expedite customs clearance procedures to ensure timely availability of imported goods in the market.

    Price Monitoring and Control:

    • Implement strict price monitoring mechanisms to prevent hoarding and profiteering.
    • Set up special task forces or committees to monitor price movements and take swift action against price manipulation.

    Demand Management:

    • Promote alternative dietary choices to alleviate pressure on high-priced items.
    • Encourage conservation and rational utilization of essential commodities through public awareness campaigns.

    [B] Long-Term Measures:

    Investment in Agriculture Infrastructure:

    • Enhance investment in agricultural infrastructure, including irrigation systems, cold storage facilities, and transportation networks, to improve productivity and reduce post-harvest losses.

    Crop Diversification and Technology Adoption:

    • Encourage farmers to diversify their crops to mitigate the impact of price volatility.
    • Promote the adoption of modern agricultural practices, including mechanization, precision farming, and biotechnology, to enhance crop yields and resilience to climate change.

    Market Reforms:

    • Implement market reforms to create a more efficient and transparent agricultural marketing system.
    • Facilitate the establishment of Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs) and agricultural cooperatives to empower farmers and strengthen their bargaining power in the market.

    Food Processing and Value Addition:

    • Promote investment in food processing industries to add value to agricultural produce and reduce post-harvest losses.
    • Establish food processing clusters and agro-industrial parks to encourage entrepreneurship and create employment opportunities in rural areas.

    Risk Management and Insurance:

    • Introduce crop insurance schemes and risk management tools to protect farmers from income volatility caused by price fluctuations and natural disasters.
    • Provide training and technical assistance to farmers to improve their risk assessment and management capabilities.

    Sustainable Agriculture Practices:

    • Encourage the adoption of sustainable agriculture practices, including organic farming, agroforestry, and soil conservation, to ensure long-term environmental sustainability and food security.

    Conclusion-

    To mitigate food inflation, short-term measures such as supply-side interventions and price monitoring are essential, while long-term solutions like investment in agriculture infrastructure and market reforms are crucial for sustainable food security.

  • Mission Palm Oil: Achieving Self-sufficiency in Edible Oil Production

    Why in the news-

    • The Prime Minister highlighted the National Mission on Edible Oils – Oil Palm (NMEO-OP) during his visit to Arunachal Pradesh, inaugurating the first oil mill under this mission.

    Why discuss this?

    • This results in a substantial outflow of $20.56 billion in foreign exchange, the need for self-reliance in edible oil production has become paramount.

    Edible Oil Consumption in India: Key Facts

    • India, the world’s biggest importer of vegetable oils, is likely to buy 15.6 million metric tons of cooking oils in the 2023-24 oil year, down from 16.6 million in the current year to Oct.
    • With India imports 57% of its vegetable oil demand.
    • These imports have shown a declining trend in recent months.
    • This decline is attributed to various factors such as reduced availability of palm oil for edible oil requirements due to producers diverting it for biodiesel production.
    • Additionally, the import of soyabean oil from Argentina increased sharply in February 2024, while imports from Brazil declined.
    • The top three vegetable oil imports – palm, soybean, and sunflower seed oil.
    • India’s vegetable oil sector accounts for 13% of the Gross Cropped Area, 3% of the Gross National Product, and 10% of the value of all agricultural commodities.
    • A substantial portion of India’s edible oil requirement is fulfilled through palm oil imports from Indonesia and Malaysia.

    Mission Palm Oil: A Catalyst for Self-Reliance

    • It is a Centrally Sponsored Scheme launched in 2021 targeting a substantial increase in oil palm cultivation and crude palm oil production.
    • It has been introduced with a particular emphasis on the Northeast region and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

    Objectives:

    1. Expand oil palm acreage by an additional 6.5 lakh hectares by 2025-26
    2. Increase crude palm oil production to 11.2 lakh tonnes by 2025-26, reaching up to 28 lakh tonnes by 2029-30.
    3. Increase consumer awareness to maintain a consumption level of 19.00 kg/person/annum till 2025-26.

    Focus Areas

    (1)  Fixing of Viability Price

    • Oil palm farmers currently produce Fresh Fruit Bunches (FFBs), from which the industry extracts oil.
    • Presently, FFB prices fluctuate with international Crude Palm Oil (CPO) prices.
    • The Government of India will now assure price stability for FFBs, known as Viability Price (VP), shielding farmers from international CPO price fluctuations.
    • A Formula Price (FP), set at 14.3% of CPO and adjusted monthly, will be established. Viability gap funding will be the difference between VP and FP, directly disbursed to farmers’ accounts via Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) when necessary.

    (2) Input Assistance

    • The scheme’s second major focus is to significantly enhance input assistance/interventions, including:
      1. Increasing assistance for oil palm planting material from Rs. 12,000 to Rs. 29,000 per hectare.
      2. Boosting support for maintenance and intercropping interventions.
      3. Providing special assistance of Rs. 250 per plant for replanting old gardens to rejuvenate them.
      4. Offering special assistance tailored for the North-East and Andaman regions, including provisions for half-moon terrace cultivation, bio-fencing, land clearance, and integrated farming.

    Try this PYQ from CSE Prelims 2019:

    Among the following, which one is the largest exporter of rice in the world in the last five years?

    (a) China

    (b) India

    (c) Myanmar

    (d) Vietnam

     

    Practice MCQ:

    Consider the following statements:

    1. India is the world’s biggest importer of vegetable oils.
    2. The top three vegetable oil imports include – soybean, palm and groundnut oil.

    Which of the given statements is/are correct?

    (a) Only 1

    (b) Only 2

    (c) Both 1 and 2

    (d) Neither 1 nor 2

     

  • [pib] Integration of Kisan Credit Card (KCC) Fisheries Scheme and JanSamarth Portal

    Why in the news-

    • The Department of Fisheries inaugurated the integration of the Kisan Credit Card (KCC) Fisheries scheme onto the JanSamarth Portal, marking a revolutionary step in providing credit facilities to fishers and fish farmers nationwide.

    JanSamarth Portal

    • It is a first-of-its-kind online platform for directly connecting lenders with beneficiaries. Citizens can avail loans under 13 Central government schemes under 4 loan categories.
    • The one-stop portal allows citizens to check eligibility, apply online and get digital approval.

    About KCC Fisheries Scheme

    • The GoI, in the year 2018-19, extended KCC facility to fisheries and animal husbandry farmers to help them to meet their working capital requirements.
    • Bank authorities have been instructed to issue KCC within 14 days of receipt of the completed application from the fish farmers.
    • Benefits Include:
    1. For the existing KCC holders the benefits of interest subvention and prompt repayment incentive will be admissible up to the credit limit of Rs. 3 lakhs including fisheries activities.
    2. In the case of new card holders, the credit limit is Rs. 2 lakhs to meet their working capital requirements for fisheries activities.
    3. In the KCC scheme @7% is the lending rate to farmers including @2% interest subvention per annum by GoI. Also, another @3% per annum is provided in case of prompt repayment as an additional incentive as per the existing guidelines.
    4. This implies that the farmers repaying promptly as above would get a loan @ 4% per annum effectively for loan amount upto Rs 2 lakhs.

    Kisan Credit Cards (KCC) Scheme

    • The KCC scheme was introduced on the recommendation of R.V. Gupta of the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development.
    • The scheme was launched in 1998 to provide adequate and timely credit support from the banking system to the farmers.
    • It provides a single window with flexible and simplified procedures to the farmers for their cultivation and other needs like purchasing agriculture inputs such as seeds, fertilizers, pesticides etc. and drawing cash for their production needs.
    • The scheme was further extended for the investment credit requirement of farmers viz. allied and non-farm activities in the year 2004.
    • In 2018-19, it was extended to fisheries and animal husbandry farmers.

    Objectives include:

    1. To meet the short-term credit requirement for cultivation
    2. To manage post-harvest expenses
    3. To meet the consumption requirement of farmer’s household
    4. Working capital for maintaining the farm assets and activities allied to agriculture
    5. Investment credit requirement for agriculture-allied activities

    KCC scheme is implemented by:

    1. Commercial banks
    2. Regional Rural Banks (RRBs)
    3. Small Financial Banks, and
    4. Cooperative banks

    Try this PYQ from CSE Prelims 2020:

    Under the Kisan Credit Card scheme, short-term credit support is given to farmers for which of the following purposes?

    1. Working capital for maintenance of farm assets
    2. Purchase of combine harvesters, tractors and mini trucks
    3. Consumption requirements of farm households
    4. Post-harvest expenses
    5. Construction of family house and setting up of village cold storage facility

    Select the correct answer:

    (a) 1, 2 and 5 only

    (b) 1, 3 and 4 only

    (c) 2, 3, 4 and 5 only

    (d) 1, 2, 4 and 5

     

    Practice MCQ:

    The JanSamarth Portal often seen in the news is related to:

    (a) Lending Facility

    (b) E-KYC

    (c) Consumer Grievances

    (d) Right to Information

     

  • FAO publishes first national report on AMR Surveillance in India’s fisheries, livestock sectors

    In the news

    • The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) jointly published the surveillance data of the Indian Network for Fishery and Animal Antimicrobial Resistance (INFAAR) for 2019-22.
    • This report marks the first comprehensive analysis of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) trends in India’s fisheries and livestock sectors.

    About INFAAR

    • Network Formation: INFAAR, established under ICAR, comprises 20 laboratories, including 17 ICAR Research Institute Laboratories, one Central Agriculture University Laboratory, one State Agriculture University Laboratory, and one State Veterinary University.
    • Collaborative Support: Technical assistance from FAO and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) enhances INFAAR’s capabilities for data collection and analysis.
    • Expansion Goals: INFAAR aims for further expansion to encompass more laboratories and enhance surveillance coverage.

    Antibiotic Use and AMR Trends

    • Impact of Antibiotics: Antibiotic usage in food animal production contributes to AMR development, necessitating surveillance to inform policy decisions.
    • Production Systems: Three key aquaculture systems—freshwater, brackish-water, and marine—were surveyed, covering diverse environments.
    • Panel of Antibiotics: Antibiotics tested included amikacin, ampicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, aztreonam, cefotaxime, cefepime, cefoxitin, ceftazidime, chloramphenicol, co-trimoxazole, enrofloxacin, gentamicin, imipenem, meropenem, and tetracycline.

    Surveillance Methodology

    • Sample Collection: Samples collected from 3,087 farms spanning 42 districts in 12 states of India, including fish or shrimp tissues and pond or seawater samples.
    • Bacterial Isolates: A total of 6,789 bacterial isolates were analyzed, including 4,523 freshwater, 1,809 shrimp, and 457 mariculture isolates.
    • Resistance Profiles: Resistance profiles were analyzed for Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus species (CONS), Escherichia coli, Vibrio parahaemolyticus, Vibrio sp., and Aeromonas species.

    Key Findings:

    (1) Resistance Patterns in Fisheries Sector

    • Species Specific Resistance: Isolates of Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative Staphylococcus species exhibited high resistance against penicillin across all systems.
    • Variation across Environments: Freshwater fish showed notable resistance to ciprofloxacin, while marine samples demonstrated higher resistance to cefotaxime.
    • Shrimp Aquaculture: Notable resistance against ampicillin and cefotaxime was observed in shrimp samples, indicating a concerning trend.

    (2) Resistance Patterns in Livestock Sector

    • Animal Origins: E. coli and Staphylococcus isolates from cattle, buffalo, goat, sheep, pig, and poultry were characterized for AMR profiles.
    • Poultry Resistance: Poultry-origin isolates exhibited higher resistance rates across various antibiotics compared to other food animals.

    (3) Multidrug Resistance Analysis

    • Emergence of MDR: Approximately 39% of aquaculture-origin E. coli isolates and 15.8% of poultry isolates exhibited multidrug resistance (MDR).
    • ESBL and AmpC Producers: Detection of extended spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) and AmpC type β-lactamase producers underscores the complexity of AMR challenges.

    Key Recommendations by the Study

    • Baseline Data: The report provides foundational data for understanding AMR trends and evaluating intervention effectiveness.
    • Judicious Use: High resistance to critical antibiotics underscores the importance of prudent antibiotic use in food animal production.
    • Policy Implications: The findings will inform policy and decision-making for AMR containment in India’s fisheries and livestock sectors.

    Conclusion

    • The INFAAR surveillance report sheds light on the evolving landscape of antimicrobial resistance in India’s fisheries and livestock sectors.
    • By highlighting resistance patterns and advocating for responsible antibiotic usage, this initiative paves the way for effective AMR containment strategies and sustainable agricultural practices.

  • The cost of legal MSP is greatly exaggerated

     

    Demystifying Minimum Support Price (MSP) | Legacy IAS Academy

    Central Idea:

    The article discusses the ongoing demands of farmers for a legal guarantee of Minimum Support Prices (MSP) in India, highlighting the necessity of such a mechanism to stabilize agricultural commodity prices and support farmers’ incomes. It addresses misconceptions surrounding MSP, emphasizing its importance in insulating farmers from market price volatility and rectifying imbalances in agricultural productivity and regional procurement.

    Key Highlights:

    • Farmers are demanding a legal guarantee for MSP to ensure price stability and protect their incomes.
    • MSP has been a longstanding mechanism in India to stabilize agricultural commodity prices, but its implementation has been limited.
    • Misconceptions about the fiscal costs and operational aspects of MSP have led to hesitancy in legalizing it, despite political consensus.
    • Government procurement under MSP primarily benefits consumers, not farmers, as it fulfills obligations under the National Food Security Act (NFSA).
    • Expansion of MSP to cover a wider range of crops and regions is necessary to address regional imbalances in agricultural productivity and support crop diversification.

    Key Challenges:

    • Misunderstanding of MSP’s fiscal implications and operational requirements.
    • Limited government intervention beyond rice and wheat procurement, leading to neglect of other crops and regions.
    • Concerns over excessive government expenditure and market distortions.
    • Ensuring effective implementation and monitoring of MSP across diverse agricultural sectors and regions.

    Main Terms or keywords for answer writing:

    • Minimum Support Price (MSP)
    • National Food Security Act (NFSA)
    • Market Price Volatility
    • Agricultural Commodity Procurement
    • Price Stability
    • Geographical Imbalances
    • Crop Diversification

    Important Phrases for answer quality enrichment:

    • Legal Guarantee for MSP
    • Price Stability Mechanism
    • Market Price Volatility
    • Government Intervention in Agricultural Markets
    • Regional Imbalances in Agricultural Productivity
    • Income Protection for Farmers

    Cabinet announces hike in MSP for kharif crops in 5% to 10% range | Business News - The Indian Express

    Quotes:

    • “A guaranteed MSP may not solve the farmers’ problems. But it offers a good opportunity to rectify the imbalances in the MSP and procurement system.”
    • “Price stability will protect the average consumer from the vagaries of inflation.”
    • “Protecting the income of farmers will help revive the rural economy.”

    Anecdotes:

    • Instances of government procurement primarily benefiting consumers rather than farmers, highlighting the need for MSP reform.
    • Farmers’ struggles with declining real incomes and wages, reflecting long-standing neglect of the agrarian economy.

    Useful Statements:

    • “Misconceptions surrounding the fiscal costs of MSP overlook its role in stabilizing prices and supporting farmers’ incomes.”
    • “Expansion of MSP to cover a wider range of crops and regions is necessary to address regional imbalances in agricultural productivity.”

    Examples and References:

    • Government procurement data for rice and wheat compared to other crops, illustrating limited intervention beyond major staples.
    • Comparative analysis of MSP implementation in India and other countries with similar price stabilization mechanisms.

    Facts and Data:

    • Government procurement figures for rice and wheat in recent years.
    • Estimates of the potential fiscal costs of implementing a legal guarantee for MSP.
    • Statistics on declining real incomes and wages in the agrarian sector.

    Critical Analysis:

    • Emphasizes the importance of MSP in stabilizing agricultural prices and supporting farmer livelihoods.
    • Addresses misconceptions and challenges surrounding MSP implementation.
    • Advocates for reforms to expand MSP coverage and address regional imbalances in agricultural productivity.

    Way Forward:

    • Implement legal guarantee for MSP to ensure price stability and support farmer incomes.
    • Expand MSP coverage to include a wider range of crops and regions.
    • Enhance monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to ensure effective implementation of MSP.
    • Address misconceptions and concerns regarding fiscal costs and market distortions associated with MSP.

    Overall, the article underscores the necessity of legalizing MSP to support farmers’ incomes, stabilize agricultural prices, and address long-standing neglect in the agrarian sector. It advocates for comprehensive reforms to expand MSP coverage and ensure its effective implementation across diverse agricultural sectors and regions.

  • Some Basic Facts about Indian Farmers

    Introduction

    • Amidst the ongoing farmer protests, the demand for a legal assurance backing Minimum Support Prices (MSPs) has taken center stage, sparking debates and polarizing opinions.
    • Delving into the intricacies of MSPs is crucial to grasp the gravity of this contentious issue.

    Deciphering MSPs: A Primer

    • Fundamental Concept: MSPs, or Minimum Support Prices, signify the price floor set by the government for various crops, serving as a safety net to safeguard farmers’ incomes.
    • Ramifications: The significance of MSPs transcends mere agricultural economics, influencing farmers’ livelihoods, consumer prices, and even governmental budgetary allocations.

    Backdrop of Farmer Protests

    • Escalating Tensions: The introduction and subsequent repeal of three farm laws by the current Union government in 2020 have catalysed widespread farmer protests, drawing attention to the MSP debate.
    • Polarized Discourse: The discourse surrounding farmer protests has veered into a realm of political polarization, overshadowing the substantive issues at hand.

    Key Insights into India’s Agricultural Landscape

    [1] Shift in Economic Dynamics

    • Historical Perspective: Post-Independence, agriculture commanded a significant share of India’s workforce and economic output, with around 70% of the workforce engaged in the sector.
    • Contemporary Scenario: Despite a decline in agriculture’s contribution to GDP, the proportion of the agricultural workforce remains relatively high, signaling a skewed economic paradigm. In 2011, approximately 6% of the workforce was engaged in agriculture.

    [2] Transition in Farming Patterns

    • Rising Labour Dependency: The shift from cultivators to agricultural laborers underscores the evolving nature of farming practices, reflecting growing challenges in sustaining agricultural livelihoods. In 1951, 72% of all farm workers were cultivators, whereas by 2011, this proportion decreased to 45%.
    • Small Holdings and Indebtedness: Small and marginal landholdings coupled with high levels of indebtedness paint a grim picture of the financial vulnerability faced by Indian farmers. According to a 2019 survey, around 70% of all agricultural households have a land holding size of less than 1 hectare, and almost 50% are indebted.

    [3] Income Disparities and Debt Burdens

    • Regional Disparities: Regional variations in farm incomes and indebtedness highlight the multifaceted nature of agrarian distress. In 2019, the average monthly income per household was Rs 10,218, while 50% of all farm households were indebted.
    • Terms of Trade Dynamics: Fluctuating terms of trade between farmers and non-farmers further exacerbate farmers’ financial woes, reflecting structural imbalances in the agricultural sector. The Terms of Trade (ToT) between farmers and non-farmers have remained stagnant or negative since 2010-11.

    [4] Global Perspectives on Agricultural Support

    • Comparative Analysis: India’s standing in terms of producer protection and agricultural support reveals stark disparities, challenging misconceptions about excessive financial assistance to Indian farmers.
    • India is Lagging: India ranks last among the countries compared by the OECD on producer protection and lags in terms of the “total support estimate” (TSE) relative to other countries and regions.

    Navigating the Complexities

    • Beyond MSPs: While MSPs occupy a prominent position in the discourse, addressing India’s agricultural woes requires a holistic approach encompassing structural reforms, income augmentation, and infrastructural development.
    • Long-standing Challenges: Structural deficiencies within the agricultural sector necessitate comprehensive interventions, transcending short-term fixes and political rhetoric.

    Conclusion

    • As India grapples with the intricacies of farmer protests and MSP demands, a nuanced understanding of agricultural dynamics is imperative to devise sustainable solutions.
    • Addressing the root causes of agrarian distress demands concerted efforts aimed at bolstering farmers’ resilience, fostering equitable economic growth, and ushering in transformative reforms to ensure the viability of India’s agricultural ecosystem.

    Try this question from CS Mains (2018)

    What do you mean by Minimum Support Price (MSP)? How will MSP rescue the farmers from the low-income trap? [150 Words, 10 Marks]

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”c37r4lomki” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

  • Fair and Remunerative Price (FRP) of Sugarcane

    Introduction

    • The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs approved ₹340/quintal as the Fair and Remunerative Price (FRP) of sugarcane for sugar season 2024-25 at sugar recovery rate of 10.25%.
    • This is about 8% higher than FRP of sugarcane for the current season 2023-24.

    Fair and Remunerative Price (FRP): Explained

    • Legal Framework: FRP is established under the Sugarcane Control Order, 1966.
    • Minimum Payment: It denotes the minimum price obligated to be paid by sugar mills to farmers for their sugarcane produce.
    • State Agreed Price (SAP): States have the authority to determine their SAP, typically higher than the FRP.
    • The fixation of FRP considers various factors, including:
    1. Cost of sugarcane production,
    2. Return from alternative crops,
    3. Consumer sugar prices,
    4. Sale price of sugar,
    5. Sugarcane-to-sugar recovery rate,
    6. Income from by-products (e.g., molasses, bagasse),
    7. Adequate profit margins for sugarcane growers.

    Determining Sugarcane Prices

    • Central Determination: FRP is set by the Central Government based on recommendations from the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP) and endorsed by the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs.
    • State Role: States announce SAP, often surpassing the FRP.

    Minimum Selling Price (MSP) for Sugar

    • Market Dynamics: Sugar prices fluctuate based on market demand and supply.
    • Introducing MSP: To safeguard farmers’ interests, MSP for sugar was introduced in 2018.
    • Components Considered: MSP incorporates elements of FRP for sugarcane and the minimal conversion cost of efficient mills.

    Basis of Price Determination

    • Transition from SMP to FRP: In 2009-10, FRP replaced the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) of sugarcane.
    • Consultative Process: The Central Government, in consultation with state authorities and sugar industry associations, determines the sugarcane price based on CACP recommendations.

    Try this PYQ from CSP 2019:

    Q. The Fair and Remunerative Price (FRP) of sugarcane is approved by the:

    (a) Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs

    (b) Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices

    (c) Directorate of Marketing and Inspection, Ministry of Agriculture

    (d) Agricultural Produce Market Committee

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”ov8suchbe6″ question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

  • FCI Capital raised from Rs 10,000 cr to Rs 21,000 cr

    Introduction

    • The government has raised the authorized capital of the state-run Food Corporation of India (FCI) from ₹10,000 crore to ₹21,000 crore, marking a significant stride in bolstering its operational capabilities.
    • This initiative, announced by the Food Ministry, underscores the government’s commitment to strengthening FCI’s role in ensuring food security and safeguarding farmers’ interests.

    About Food Corporation of India (FCI)

    • Establishment and Objectives: Founded in 1965 under the Food Corporation Act, 1964, FCI serves as a statutory body under the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Government of India.
    • Core Objectives: FCI is entrusted with the tasks of providing price support to farmers by
    1. Procuring grains at Minimum Support Prices (MSP),
    2. Supplying grains to Public Distribution System (PDS), and
    3. Maintaining strategic grain reserves.

    Initiatives to Enhance FCI’s Efficiency

    • Integrated IT Systems: FCI is implementing integrated IT solutions and adopting e-office initiatives to transition towards a paperless work environment and streamline operational functions effectively.
    • Infrastructure Development: FCI is investing in infrastructure projects such as cement road construction, roof maintenance, and weighbridge modernization to enhance operational efficiency.
    • Quality Assurance: Efforts are underway to procure lab equipment and develop software platforms for quality assessment, ensuring adherence to stringent quality standards.

    Significance of Increased Authorized Capital

    • Operational Strengthening: The augmentation of authorized capital aims to bolster FCI’s operational efficiency, reduce interest burdens, and positively impact government subsidies.
    • Modernization Imperative: In addition to financial infusion, the government emphasizes the modernization of storage facilities, transportation networks, and adoption of advanced technologies for enhanced performance.
    • Empowering Farmers: The government’s commitment to MSP-based procurement and investment in FCI’s operational capabilities reflects a collaborative approach towards empowering farmers, fortifying the agricultural sector, and ensuring nationwide food security.

    Relevance of FCI

    • Bedrock of National Food Security: FCI plays a pivotal role in implementing the National Food Security Act, ensuring procurement and distribution to far-flung areas for national food security.
    • Response to Crisis: During crises such as the Covid pandemic and migrant crises, FCI has effectively tackled challenges of hunger and starvation.
    • Fight against Malnutrition and Poverty: FCI’s role in the Public Distribution System (PDS) contributes to combating malnutrition and poverty, promoting inclusive growth.
    • Support to Farmers: By purchasing crops at MSP, FCI provides financial security to farmers, making agriculture remunerative.

    Challenges Faced by FCI

    • Limited Farmer Participation: Less than 10% of farmers can sell their produce to government agencies due to various factors such as lack of awareness or access to the MSP system, benefiting only large farmers in certain states like Punjab.
    • Storage Overload: FCI has stored double the grains than the prescribed buffer limits, leading to a shortage in the open market, inflation, and deterioration of grains due to limited storage capacity.
    • Leakages in Distribution: According to NSSO 2011, 40-60% of grains distributed through the Public Distribution System (PDS) are siphoned off, highlighting significant challenges in distribution efficiency and governance.

    Way Forward:

    Shanta Kumar Committee (2014) Recommendations

    • The Shanta Kumar Committee proposed a comprehensive set of recommendations aimed at reforming the Food Corporation of India (FCI) and enhancing its efficiency in managing food systems.
    • The committee proposes designating FCI as an “Agency for Innovation in Food Management Systems” to foster creativity and efficiency in managing food resources.

    [A] Procurement Stage

    • Outsourcing Procurement: Recommends outsourcing procurement activities in better-performing states like Punjab while centralizing procurement in states like Bihar, Assam, Bengal, and eastern Uttar Pradesh.
    • Cash Transfers to Farmers: Suggests exploring cash transfers to farmers as an alternative mechanism for procurement.
    • Buffer Stock Quotas: Advocates setting buffer stock quotas instead of open-ended procurement to optimize resource utilization.
    • Stringent Quality Checks: Emphasizes the need for stringent quality checks by third parties to ensure the quality of procured grains.

    [B] Storage Stage

    • Outsourcing Stocking Operations: Recommends outsourcing stocking operations to various agencies such as the Central Warehousing Corporation (CWC), State Warehousing Corporation (SWC), and the private sector under the Private Entrepreneur Guarantee (PEG) scheme.
    • Automatic Liquidation of Excess Stock: Proposes automatic liquidation of excess buffer stock in the open market to prevent overstocking and market distortions.
    • Maintaining Strategic Buffer Reserves: Suggests maintaining strategic buffer reserves to stabilize markets and address emergencies effectively.

    [C] Distribution Stage

    • Expanding Coverage under NFSA: Recommends expanding coverage under the National Food Security Act 2013 to encompass 40% of the population, ensuring wider access to subsidized food grains.
    • End-to-End Computerization: Advocates for end-to-end computerization of the distribution system to enhance transparency, efficiency, and accountability.
    • Online Tracking: Proposes online tracking of the entire system from procurement to retail distribution to facilitate real-time monitoring and management.

    [D] Transportation Improvements

    • Integration of Road and Rail Transport: Suggests integrating road transport along with rail to optimize transportation networks and reduce dependency on rail.
    • Containerization: Recommends using containers instead of gunny bags for efficient and hygienic transportation of food grains.
    • Utilization of Inland Waterways: Advocates utilizing inland waterways for transporting food grains, leveraging cost-effective and eco-friendly transportation modes.
    • Automation in Loading and Unloading: Proposes automation in loading and unloading processes to enhance efficiency and minimize manual labor.

    [E] Operational Overhaul

    • Doing Away with FIFO Principle: Suggests doing away with the FIFO (first in, first out) principle to release hygienic food grains on time and prevent wastage.
    • Targeting Chronically Starved Areas: Recommends implementing a pre-positioning shipment policy to store food grains nearer to chronically starved areas, ensuring timely access to essential supplies during emergencies.
    • Ensuring Last-Mile Connectivity: Advocates leveraging a network of Self-Help Groups (SHGs) and Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs) to ensure last-mile connectivity and efficient distribution of food grains.

  • Global Pulse Confederation (GPC) held in New Delhi

    Introduction

    • The Global Pulse Confederation (GPC) has initiated the three-day convention — Pulses 24 — in New Delhi, India.

    About Global Pulse Confederation (GPC)

    Description
    Formation Founded in 2016 through the merger of the Global Pulse Confederation (GPC) and the International Starch Institute (ISI).
    Headquarters Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
    Mission Represents the global pulse industry, aiming to promote the sustainable growth of the pulse industry worldwide.
    Focus Areas
    • Advocating for policies supporting the pulse industry’s interests.
    • Providing resources and support to pulse industry stakeholders.
    • Facilitating research and innovation in pulse production and utilization.
    Membership Open to businesses, organizations, and individuals involved in the pulse industry, including growers, processors, traders, and researchers.
    India’s Connect India, being a major producer and consumer of pulses, actively participates in the GPC and holds membership status, contributing to the organization’s objectives.

    Key Highlights from Pulses 24 Convention

    • Production Growth: Pulses production in India has increased by 60% over the past decade, reaching 270 lakh tonnes in 2024 from 171 lakh tonnes in 2014.
    • Partnership Goals: Mr. Goyal emphasized the partnership between NAFED and GPC, aiming to position pulses as a vital dietary component not only in India but also globally.
    • Minimum Support Price (MSP): The Centre ensures an MSP offering 50% over the actual cost of production to farmers, resulting in attractive returns on investment. Significant increases in MSP for various pulses were highlighted, reaching as high as 117% in masoor and 90% in moong over the past decade.
    • Self-Sufficiency by 2027: India’s progress towards self-reliance in chickpeas and other pulses, with efforts focused on achieving self-sufficiency in all pulses by 2027. Initiatives include the supply of new seed varieties and the expansion of tur and black gram cultivation.
    • Global Knowledge Sharing: GPC president emphasized India’s potential to benefit from the conference by exchanging best practices and technological advancements in pulse cultivation from other countries.
    • Focus on Smallholding Farmers: Pulses are noted for their soil benefits and nutritional value, particularly beneficial for smallholding farmers.