Govt should give farmers incentive to not burn stubble

BB MAHAJAN

Not long ago, farmers of Punjab and Haryana were being praised for their contribution to the country’s food production and making the country selfsufficient. Suddenly, they are being criticised for causing pollution in Punjab, Haryana and Delhi and being threatened with fines and other punitive measures for burning the paddy residue.

What happened to turn them from heroes to villains? Farmers like everyone else respond to economic incentives. During the ’60s, when the country was facing an acute food shortage, the central government launched an integrated programme for increasing food production. At that time, dwarf varieties of paddy and wheat had been developed. The government provided seeds of these varieties, fertilisers, pesticides and other agriculture inputs at subsidised rates. The minimum support price (MSP) for food crops were announced and enforced through the public procurement of wheat and rice.

Farmers in Punjab and Haryana, which were previously not paddy-growing areas due to low rainfall, responded to these incentives by diverting the area from maize, bajra, pulses and oilseeds (mainly groundnuts) to paddy in kharif, which became relatively more profitable. The government gave liberal loans through cooperatives at a low rate of interest for boring tubewells to supplement canal water and rainfall and provide controlled irrigation. A large number of tubewells were installed. The production of rice increased rapidly both by diversification from other crops and increased yield by intensive agriculture.

The Punjab government started providing free electricity for tubewells and free canal irrigation. This increased the incentive for growing paddy that consumes more water per tonne of production than other crops. The country now became not only sufficient but surplus in wheat and rice also. With food stocks being more than the level of buffer stocks required for the public distribution system, the increase in the minimum support price (MSP) slowed down. MSPs for coarse grains, pulses and oilseeds were increased to provide incentive for the switchover to these crops. The production of paddy, however, continued as with free water, it was still more remunerative and there were no proper arrangements for the procurement of these crops so that their production continued to involve risk of fall in prices at harvest time.

PROBLEM OF SURPLUS

The problem of surplus stocks can to some extent be solved by promoting their consumption by poorer sections, which are still suffering from malnutrition, by larger supplies through the PDS. However, this largescale diversification of area to paddy has led to other serious consequences. The water table for both states has been going down rapidly as use of groundwater for paddy is more than the natural recharge. Soil health has also deteriorated due to the depletion of micro nutrients. Experts have predicted that these states will soon become a desert if the present trend continues.

The need for crop diversification is well recognised. However to achieve this, it is not enough to appeal to the farmers. It is important to provide them proper economic incentives to divert the area from paddy to other crops. It is necessary to stop free supply of power and canal water for irrigation as it incentivises the production of paddy which uses more water than other crops. This is politically difficult and no government has found the courage to do so. It also needs to be realised that farmers’ relative incomes have declined in recent years. It may, therefore, be difficult for them to bear the additional cost for electricity and canal water.

The way out may be to simultaneously provide income support to farmers based on the area of their land in the base year under different crops and the additional cost on account of charges for electricity and canal water which they will have to bear for irrigating those crops. Along with this, the arrangements need to be made by the central government along with the state governments to ensure a strong procurement system for the alternative crops and mechanism for sharing the loss that may be incurred in the process of their procurement and disposal.

THREATS DON’T WORK

Due to the declining water table, state governments had to impose restrictions on planting paddy before the last week of June as earlier planting would involve the use of a large amount of water during the summer heat in the absence of rains. As a result, the ripening of the crop has also got delayed. The rabi crop of wheat has to be sown by mid-November for optimum yield. The period available for harvesting of paddy and preparation of fields for sowing wheat has considerably reduced. The farmer has to use harvest combines for quick harvesting and for coping with labour shortage caused by a relative increase of income of poorer sections in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

This leaves a large amount of paddy residue. Farmers don’t have enough time to plough these back in the field before sowing the rabi crop, and therefore have per force to burn the residue. No amount of threatening and criticising is going to help. The only solution is to provide economic incentive for not burning the residue. There are a number of options available such as adding the residue management system to combine harvesters, using the residue for power generation, the production of CNG, the making of cardboards and hay for cattle feed. Their economic viability needs to be assessed and a comprehensive programme launched to make these available to farmers at a subsidised rate.

The writer, a 1957-batch IAS officer, retired as secretary, food, Government of India

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF RESIDUE

MANAGEMENT OPTIONS BUT THEIR ECONOMIC VIABILITY NEEDS TO BE ASSESSED AND A COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAMME LAUNCHED