Sustaining Small Holder Agriculture in India

Ramanjaneyulu

Centre for Sustainable Agriculture…caring for those who feed the nation

Andhra Pradesh Maharashtra Punjab

Green Revolution Paradigm

• Synergy between technology and public policy• Nation’s self sufficiency as goal• Public Sector playing major role• Public extension• Irrigation playing major role• Technology transfer public to private• Free technology• Input intensive• Controlled markets• Public Distribution System

Green Revolution• is based on maximizing the output of a narrow range

of species leading to monoculture of crops and varieties

• is based on capital depletion and massive additions of external inputs (e.g. water, chemicals)

• High energy consuming: fossil fuel, chemical fertilizers, chemicals, processing, storage, transport

• views the farm as a factory with “inputs” (such as pesticides, feed, fertilizer, and fuel) and “outputs” (grain, cotton, chicken, and so forth)

• never cared about the externalities

02000400060008000

100001200014000160001800020000

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

Farmers suicides in India

No. of suicides

Source: NCRB 1995-2010Total 270,940 in 17 years

• an annual average of 14,462 in six years, from 1995 to 2000• a yearly average of 16,743 in 11 years between 2001 and 2011• around 46 farmers’ suicides each day, on average or nearly one every half-hour

since 2001• Farmers Suicide Rate is 16.3% compared to 11.1 % among rest of Indians (47%

higher)

• two-thirds of the suicides are occurring in half-a-dozen States that account for just about one-third of the country’s population

State Farmer Suicides Difference

1995-2002 2003-2010

Andhra Pradesh 1590 2301 +711

Karnataka 2259 2123 -136

MP+Chhattisgarh 2304 2829 +525

Maharashtra 2508 3802 +1294

Source: NCRB Accidental Deaths & Suicides in India Reports 1995-2010

Post Green Revolution: dominant paradigm

Proprietary technologies GM intensive Monoculture-monopoly Decreasing role of public research and extension

• Realignment of links in the trade• Free markets: Shift from spot markets to specialized wholesalers to

guarantee q and q leading to new intermediaries and logistics

• Contract farming-Preference for limited transactions

• Rise of private standards-Quality, safety not common for internal trade

What do Census-2011 say• Cultivators are 118.7 million (24.6%) and

Agricultural Labourers are 144.3 (30.0%)• Proportion of cultivators reduced from 31.7

% and agriculture workers increased from 26.5% in 2001

• Main cultivators only 95.8 million (< 8 per cent of the population) down from 103 million in 2001 and 110 million in 1991.

• 15 million farmers (‘Main’ cultivators) fewer than there were in 1991 and over 7.7 million less since 2001

• Agriculture workers numbers increased from 63.4 m to 86.1 m between 2001-11

• On average about 2,035 farmers losing ‘Main Cultivator’ status every single day for the last 20 years

Where are they going?• From 2004-05 to 2009-10, only 2 million additional employment was generated but 55 million were added to working

age population!• 25.1 million people lost their self-employment• Increase in the number of casual workers by 21.9 million, while growth in the number of regular workers nearly halved

between 2004-05 and 2009-10, compared with the previous 5 year period.

Sector 2004-05 2009-10 Difference

Agriculture 258.93 243.21 -15.71

Manufacturing 55.77 48.54 -7.23

Services 112.81 112.33 -0.48

Non-Manufacturing (construction)

29.96 56.10 26.14

TOTAL 457.46 460.18 2.72

Sector-wise unemployment (millions)

Lives not better….66th NSSO survey says• Per capita expenditure of urban India was 88% higher than rural India• Average MPCE in 2009-10 to be Rs. 1054 and Rs. 1984 in rural India and urban India

respectively • Top 10% of India’s rural population having an average MPCE (Rs. 2517) 5.6 times that of

the poorest 10% (Rs. 453)• Top 10% of urban population having a 9.8 times higher average MPCE (Rs. 5863) compared

that of the bottom 10% (Rs. 599)• Considering the average rural MPCE value of Rs. 1054 in isolation would be

partially misleading. The rural MPCE median of Rs. 895 (about Rs. 30 per day) implies that half the rural population had MPCE below this level.

• 40% of the rural population had MPCE below Rs. 800 while 60% had MPCE below Rs. 1000• Compared to the rural median MPCE (Rs. 895), the urban median MPCE level was 1.68

times higher at Rs. 1502 with 30% of the urban population having MPCE above Rs. 2100 and 20% having MPCE above Rs. 2600.

Income and Expenditure of farmersLand holding

Category Total Income (Rs/month)

Expenditure(Rs/month)

Percent of farmers

<0.01 Landless 1380 2297 36 %

0.01-0.4 Sub marginal 1633 2390

0.4-1.0 Marginal 1809 2672 31 %

1.0-2.0 Small 2493 3148 17 %

2.0-4.0 Semi-medium 3589 3685 10 %

4.0-10.0 Medium 5681 4626 6 %

>10.0 Large 9667 6418

Total 2115 2770 All farmers

Source: Report “On Conditions Of Work And Promotion Of Livelihoods In The Unorganised Sector” Arjun Sen Gupta Committee, 2007

•Income per ha in Karnataka from Rs.8809 to Rs.5671

•Income per ha in Maharashtra from Rs.4194 to Rs.3047

Smaller holdings

• Between 1960-61 and 2003, the total number of operational holdings increased from 50.77 million to 101.27 million.

• During the same period, the total operated area declined from 133.46 million hectares to 107.65 million hectares.

• Thus average operated area declined from 2.63 hectares to 1.06 hectares.

(NSSO, Some Aspects of Operational Land Holdings in India, various issues, 2003)

Reducing institutional credit• The share of agricultural credit in total bank lending nearly doubled

from around 10% in the mid-1970s to about 18% in the late 1980s. • The share of agricultural credit in total bank lending declined from

the peak of 18% in the late 1980s to about 11% in 2005, the decline has continued since then.

• Rural branches of commercial banks has declined from 51.2% in March 1996 to 45.7% in March 2005.

• Data also shows that the share of agricultural credit cornered by farm sizes of more than 5 acres has increased

• Tenancy is informal and tenant farmers do not get access to credit

(GOI, 2007).

Year Share in total agricultural Credit (%)

Direct Finance Indirect Finance Total

1985 83.2 16.8 100.0

1990 86.8 13.2 100.0

2000 84.5 15.5 100.0

2005 76.1 23.9 100.0

2006 72.1 27.9 100.0

2007 74.5 25.5 100.0

2008 77.5 22.5 100.0

2009 77.1 22.9 100.0

2010 76.1 23.9 100.0

Source: Basic Statistical Returns’ Reserve Bank of India, Various Issues

Shares of direct and indirect finance to agriculture in total credit to agriculture from scheduled commercial banks, India, 1985 to 2009 in per cent

Credit limit size class of loans (Rs)

Share of amount outstanding in total out standing (%)

1990 2000 2005 2010

Less than 2 lakh 82.6 67.6 51.9 44.3

2 lakh to 10 lakh 4.3 11.7 17.9 22.6

10 lakh to 1 crore 7.6 6.6 6.4 6.4

1 crore to 10 crore 4.2 6.7 8.0 6.3

10 crore to 25 crore

1.3

1.7 3.3 2.7

Above 25 crore 5.7 12.6 17.7

100 100 100 100Source: ‘Basic Statistical Returns’, Reserve Bank of India, Various Issues

Distribution of amount outstanding under total agricultural advances by scheduled commercial banks, by credit limit size-classes of loans, 1990 to 2010, in per cent

• Not adequate• Not accessible-

crops, region, tenant farmers

• Interest subvention who benefits?

• How to increase coverage?

Year Rural + semi-urban branches

Only rural branches

Urban+ metropolitan branches

Only metropolitan branches

All branches

All India

1990 85.1 55.5 14.9 4.0 100.0

1994 83.4 54.6 16.6 5.6 100.0

1995 83.7 52.7 16.3 7.3 100.0

2005 69.3 43.0 30.7 19.0 100.0

2006 62.4 37.1 37.6 23.8 100.0

2008 66.0 38.4 34.0 20.0 100.0

Maharashtra

1990 82.4 59.7 17.6 - 100.0

1994 76.8 52.9 23.2 - 100.0

1995 70.5 46.5 29.5 - 100.0

2005 41.8 26.1 58.2 48.5 100.0

2006 31.6 18.4 68.4 61.3 100.0

2008 42.4 25.7 57.6 48.3 100.0

Share of agriculture credit from different bank branches 1990-2008 (in %)

Insurance

• Inadequate coverage: crops, people, regions• Problems in settling claims• Claims not covering the loss• Completely becoming a business model• How do we increase the coverage and make it

workable to reduce risks

subsidies

• On decline….• Input based hence benefits only the suppliers• Specific inputs hence drives particular

technologies and models of agriculture• Farmers own resources, labour never

supported

Unremunerative prices• MSP determination is faulty and unscientific. • Governments keep the prices low to ensure cheap

labor and cheap inputs, and food security for poor• Minimum Support Prices are announced for 25

commodities but market intervention only for rice, wheat, cotton

• Agricultural prices don’t account for living costs of rural families. Rising inflation has double impact on farmers with increasing living costs & decreasing incomes

• Removal of quantitative restrictions and allowing cheaper imports

• Restrictions on exports on certain crops depressing local market prices

State governments irresponsibleMSPs recommended for 2013-14 (Rs/q)

Crop Announced MSP (Rs/q) 2011-12

Announced MSP (Rs/q) 2012-13

Recommended MSP (Rs/q) 2013-14

Announced MSP (Rs/q)2013-14

Paddy 1110 1280 2811 1310

Blackgram 3300 4300 7295 4500

Soybean 1650 2200 4382 2500

Groundnut 2700 3700 8019 4000

Sunflower 2800 3700 7412 3700

Sesame 3400 4200 7847 4500

Ragi 1050 1500 2925

Maize 980 1175 2100 1310

Jowar 1000 1520 2862

Redgram 3850 7277 4300

Greengram 4300 7287 4300

Government of Andhra Pradesh

Monoculturing crops, varieties, genes, trees animals

• Today Cotton, Maize, Paddy are the only crops whose area increasing..globally only 3 crops supply 60% of food

• Within crops 80% of the production comes from few genetic backgrounds

• Increasing area under hybrid crops in areas not suitable like rainfed areas, hill regions

• 99 % of the cotton with bt genes to fight four major pests..several others in pipeline

• Promotion of water intensive orchards in rainfed areas• Promotion of cross bred animals, buffaloes in rainfed

areas

GM crops and foods• Key issues

• Relevance of GM crops• Biosafety issues• IPRs andMarket monopoly• Conflicts of interests and scandals

• Studies on NPM vs/Bt cotton• Documentary evidences on Violations of regulations in field

trials, • Illegal GM food crop field trials• First reports on Bronze wilt, Tobacco Streak Virus, Mealybug• Evidences on sheep death• Studies on Environmental Risk Assessment and Socio

Economic Impacts• Contamination• IPRs

http://www.indiagminfo.org

GM foods

Do you remember I was this small when we first met!

Pests and pesticides contribute to the major economic and ecological problems affecting the farmers, crops and their living environment

• Pesticide induced pest problem• Pesticide resistance• Pesticide poisoning (acute and chronic)• Pesticide and ecological problems• IPM > IRM

(‘000 crore)

2008

2012

Life in queues 2011

Life in queues 2012

Depleting natural resources• Increasing dark zones due

to groundwater depletion• 30 % of soils are reported

to be saline by the recent study by ministry of environment

Ecological Foot Prints

Each ha of paddy yields @ 30 bags/acre and 75 kg/bag

5625 kg/ha grain

In terms of rice 70 % milling 3938 kg/ha

Water requirement 2000 mm (2 m) crop water requirement x10000 sq m.

20000 cu m water

Which is equal to 5.078 cu.m/kg rice (5078 litres/kg rice)

Each family consuming monthly 30 kg rice

152340 Litres of water per month per family

This is equivalent to

Each family consumes water directly at around

@ 300 litres/day and for 30 days

9000 litres

Water consumption by way of rice is

16.93 times higher than the water we consume directly

BUSINESS AS USUAL IS NOT AN OPTION

We are what we eatandFood is only as safe as it is grown

What is needed….• Integrated farming systems integrating livestock,

trees etc• Agronomic innovations like high density

plantation in cotton or SRI in paddy• Building soil organic matter, mulches etc• Conserving moisture and Rainwater harvesting• Locally adopted crops and varieties-millets,

pulses, oilseeds, vegetables….• Contingence planning• Moving away from agro-chemical use

34Changing to multiple cropping systems

35Switching over to ecological farming practices

Millets in our dietGrain P Mg Ca Fe Zn Cu Mn Mo CrSorghum 352 171 15 4.2 2.5 0.44 1.15 0.06 0.017Pearl millet 379 137 46 8.0 3.1 1.06 1.15 0.07 0.023Finger millet 320 137 398 3.9 2.3 0.47 5.49 0.10 0.028Foxtail millet                  

Whole 422 81 38 5.3 2.9 1.60 0.85 - 0.070Dehulled 360 68 21 2.8 2.4 1.40 0.60 - 0.030

Common millet

                 

Whole 281 117 23 4.0 2.4 5.80 1.20 - 0.040Dehulled 156 78 8 0.8 1.4 1.60 0.60 - 0.020

Little millet                  Whole 251 133 12 13.9 3.5 1.60 1.03 - 0.240

Dehulled 220 139 13 9.3 3.7 1.00 0.68 - 0.180Barnyard millet

                 

Whole 340 82 21 9.2 2.6 1.30 1.33 - 0.140Dehulled 267 39 28 5.0 3.0 0.60 0.96 - 0.090

Kodo millet                  Whole 215 166 31 3.6 1.5 5.80 2.90 - 0.080

Dehulled 161 82 20 0.5 0.7 1.60 1.10 - 0.020

Punukula, the first pesticides-free village

Yenabavi -Organic Village• Entire village (55 households’ 228 acres) organic for last five

years• Most of the inputs internalised into farming• Land Productivity increased, crop yields maintained• In SRI paddy 44 bags were also recorded • Recently awarded Krishi Gaurav Award by Baba Ramdev’s

Patanjali Trust for their role in promoting organic farming• More than 30 thousand farmers visited the village in last

three years

Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture in Andhra Pradesh

Basic Principles Regenerative, ecologically sound practices Organized action by communities in

planning, implementing and managing the program

Govt/ngos playing facilitating agency role

2004-05 started with 225 acres in one dist and reached 7 lakh acres in 2007-08 in 18 dist. World Bank says this is a good tool for poverty eradication and now promoted as part of NRLMWith 50 % development expenditure one can double the incomes of the farmers A national program called Mahila Krishi Sashaktikaran Pariyojana (MKSP) is launched based on this experiencce

0.225 25 200 700

1300

2000

2800

3500 3600

0.1 15 80 300600

10001500 1600 1770

2135 1997

1394 1541 1381

1015

0500

1000150020002500300035004000

Acerage ('000 acres) Farmers ('000) Pesticide use (MT Active Ingradient)

Farmers and area covered under CMSA

http://65.19.149.140/pilots/cmsanew/index.html

Distinguished visitors

Dr. V L Chopra, Member Planning Commission

Jairam Ramesh, Honble Minister for Commerce

T. NandakumarSecretary AgricultureGOI

States/UTs 2004-05 2005-06 2006-072007-08 2008-09 2009-10kg/ha 2000-01

kg/ha 2009-10

Punjab 6900 5610 5975 6080 5760 5810 0.98 0.82Haryana 4520 4560 4600 4390 4288 4070 0.84 0.68Andhra Pradesh 2135 1997 1394 1541 1381 1015 0.34 0.09Maharastra 3030 3198 3193 3050 2400 4639 0.17 0.24Tamil Nadu 2466 2211 3940 2048 2317 2335 0.32 0.45Gujarat 2900 2700 2670 2660 2650 2750 0.30 0.29Kerala 360 571 545 780 272.69 631 0.31 0.26Karnataka 2200 1638 1362 1588 1675 1647 0.17 0.14

Status of pesticide utilization in different states**

**Source: http://ppqs.gov.in/IpmPesticides.htm MT of active ingredient

Average Reduction in costs and net additional income for different crops

Crops Reduction in cost due to NPM (Rs)

Reduction in costs due to use of organic fertilisers/manures (Rs)

Net additional income (Rs)

Paddy 940 1450 5590

Maize 1319 2357 5676

Cotton 1733 1968 5676

Chillies 1733 1968 7701

Groundnut 1021 3462 10483

Vegetables 1400 390 3790

3rd Party Evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) : Community Managed Organic Farming implemented by SERP

Evaluation TeamProf. R. Ratnakar, Director, Dr. M. Surya Mani, Professor, EXTENSION EDUCATION INSTITUTE, (Southern Region), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India

Dorli, Maharashtra

• CSA started working in Dorli cluster from 2006

• Today farmers are back to farming and managing

• Started a seed producer company

Sahaja Aharam Community Marketing

Producer Co-op-1Farmer Group B

Consumer Co-op

•Healthy food•Affordable Price•Max share to farmers Organic Store

Mobile Store

Direct to Home

Producer Co-op-2

Other farmers and farmers groups

Farmer Group A

Farmer Group C

Sahaja Aharam Cooperative Federation•Capacity building•Institutional building•Investment support•Brand building•Qualtiy Management•Fair Trade

Market placeDirect to resellers

Whole sale to traders

Bulk buyers

Organic Store

Processing unitsSeed market

Yet to estiblish

Marketing Agency

Value Chain Fund

COOPERATIVE MELA

So…what can be done

• Support farmers to switch to ecological farming

• Help them to get organised for production, marketing and entitlements

• Recast the support systems-research, extension, subsidies….

• Increase the investment-public and private to make farming viable

www.csa-india.orgwww.krishi.tvwww.agrariancrisis.inFacebook: ramoo.agripageTwitter: ramanjaneyuluGVEmail: ramoo.csa@gmail.comPhone: 040-27017735, 09000699702