This is a remarkable book on Indian agriculture from a well known columnist and speaker on the subject. The remarkable fact about Mr. Sud’s analysis, whether in the print or the electronic media, and on a wide range of subjects – the price of onions, or the efficacy of organic agriculture, or the reasons for farmers suicides is that he marshals empirical evidence to back up his point of view. There are few who would disagree with his analysis, though as is to be expected, there is bound to be a healthy difference of opinion on the way forward. In fact as TN Ninan writes in the Foreword : Change is easiest when you have an empty palette. Populate the palette fully and change becomes difficult; too many things come in the way. And so it has been in agriculture. When half the population ( of India)lives off the land, most of them eking out a marginal existence, change has to be introduced carefully…
It is not that the problems are not well known or documented. There are some things which are ‘no –brainers’ , but the deep entanglement , and the inability to cut through the maze because of ‘short –term considerations’ has ensured that this sector has not been able to garner the benefits of the liberalization regime. Also, in a way, the country has not been able to get out of the Green revolution syndrome. Interventions during the GR period were effective to tackle the problems then – however, the same set of solutions cannot be applied as a silver bullet for all times, all crops, all seasons and all land –holding patterns. This had worked well for a while, and the agricultural output grew significantly faster than the population for the nearly three decades. Then the momentum was lost , and rather than ‘investing ‘ in agriculture, the softer option of ‘subsidizing inputs’ became the dominant mantra. Subsidies have the great advantage of being easier to implement, and also afford greater flexibility to accommodate patronage.
In the lead essay ‘ the Green revolution : what went wrong ?’ , he has identified soil fatigue, land degradation, vanishing water, low capital formation, credit, seeds, fertilizer and irrigation as the issues that need immediate attention. He shows the inter connectedness of all these factors, and the problem that the government often looks at all these in distinct ‘silos’. Moreover even as the ICAR/DARE(Indian Council of Agriculture Research /Department of Agriculture research and extension) and the DAC (department of Agriculture and Co-operation) are both part of the Ministry of Agriculture and under the same Minister, the ground level co-operation is not eh way it should be. In a later chapter ‘Research and Human Resource Development’, he rues the fact that bureaucrats have tried to ride rough shod over the agricultural scientists, and often not realized that investments in agriculture research by their very nature are more long term. He is critical of trying to measure ICAR by the standards of CSIR because the two operate in entirely different domains. |
However, to revert to the main argument on the reasons for the inability of the GR to extend its shelf life beyond the designated areas and crops, he points out that procurement, marketing and price support operations have never really been as effective for pulses, oilseeds and coarse cereals as has been the case for wheat and rice, which has always received the unstinted support of the government. The reason is the obvious : wheat and rice are basic cereals, and governments cannot afford to make any mistakes on these crops. However , it must be mentioned that from the time of the publication of this book, focused steps have been taken by the government to address these issues. Thus the National Food Security Mission is addressing the issue of productivity, especially yield gaps in all the districts which have the potential to raise the production of cereals and pulses. The RKVY (Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana) addresses the issue of capital formation in agriculture, and has incentivized states to pump money into the agriculture and allied sectors. The sectors identified by Sud as ‘Drivers of future Growth’ have been more or less accepted by the government, even though the scale and scope of investments still offers scope for further improvement. Take bee keeping for example. As pointed out by him, while traditional bee keeping continues to provide supplementary income and livelihoods, especially as market linkages are becoming stronger, agri entrepreneurs are also adopting the European business model of ‘migratory bee keeping’- moving their bee colonies from one area to another to offer pollination services, which are valued higher than the ‘honey’,’ bee venom’ and the ‘royal jelly’ and ‘beeswax’, all of which have clearly identified niche markets. The National Bee Board is currently in the process of establishing a world class honey testing laboratory to address the issues of traceability and residue monitoring.
Sud has also identified organic farming, vermiculture, biodynamic agriculture , conservation agriculture and bio technology as the novel farming techniques and practices which have still not received the required policy or funding support from either the central or the state governments. The last chapter is on climate change , global warming and the impact on agriculture. While the ICAR and the DAC have started working on these issues, he suggests that these should be treated both as ‘Important and URGENT ‘.
Currently, the Agriculture editor of Business Standard , which has also brought out the publication, he has written for the Indian Express, Times of India and several other leading journals in the country, and has addressed professional and lay audiences across the country, including the training programmes at the LBS National academy of Administration. His views have been non dogmatic, and he has never taken the typical ‘state versus market’ approach in his writings. Both have a complimentary role : state intervention must be efficient, and market regulations must be effective.