Last week, your columnist was invited in his capacity as the Agriculture Secretary of West Bengal to deliver the Keynote address at the Regional Meeting to showcase AGRIMACH 09, an international exhibition, conference and Business meeting on Agriculture Machinery and Farm equipment scheduled to be held at New Delhi in December this . Organised by the FICCI in association with the Union Ministry of Agriculture, the event is meant to showcase show case the entire range of equipment that is required by farmers from the preparation of soil for cultivation to harvesting and post production farm level grading, sorting and primary storage. These range from the now ubiquitous tractors to machines for Zero Tillage, Laser Levellers, micro and drip irrigation equipment, paddy reapers, trans-planters, threshers, excavators etc.
What makes AGRIMACH’s Indian edition interesting is the fact that most of the equipment that will be on display will be beyond the purchasing power capacity of individual farmers. However, farmer’s organisations like co-operatives and self help groups, and the agro industries corporations of state governments, Agriculture Universities, Command Area corporations and Agro service centres will be able to afford them. This promises to be a very interesting variant of the ‘Bottom of the Pyramid’ concept of Prof CK Prahlad, who showed how ‘miniaturisation’ of packaging in the Fast Moving Consumer Goods Sector (FMCG) had made it possible for people at the bottom of the pyramid to afford consumer products like shampoos, creams, tooth paste, and branded shaving blades, jams, jellies, biscuits etc. Now a tractor or a combine harvester cannot appear in a Nano version – but newer institutional arrangements can ensure that even a marginal and small farmer can ‘hire’ the services of these productivity enhancement instruments to increase their profits. It is also important to understand that thanks to the NREGA, the wage rates for daily labour have shot up in most agriculture production zones, and in multi cropped areas, labour negotiates a ‘price’ which makes the farmer think of ‘mechanizing’ his operations. This is a positive cycle, because higher and assured wages for farm labour creates a market for the agricultural produce of the farmer. This can turn out to be a win-win situation if the calibration is proper.
The big ‘if’ however relates to the institutional capacity of the farmer’s co-operatives, and the government departments to leverage this opportunity, and their willingness and capacity to work with each other. While government departments are not short on funds, optimal performance is rarely achieved on account of design failure, which often stems from the great desire to run a regime of ‘patronage dispensation’, rather than a self sustaining ‘revenue model in an auto – pilot’ mode. The farmers co-operatives and Self Help groups on the other hand, have a far nimble organisation, and are in a position to make local adjustments , but do not have the necessary funds. Let me take a concrete example. If, for example a state corporation were to operate a scheme for hiring out a Laser levelling machine at rates which are affordable to the farmer , the machine would run as per government mandated duty hours, with two weekly holidays , and hours of operation which would not make sense to the farmer. The machine would have periods of intense activity when the land is being prepared for tillage and sowing, but would be idle, when the seeds have been broadcast in the farmers field. However a state corporation will not have the flexibility of hiring manpower for the equipment on the basis of actual requirement. The ‘hybrid’ solution therefore is for the government to purchase the equipment, and lease it to farmers organisations at rates which ensure that the operating expenditure is met by receipts from the users. Apart from getting the users to have a degree of control over the equipment, this also ensures that for the running costs, minor repairs, workers overtime, additional manpower during peak periods, decisions can be taken locally without reference to the government system. It can be argues that this function could eb devolved on the Panchayats, but AgriMatters feels that it is best if it left to the farmers own organisations to manage this equipment.
This brings us to another point on which there was an animated discussion. Most speakers from the corporate sector spoke of the great opportunities that exist in India for contract farming, and that it could be a mutually beneficial relationship for both the farmers and the agribusiness firm. AgriMatters has held the view that rather than facilitate contract farming, the state should encourage ‘partnership farming’, and the primary contract of the corporate should be with the farmers co-operative, rather than the individual farmer, who will find it difficult to understand and enforce his contract. AgriMatters is convinced that more important than technology is the institutional context in which it is placed- and any arrangement which puts the farmer in a position of control needs the strongest support from all quarters.