Unseasonal rains and hailstorms have savaged the crops of farmers, especially in central and western India; many of these — chana, lentils and wheat in Madhya Pradesh, mustard in Rajasthan or onions and grapes in Maharashtra – were due for harvesting. Unusually intense western disturbances originating from the Mediterranean Sea interacting with moist south-easterly winds from the Bay of Bengal were the cause of the heavy rain and hail-producing thunderstorms, resulting in crop destruction. So, instead of the expected bumper harvest on the back of excellent monsoons, the farmers reaped only misery.

Compounding their plight is the onset of the Lok Sabha poll. The model code of conduct prohibits any special relief package on the ground that it could influence voters. Even if the Election Commission takes an accommodative view on this, there is the issue of the preparedness of State and district administrations. Given their current preoccupation with the conduct of elections, assessing the extent of crop damage and compensation to be paid to individual farmers are unlikely to receive top priority. Effectively, apart from politicians competing to offer commiserations, real and substantial support is very improbable over the next couple of months, if not more.

The plight of the farmers underlines the need for a proper crop insurance scheme that triggers automatic payments for losses from natural disasters; such a mechanism should be independent of elections or government large-heartedness. Agriculture is inherently risk-prone and susceptible to the vagaries of the weather vagaries. A recent nationwide survey showed that 70 per cent of the over 5,000 farmer-households polled had reported their crops suffered damage in the last three years. The present National Agricultural Insurance Scheme is far too inadequate. To start with, it is compulsory only for farmers who have taken loans. Secondly, it operates on an ‘area approach’. A farmer is not eligible for indemnity unless the entire taluka or block area in which the farm falls is declared by the State Government as calamity-affected. This, in turn, is to be determined on the basis of crop cutting experiments that confirm actual yields have fallen short of normal average ‘threshold’ yields for a particular area. The whole process is bureaucratic and by the time the farmer gets the claim amount, it is most often too little too late. We need to shift to a system where insurance is mandatory for receiving compensation against crop loss. Also, claims should be assessed on the basis of individual farmers against the ‘area approach’. The arrangement should be a matter between the farmer and the insurance company, subject to regulation and with the government chipping in to subsidise premiums if necessary.

Related Topics