The Hindu Business Line : Technocrats have let down agriculture

More than politicians, technocrats and researchers have failed the Indian farmer, particularly the distressed small farmer, says Dr Suresh Babu, Programme Leader, IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute). In an interview with Business Line he discussed why agriculture was becoming unviable and the need to look at such profitable areas as poultry, fruits and vegetables, aquaculture, and so on.

Excerpts from the interview:

How do you look at the increasing non-profitability and distress of the Indian farmers?

Agriculture is increasingly becoming knowledge-driven, where competition is based not on economics alone but the future of the technology, the information that farmers will have on hand to meet the challenge of globalisation including global and niche markets, the prices they can get and how they can position themselves. We have to examine how India can position itself to compete in the international arena

In the last 10 years a clear trend is emerging with the middle-income population increasing its demand of high-value commodities leading to more demand for livestock products, fish, fruits, vegetables and poultry. The input suppliers for these industries are increasingly becoming corporatised with greater private sector participation. This is natural for a developing country; 20-30 years ago the private sector participation in agriculture was basically the input industry — pesticides, fertilisers, etc. In the poultry industry, egg-processing plants, retailers selling poultry, etc have grown.

But what will this mean for the Indian farmer?

In a sense this is the second green revolution that is being talked about. But are we prepared for this revolution that'll have to go beyond our borders to make our farmers productive and competitive?

All that is fine and may work for the bigger farmers, what about the small ones who face huge distress levels?

That is why you're seeing two sets of farming systems clearly emerging in India — the traditional smallholders with 1-5 acres either in the irrigated areas growing rice or wheat or in the dryland farming system depending on groundwater... This set of farmers is still struggling. The second green revolution or high value agriculture is not reaching them; they're not even connected to it because the infrastructure, market intelligence and corporatisation of industry have not reached them.

Can you give an example?

In Dharmapuri and Ramnad districts of Tamil Nadu, dryland farmers with less than 5 acres are producing cotton, groundnuts or millets, not high-value crops because they cannot participate in the market, and they depend on rain or groundwater. Those who can participate in the market are those who can establish poultry or go into aquaculture. In the Krishnagiri region, even those with 15 acres switched 10 years ago to mango or coconut, needing less water.

But the small farmer is getting squeezed out. You're studied farmer suicides in Andhra Pradesh; they borrow at huge rates of interest, depend on rain or groundwater and were devastated by the four years of drought — 2000-2004. What is the hope for them?

In Cuddapah, Kurnool, Ananathapur districts of AP, as you put it, it is an accumulated distress over the years, which is very unfortunate... This is the financial string; it is not that they simply borrow and don't repay. Due to their vulnerability to drought, production goes down and there are no returns from agriculture. Part of the problem is high interest rates, loans from non-institutional financial intermediaries. Institutional finance is available at 6-7 per cent; the Farmers' Commission has recommended 3-4 per cent interest...

But credit reaching the small farmers at these rates is highly doubtful; touts add to the interest cost...

Banks will never be able to reach all the farmers, as they are too few and far between...

So what is the remedy, how do we help them? Their need is today...

If we look at other countries and take the US as an example..

But is it not like comparing oranges and apples?

It is not. Our smallholding farmers are called family farmers in the US, and their farms are between 50 and 100 acres... yes, they are large in size, but in bare economic calculations and percentage of returns, it is a similar situation. But in the US, when their crop fails, the farmers get cheques in the mail.

It's a welfare system, so what's the point in comparing Indian and the US model?

I'm arguing that in a country where farmers can fend for themselves without government support, they still get it. Our government cannot support them cent per cent... the institutions are missing here... the country is developing, but we've not developed our institutions.

Bluntly put, agriculture is no longer a viable proposition in India.

I agree with you, and have seen it on the ground, heard it several times too and it has become such a cliché. It's not viable because the productivity of our agriculture is very low.

Or is it that we are not paying the farmer enough for what he produces? His input costs are going up ... cost of credit, water, seeds, pesticides, labour, fertilisers... Are we paying him a fair prices for a kg of rice, wheat?

Ultimately, it boils down to economics; there are several ways a small farmer can make money; one is to give him a higher price.

Or move him into a higher value product...

Yes, but the possibility of doing that for the distressed farmers committing suicide is minimal and not possible in the short term. Their low productivity is because the technology we've given our farmers is not adequate.

What kind of technological input?

Drought is the major issue. Let's take cotton as an example; what are our research institutions doing in terms of developing drought resistant cotton varieties? There has been a lot of research that we can easily borrow to develop drought resistant cotton variety. I do not see anything coming out of our labs to the farmers. Five years in a row our farmers have planted cotton and failed. There must be a cotton variety that can withstand moderate drought; total drought may be different. Even in the bad years there was some rainfall and with that level of rainfall there must be technology that could have helped the farmers.

So are you saying that our agricultural universities and researchers have let down the farmers?

I would say that our system of agricultural research has not met the needs of the small farmer in dryland farming.

Why? Is the Indian farmer not demanding enough?

Well that's a very polite way of putting it; the fact is these people do not have a voice.

Majority of research is done on rice and wheat, including the high value commodities, and there you have lobbies working. In the rice and wheat-growing belt — Punjab, Haryana, Western UP, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, the minimum price that we pay is just enough to sow the crop. If the production is good, or even normal, they're happy as the government is procuring all the rice and wheat and they don't have a problem. And, they are organised; in Thanjavur there is a strong association of the delta farmers; the same is true in Godavari and Krishna districts.

The large farmers are very influential and deal with the Agriculture Minister on a day-to-day basis. But that voice is missing for the small farmers. The ICAR sets priorities according to the farmers' demand, but they have not adequately recognised the needs of the smallholding farmers... so this group is left behind in agricultural development.

What is the solution?

Institutions. We have not been able to organise small farmers associations, so they can come together, identify their needs and make demands. Japan managed to do that in the 19th century.

Do you see this happening in India as they get more aware?

They are already aware but in these districts they're disenfranchised even within their community, so it is very difficult for them to come together.

How are they `disenfranchised'?

They're re not connected to the system and don't know where to go. When in financial trouble I should either have government mechanism to tell me what to do or a group to listen to my problems. Right now they don't have either and so commit suicide, thinking at least their family will get Rs 1 lakh compensation. That is the level of despair.

I find youngsters in well-to do farming families don't want to continue in agriculture; they want jobs at Infosys. The educated might get them, but what about the Standard VIII dropouts?

Another institution missing here is vocational agriculture- how do we make entrepreneurs out of Std VIII dropouts. For example, the demand for poultry and other livestock products is going to go up enormously. We can train and organise youngsters in drought prone and vulnerable districts, identify the demand for the product 5 to 10 years ahead and prepare them. But such institutions/mechanisms are missing in India.

Do you see any sign of such things happening?

No.

How can it be triggered?

The Farmers' Commission has to think of such things, look for opportunities for rural youth whose parents have a couple of acres of land... how can we make them agricultural entrepreneurs; it has to be an organised institutionalised process to change rural economy. Then they will stay in agriculture, use the land as part of their business.

Is there political will to do that?

In my own experience in working with politicians in India for a decade, I've found that they are genuinely interested, willing to listen and worried about the future of agriculture. But they have to deal with so many issues. I would hold the technocrats responsible. I'm talking of the professors in universities who hide behind their professorial titles. The failure of agriculture is not due so much to lack of political commitment but the poor response of the academic and research institutions.

So our technologists and academicians have to get out of their ivory towers?

I will back that position anytime. What else are they there for? They don't do it because there's no accountability. I know that after 10 years I'll become an assistant professor, etc. Performance evaluation of the job should depend on how much you have gone to the field and what you have achieved on the ground. Our have to improve of our system of accountability and make our researchers accountable for the money being spent on them in terms of results on the ground. Do institutions like e-chaupal help, and are more required?

It is a natural thing to happen because the industrial sector is progressing fast. It is a welcome move and they are filling the market information gap. But the initiative by ITC is minuscule compared to the need and the model needs to be scaled up. Again, I go back to the universities, they should do their job. Their research stations - almost in every district - have to connect with the farmers and work on their problems.

Response may be sent to rasheeda@thehindu.co.in

More Stories on : Agriculture | Interview

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Flush of funds

Technocrats have let down agriculture

Fuel the `inclusive' model of development

Educated MLAs/MPs can be asset to nation

WTO: India must focus on people movement

Indian IPR law firm courts China

Sealing drive

Sensex high

Organic farming