Ajay Vir Jakhar
The RENOWNED agricultural economist Dr. SS Johl submitted two reports in 1986 and 2002 on the need for crop diversification in Punjab. After more than three decades, overflowing granaries and large budget deficits have finally forced a serious policy rethink at the Union government level, with an open-ended public procurement system limited to rice and wheat. These two staples were favored for the Green Revolution because, when irrigated, crops are less susceptible to weather fluctuations, can be stored inexpensively for long periods of time, and are therefore better suited for food security purposes. Punjab offered the ideal conditions for growing these crops and was voted the state of the Green Revolution. When India gained independence, Punjab had a diversified agricultural landscape. But under the Union government’s directives, directives and incentives to ensure India’s food security during its most difficult decades, it turned to specialized agriculture.
It is unrealistic to expect a financially constrained Punjab to bear the cost of crop diversification. The process becomes even more complicated when trying to ensure a decent livelihood for those dependent on agriculture at the same time as switching to regenerative alternatives. Solving the maze of government free power policy for tubular wells requires political will, which unfortunately is lacking. Such challenges make the task of diversification too daunting for management to even consider.
Undeniably, a critical need for crop diversification is to address groundwater depletion. The two-culture monoculture is wiping out biodiversity, but most ignore it as an existential crisis. There is also a direct link between bicultural monoculture areas and peasant suicides. Man-days of labor caused by the paddy-wheat cycle may be 130 days a year or less. Spending days without work in a state of jobless “unemployment” leads to depression, which is rampant in such communities. Creating a diversity of rural occupations is just as important as creating jobs outside of agriculture to improve rural livelihoods. Reducing rice cultivation is also important to solve the vexing problem of crop burning.
People revel in contentment as India usually celebrates its “food self-sufficiency” amid ongoing massive malnutrition. The misperception only emerges because the majority of people cannot afford nutritious meals and demand remains subdued. Consumption patterns are changing as economies grow as people can afford and demand more nutritious and diverse foods. Even as demand for diversified food increases, climate change will adversely affect food production goals and regularly lead to irregular production. Across India, water tables are falling to a point where even access to drinking water has become a problem in tens of thousands of villages. Faced with these challenges, Punjab, uniquely endowed with natural resources, is key to achieving India’s food security.
The question may well be asked: if crop diversification is so important, why have we failed so miserably for decades? The answer is simple enough: despite the noise, the Union government has always been wary of diversifying cultivation in Punjab. India’s priorities are changing with rising international commodity prices and occasional droughts across the country. The secure procurement of rice and wheat at good prices from village market yards, coupled with prompt payment, created the scourge. Impossible to substitute or replicate for other growing systems. Public procurement by the central purchasing bodies brings in around 60,000 rupees annually to the financially strained Punjab. Unable to balance the inflows and revenues flowing into the state, the state has opted too much for maintaining the status quo. Globally, most trade takes place around the world with neighboring countries such as America or the European Union. In the case of Punjab, far from seaports and neighboring hostile Pakistan, trade is being strangled, leading to the loss of agricultural export opportunities and the creation of non-agricultural jobs. In the process, Punjab has lost the export markets of its traditional trading partners Afghanistan and Pakistan. It is also denied road access to Central Asian markets closer to Punjab than Mumbai or Bengaluru.
The financially stricken Punjab Agricultural University also failed to live up to expectations, and “agricultural research and extension” needs to be restarted urgently. Ironically, an agriculturally rich state like Punjab has become a net importer of fruits and vegetables, the cultivation of which would provide food and labor on the farm. Rice substitute crops such as corn, peanut, moong, cotton, bajra, arhar, and soybeans simply don’t bring comparable profits. Profit is not the only reason farmers choose to grow a particular crop. Comparable weather-related production risks in other crops make rice a preferred crop. The late dr. GS Kalkat had observed that small and marginal farmers would not accept new crops unless they had the confidence to market their produce. Crop production diversification will require a variety of policies, including the creation of regulated spaces for private traders, support for farm producer organizations to become aggregators, futures and options, stock receipts, risk insurance, and the dismantling of trader monopolies in APMC market yards. But governance remains the main challenge in the indebted Punjab’s struggle to regain its glory. Much of what is required for successful diversification also lies outside the country’s borders. For example, the Punjab dairy industry’s demand for corn is met from Bihar, where it is sold for half the value of the MSP. This dampens farm gate prices in Punjab and hinders crop diversification. The food processing industry is essential for crop diversification, but the Union government’s policies have not borne fruit. What hurts more is the regularity of arbitrary import-export restrictions.
The way forward
Punjab secured India’s first 50 years of food security; the time has come for the Union government to fund crop diversification in Punjab to ensure India’s food security for the next 50 years. What should work is that the center allocates Rs 5,000 crore per year for a period of six years. This should go beyond current procurement payouts to Punjab farmers. Unfortunately, the Punjab facility cannot be trusted to use the money for its intended purposes and ensure a just transformation; Nor can the Union government be expected to permanently address the pain of diversification. To make the transition durable, we must go beyond simply bridging the profitability gap between rice and diversification crops. Therefore, an “interim commission” headed by Niti Aayog should be formed to be responsible for evaluating states’ plans and conditionally allocating resources.
It is unrealistic to expect a financially constrained Punjab to bear the cost of crop diversification. The process becomes even more complicated when trying to ensure a decent livelihood for those dependent on agriculture at the same time as switching to regenerative alternatives. Solving the maze of government free power policy for tubular wells requires political will, which unfortunately is lacking. Both politicians and leaders of farmer organizations are betting on populist, short-term economic benefits for farmers by deliberately sacrificing the livelihoods of future generations. Such challenges make the task of diversification too daunting for management to even consider. Consequently, even if something seems logical or resources are available, it does not mean that the transformation will be achieved. Let’s not lose hope, let’s pray.
Five proposals for budget 2022
1 Find an evaluation of government programs by organizations from Beneficiaries to allow different departments to ensure the achievement of objectives and the best use of budget allocations.
2 Statutory levying of import duties on crops/food whose landed cost is below MSP (if declared) or below profitable prices (excluding MSP) so that they do not enter the Indian market below a threshold price.
3 Double funding for agricultural research institutes and agricultural extension services.
4 Funding a consortium of farmer organizations to develop a metric to measure what matters: true cost of food; and payment for agricultural ecosystem services.
5 Establishment of an autonomous agency under the aegis of the Department of Agriculture charged with providing all stakeholders, including states, with real-time market intelligence and a nationally consistent database of food systems.
The author is a former Chairman of the Punjab State Farmers’ & Farm Workers’ Commission
Send your feedback to letters@tribunemail.com
