Agri crisis looming large over UP
The country has been facing serious agrarian crisis for quite some time without adequate policy response from successive governments. Uttar Pradesh, though better endowed in terms of fertile soil, irrigation facilities and agro-climatic conditions, is no exception. In fact, agricultural growth in UP has been lagging behind that of the country as a whole during successive plans.
A look at the trends in foodgrain output reveals the extent of agricultural stagnation the state has been facing. Foodgrain output in the state stood at 520 lakh MT in 2011-12, which remained around the same level in the next two years but declined to 382 lakh MT in 2014-15 due to bad weather condition. It went up to 440 lakh MT in 2015-16 but remained considerably lower than the record output of 2011-12. Foodgrain output is estimated to be 550 lakh MT in 2016-17. Though a new record, it is less than 6 per cent more than the output recorded in 2011-12 that is five year back.
The state level figures conceal variations in agricultural performance at the regional and district level. During 2000-01 to 2012-13 as many as 13 districts registered a growth rate of over 3 per cent per annum in foodgrain output. Out of these 6 districts belonged to Bundelkhand region, 3 each to central and eastern region and 1 to western region.
In 19 districts growth rate of foodgrain output was between 2 and 3 per cent per annum. But the growth rate of foodgrain output was below 2 per cent in as many as 28 districts while as many as 10 districts registered negative growth rate. As many as 6 of these districts belonged to western region namely Meerut, Mathura, JB Phule Nagar, Hathras, Budaun and Gautam Budh Nagar.
In Saharanpur and Muzaffarnagar the growth rate was almost nil. Thus, more than half of the districts in UP have experienced sluggish or negative growth of foodgrains output during the last decade indicating a widespread crisis in agriculture scenario of the state.
The performance of western districts, the traditional wheat basket of UP in particular has been dismal.
Overall performance of the farm sector is shown by the trends in the domestic product of the agricultural sector including animal husbandry. The growth rate of agricultural GSDP was 0.5 and -2.5 per cent in 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively, which increased to 3.7 per cent in 2015-16 and is expected to be 5.5 per cent in 2016-17. These trends reflect the shift in agricultural production in favour of high value crops as well as income from animal husbandry, which is taken up as an allied activity by farmers.
As in the case of foodgrain output large variations in growth rate of agricultural net domestic product (NDDP) are observed at the district level. During 2004-05 and 2013-14 the growth rate of NDDP agriculture exceeded 3 per cent per annum in 25 districts. Out of these, 12 districts registered agricultural growth of over 5 per cent per annum. As many as 9 of these districts belonged to the eastern region. Growth rate of agricultural NNDP varied between 2 and 3 per cent in 19 districts. On the other hand, 18 districts registered growth rate of less than 2 per cent, while as many as 8 districts experienced negative growth in agricultural NNDP. Four of these districts were in Bundelkhand, 3 in western region and 1 in Central region.
In foodgrain output growth Bundelkhand was the best performer, but in terms of growth of agricultural NDDP it lagged behind all the other regions. Western and Eastern regions registered high growth in agricultural NDDP, but lagged behind in the growth of foodgrain output. Central region was in the middle category of agricultural growth. Moreover, in all the regions there were sharp intra-regional disparities in agricultural growth at the district level. All regions had a mix of high growth and low growth districts.
One third districts in the state have recorded fairly satisfactory growth in agriculture. However, it is a rather worrisome fact that about half of the districts of the state are experiencing agricultural stagnation for over a decade. In addition, farmers face sharp year to year variations in agricultural output. These trends indicate inadequate policy support to agriculture and ineffective monitoring of agricultural schemes at the district level.
It is quite puzzling to note that in the same region agricultural performance shows sharp variations across districts. The need of the hour is to examine factors which are affecting agricultural growth at the district level and prepare suitable micro level plans to deal with the specific problems in each district. A special task force should be set up by the state government for this purpose to prepare a strategy for a sustainable and regionally balanced pattern of agricultural development.