National Workshop on

Disaster Preparedness in Agriculture Nagapattinam

3rd & 4th August 06

A REPORT

DAY 1

SESSION 1: INAUGURAL SESSION

• Welcome: Ms Annie George, CEO, NCRC • Inaugural address: Prof N Vinod Chandra Menon, Member, NDMA • Presidential address: Mr Tenkasi S. Jawahar, IAS, District Collector,

Nagapattinam • Key note address: Dr P. Somasekhar Rao, National Programme Coordinator,

FAO. Felicitations

• Mr R. Venkatesan, IAS, Joint Commissioner (R&R), Government of Tamil Nadu. • Mr PK Prabhakar, Project Coordinator, Concern Worldwide • Mr G. Nammalwar, Organic Farmers Movement

SESSION 2: INTRODUCTORY SESSION Chair: Mr VC Natarajan, Consultant, CCD

• Mr V Vivekanandan, Steering Committee Member, NCRC “Tsunami Rehabilitation in Nagapattinam – with special focus on agriculture”

• Sri S. Renganathan, General Secretary, Tamil Nadu Cauvery Delta Farmers’ Welfare Association “Agriculture in Cauvery Delta and disasters”

• Ms Annie George, CEO, NCRC

“Emerging Findings on Vulnerability Study of the Tsunami Affected Farming Area of Nagappattinam”

1

• Introductory Session - Discussion

TECHNICAL SESSION I: TSUNAMI/SALINATION Chair: Mr. PG Diwakar, Head, Regional Remote Sensing Service Centre, ISRO, Bangalore

• Mr GM Chandra Mohan, Sector Head, Agriculture “Post-tsunami agriculture livelihood restoration: a district-level coordination effort”

• Ms Revathy, Executive Director, Tamil Nadu Organic Farmers’ Movement

“Reclamation and Re-construction of Tsunami affected Agricultural Villages in Nagapattinam District of Tamil Nadu”

• Dr Rani Senthamarai, Lecturer, Presidency College, Chennai. “Vulnerability Mapping: An Application of GIS, GPS and Remote Sensing for Demarcating Flood Zones”

• Dr A. Baskar, Professor and Head, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture and Research Institute, Karaikal “Tsunami – its Impact on Soil Quality and Reclamation Strategies”

• Technical Session I- Discussion

• Presentations from the group discussion on salinity

DAY 2

TECHNICAL SESSION II: FLOOD Chair: Ms Meera, American Indian Foundation

• Mr PG Diwakar, Head, Regional Remote Sensing Service Centre, ISRO, Bangalore “Disaster Preparedness – Space Technology and Tools”

• Dr AK Patra, National Institute of Mushroom and Biological Sciences, Orissa

Livelihood restoration for the victims of supercyclone and flood victims of mid and north coastal Orissa during 2003 and 2005.

• Ms Bhuvaneshwari, Covenant Centre for Development, Nagapattinam

2

• Mr Jayachandran, Joint Director of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture, Chennai.

• Mr Ravindranath, Rural Volunteers Centre, Assam

• Technical Session II: Discussion

TECHNICAL SESSION III: OTHER DISASTERS – DROUGHT/ CYCLONE Chair: Mr. PK Prabhakar, Concern Worldwide

• Mr Oswald Quintal, Team Leader, Kudumbam, Tiruchirapalli

• Dr TR Shanmugham, Prof of Agricultural Economics, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore. Preparedness in agriculture with respect to drought in India

• Mr Shriji Kurup, CEE, Karaikal

Understanding vulnerability for coastal agrarian communities

• Technical Session III -Discussion TECHNICAL SESSION IV: DISASTER PREPAREDNESS Chair: Dr Nalini Keshavaraj, Manager, TNTRC

• Mr Senthil Kumar, MSSRF

• Ramasubramanian, Chief, Samanvaya “Disaster Preparedness in Agriculture: Lessons from Nagapattinam”

• Mr C. Anbarasu, Regional Manager, Agriculture Insurance Company of India

• Ms Subhashini Sridhar, Programme Coordinator, CIKS

Tsunami reclamation – a way forward

• Technical Session IV - Discussion

PLENARY SESSION

• Ms Annie George, CEO, NCRC • Mr V.Vivekanandan, Steering Committee Member, NCRC

o Draft recommendations • Mr CV Sankar, IAS, OSD (R&R), Government of Tamil Nadu • Mr Tenkasi S Jawahar, IAS, District Collector, Nagapattinam.

3

DAY 1

SESSION 1: INAUGURAL SESSION Welcome: Ms Annie George, CEO, NCRC The inaugural session started off with the welcome by Ms Annie George, CEO, NCRC. She started by saying that this workshop was a dream come true because in the initial stages, they were not sure how to deal with the issues in agriculture post-tsunami, except knowing that something had to be done very quickly about it. Discussing with like minded people showed the need for collective thinking and working together for disaster preparedness and to reduce vulnerabilities in agriculture. The 2004 tsunami had brought together committed NGOs, technocrats, professionals, bureaucrats and donor organizations who provided funds to ensure that something good was done. This opportunity could be used to bring in some kind of a sustainable approach to the variety of disasters that are being faced in this sector. She welcomed Prof N. Vinod Chandra Menon, Member of the National Disaster Management Authority who was always very positive and accessible especially when discussing their concerns and how to go forward; Mr Tenkasi S. Jawahar, District Collector, Nagapattinam who showed his willingness and enthusiasm about the programme to the extent of even offering to fund it; Dr Somasekhara Rao of the FAO; Mr R. Venkatesan, IAS, Joint Commissioner, Relief; Mr Prabhakar of Concern International for his energy and enthusiasm and Mr Nammalwar, father of the organic movement embodying the spirit of Indian agriculture and the farming community; and all the invitees who were there because each had a special contribution to make to the entire process. She made a special mention of Mr R. Santhanam, IAS, State Relief Commissioner, Government of Tamil Nadu, whose acceptance and enthusiasm made them believe that they were on the right track (he was not present) and concluded by saying that this conference was not a public relations exercise but aimed at helping the suffering farming community. Inaugural address: Prof N Vinod Chandra Menon, Member, NDMA, Prof Vinod Menon began with a reference to Masanobu Fukuoka, one of the pioneers of sustainable agriculture whose books he had seen in one of the stalls in the exhibition. He said that Nagapattinam district was the worst affected in Tamil Nadu during the tsunami of 2004 and hence was the core of attention. He said that recalling memories of that fateful day haunt us – every disaster is both a portent of danger and harbinger of opportunity. The exhibition showed how civil society farmers have worked with the farming communities to carry knowledge to those people.

4

It was only a day after the tsunami that realization on the extent of devastation in Indira Point and Campbell Bay in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands struck considering the closeness of the place to Banda Aceh and Indonesia. Subsequently India was one of the first countries to set up a National Disaster Mangement Authority, though the NDMA bill was passed only in 2005. In May 2005, the government announced the names of those who were to handle the NDMA. He was handling the response to floods in Mumbai when the call came from the PM’s office to be a member of the NDMA and he looked at it as an opportunity to work with the NDMA and disaster preparedness. The team at the NDMA is a remarkable one with the Prime Minister as the Chairman and Gen NC Vij, former Army Chief, as the vice chairman with the status of a cabinet minister. He then made a presentation on “New Initiatives in Disaster Management in India”. He said that every disaster, an earthquake, tsunami, flood or drought, leaves its own footprint. We have to be determined as a nation to work together with this basic understanding considering the number of disasters constantly happening around us. There is a high probability of a low probability event happening anytime anywhere in India. In the case of a low probability event (a tsunami, for example), one does not know what the event will be or where it will strike, and hence the need for all of us to be prepared. Disaster preparedness could be split into two phases – Pre disaster preparedness and prevention (mitigation), and the Post Disaster phase which includes response, rehabilitation and recovery. Advanced countries teach us that if we are strong in the pre disaster preparedness, losses are much lower. However, India has been working mostly on the post disaster issues seeing it mainly as relief-centric, focusing on relief, rescue, rehabilitation and recovery. It was necessary to change over to a new disaster management paradigm stressing on strengthening prevention, mitigation and preparedness, while consolidating emergency response. For a country of over one billion people, and with a number of states constantly facing some disaster or the other, it was necessary for disaster preparedness to become part of the culture for it to be effective. The National Disaster Management Authority is the apex body for disaster management in the country set up as part of the Government of India’s decision to put in place necessary institutional mechanisms for drawing up and monitoring the implementation of disaster management plans, ensuring measures for prevention and mitigation of disasters and for undertaking a holistic, coordinated and prompt response to any disaster situation. The NDMA is responsible for making the plans and policies for disaster management, including approval of plans prepared by the Ministries and Departments of the Government in accordance with the National Disaster Management Plan as well as guidelines to be followed by the State Authorities in drawing up State

5

Plans. The mandate is to lay down guidelines to be followed by different Ministries and Departments of the government in order to integrate measures for disaster prevention and mitigation in the various development projects and to coordinate the enforcement and implementation, to organize funds for mitigation measures and also to offer support to other countries in need as may be determined by the Central Government. The NDMA is also mandated to lay down minimum guidelines for provision of relief as well as in issues such as loan repayment for those affected by a disaster – this is important as there is a variation in the kind of relief provided under various situations. Capacity building for dealing with potential threatening disaster situations or disasters is also part of the mandate of the NDMA. Disaster management committees are proposed at the state as well as the district levels to prepare disaster management plans. In addition, a National Disaster Response Force (NDRF) with the strength of 8 battalions has also been earmarked. National and state level NGO task forces on disaster management have been set up. Core groups to study the available early warning instrumentation as well as to prepare policies and guidelines have been set up. In the next few months a much more consolidated effort is expected to be seen with a series of policies and guidelines with regard to management of these disasters. The Disaster Management Bill, 2005 was passed in the winter session of both houses of Parliament in 2005 for streamlining the institutional mechanisms for disaster management in India. NDMA visualizes a three tier training infrastructure – at the national, regional and operational levels. The national level facility will also help in training of personnel from ASEAN and SAARC countries. Moving on to the topic of the seminar, Prof Menon began by complimenting NCRC for addressing one of the most vulnerable issues in the post tsunami response. Contrary to the general belief that the tsunami affected only the fishing community, the NCRC brought to attention that the agricultural community was also badly affected – with the first focus on salinity caused by storm surge during the tsunami. Despite people saying that it would take years for recovery, the NCRC along with a number of organizations working in this sector along with the district administration and the community has been able to restore productivity using both traditional knowledge and scientific knowledge as seen in the exhibition put up by the various NGOs and other organizations, and also been able to create enormous strength in the people who are on the verge of abandoning agriculture. The problem today is that agriculture is becoming increasingly unviable and along with threats of salinity intrusion or natural disasters like a tsunami is causing alienation of farmland. Other problems with agriculture today include dependence on rainfed farming, predominance of paddy cultivation, large tracts of cultivable wasteland, low average farm sizes, and dependence on credit from moneylenders or other unviable credit systems as seen from some farmer suicides. He emphasized the need for building up both forward and backward linkages including provision of organized credit and increase of insurance coverage.

6

With regard to preparedness, he felt that there was a major role to be played by the rural knowledge centres such as those set up by the MSSRF where all relevant applied knowledge is made available. Community radio also had an important role to play – he mentioned Radio Alakal, an initiative of the fishing community in Kerala. He said that it was time to start thinking out of the box and referred to what Md Ali, the great boxer said – there was no point in planning after receiving punches in the ring, planning had to be done earlier. Application of science and technology as well as indigenous knowledge was necessary for sustainable agriculture. Referring to the article on bio-diesel in The Hindu that day, he said that we need to look at crops for bio-diesel production and mentioned that there could be buy-back agreements with companies if assured supplies were possible from such plantation crops. It must be understood that conventional management attends to the realism of what is, but it is leadership that is very important and NCRC, especially Ms Annie George, has shown leadership in this very critical area. At the national level, incrementalism is reactive, a band-aid kind of approach. What is needed is proactive design. This means making a categorical and bold statement which says that we have absolutely zero tolerance to death from disasters – this means that we will not allow school buildings to collapse and children die, or allow hospitals to be damaged and doctors and patients hurt. It means that we will implement building codes and bye laws where necessary and thus be proactive. The need is to start working with the state and district administration in the enforcement of safety codes, and also take into look at the new practices in the National Disaster Response Force, training institutions like the National Institute of Disaster Management, disaster response and disaster mitigation funds and most important of all the need to involve all stakeholders. This is a national priority and Prof Menon called for support and solidarity from everyone saying that the participation of the NDMA in this programme was an extension of that solidarity. They were always available to anyone who wanted to reach out and disseminate their activities. He once again said that he was impressed by the exhibition taking it as a small indication of what was actually available and then formally declared the conference open. Presidential address: Mr Tenkasi S. Jawahar, IAS, District Collector, Nagapattinam Mr Tenkasi S. Jawahar began by saying that Nagapattinam district was a right choice for holding such a national level workshop because except for earthquakes, all kinds of disasters – droughts, floods, and in recent times, the tsunami – were experienced by the district. This was mainly because of the 180 km long coastline, almost 70% of the Tamil Nadu coast. Cyclones from the Bay of Bengal were common and Nagapattinam was also at the tail end of the Cauvery irrigation system. When there was no water in the Mettur dam, the district did not receive any water and faced drought; when there was too much water in the dam, the floodgates were opened and the district went under water. So the district faced threat from both land and sea and hence the importance of being prepared. Earlier there was a reactive mechanism, now there was a pro active mechanism regarding disasters.

7

75% of economy of Nagapattinam district was dependent on agriculture, with over 55% under cultivation but the holdings were in a skewed manner. 74% of the farmers owned less than a hectare of land – about something like 1,46,357 marginal farmers, whereas 48% of the land was held by 11% of the farmers, the big farmers who held more than 2ha land. It was the small and marginal farmers who bore the brunt of any disaster. During October 2004, for example, 1,11,480 ha land were submerged resulting in a loss of 4.18 lakh metric tonnes of crop translating to a loss of Rs 275 lakhs. In 2005, the loss due to floods was of the order of Rs 246 lakh because of the loss 3.73 lakh metric tons of crop due to submergence of 1,14,070 ha of land. Drought and floods were the usual events in the district till 2004 the unheard of tsunami struck. The tsunami caused instant as well as long term damage in terms of loss of livelihood, loss of productivity, destruction of fields etc. In agriculture, the damage included seawater inundation in agricultural lands, erosion of cultivated lands, sand casts on fields, uprooting of perennial and other trees, shallow aquifer contamination etc. At one point people wondered if it was going to be possible to recover at all; the fact is that recovery is on its way and it is expected to be back to normal in the near future. The tsunami affected 4657ha in 42 agricultural villages predominantly in all the six coastal blocks of the total 11 developmental blocks. 297 SHG (Self Help Groups) have been formed post tsunami, 8,727 farmers are members of which 776 belong to the scheduled castes. No response could be complete without the active participation of the Non Governmental Organizations (NGO) who played a major role in all activities from relief to sustainable development programmes to rehabilitation programmes. About 18,000 houses are being built for affected families by various NGOs for which government has given land worth about Rs. 30 crore. In agriculture, about 20 NGOs have been working for effective reclamation of agricultural land to ensure sowing during subsequent monsoon season. It was a learning experience for all in terms of effective partnership in bringing in technology, traditional and indigenous knowledge, practices and holistic planning. It was essential that this should not be forgotten, but kept alive for creating viable mechanisms to mitigate disasters in the future. Today, access to the world’s best talent, financial resources and technical expertise is available and should be used properly. Hence, approaches, strategies and institutional mechanisms need be set up to help us plan for the future so that we are never caught by a disaster. The District Administration works in close accord with the NGOs and along with participation of the people to ensure we do not get hit by natural diasters. The District Collector closed his address by complementing the NCRC and Concern for organising the workshop and the exhibition and hoped that the forthcoming deliberations will help to plan for the future. Key note address: Dr P. Somasekhar Rao, National Programme Coordinator, FAO. Dr Rao began by saying that NGOs have always done good work, especially in times of disasters. Many a time, coordination amongst NGOs and between NGOs and the

8

government has been a problem. In Nagapattinam, the NCRC helped in the coordination between the NGOs and between the NGO community and the district administration. He said that Prof Menon, in his speech, had shown how the government has opened a larger window of opportunity for future work. The exhibition showed the high quality and professionalism of NGO work hitherto often only the domain of the government departments. The FAO had been carrying out work in all affected countries, largely for the assessment of possible damages. This had to be done on a regional scale and strategies for recovery in agriculture had also been on a regional scale. At the governmental level, FAO provided advice and policy including on integrated coastal area management by means of training and the facilitation of networks for sharing of information as well as procurement of assets for agriculture rehab. In India, this has not been necessary as the government infrastructure to address these concerns is strong and there is enough professional expertise and hence no external input was required. The focus had been largely on fishing community, a national priority considering extensive coastal areas and the large coastline. With reference to agriculture, it is still picking up and the focus is now on the less visible type of damages including collapse of community structures, support to agriculture market chains, credit mechanisms, backward and forward linkages etc. which were not a priority initially but are picking up in importance now. With reference to the salinity assessment across the region, most countries now feel that it is not such a major threat considering the levels of precipitation and good leaching of soil. But there is a severe shortage of capacity in carrying out local salinity and water quality assessment as well as continuous monitoring of the desalination process. For this, capacity is being built, and in some countries equipment has been supplied by the FAO. The intention is to consolidate the approach where the salinity monitoring and other things will become part and parcel of regular work. A regional framework for entire region is under preparation and should be operational soon and India is also part of this. He concluded by mentioning a successful initiative that had come up recently – the concept of microgardens. These were small scale horticulture initiatives that could be adopted by local communities. Various technical options were available for this; in some cases it was possible even without usage of soil. This could reduces food distribution requirements especially in times of disaster. It involved less physical effort, it was highly efficient in water use and there was no soil erosion. Overall it looked very attractive and the FAO website had more information on this. It appeared to be a good option for disaster preparedness. Felicitations 1. R. Venkatesan, IAS, Joint Commissioner (R&R), Government of Tamil Nadu.

9

He began by saying that the workshop was the need of the hour and that effort to study and suggest suitable measures for preparedness was laudable. The Indian economy largely depends on agriculture and industries in rural areas were agro-based. Our countries backbone lies in our villages and if agriculture is affected, it takes time to recover – but unfortunately as India has monsoons, we are continuously affected by nature’s fury. He was the Collector of Kanchipuram district when tsunami struck in 2004 and he visited villages; saw a lot of dead bodies especially in Kalpakkam area where many people died. The situation was very bad at that time and the focus was on rescue and relief operations. As time goes by, Mr Venkatesan said that we tend to forget the past and take over new thoughts. We do not realize the painful recovery process of the victims especially in terms of lost livelihoods to start life afresh and it is in this light that the conference becomes important. Immediate relief was provided by the government for agriculture, at Rs 15,000 per ha for recovery from salinity. Issues like deposition of sand in fields, recovery of soil, stagnation of seawater, and change in pH values are to be tackled. The government sought constant inputs from various bodies and organizations but discussing these issues in the light of experiences from other states would help at this time to decide on priority methods for recovery. He said that he looked forward to solutions to the pressing problems faced by the coastal community and concluded by saying that while hazards are inevitable, each hazard need not be converted into a disaster as what comes in between is the culture of safety and disaster preparedness and we need to be well versed in this. 2. Sri PK Prabhakar, Project Coordinator, Concern Worldwide He began by thanking SIFFS and NCRC for their guidance in using their resources effectively in the agriculture rehabilitation programmes. It was NCRC which had made some of the donor agencies aware of the need to invest in agriculture, and this resulted in coordinated effort in rehab in agriculture. Despite the fact that the founders of NCRC were not agriculture professionals, NCRC had gained confidence of most farmers in this district because of the organization of village level coordination. It was very important to look at disaster proofing of agriculture considering the varieties of problems including flooding and backwater problems which were perennial problems of the district. He pointed out that the government or donor agencies were not going to look back at Nagapattinam district after 15 or 18 months and it was necessary to convince both government and other organizations such as the ADB in investing resources for long term needs and hence it was essential that this time was put to good use. All including the supporting organizations have to come together as it was not a farmer-level issue – but panchayat or block level. He cited an example of how without government help, problems could not be addressed as the government was a major player. For example, a canal near Poompuhar laid

10

almost 108 years ago, was renovated recently and during the renovation it was found that almost ¾th of the canal was occupied and being cultivated. A re-survey of the canal was possible only because local administration – the tahsildar and local revenue inspector - helped the NGO and the community. A twenty metre wide canal had shrunk to three metres and after clearing, it was about 10-12 m wide. The need of the hour was to come together to keep the cause of the farmers in front. There is need to work as a group and pool resources together, else common infrastructure could not be addressed; and a need for sustained effort among donor agencies for next 15-18 months. There was also a need to take responsibility to spread the information regarding the need for sustained effort. While resources were available, guidance was required for proper investment of these resources. NCRC should go to the logical conclusion and not end with this workshop. The proceedings should result in developing a programme with a greater role for the government to play so that the programme can succeed: for example, the entire government machinery is required for redoing the canals that have been choked. 3. Sri G. Nammalwar, Organic Farmers Movement He began by extending his appreciation and congratulating NCRC for their efforts in conducting the two day workshop to bring out formulas to help the government, people and the NGOs for disaster preparedness. He offered a few reflections from his side for the forum to consider. He pointed out that one should understand that lands most affected were paddy fields but farmers were not wholly dependent on paddy, which was cultivated more for their own consumption. They also had trees and livestock. In coastal areas it was necessary to think of integrated farming systems. Earlier, the policy was to use a uniform plan throughout India or even the world for agriculture. Such plans have failed to serve the objectives. Agriculture is location specific with different practices for each location otherwise it will not be appropriate. For the coastal belt, there needs to be special consideration as it is risk prone. It is important to reduce external input as that was additional economic burden to farmers. Tsunami was a one time event but cyclones and sea water intrusion into fields was a regular happening. The emphasis had to be on organic farming in this area, with focus on practices used by farmers for thousands of years. The introduction of dwarf varieties, for example, has been harmful in an area prone to cyclones. There was a need to improve irrigation infrastructure as being in the tail end of the delta, Nagapattinam farmers did not derive any benefit from the river supply. Irrigation had to be improved by clearing channels and small dams in upper catchment areas that are not polluted by seawater but help in groundwater recharge should be made. The other problem was that farmers have trees but do not get proper markets/prices for their fruit produce. Farmers have work only for 4-5 months a year as they are dependent on rain, and hence there is need to think of value added products and to provide more occupation; in other words, there was a need to economically strengthen farmers. Farmers still have

11

traditional varieties – kuzhiadichan is one that can tolerate floods, droughts etc. It was necessary to declare coastal areas as organic zones. The previous year they had desalinated over 3000 acres by mechanical and biological methods. At the same time, the government did something that was not desirable which was supply of gypsum – which in addition requires a lot of water to wash out the salts and neither the water nor drainage was available. The coordination by NCRC between NGOs, government etc. had to be strengthened. In a few places like Muthupet, mangroves saved the people and the land; in South Poigainallur, the sand dunes were protected and extended by villagers and the dunes protected the land and the people. Such methods of prevention of seawater ingress have to be explored and re-established in places where it is gone. Integration of the tree-crop-livestock system was important in organic farming as it provided both regular income and employment. Organic farming has increased both the quality and quantity of produce. Green manure to make compost, fodder trees for maintaining animals especially goats and improved breeds of livestock are needed. Cultivable wasteland should be developed into grazing lands so that animals are assured of fodder through the year. All these things can improve income of farmers and improve their quality of life that would enable them to overcome disasters. He concluded saying that out that the previous year, traditional paddy varieties had been brought in from Orissa and used in different places but their viability had not been documented, which was a mistake. In Kerala (Kottayam), there were paddy varieties that grow in salt water which were available for trial cultivation – the bold grain rice was not consumed in Tamil Nadu and the people in Kerala were prepared to buy back the paddy grown here. The vote of thanks was proposed by Mr GM Chandra Mohan, Sector Head, Agriculture, NCRC. SESSION 2: INTRODUCTORY SESSION Chair: Mr VC Natarajan, Consultant, CCD Mr Natarajan, in his opening remarks, said that contextualizing the workshop on disaster preparedness in agriculture brought to the fore two issues of importance – one set which was core to coastal agriculture and another which included the outliers that had tremendous influence in defining and deciding agriculture. Going deeper into preparedness, it was needed to see how loss or damage could be minimized to standing crops, minimizing economic loss due to loss of livestock, damage to infrastructure and also, to avoid reducing confidence in agriculture as a vocation, Other issues that have influence include policy and the role of science and technology. We also need to look at issues such as the connections between agriculture and mangroves and also what we have to offer to India and the world and look at ways to evolve guidelines to deploy the much needed resources.

12

Mr V Vivekanandan, Steering Committee Member, NCRC, “Tsunami Rehabilitation in Nagapattinam – with special focus on agriculture” Mr Vivekanandan began by saying that his presentation was to set a backdrop of what happened in Nagapattinam. The tsunami was an unexpected and unprecedented disaster. For the first few days the government was caught napping – but after that they pulled all stops – putting together dedicated teams working in mission mode for the first month in clearing the area and in providing relief. Donor organizations from across the world have been extremely impressed by the response of the government. The civil society too, came in full force. Nagapattinam in many ways was flooded with people deeply concerned with the welfare of the affected. The entire response could be looked at in three phases – during the first three months, the government provided essential relief services, compensation for losses and so on which was supplemented by the NGOs providing considerable amount of relief associated with the government programmes. The second phase that we are in now seems to have been an NGO led rehab in permanent shelter, livelihoods and other services. The government has provided a framework for this participation, acted as a facilitator ensuring that this tremendous outpouring civil society response is useful and channelized and it has quietly taken over the restoration of common infrastructure. The NGOs have by and large worked on individuals and families that are affected and the government is taking care of other things. The third phase has already started, and it is going to be a government led rehab (considering most NGOs are exhausted mentally and/or financially) using multilateral and other funding including from the Government of India. The NGOs are going to revert back into their normal roles – a bit like wartime/peacetime and it is going to be more the peace time work such as being a watchdog, critic of the government, organizing the people, and so on. Looking at the kind of contributions that the NGOs have done in tsunami rehabilitation, they were very active in the relief phase and organized a number of temporary shelters; and are currently involved in the construction of 17000 plus houses. They have also been involved in restoring some community infrastructure such as small schools and various other buildings. Major interventions have been in livelihood restoration especially in fisheries and in agriculture and also in alternative livelihoods and income generating activities. There are also the traditional constituencies of women and children and the traditional thematic areas of health and education and a purely disaster related theme of psychosocial counselling. As many as 500 NGOs were in the relief phase, and many others un-categorized. There are still around 100-150 NGOs working in shelter, agriculture etc. Back of the envelope calculations indicate that NGOs are spending some Rs 800 crore in Nagapattinam district. The bulk of this is in housing. With specific reference to NCRC – setting up the NGO coordination centre on the 1st January 2005 was a very significant step in rehabilitation. It was the result of consultations between many NGOs and the district administration and it was not part of any specific plan but because of the recognition for the need for coordination. Two long

13

term actors in the coastal area – SIFFS and SNEHA were given the responsibility of running the coordination centre. Initial coordination during relief was in terms of services to NGOs, links with communities, liaison with district administration. Subsequently NCRC transformed itself from a volunteer based centre to a professionally run centre benefiting a great deal from the UNDP in this. NCRC works on information exchange and communication, sector support groups such as agriculture, fisheries etc. and village information centres which link with the communities acting as a two-way link system with the villages. There is also a unique three-way relationship between the district administration, the NGO community and the affected communities and the key to success and durability of the venture has been the strong relationship with the district administration. The openness and willingness of the TN government and the district administration for this collaboration needs to be recognized. Initially, the first six months, with the limelight on fisheries sector and fishermen, agriculture sector was neglected. One of the critical issues in rehabilitation has been the visible losses versus the invisible losses. The problem with the invisible losses is that when they are focused on after a time gao, it becomes very difficult to identify who were affected and what were the actual losses. The initial NGO responses were also piecemeal and localized. It was a humanitarian rather than a sectoral initiative, of helping people who were affected such as cash for work programmes, targeted response focusing on groups such as older people etc. The government response was also weak and slow in coming. From January to June 2005, the lack of clarity on the problem and the solution, and the failure of the scientific establishment in agriculture were evident. There were big debates on gypsum and on sea-mud but there was no authoritative word from any scientific institution that would be binding on anyone. The government package was too little and too late and was more a financial package rather than a plan of action based on a clear technical solution. The other problem is the SHG fixation – any problem and an SHG is formed. SHGs are only a transfer mechanism and not social mobilization. Many of those working in the fishing community were under the impression that the fishing community was not organized; but in the end it was clear that it was the fishers who were organized, bargaining for their assets. The farming community, extremely fragmented on class, caste and political lines was unable to come together; and it was only a small part of the community that was affected – the rest of the community is still talking about Cauvery floods, not tsunami. Unlike the fishing sector where all elements come under one department, in the agriculture sector, all are not under one roof - such as irrigation, horticulture, etc. having their own departments - and thus there are important governance issues that have no relationship to the disaster. Some NGOs such as the TN organic farmers’ movement did a fair amount of work in the first six months after the disaster. TOFARM’s ‘reclamation plus’ package was to lift up the people to a higher level of productivity and existence. NCRC then brought together a set of NGOs towards a coordinated programme of reclamation. The district administration and the local agriculture department accepted the programme and provided the support. It was an entirely local event, and the communities were totally involved in planning and implementation. Ultimately it can be said that some 8000ha

14

have been fully or partially reclaimed and farming is back to ‘normal’ for this area. The ‘Reclamation plus’ package is still weakly implemented and all that could be done was to address the immediate problems leaving chronic problems unaddressed and the farm sector still vulnerable to future disasters. Looking at some lessons learnt, it is clear that a sectoral approach is needed in livelihoods – it could be demonstrated only in this sector. It is also clear that past failures and bad governance limit interventions in a post disaster situation as you cannot make up for what was not there. In his plea for agriculture, he said that there was a need to recognize the vulnerability and extreme enfeeblement of farming communities in Nagapattinam. The absence of local alternatives for escaping the poverty cycle in an entirely rural district despite its great historical importance needs to be looked into. Disaster preparedness cannot be divorced from development of agriculture. With reference to the Cauvery issue, we have to move forward given the various limitations and restrictions that are already there making it impossible for everyone to get a share in the water. Being at the tail end of the Cauvery system, the chances of getting water are anyway slim. Development should have as its goal sustainability and income enhancement. Interventions are needed at many levels – at the regional level, watershed planning; at the farm level, crop choices and technology; and we also need integration of dairying, horticulture and pisciculture, farmers’ organizations and food processing industries. Concluding his presentation, Mr Vivekanandan said that given the huge mobilization for tsunami rehab worldwide, history will not forgive us if agricultural rehab leaves behind unsustainable farms and poor farmers who cannot weather the next storm and if most resources are only dumped in the sea (boats, nets, etc.), or on concrete (housing, building, ports, sea walls, etc.). We need to leave behind something more organic, more sustainable. Sri S. Ranganathan, General Secretary, Tamil Nadu Cauvery Delta Farmers’ Welfare Association “Agriculture in Cauvery delta and disasters” He began by saying that it is the auspicious day of Adi Perukku when all the farmers spend the day on the banks of Cauvery. The Cauvery delta can be likened to the nervous system of the human body with a huge network of rivers and channels. It has sustained nearly 2000 years of monocrop agriculture – thrust on the farmers by the geography of the area. The prevalent monsoon is the northeast monsoon and it is disastrous as it causes cyclones and floods. The rainfall is confined to short spells, especially in the third week of December. On the western side, the delta is narrowed down like a triangle. Originally a composite district, it was divided into east and west and the eastern part where Nagapattinam is located has all the problems one can conceive of in terms of tenancy issues, finance, landless labour, land grabbing and encroachment. The Chola kings perfected agriculture by constructing the Grand Anicut providing continuous irrigation for over 1500 years.

15

The continuity of 2000 years of agriculture in this area was because the agriculturists of yesteryears understood the problems on the ground – the nature, the geography etc. and there are thus two seasons with two paddy crops - kuruvai and thalai; two vegetable crops and two mango crops and so on. With a lot of evaporation in puratasi, there is rain in Aipassi – called adi mazhai. The modern day agriculturists or scientists have not understood the nature or the geography of the region, and hence disasters are more due to human failures rather than natural disasters. Because of the Cauvery dispute, very little water flows in the river and hence groundwater recharge has been affected. Every river has what is known as ‘padugai’ or flood plain which has been converted into paddy fields. Also, earlier, every village had what are known as ‘kottagam’ which are comparatively low lying fields in the village that will carry and collect the flood waters. Tirupoondi, Kivelur etc are the kottagam which could perhaps be rejuvenated and converted into lakes. The other major problems of recent times are sand mining and the advent of prawn culture – it is clear that agriculture and prawn culture cannot coexist. Hundreds of years ago, there was a line of vetiver (a grass) between Chidambaram and Sirgazhi, totally lost today. Vetiver has a root system penetrating 15 feet deep which prevents ingress of seawater. He showed an example from Bangladesh where a vetiver barrier saved a paddy crop. One could even say that when vetiver was lost, Sirgazhi lost its crop as sea water intruded into the agricultural fields. In other places vetiver has been used for soil conservation. Hence, it may be possible that a row of vetiver between prawn farms and agricultural land may allow the two to coexist. He also referred to the lost art of kudimaramathu – the community maintenance of irrigation channels – which needs to be revived. Mr Ranganathan said that cannot stop disasters but we need to learn to live with them. There is a need for a change in cropping pattern especially along the coastal areas. Unfortunately farmers are governed by political parties, economic status, castes etc. and hence there is a need for better integration. The need for drainage cannot be over emphasized. The extensive encroachment of drainage channels means that flood waters cannot drain from fields, the prawn farms have bunds and lead into the agricultural fields. It may be possible for prawn and agriculture to coexist if they have individual drainage and irrigation systems. Hence it is necessary to identify prawn areas and agricultural areas and keep them separate. He concluded by saying that Thanjavur had a very good crop system including special rice to be harvested from boats when flooded. The dwarf, short term hybrid varieties are not very suitable for this area and hence the traditional varieties have to be revived and much work has to be done in this area. Ms Annie George, CEO, NCRC “Emerging Findings on Vulnerability Study of the Tsunami Affected Farming Area of Nagapattinam”

16

She said that this was a presentation on the first level of findings and these had to be validated and only then some of them at least could be talked about with certainty. The objective was to explain why the study was needed and what they indicated. Five coastal taluks got affected by the tsunami and out of the 3625 sq km, about 66% is under crops indicating the importance of agriculture to Nagapattinam. About 23% of the land is barren and about 1% under forests. The main type of soil is sandy coastal and a little of black soil. Because of the type of soil, there are soil-related problems as well. The chief sources of irrigation are rivers, rain fed tanks and some wells. The entire agricultural community appeared to finding it more unviable and hence the study aimed at getting an idea of who are the vulnerable communities and what are the different vulnerabilities – doing not just a geographic mapping, but a mapping of social vulnerability, and to understand the current coping mechanisms of the people while facing disasters. Another aim of the study was to identify areas for support to coastal agricultural communities for disaster preparedness. The study was a mix of household and village based primary data, secondary data and discussions. It covered 15 of the 42 revenue villages affected by the tsunami. The sampling was purposive based on the distance from the sea, region and land holding pattern. 10% of the total farmers selected for household survey represented the land holding pattern of the village. A pictorial representation of the socio economic profile of the farming community was explained. Marginal, small and medium/large farmers were profiled based on caste, literacy, housing, occupational pattern and economic category. The medium and large farmers are mainly dependent on agriculture whereas the marginal farmers also had labour as an option for livelihood. The land ownership pattern showed that 73% of the farmers were marginal farmers (<2.5 acres) holding 42% of the land while 8% belonged to the medium/large category (>5 acres) but held 31% of the land. 39% of the land overall was under irrigation with the main source being canals. Very few had private borewells for irrigation. Main crops cultivated were paddy and ground nut. The normal yield of paddy in the dry and wet areas was also compared and the wet-lands returned higher yields of paddy. Looking at the yield over time, it showed that those with 90% normal yield are coming down while the numbers of those with upto 50% of normal yield are on the rise. This year, there has been no yield. This shows that the average yield of the land is coming down and this needs to be addressed. Some coping mechanisms were looked into. Storage of paddy was 49% on an average with not much difference between the marginal and small farmers saying that immediate sale was because it was it was easy to sell or that they needed money. About 20% of the people said that it was because no storage facility was available – perhaps this could be investigated to see if better storage mechanisms could increase the coping mechanism. With reference to coping mechanisms in the case of a flood, only 47% of the marginal farmers said that they had tried to drain the excess water while 35% said that there was ‘nothing to do’ indicating the pathos of the situation. In the case of the coping mechanism to run a family during a flood, a large proportion of marginal farmers opted to work as labour. Small and the medium/large farmers were dependent on their savings for coping during a flood. A similar pattern is seen when coping with a drought situation. Regarding the tsunami affected areas, the ‘nothing to do’ category among

17

marginal farmers was small indicating that if resources are made available; the farmers do put in the effort to save their crop. Medium and large farmers had better access to relief – including from NGOs. This indicates that marginal farmers are missing out and hence, this aspect needs to be studied. Conclusions that can be drawn are that large proportion of the coastal communities are dependant on agriculture, of which 90% are “poor” with low land- holdings and their coping mechanisms are poor and unsustainable. There is an increasing trend of disasters with total loss of production as well as decreasing productivity of land. The decreasing food security and capacities to invest in land are leading to migration or search for alternate sources of livelihood. In the case of the agriculture sector, because of the frequent disasters, the compensation amount has been kept small and the response is reactive rather than pro active. Because compensation is based only on tangible losses such as crop or land loss, this results in outright exclusion of a large number of marginal farmers. The tsunami response proved that a well planned multi planned facilitative approach can result in better production and that both disaster response packages as well as disaster preparedness packages need to be in place. For disaster response, it is needed to develop a scientific base to assess loss and award appropriate compensation as well as set up appropriate institutional mechanisms for faster and more effective responses. Community consultations need to be built into these mechanisms. In the case of disaster preparedness, there is a need for better understanding of the different types of vulnerabilities as well as better access to social, technical and financial support systems. For example, when organic fertilizers were made available, the farmers were prepared to use it. Regional level planning is required, for example it was found that shelter construction was affecting agriculture. Regional level studies to understand reasons for growing frequency of disasters and mechanisms planned to reduce these vulnerabilities are needed. While improvement of social safety nets is a much used cliché, it is necessary to see why certain kinds of approaches did not work and then follow a ‘think out of the box’ approach. Strengthening farmer based organizations for collective management of farms – 1.1 acre farm is not much an incentive for a farmer to try out new techniques but combining plots could help. Considering the multiplicity of organizations dealing with any area, it was important to have nodal institutional mechanism at district level to periodically review the effect and feed into policies and practices at state and national levels. Introductory Session - Discussion Ms Subhashini Sridhar from CIKS based at Sirgazhi said that traditional varieties of paddy were already being conserved by them, specifically the one mentioned by Mr Ranganathan which is grown in lake area. This variety called samba mosanam (locally called eri nellu) had a duration of 160-170 days and was being conserved in about 10 acres in Sirgazhi and Kollidam blocks and other traditional varieties are being studied in tsunami affected areas, especially the saline tolerant varieties.

18

Mr Rabindranath said that there was a variety of paddy in Assam also which had to be harvested from a boat, as the water level rose, the paddy also rose. The local name of the paddy variety was bao and his organization was prepared to send 5 quintals of seed to anyone who wanted to try it out in this district. One of the participants suggested that this offer could be taken up by one of the many agricultural departments of the government/agricultural university to be tried out. A representative from the Krishi Vigyan Kendra said that they were prepared to take up the offer and try it out here. Mr Ranganathan pointed out that though the red rice variety was raised specially for Kerala was not allowed to be transported there. This was a kuruvai crop raised for cash while samba was raised for consumption. He also bemoaned the loss of many traditional varieties. To this Ms Revathi of TOFARM said that even this season some farmers had grown the traditional variety that could be harvested from a boat during floods and that they had documented over 15 traditional varieties of paddy from this region, plus varieties from Kerala and Orissa. Mr Rabindranath added that the water used for growing crop in Assam has high iron content and is also a little saline. He said that the tho maati or deep water land in the low lying areas is used to grow bao which is a rich variety because it is a slow growing 6 month crop and so has high nutrient levels. Mr Vinod Menon suggested that any policy issues such as the restrictions of movement of paddy, whether imposed by the state or the centre, should be brought up so that it could be taken up for action at the appropriate level. This, the Chairman Mr Natarajan said, was an important point especially in light of the fact that most of the Kerala rice requirements were being met from Nagapattinam area and restrictions in movement had created a lot of problems. The Chairman summed up the session by referring to Mr Vivekanandan’s presentation about the move from the NGO led rehab process to a government led rehab process; Mr Ranganathan’s presentation on the Cauvery delta speaking as a son of the soil would do and Ms Annie George’s analysis of the status of farmers. All these gave a good overall picture of the situation. TECHNICAL SESSION I: TSUNAMI/SALINATION Chair: Mr. PG Diwakar, Head, Regional Remote Sensing Service Centre, ISRO, Bangalore Mr GM Chandra Mohan, Sector Head, Agriculture, NCRC “Post-tsunami agriculture livelihood restoration: a district-level coordination effort” Taking off from the point at which Mr Vivekanandan stopped in his morning’s presentation, Mr Chandra Mohan began by comparing the figures for damage in Nagapattinam vis a vis the rest of Tamil Nadu. In Nagapattinam, standing crop in 4657.47ha of land was lost accounting for over 50% of the overall damage in the state.

19

The actual damage was more as it included fallow lands, pastures and so on. 8727 farm families in 42 villages belonging to 6 blocks in the five taluks were affected. NCRC’s initial assessment in April 2005 and a very intensive assessment in June-July 2005 in three taluks (plus projections for two taluks) indicated that standing crop was lost in 5200ha, 7000ha of land was salinated, 1367 ha was affected by sand/silt cast and about 3200 farm ponds were silted. All these kinds of damage were seen in all the lands, more in south Nagapattinam rather than north Nagapattinam. Farm ponds are the most important irrigation sources in southern Nagapattinam. Siltation of common ponds as well as of irrigation/drainage channels was also extensively seen. Photographs of these were also shown. The package proposed for work by NGOs could be divided into three kinds- immediate measures, short-term measures and long-term measures. This had to be done because there was little clarity especially in the minds of the donors about what had to be done. NCRC initiated a series of discussions because apart from the gypsum package, there was not much from the government regarding the issue of salinity. The immediate measures included removal and transport of sand/mud casts in the fields (removed when the deposits were >2-3" thick), deep ploughing and trenching around the fields, clearing farm ponds and common ponds as well as the irrigation and drainage channels. Short term measures included in-situ provision of green manure, application of organic manure such as farmyard manure/compost/vermi-compost) and the use of saline tolerant crop varieties. Though the latter was part of the government package the quantities of seeds supplied were not sufficient and had to be supplemented. Also some farmers were left out and they had to be brought into the fold as well. Long term measures include the on-farm production of compost/vermi-compost, growing of biomass producing trees and production of forage/fodder grasses for sustaining livestock which would also help in the production of organic manure. This plan is being implemented by 23 NGOs. There were different approaches by the various NGOs but overall, the package was similar. NCRC started coordinating with the NGOs with periodic meetings at the district level and at the taluk level. NCRC took the responsibility of persuading even those NGOs who had not traditionally worked in the agriculture sector to invest in this sector. A common understanding and approach had to be brought and for this regular meetings helped in shared understanding. Linkage with the donors was possible by participation and presentations in the DEC (Disasters and Emergencies Committee) meetings at Chennai. For coordination with the departments and community, workshops were held with the participation of line departments and the community to legitimize the package and to share with the communities what the line departments had in their mind with regard to land reclamation. In terms of capacity building, training had to be provided both in terms of skill development and the development of conviction that these measures would work. Data collection and triangulation was done through review and planning meetings with NGOs as well as extensive field visits by NCRC staff and feedback received at the village information centres. Dissemination of information was by brochures to farmers as well as by discussion over the Karaikal station of the AIR. With NGOs, advocacy was done related to having common methodologies for doing the work and with donors, to

20

sensitise them especially about contiguity in action. As far as the constraints were concerned, there was a limitation regarding the government’s reclamation plans, NGOs working based on their ideologies and donor organizations working with specific groups not to mention the high demands of the community. Shortcomings include the facilitation of the implantation of long term activities considering that many NGOs are not sure about how long they are going to stay here, capacity building of farmers as well as the effective participation of the farming community in the various activities. What is needed in the future is to work towards simple farming systems that sustain the productivity of the soil and the crop, to bring in a number of agri-related enterprises to the farm, as well as the integration of horticulture, forestry and animal husbandry. Building capacity and interventions with regard to disaster preparedness were also required. Ms Revathy, Executive Director, Tamil Nadu Organic Farmers’ Movement “Reclamation and Re-construction of Tsunami affected Agricultural Villages in Nagapattinam District of Tamil Nadu” TOFARM is an activist movement for farmers. They are familiar with the Nagapattinam area having 3 organic farming training centres at Nagapattinam with a number of farmers being members. After the tsunami, TOFARM came to know that a large tract of agricultural land had been damaged. The general feeling from visiting experts was that it would take 3-4 years for recovery of the land and TOFARM stepped in at this point saying that recovery would be possible in three months if organic techniques were followed. Work was begun in South Poigainallur, an area that was protected by sand dunes. The land was found to be affected in three ways - high salinity, complete washout of organic matter and the almost dead soil with no microbial activity. The damage was not the same in all places, in some it was high and some it was relatively lower. The method was to dialogue with the farmers on the right approach and an appropriate package was devised. The sea mud that had been dumped on the fields had to be removed without affecting the top soil. It was removed from the fields and deposited along the existing sand dunes. Saline resistant varieties were then planted on the dunes. Deep ploughing was done with the help of tractors. The loosening of the soil and the subsequent rainfall then helped in the recovery. 837 farm ponds have been cleaned and the number should cross 1000 by the end of this month. The dalits and landless labour were not benefited by efforts taken by various stakeholders and hence wherever possible they were brought in the clearing of common ponds, irrigation channels etc. Because of this, subsequent floods did not affect greatly the areas that they had worked on. Digging trenches and burying coarse material (twigs, palm leaves), a traditional practice that helped microbial growth was followed. In this manner, a large number of landless labour were provided work. Daincha, a saline tolerant plant that generates considerable biomass within 45 days was grown and incorporated back into the soil to increase the organic matter. During this process, farmers were trained in soil management, water management, integrated management etc so that they are aware of sustainable management

21

practices. Training to prepare various organic inputs was also given. Fodder tree saplings were also provided to the farmers. Over 3000 vermi composting units from Vedaranyam to Sirgazhi have been established. During September last year, they were able to go for planting in the tsunami affected lands. However the subsequent floods did damage parts of the crop, especially in low lying areas. But organic methods of farming helped in high production to the extent that many farmers are now refusing offers of fertilizers. The practices brought recognition from many places so much so that an invitation to Indonesia, a totally unknown area for them, resulted. In Indonesia, they found that high application of fertilizers had resulted in the weeds growing to be much larger than the crop plants. Application of weedicides resulted in resistant weeds. To over come these problems, the weeds were looked upon as a misplaced resource and were incorporated into the soil. Other green manure plants which were available but whose potential were not known to the locals were identified for use. Location specific reclamation was followed and this worked very well. This year also the work is being continued. Coming to seed varieties, she said that since Nagapattinam is a disaster prone area, maduvumuzhingi, a highly tolerant variety is appropriate for usage here. Over the years, it has gone out of use and only a few farmers have the seeds for it. A large number of farm ponds are available for rainwater collection but they have been maintained poorly and this was being addressed. Since theirs was an activist organization and could not stay in one place for a long time, they were training master farmers for sustained economic and environmental development of coastal farming communities. These master farmers were to train the others and thus spread the seeds of hope. Alternative income opportunities for co-producers and the forming and strengthening of landless labour collectives to reduce their migration was also being done. Rather than changing just cropping patterns, it is necessary to look at an alternative farming system where the land has three components – a pond, a paddy field and a mixed culture of vegetables – and this system is possible even in an acre of land. 10 model plots have been selected and work is progressing. Dr Rani Senthamarai, Lecturer, Presidency College, Chennai. “Vulnerability Mapping: An Application of GIS, GPS and Remote Sensing for Demarcating Flood Zones” This presentation was a sharing of her experience from a project that she had undertaken. After tsunami, everyone wanted to do something. As a researcher, she wanted to make her own contribution. As a geographer, her contribution was a map, a visual presentation providing an understanding of the spatial patterns, relationships and the complexity of the environment in which we live. Three basic facts about maps had to be kept in mind – if the facts were wrong, the map would be wrong and if the map was wrong, the interventions planned would be incorrect and it is hard to change a map, once it is published. If a wrong projection is chosen, the map can be distorted. We are now in the era of digital mapping. The maps can be visualized in different formats. Lack of data in readily usable forms, lack of portability because it is coded, incompatible

22

hardware or software specific formats and lack of skilled professionals are three shortcomings in the use of digital mapping. This presentation was an attempt to create a scientific database and to demarcate vulnerable zones in the flood affected areas using Geographical Information Technologies combined with traditional techniques. Geographical Information Technologies included Global Positioning Systems (GPS), Remote Sensing (RS) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS). For NGOs working in the field it was essential for them to understand and use these technologies and it is also a time when NGOs working in the field and researchers who don’t go there to work together. The GIS which is essentially a database stores information in layers. So specific information can be extracted – which cannot be done from a printed map. Before vulnerability mapping is done, data has to be captured and geo-referencing has to be done (latitude – longitude) which is equivalent to specifying address of a location. She explained how the tsunami indundation mapping was done. It was difficult to get the data as it involved going to the field to points where access was difficult. The lat-long of the different locations was obtained and based on this a detailed contour map was generated. The geomorphology of the selected area was thus mapped in detail. It was clear that in places where the mangrove forests were thick, wave penetration during tsunami was less. Village level maps have been prepared and into this the socio-economic data can be incorporated and she offered the use of her students who could be assigned research projects to do this work. Dr A. Baskar, Professor and Head, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture and Research Institute, Karaikal “Tsunami – its Impact on Soil Quality and Reclamation Strategies” Dr Baskar began his presentation by explaining what a tsunami is using pictures including those that appeared in a Tamil magazine and also gave an estimate of the various kinds of damage caused by the tsunami in India. He said that the chance of a tsunami in the Bay of Bengal is about 0.08% and He went on to explain the preliminary rapid survey of water analysis done by them comparing the water from tsunami affected fields and sea water. They had also analyzed the different layers of the soil and found that the top layer which had been deposited by the tsunami had very high electrical conductivity though the pH level was not too different. Regarding the marine deposits, the amount of sodium and sulphur were seen to be very high and based on this, it was recommended that the marine deposits should be removed and deposited back into the sea and not ploughed into the soil. Reclamation strategies include the removal of deposit, summer ploughing after rainfall and sowing/removal of green manure crop (in some cases, removal of green manure rather than ploughing it back was recommended because the crop tends to accumulate salts from soil and hence when reduction of salts is looked at, this is necessary). The important aspect is the creating of a reclamation package for individual fields – something quite different from other states - based on chemical analysis which includes the use or non-use of gypsum on a need basis.

23

The total area of agricultural land damaged in the UT of Pondicherry was 1220.76 ha which had to be reclaimed. The nature of the soil damage varied with fields that were flooded with sea water which drained quickly or slowly, whose top soil was eroded or over which coarse particles/sand/silt was deposited. All this caused varied damage and hence site specific reclamation is recommended in every field. This was possible in the UT because the area to be reclaimed was limited. The method of soil analysis was discussed briefly and the shortcomings described. The package was in two parts – reclamation of the land and the restoration of productivity. The need for taking care regarding the amount of gypsum required was emphasized – their field analysis showed that the requirements were highly variable, and many fields did not require gypsum at all for reclamation. There were many farmers who quickly drained the water and washed the land with canal water so that their land was not affected – these progressive farmers lost out when the compensation was provided as they did not show losses like the others. For these, some effort is being made to provide compensation as these farmers actually deserve more for their quick thinking. Concluding, Dr Baskar said that there were field to field variations in the nature of soil damage due to inundation by the tsunami. The affected land could be saline, sodic or saline sodic and the gypsum requirement for reclamation varied widely among the different soil samples, ranging from nil to 30 tonnes per ha. A drainage network needs to be planned for effective leaching because application of gypsum without proper drainage is useless. Technical Session I- Discussion A participant from Orissa said that he had reservations on organic farming practices as considering the rise of population of our country how could the needs of the country be faced? His second question was the need for setting up proper infrastructure for organic farming as without that, how could organic farming practices be propagated? Ms Revathy answered that they had a strong network of organic farmers throughout India. Using organic methods, farmers are able to cross 5 tonnes per acre while the Indian average was 1.5 tonnes. This was sustainable once soil fertility was improved by organic methods which would talk about 2-3 years. Use of microbial technology permitted increased generation of microbial population in the soil. Thus 1 cow provides manure for 30 acres as the cow manure is actually used only as an inoculum. In addition, multiple seed sowing methods, liquid bio-inputs and various other methods of farming including various methods of sowing seeds etc. and mixed farming techniques are used in organic farming. Mr Shriji Kurup of CEE, Karaikal wanted to know how much of these scientific recommendations and concepts including organic farming concepts which have to do with reclamation and revival of fertility and productivity of the land are understood by the farmers - for example there are recommendations on the application of gypsum on land, but what is gypsum, leaching etc. has to be understood by the farmers. The coping mechanisms in a disaster event – whether the community can or cannot take up the

24

recommendations following a disaster can itself aggravate or lessen a disaster’s effects. For example, application of gypsum is part of a package, but the farmers take it irrespective of the need because it is given. Hence, policy, education especially at the grassroots level about the scientific interventions is needed so that there is an element of sustainability in the interventions. Dr Baskar responded by saying that based on their recommendations which were based on their field studies, some farmers in a village were given gypsum while others were not. So those who did not receive gypsum wanted to know why they were left out. So either everyone was given gypsum, or the farmers ended up sharing, irrespective of whether they needed gypsum for reclamation. The Chairman noted that based on this response it was clear that technical training was required for such interventions. Ms Geeta, a researcher from MIDS, Chennai said that shrimp farming was there even before tsunami and hence the problem of salination due to shrimp farms that has been around for over a decade resulting in hundreds of acres affected by salinity and lying fallow, and wanted to know if organic farming techniques could be applied to these lands to reclaim them or was it only for tsunami affected farms. Ms Revathy responded by saying that nature has high potential and there were many techniques that could be applied which, along with the application of farmers’ traditional knowledge could help in the reclamation of any kind of land; but there are social problems that need to be overcome in some places. Technically it was possible. Mr Ganapathi, ex correspondent of The Hindu wanted to know the time interval between tsunami and the results of the research undertaken. Dr Baskar responded that it took about 1 month to start the project after the tsunami happened and the results were available in about six months. Dr Rani Senthamarai also responded with the same answer for the time it took to finish her research project. Mr Prabhakar of Concern pointed out that there was no need for anything except plentiful freshwater used to leach out the salts as was done in Krishna district in AP. The difference was that pre-tsunami, farmers worked on their own whereas post tsunami, they were waiting for compensation. There is also the other recurring problem of salinization – due to tidal effects. Was there a mechanism to address this issue? Mr Chandra Mohan answered saying that it was a persistent problem and long term measures in terms of inculcating actions, knowledge, information and capacities etc. are required. Water flow during new and full moon days in the backwaters is a perennial problem affecting certain villages. Earlier there were community managed systems such as strengthening river banks and other small structures. In the second year of tsunami rehab, some of the NGOs and some of the villages especially those not directly affected

25

by tsunami are being targeted so that the river banks are being strengthened and also shutters and other structural features are being repaired. Ms Revathy added that there were three major traditional techniques to prevent saline water intrusion including sand dunes, ponds used to store fresh water and the planting of vetiver as a barrier which help the farmers in preventing seawater entry into the fields. A participant pointed out that in shrimp farming areas there is accumulation of salts and was it possible just by washing with freshwater, the salts could be washed away? Dr Baskar answered that it was not possible to merely use freshwater to wash off the salts because of the high salt accumulation. Mr Prabhakar said that there are 3000 acres in the Krishna District where intensive shrimp farming was practiced and these are being reclaimed totally by the farmers without any scientist intervening. Since in Krishna district there was excess of freshwater, it was just let in and let out of the fields and this helped in washing off the excess salts. The fields were ploughed and the farmers had subsequently raised two crops. Mr Diwakar closed the session thanking the speakers and the audience for a lively session and discussion. The participants were divided into two groups to discuss the issues of salinity and to come up with solutions/suggestions. The following are the set of points presented by each group. Presentations from the group discussion on salinity Group – I Issues: • Limitation of natural drainage system ( Topography and slope) • Shrimp farming • Back water inundation in fall moon an new moon days • Poor irrigation structures in the farmers’ holding • Encroachment in the water bodies • Poor maintenance of water bodies • Improper maintenance and non availability of irrigation and proper drainage

structures • Mono cropping • Subsistence farming Solutions / Suggestions: • Improving drainage structure • Increasing water harvesting and artificial recharging structures

26

• Regulating area of agricultural and aquaculture • Increasing organic matter in the soil • Integrated Farming System (IFS) and Integrated Nutrient Management (INM) and

alternate crops • Rice - Pisciculture • Integrated coastal area development and management with involvement of local

stake holders • Farmer participatory and collective farming • Capacity building and creating awareness Group - II Issues: • Government allowing more and more shrimp farms to come up • Over extraction of ground water • Poor maintenance of canals, ponds, water bodies, etc. • Conversion of water bodies, sluices and channels • Poor watershed management (check dams, anicuts, etc) • Faulty and non implementation of land ceiling act • Use of more inorganic fertilizers • Mono cropping and Monoculture Solutions / Suggestions: • Strict enforcement/implementation of Government Acts, Policies and Laws • Localized watershed management practices need to be encouraged • Practices of traditional green manure cover • Construction of check dams at proper locations • Easy access to technological services through effective public-private partnership • Reclamation of traditional water bodies and ensuring proper maintenance of the

same • Development of bio-shield • Coordination of different stake holders • Strengthening community participation and extension services • Creating a data base such as land information system using Geographical

Information System (GIS) and Remote Sensing (RS)

27

DAY II TECHNICAL SESSION II: FLOOD Chair: Ms Meera, American Indian Foundation Ms Meera, Chairperson for the session, began by recapitulating what had been discussed in the previous technical session on salinity. She said that agriculture being practiced for a very long time in India had resulted in a number of traditional practices. The disasters are more man made in recent times considering following of intensive irrigation and other practices and we need to look at what kinds of preparedness practices are needed. Mr PG Diwakar, Head, Regional Remote Sensing Service Centre, ISRO, Bangalore “Disaster Preparedness – Space Technology and Tools” Mr Diwakar began by showing a satellite map of Tamil Nadu and how by clicking on the image information could be obtained on the area we want to look at because of the availability now of various sensors allowing upto 2.5m resolution which could even show the shrimp farms on the ground. Judicial use of technology needs to be made to suit our needs and requirements. Giving a brief on the Indian space programme, he said that the aim was to that we are second to none as far as applications are concerned. The disasters that were being looked at include floods, cyclones, drought, landslides, earthquakes and forest fires. India was naturally vulnerable to disasters with 40 million hectares (8%) of landmass prone to floods, 8000km long coastline with two cyclone seasons, low and medium rainfall region constituting 68% of the total area vulnerable to drought, hilly regions vulnerable to avalanches, landslides etc, and 54% of the land mass prone to earthquakes. It is possible to make a calendar mapping to get an idea of the period in the year when a particular area is vulnerable to a disaster and the areas that are vulnerable. Historical data provides us statistics to give us an idea of the timescale and place of the disaster. With regard to space and disaster management, we have three things: communications, meteorological imaging and remote sensing data. The information can be used in various ways – with regard to preparedness, vulnerability mapping and response planning can be done and with respect to prediction, forecast models especially in the case of cyclones and floods and vigilance systems can be developed. This comes under the pre-disaster planning. Post disaster, identification and immediate response information goes into the relief component; and rehab and impact studies into the recovery component. He went on to discuss each of these disasters in terms of information requirements, inundation layer (mapping) and what can be done for disaster preparedness. With reference to floods, the information requirement includes rainfall, runoff, terrain information including slopes, information from historical events, risk zonation etc; the

28

inundation layer mapping can be done using satellite imagery. He showed an example from the Brahmaputra where the inundation mapping over the village boundaries gives a clear picture of which are the villages inundated and how to do relief and rehabilitation. Looking at preparedness, we need to see what the requirement is and what can be done. Remote sensing analysis provides data for historical analysis of occurrence for damage assessment and database updating, creation of GIS database including spatial and non spatial; action plan can be made for relief and rehab using GIS. A detailed mapping of all the flood prone areas in the country has already been completed and is available to the state governments. Radar remote sensing can be used when optical sensors do not allow taking of images when there is cloud cover. Integrating flood damage assessment with crop damage assessment using GIS provides an idea of village wise loss of crop on near real time basis. Hazard maps can be prepared well in advance so that people can be moved well in advance to reduce loss of life. Flood forecast modelling helps in taking stock of situation in advance and here rainfall information and elevation information become crucial. He also explained how airborne laser terrain technology allows accurate simulation of where inundation can take place. The next disaster situation was cyclones. Historical database from existing records under GIS environment is very essential. This helps in formulating the ground plan which allows you to find out where are the places where people can be moved. Geospatial database becomes very important in rescue and relief operations and in the movement of humans and livestock. The movement of cyclonic storms can be followed using INSAT series of satellites with images taken at very short intervals of even half an hour. But despite this kind of information being available, if the ground plan is not made, then the people cannot be moved away. The other important area is coastal and marine hazards including pollution and erosion based on which action plans can be made. Human activities such as aquaculture or oil slicks (identifiable using thermal infra red bands) can also be addressed using different resolutions of space imaging. A time series data on vegetation status can give early warning for drought. A whitefield sensor, an advanced whitefield sensor and ocean colour monitor (OCM) are the satellite sensors from India able to provide advanced warning on drought which can be used at district and taluk level. 14 states have been getting drought reports regularly and this is based on the profile of vegetation at a given point in time. Weather data combined with satellite images based on vegetation indices can be used to be prepared for drought. Earthquake preparedness is also done based on seismic activity integrated over the GIS maps. Avoiding serious debacles could be by prioritizing hazard zones and insisting on building codes and construction quality. While prediction is difficult, damage assessment and rehab are easier. A National Emergency and Disaster Management programme which will have direct connectivity from the space systems to the MHA which will allow the information to be available online for anyone to access is also being looked at. A lot of new techniques are available regarding predictions such as RADAR interferometry – which allows land subsidence analysis where centimetre level deformations on the ground can be detected.

29

Mr Diwakar went on to show the images and information with reference to the tsunami in Nagapattinam. The images showed low lying areas that are regularly inundated. High resolution data allows us to look at the types of houses, how many have fallen down etc. and thus can be used as a ground truth rather than going to the ground for verification of information which was very tedious. A detailed database has been created and provided to the Nagapattinam Collectorate and to the State Government. The terrain conditions or vegetation showed how the variations in inundation occurred. Since there was a lot of discussion on drainage, he pointed out that drainage mapping could also be done by satellite imagery and many channels that are not visible on the ground can be picked up from space. Usage of cadastral maps can help in inclusion of the communities as well. Though it is difficult, it is time to use locale specific databases for addressing local specific problems. Data from NCRC’s database has been integrated into the maps as well. Today it is a three dimensional arena and near real time mapping and near real time planning can be done for any kind of disaster related activity. It is a must to use all the technology available to derive maximum benefit. Dr AK Patra, National Institute of Mushroom and Biological Sciences, Orissa Livelihood restoration for the victims of supercyclone and flood victims of mid and north coastal Orissa during 2003 and 2005. His presentation was based on experiences in the supercyclone in Orissa in 1999 and cyclones thereafter. Most cyclones hit Orissa in October causing destruction. He gave a brief on the intensity of the 1999 supercyclone and the devastation it caused with a wind velocity of 240-300 km/h and rainfall of 800mm in two days and a 7 metre high tidal wave that inundated upto 20km of land. The project launched thereafter was aimed at restoring livelihoods. The objective was to introduce and disseminate specific technology to increase income. High yielding varieties of crops were introduced and coconut and other orchards were rejuvenated. Integrated nutrition management and integrated pest management was followed. Shelter belt plantations using suitable tree species; and poultry keeping, mushroom cultivation and bee keeping were introduced. They addressed the various problems with regard to paddy cultivation by using short duration varieties as well as optimum fertilizer and pesticide usage. Similar methods were followed in the case of pulse and oil-seed crops and vegetables especially tomato, and betel vine which is a cash crop. Successful campaigns were conducted through SHGs and youth through night meetings for rodent control and pre-baiting followed by poison baiting was the method followed. For alternate employment mushroom cultivation was suggested resulting in participation by 70% of women. Various mushrooms were suggested depending on the season. Honey production was encouraged with a number of hives supplied with colonies and installed in crop fields. Plantations of Casuarina and Acacia were found to be fast growing compared to teak for timber. This presentation was followed by one on floods in Orissa. After giving a background of extent of damages caused by the floods, he went on to explain the programme strategy for immediate livelihood restoration by supporting emergency preparedness and

30

mitigation. He concluded by saying that in areas prone to flood we should go in for crops that can be harvested quickly in anticipation of flood and similarly in the case of prawn farms, collect the spawn before the flood. Raising of banana, bamboo and other plantations could be done around the houses, villages, river banks, canals etc. Drainage systems have to be improved and irrigation facilities for the next crop have to be provided. Ms Bhuvaneshwari, Covenant Centre for Development, Nagapattinam She began by saying that the CCD aims at utilizing local resources and traditional skills of the community by promoting community based organizations and gave a brief account of programmes in other areas. While they had programmes operational in Madurai, Kanyakumari and Ramanathapuram districts, after tsunami they entered Nagapattinam and Kanyakumari districts. They focused on agriculture with the main work areas being near Poompuhar of Sirgazhi taluk. She provided salient features of agriculture in Nagapattinam saying that the issues here are mainly drainage and salinity. In the last two years, there have been a lot of reports on floods, even this year. Only after floods happen do people start talking about drainage and the earlier systems that prevailed and the channels in the rivers that carried excess water into the sea. She quoted the UNDP report giving damages due to floods of last November to indicate the extent of damage. Specific to the problem, she said that the irrigation system of the Cauvery delta was created 2000 years ago and consists of anicuts, regulators and bridges across the rivers, canals and water drains. The request that came from the farmers immediately after the tsunami was to desilt the irrigation and drainage channels in the villages. Since there were no rains in recent times and also there was very little water in the Cauveri, maintenance of canals had been stopped. All farmers depend on the samba crop for their livelihood. For over five years, there had been no investment in the drainage sector. From experience it is known to be very complex – in some places drainage and irrigation are separate while in others, the drainage of one village is the irrigation channel of the next. In some communities, the maintenance is taken care of by the community using traditional practices (kudimaramathu). After tsunami, since large amount of funds were required for the larger canals which their organization was unable to take up, they provided money for desilting of small canals. She then went on to use a case study of Nattukanni, a feeder canal from Tirunagari canal taking water to Maniyaru which benefits six villages in Sirgazhi block. In the last few years, because of reduced water flow the villages had not been able to produce much by way of crop. The length of the canal is 4 km and benefits 800 acres. Showing photographs of the canal before their intervention began she explained how an 18’ wide canal had shrunk to about 6 feet. The last time the canal was maintained was in 1920. They had to take the help of the tahsildar and the 3 surveyors sent by the tahsildar and along with the communities they had to work on the canal contours. Because they communities supported them, they were able to tackle the problem of encroachments and the canal was deepened and widened.

31

She said that while the drainage systems could be mapped using the latest technology, on ground problems have to be looked at and preventive measures put into place. In the case of irrigation and drainage systems, she said that there was a need to modernize the systems and repair many regulators which were more than 100 years old. More investment is required to look at the issue and involvement and participation of the farm community to reduce flood damage. She emphasised once again that protection of irrigation sources with a long-term perspective needs more attention with community participation to reduce flood damage. Mr Jayachandran, Joint Director of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture, Chennai. He began by giving a brief overview of the flood scenario in previous years and the loss of production in terms of quantity and value due to the floods. About Rs 2.5 crores is lost every year. Some years ago, the PM said that everything could wait, but not agriculture, but unfortunately we are still ‘waiting’. This is particularly so in Nagapattinam district. It is interesting to note that only in Nagapattinam district in TN, there was a ‘drainage’ division in the Agriculture department; in all others there was only an ‘irrigation’ division. When there is no water, the canals close up. The other thing is that many of the canals are both for irrigation and drainage. An involvement of all stakeholders is required in risk management in agriculture. There is sufficient advance warning available when water is released from the Mettur dam or Stanley reservoir. Unfortunately unlike evacuating people living on the river banks, the crop cannot be removed to safety and brought back when the flood waters have receded. Drought, he felt, was not of relevance anymore in Nagapattinam district. He referred to the subsidy provided by the government for agriculture insurance. Compensation was provided based on some random experiments conducted for those who had insured their crop. This year, a model plot is being used for this purpose. In future insurance of crops is going to be done widely so that compensation can be given in case of flood as well as when the monsoon fails. Adjustment of the cropping season has to be done. Earlier during, a kuruvai crop was raised in June-September, there was no crop between September and December and the land remained submerged under water. Mid December onwards another crop was raised with water from the canals. In this region, no other crop other than paddy is thought of. Now the entire district is only under samba cultivation. When water was not released once from Mettur dam, they had advised the farmers to go in for a low water requiring pulse crop. When the crop was just ten days old, sufficient water had accumulated in Mettur dam and it was released. The farmers preferred to plough back the pulse crop as it was a good green manure and raised paddy instead when this happened. Hence changing the mind set of the farmers is difficult. It was necessary to think of allied activities and go in for integrated approach using livestock. He offered Rs 20,000 as loan through banks for those prepared to go in for this approach. This way the farmer does not have to depend only on the paddy crop.

32

Many of the farmers or the labour wanted to leave agriculture and this should not be encouraged; rather their activities should be widened so that they are not dependent on only one activity. The other issue is that the agriculture department is woefully short of manpower and hence he requested participation from NGOs to implement some of the department’s programmes including identification of innovative ideas to improve agricultural conditions. Use of internal resources should be maximized and external resources must be limited – NGOs can play an important role in this. While the farmer is suffering, the agri-allied industries were doing well. The problem was well known and so was the solution and it was now time to put the two together to improve farmers’ well being. Earlier, when farmers were visited, they would say, “you take this or that”; now they say, “what are you going to give us”. He said that they now have a programme where participation of NGO participation is compulsory and hence requested all NGOs to got o the rescue of the department and together they could go to the rescue of the farmers. He also pointed out that while various demands were made to the department after the tsunami, none had asked for funds for drainage works. Funds were available and NGOs could contact the Joint Director of Agriculture along with the tsunami SHGs, assess their real needs and submit a proposal which would be approved by the Collector in Nagapattinam. Mr Ravindranath, Rural Volunteers Centre, Assam

Mr Ravindranath is from the Rural Volunteers Centre, a commune of 150 volunteers working in about 400 villages in two districts, also campaigning for the whole north-east by a front called River Basin Friends which is also an early warning system for the Ganga-Brahmaputra-Meghna basin. The Brahmaputra basin is full of tributaries and a satellite image shows it like a huge drain. The soil quality is saline with high iron content. The communities face flash floods, water logging and erosion every year. The total land mass that has been lost is 7% of the soil of whole of Assam. Constant threats are the possibilities of breakdown of the dams in Bhutan and Assam and the Tibetan earthen bunds. Hence the problem is international. Every year the water affects thousands of families. The sand deposition is very high ranging from 1-15 feet. Sometimes it is as high as 3 feet in 2 hours. This is mainly because of the extractive mining in the hills. The Centre was trying to work with the locals with bio intensified farming practices and organic farming practices. Organic farming is prevalent in the whole of the north-east except in the tea gardens. The Fukuoka method where only the top of the paddy is harvested is still practiced. The rain fall is 2000-4000mm per year. He then went on to suggest some things that could be followed in Nagapattinam. Using a case study of the causes of sand cast in Dhemaji, he said that the geomorphological situation, huge siltation in river channel and the upheaval of river bed were the major causes of sand cast. He felt that just barricading the land and allowing it to reclaim itself would be effective. The soil was not as saline as in Nagapattinam. The fine organic silt is mostly washed into Bangladesh and what remained was good for crops. He showed pictures of natural vegetation that rise on the sand. Kokuwa aao was a paddy variety used by tribals that grows from seeds that grows in sandy soil, and there were varieties that grow in 90 days while the bao variety takes 180 days. Other plants that were grown

33

on sand casts include tomato, chillies, okra, brinjal, mint, gourds, groundnut and even betel vine. Going on to specific recommendations, he said that they have done community based disaster management from the planning to implementation stages with the setting up of ‘duryog nivaran samiti’. There is equal participation of every group of the community. Knowledge is imparted to the community emphasizing local resources, knowledge and skill of the people. One of his pleas was that microfinance should not be mixed with the such equivalents of duryog nivaran samiti if they are set up here. An important undertaking is the storage of contingency stock with the community. Two hand pumps, 20 tarpaulin sheets, 500 ORS packets etc are given to the community so that the affected communities are prepared for setting up make-shift camps. The other suggestion was the setting up of food and seed/grain banks. Immediately after a disaster, relief does not reach the people and hence the food stored is used by the people for 7-10 days. While the infrastructure to hold the food and grain bank may be externally funded, the communities/duryog nivaran samiti should be in control of running/maintaining it. The infrastructure should be on stilts whose heights can be designed based on historical flood data. Later, he also showed pictures of the food and seed bank structures as well as the raised platform constructed by the RVC where people could take shelter during a disaster. He also emphasized the importance of protection of plinth of homesteads and showed how they used bamboo to do it. Technical Session II: Discussion A question to Mr Jeyachandran was regarding the cropping pattern for Kollidam block asking what paddy varieties should be raised from June to September and from October to December. He responded that it should be short duration varieties. During May, earlier the water released from the Grand Anicut used to reach the tail end of the delta within 5 days, now it takes 15 days, he said. The participant said that the situation prevailing in delta was that the season started in August and ended in January and this was the samba crop. After this, the farmer went in for a dry summer pulse crop and then for the kuruvai season. The agriculture universities also follow this pattern when they teach. But what Mr Jeyachandran said was different and so she was interested. Mr Jeychandran responded that it was different only in the Kollidam block where the rice-fallow pattern was being followed. The field was left fallow or wet from September to December. This was because of the water release pattern from the Grand Anicut. There was also need for the crop to be harvested before the end of the South West monsoon as during the end, showers were received, and the problem was the non uniform pattern of rainfall where large quantum of rain was received in a short duration of time. He said that there were many alternative choices available but because of the Cauvery dispute, no decision on alternate cropping was possible. Mr Ram Subaramanian of Samanvaya asked Dr Patra about the Taiwan and BT varieties of tomato, in the light of the controversy on BT. Dr Patra said that in Orissa BT

34

1-10 were developed that had better resistance to wilt. He said that it was not a genetically modified variety. Ms Anuradha Vidyasankar asked Mr Diwakar whether the vulnerability maps were going to be made available to the NGOs and CSOs and if there was a time frame for this to happen. Mr Diwakar answered saying that our country is very large and for organization trying to do this was not easy. Currently a database for fourteen states had been created with focus on flood affected areas – including the states of Assam, Bihar, West Bengal, Orissa and Andhra Pradesh. Presently the maps were being made available to state governments to use at district level. With NGOs working together with the state government, a consortium approach is being suggested wherein NGOs and the State government at the district level use the database together to solve problems. The civil society organizations have to work with the district administration to use the data. Mr Ram Subramanian wanted to know if there was an effort to allow people’s participation to add local information /content/ground situation to validate or substantiate information. Mr Diwakar pointed out that while it was a good technology, Google earth used old data which cannot be used for current happenings on the ground. This was what was being attempted through the NRSA and the MHA. – through the NRSA going to get near real time data uplinked to MHA and from MHA to all states especially disaster prone areas. The relevant data from MHA gets downloaded to these areas so that it can be used near real time. Districts will be the ultimate focal point to use the data. Right now there is no possibility that has been thought of but technology does not limit the possibilities of participation by others. Ms Meera summarized the session by highlighting some key issues that came up during the presentations and discussions including:

• Utilising recent techniques with regard to GIS and radar technology to monitor disasters, work for rehab and also prepare for early warning – through partnership effort of different stakeholders,

• Greater public investment for maintenance and revival of existing infrastructure for drainage and irrigation and for building new infrastructure,

• Farming and cropping patterns should be taken into consideration looking at local situation, promoting polyculture including growing of pulses and vegetables,

• Community based disaster preparedness and the formation of the equivalent of duryog nivaran samithis, and

• Promoting organic practices to prevent disaster damage during floods

35

TECHNICAL SESSION III: OTHER DISASTERS – DROUGHT/CYCLONE Chair: Mr. PK Prabhakar, Concern Worldwide Mr Oswald Quintal, Team Leader, Kudumbam, Tiruchirapalli Mr Quintal is also the state convenor of the LEISA (Low External Input and Sustainable Agriculture) network. They have been working on various issues in the drought areas including the lack of drinking water, lack of employment and hence no cash to buy food; the scarcity of fodder and the vulnerable health situation of the really poor farmers. He said that the depleting groundwater and the increasing salinity of groundwater was an issue and the communities are able to relate the changes in the state policy and the land use in the village and neighbourhood to the problem. There was a lack of ownership regarding community water bodies and they had worked on sensitizing the community on the ownership of ground water and water bodies. Crop loss could be traced to the increasing gap between two rainy days and the failure of monsoon. The resultant lack of soil moisture was addressed through bunding, mulching and the revival of farm ponds. Problems were also due to use of hybrid varieties rather than the traditional drought resistant varieties. Genetic Engineering has only resulted in shifting the problem from the soil to the seed and is abetted by industry. Crop loss was also due to monocropping and the alternative was to increase crop diversity by widening the bunds and cultivating vegetables, green and black gram on the bunds. The loss of income due to faulty land use was addressed through agroforestry, the cultivation of fruit and fodder plants and use of green manure. Over 70% of the water bodies a decade ago were fresh and are now saline. Hence there was an urgent need to look at recharge strategies. Everyday, an hour or two at the very least is spent by women in collecting water – hence there is a need to have a gender perspective in planning. There was a need to map villages in Nagapattinam where ground water and surface water bodies have become saline in the last ten years. Desilting of water bodies and deepening of drainage channels need to be taken up under the employment guarantee scheme. Traditional trees including amla, pinnai, kodukapalli and iluppai need to be planted and shrimp farms that were rendering groundwater saline should be removed. Overhead tanks and drinking water pipe line maintenance should be taken up. Mr Prabhakar summed up the presentation saying that Mr Quintal had given a good link between drought and flood. His key recommendation was the mapping of coastal water bodies - which is possible. He also provided a link between drought and drinking water. The government declares an area as drought prone based on rainfall data but evidently a policy change is required as rainfall alone is not a sufficient indicator of drought proneness. Dr TR Shanmugham, Professor of Agricultural Economics, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore. Preparedness in agriculture with respect to drought in India

36

India is a country very prone to disasters. After 1942, there has been no epidemic outbreak but droughts, cyclones and earthquakes are still common. Low rain fall regions are naturally prone to drought but man made factors also play a role. Diversion of water for other purposes has been increasing over the years. Pure water is taken especially by industries and polluted water is let out. The number of wells has increased but the irrigation per well has come down (in 1995 in TN, one well irrigated 1ha but now one well irrigates 0.3ha). This affects small and marginal farmers as they do not have money to deepen wells. Open wells are sometimes abandoned or used for some other purpose. All these have resulted in various consequences including the lowering of water table, keeping land fallow, reduction in productivity, usage of land for non-agricultural purposes, and migration of farmers as well as farm labour. With regard to drought preparedness, we need to be able to forecast how and when climatic variation will occur. A local observatory is required as each district may behave in different manner. Changing cropping pattern to grow crops using less water (such as the growing of tapioca which requires less water rather than sugarcane) though both have the same growing season, the use of traditional drought tolerant varieties (he cited a personal experience where a local traditional coconut variety was grown along with a hybrid variety and while the hybrid variety did not survive the drought, the local variety did though it did not yield during the drought period), rainwater harvesting using abandoned wells, maintenance of common property, integration of livestock with fodder and crop production (livestock population is coming down every year and must be improved as livestock is the first mortgage lifter – first the goat is sold, then the bullocks and only then dairy animals are sold, and finally the land is sold). He concluded that trees along the fields are also used as a drought coping mechanism as the first response is to sell the trees to raise cash in times of need and trees also act as pest control agents because they promote bird populations. Mr Prabhakar summed up saying that his presentation gave a number of facts and also called for greater use of traditional crop varieties and also brought back again the need to map traditional water bodies and go for agroforestry. Mr Shriji Kurup, CEE, Karaikal Understanding vulnerability for coastal agrarian communities Mr Kurup said that this presentation tried to learn from the existing information on disasters (especially cyclones in the agriculture sector) on how to address vulnerability issues. Looking at the perception of a disaster, he said that a disaster was one that caused large scale disruption of life, material, economic or environmental losses. The affected community is not able to recoup using their own resources and someone had to come in and help them out. It could be triggered naturally, or human made or triggered by human causes. He asked himself a series of questions on disasters including, ‘Are we contributing to a process that may trigger a disaster – such as our lifestyle and the way we use various resources?’ and ‘How soon can a disaster be

37

created?’ It was becoming clear that actions of the present generation would be a function of when the disaster would be created. At the individual level, there is a difference between a disaster happening locally and one at a global scale – the perceptions and reactions are quite different. Are we ready individually or collectively to face a disaster? For example, in the building of permanent shelters in the tsunami hit areas, a lot of digging up is taking place and these depressions are becoming ponds and even lakes after a rain. In this context, we need to relate to the fact that disasters need not be sudden but can also be chronic features, and based on the response of the community, the effects of the disaster could be high or low. Events such as sea level rise and climate change are silently happening at a global level and who has contributed how much cannot be visualized. They are not visible like cyclones. There are also regional divisions and divisions based on religion making society more insecure. The coastal communities and the agrarian communities are more vulnerable because the response mechanism in coastal areas takes slower. Environmental degradation along the coast such as shore erosion and salinity intrusion are of concern as they can contribute to disasters. There are also visible ‘mini’ disasters which arise from social implications of insecure agrarian livelihood and are characterised by suicides, migration, loss of traditional varieties etc which are triggered due to the lack of sustainable development apart from lacunae in education, governance problems and socio-economic divisions. Disaster preparedness has two components – capacity and risk. Risk is a combination of hazard and vulnerability. Hazards include events such as a volcano going to erupt, or could be a latent/dormant condition that represents a future threat. Vulnerability refers to susceptibility of a community to the impact of a hazard based on the physical social, economic and environmental conditions or processes existing in their society. Capacity is the ability of the community to utilize and manage its strength and resources to reduce the level of risk. This is why organizations insist on community participation when issues of sustainability are addressed because it results in building capacity for future disasters. A disaster thus results from the combination of hazards, conditions of vulnerability and insufficient capacity or measures to reduce the potential negative consequences of risk, is a result of unsustainable practices and is a function of preparedness level. An event in itself may not be a disaster but it is the way a community responds that may make it a disaster. Looking specifically at India with respect to agriculture, he provided some statistics pointing out that the young generation of 15-64 years is over 64% of the population and hence their capacity has to be built. Our economic activities are based on traditional farming systems and 3/5th of the work force is in agriculture. Agriculture contributes only to about 18% of the GDP while 60% of the labour force by occupation is in agriculture. This indicates dependence, but also opportunities and the fact that this huge population has to be prepared to face disasters. Agriculture offers more allied occupations but is vulnerable since it is highly dependent on natural forces like rainfall, climate, soil fertility,

38

surface and groundwater etc. and is facing risks at the various fronts at regular intervals leading to low economic viabilities and higher input costs. In Karaikal, based on field studies they have found that marginal farmers are maximum in number. They own a small proportion of the land or may have leased it. The disparity in land ownership and distribution makes interventions difficult. While both the marginal and big farmers face disasters, the ability to react or cope is quite different. He provided statistics on the national scenario and pointed out that the east coast was more vulnerable to disasters from the sea. Impacts from cyclones include inundation, strong winds and flooding which happen simultaneously and hence have to be addressed together. The coastal agrarian community is particularly vulnerable even when a cyclone forms in the sea because while it is beneficial sometimes, it is often destructive. All farmers are at the same phase of cultivation and hence no buffer is there (e.g. seedling stock) and all is damaged. The path of cyclone is unpredictable and there is also uncertainty about subsequent stages of formation of the cyclone. This means that there are extensive research opportunities especially with regard to providing early warning support. The stages between the formations are actually a series of small scale mini disasters that particularly impacts the livelihood of agrarian communities. Cyclone warning and threats are available – while people are able to relate the storm warnings with a cricket match, they do not relate it with agrarian livelihood. All manner of useful information may be available but it is not translated to be used at the field level. Because of the flooding, the poorest are most impacted – sandwiched between housing, health and other problems and their livelihood. It is clear that for preparedness, the community has to be redefined to include people who are affected as well as the support services such as the local administrative body, local NGOs etc. It is their combined capacity, effort and response that would determine the preparedness to mitigate and address a disaster. Mr Kurup concluded by saying that disaster preparedness for coastal agrarian communities would depend on their livelihood security in a non-disaster time and this was linked with sustainable agricultural practices. Preparedness also needs to address issues of global changes. There is a lot of scope to improve early warning mechanisms and for education and community participation. Coastal zones and coastal agrarian communities should be recognized as of prime importance for disaster preparedness. Technical Session III -Discussion Mr Vivekanandan complimented Prof Shanmugam saying that he was almost talking their language and wanted to know if the agricultural scientific mainstream community also shifting to this view. The holistic picture of having a broader concern and philosophy was generally missing as far as the scientific community was concerned and the focus has been on specific technologies and generally only for the short term.

39

Prof Shanmugam said that in the Agriculture University, there are different centres and he was from the rural development centre and in social sciences. Their points of view were not always acceptable to others. Their job was to carry the message from the public to the institution as they talked about realities but it was difficult for others to see their point of view. He said that the solutions would come, but would take time. Ms Meera indicated that there should be a holistic approach in the agricultural sector rather than a sectoral approach and should also be a fusion of the social dimensions. There is little allocation for the agriculture sector. Promoting multinational investment would only increase vulnerability of marginal farmers. Prof Shanmugam answered that the multinational issue was there in all sectors. It was difficult to stop multinationals entering the country in the post-liberalization era. Ms Meera said that the Kerala planning commission had prepared a paper on this and similarly the agriculture department can influence the body also how to overcome liberalization of this large sector which is a primary sector off which 60-70% of the people live. If it is in a state of stagnation, disaster proneness will make it more vulnerable. We need to recommend something to influence policy to take care of the agriculture sector through the state machinery, not by subsidies, but by infrastructure development to improve agricultural productivity. Mr Kurup pointed out that with the moving away of people from agriculture, their vulnerability to disaster was lessening. It was only when we wanted them to remain in the sector is the concern. The challenge is to be able to face disasters the way a multinational could. Mr Prabhakar summed up the session saying that Mr Kurup had given statistics on the loss due to floods versus the loss due to tsunami. Loss due to floods was some 25 times that of the tsunami but it was a forgotten disaster as people did not die. The worst affected were the agrarian communities. The mini disasters were being faced on a continuous basis by farmers. Farming was done by both big and marginal farmers with the latter in larger numbers. Disasters should not be linked only to loss of life, not bring in only emotional responses. These issues have to be taken up by the NGOs and a holistic approach brought in for disaster preparedness. TECHNICAL SESSION IV: DISASTER PREPAREDNESS Chair: Dr Nalini Keshavaraj, Manager, TNTRC Mr Senthil Kumar, MSSRF He began by saying that in the last 100 years, 262 cyclones were formed in the 50km wide strip on the East Coast of which 92 were severe. Frequency of depressions was higher in October and frequency of storms hitting the coast was higher in November. He

40

said that a disaster was an adverse event that created damage which could not be handled by the local community. Disaster mitigation and preparedness included long term risk reduction measures to reduce the impacts of the disaster. Disaster mitigation methods range from large scale flood protection measures to diversifying livelihoods, crops, promoting new income generating activities, grain & seed storage etc. He then gave a profile of agriculture in Nagapattinam region pointing out that it was cyclone and flood prone and the people had insecure and risky sources of livelihoods and were characterized by lack of access to basic services as well. Disaster preparedness in agriculture includes agronomic preparedness and social and institutional preparedness. Crop centred agricultural management needed to shift towards integrated crop, livestock, fishery and agro-forestry based livelihood opportunities along with promotion of off-farm income generation skills. In 1995 MSSRF had developed a model which was now extensively replicated. Backward, forward and lateral linkages among enterprises in integrated farming systems helped to reduce the risk of disaster through crop diversification, soil management, in situ water harvesting, continuous employment and income from several sources, reduced dependency on external inputs/resources through recycling of wastes, effective utilization of available limited resources and enhancing household food and nutritional security. There was also the establishment of disease outbreak responses with decentralized pest surveillance and monitoring especially for the devastating pests in groundnut, paddy, coconut etc. and also in the development of a cadre of local resource persons. There are more than 30 traditional varieties in this region but hardly 5 are being used, he said. Traditional varieties are tolerant to many stresses. With reference to seed systems, the first step was to understand how informal and formal seed systems operate so that seed support planning can be done. A data base of farmers who grow traditional varieties must be created. Agro ecological matching of varieties to physical environments as well as farmers’ preferences has to be done. A village based seed bank has to be developed with necessary training and awareness. Another aspect of agronomic preparedness is the decentralized forecasting of climate and weather. He showed pictures of a B type weather station managed by a women’s SHG located in Kannivari area which had 11 instruments – dew gauge, rain gauge, thermometers, sunshine recorders etc. Twice a week the data collected were sent through the village information centre to the Meteorological department which then forwarded them for a 4-day prediction of local weather conditions. This helped the farming community to prepare and take decisions on agronomic practices especially in terms of seed selection. For social and institutional preparedness, mobilization and promotion of village based grassroots institutions was done by forming various SHG, promoting leadership qualities, gender equity and promoting institutional mechanism for horizontal transfer of skill, knowledge and resources. Establishing modern ICT supported Village Knowledge Centers (VKC) was to provide demand driven and locale specific information related to agriculture as well as to provide clear and useful information as well as for data

41

collection to make out disaster patterns and trends. Awareness of insurance, building up of water harvesting systems, graduating farmer and SHG groups into livelihood financial institutions and promoting eco-enterprises like production and marketing of biofertlizers and biocides managed by women’s SHG were the other practices. He concluded that those affected by disasters are mostly poor and socially disadvantaged and hence it was necessary to identify the most vulnerable farming groups and develop\ location specific preparedness. There is also a need to promote diversified livelihoods and need based community based institutions such as seed banks and village knowledge centres to improve early warning systems and dissemination and communication systems. Promoting / strengthening need based linkages and partnership with financial institutions like banks, insurance companies, extension departments and technical institutions is also important. Mr Ramasubramanian, Chief, Samanvaya “Disaster Preparedness in Agriculture: Lessons from Nagapattinam” He shared his thoughts having worked in this area for the last six months consolidating on what he had learnt from the initiatives taken by the NGOs – the agricultural practices that have been effective, some lessons on what ought not be repeated and how is a response situation to be converted into a plan of action. This tsunami was the first time in history that such a large extent of agriculture land was destroyed. With reference to reclamation, it was clearly proved that traditional knowledge works and that community participation is mandatory; that the farmers were shaken but not stirred and that partnership between the government and civil society works. The traditional practices that worked included the use of salt tolerant seeds, leaching of salt, protection by sand dunes, removal of the tsunami-deposited layer above the top soil; using organic inputs such as bio manure and bio pesticides and community to community interaction to exchange views and practices. A number of traditional seeds as well as seed keeping practices that can withstand adverse situations have come to public knowledge since the tsunami. A fact to be highlighted is that traditional seeds form less than 25% of paddy grown in this country. Local practices of land reclamation worked. One farmer for example, reported very good yield and it was found that he had dug in palm leaf about 20cm below the soil and filled up the land and planted his seeds on top of it. Green leaf plants ploughed back to increase microbial activity include thakkapoondu, kolinji and sun hemp. Gunapasallam, vermicompost and panchagavya were land fertility management techniques that worked. Interaction of farmers with others who had suffered or who practiced certain techniques successfully increased enthusiasm especially when they realized that they had faced similar situations.

42

All organizations that he had interacted with said that community participation included on-the-field participation. This cannot be over emphasized. The number of experiments that farmers have been prepared to take has been astonishing. The capacity to adapt and explore is there throughout. Among lessons not to be repeated is that ‘rumours cause damage’. A good example was the issue of removal of the deposited material. Unregulated expert (local and foreign) intrusion was because of the large number of volunteers and others who came in. For example one farmer was advised by an ‘expert’ not to remove the deposits and that after the place was dry, it should be ploughed back in. The result was that while all his neighbours were well into reclamation of their land, he was left out totally because he thought he had been given superior guidance by an ‘expert’. Criticism and comments being published without being verified, insufficient clarity and content as far as aid from the government was concerned and very poor access to laboratories for testing of soil were issues that have to be addressed. Looking at the various responses and how they can be converted into preparedness, it is clear that there are constraints and advantages from which methods and tools have been built by an unprepared community. To move towards disaster preparedness, these methods and tools of community response have to be institutionalized, eliminating constraints that limited community response, strengthening those that added force to the community’s response. Institutionalization with reference to seeds could be done by building seed banks and also market linkages for traditional seeds. Institutionalizing land reclamation practices could be done by validation of these methods, creation of VKC, avoiding confusion with newer methods of data collection and most important, recognizing and honouring knowledge holders and practitioners so that they become an important resource for the community during a disaster. With reference to land inputs there are various levels of convictions regarding bio inputs especially bio pesticides. There is a need to provide a platform for sharing information since so much is happening everywhere. The need to solve the water issue on a long term basis is also very important. There is a need to encourage learning among practitioners and creation of a community level team for disaster preparedness as well as to facilitate grassroots level inputs. The way forward at the government level is for policy changes to facilitate more indigenous knowledge practices and the creation of village level disaster preparedness plans. NGO initiatives include the facilitation of the process of people’s practices being recognized and its smooth integration with the mainstream practices, and working with each other. People working on similar problems in different institutions working together may be more effective. Scientific institutions should work on knowledge co-creation along with communities on some of these traditional practices. Institutions also need to address long term plans. Communities also will have to get ready to think in terms of long term planning and will have to contribute and own up to this.

43

Mr C. Anbarasu, Regional Manager, Agriculture Insurance Company of India He began by saying that his approach was different – being a supportive measure for farmers. Crop insurance is a farmer friendly scheme, trying to give them a tailor made project for their needs. Agricultural Insurance Company of India was created by an act of Parliament and has been functioning from April 2004. The promoters include GIC of India, NABARD, Oriental Insurance Company, National Insurance Company, New India Insurance Company and United India Insurance Company. Earlier, crop insurance was dealt with by General Insurance Corporation of India. Various test measures have been made, defects are being rectified and now there is a larger scheme. National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIS) has been available from 1999 onwards), Farm Income Insurance Scheme provides compensation if market price shows loss to the farmer and the Rainfall Insurance Scheme has been recently introduced challenging rainfall shortage. He also listed a variety of other crop insurance schemes that are available. A highlight of the NAIS was that about 1 crore farmers were joining every year with 30% getting benefit every year. In other countries, the holdings were big with number of farmers being small in number. The reverse is was the case in India. Developing a scheme for fragmented land was difficult but despite that it was done. A compromise that has been done in the NAIS is the compensation payment is calculated on area approach basis. It is a Government of India supported scheme, practiced in all states except Punjab. The state government has a stake in the scheme. A 10% subsidy on the premium is given to the farmers. A recent announcement says that 50% subsidy on the premium will be given to farmers in TN (a first for any State) with the intention that many farmers should benefit. The NAIS does not cover aromatic or plantation crops but practically every other crop is covered. In the area approach sampling is done in firkha level, reduced from the block level done till recently. Crop cutting system is followed – a random sampling of yield in 5 m by 5 m is taken as the average yield for calculating compensation for losses. Any rural branch of a financial institution or society can accept the premium and the District Collector is the monitoring authority. He called upon the NGOs and others working with the farm communities, especially the non loanee farmers to motivate them to join the crop insurance schemes. The sum insured is upto 150% of the market value of the yield. Nagapattinam farmers were the first to get benefit out of the scheme. Premium rate was very limited – about 2—3.5%. It is a multi-agency service and bodies like NABARD do the monitoring. In the last two years about Rs 2000 crore was collected as premium and Rs 6000 crore was paid back. In TN alone, Rs 21 crore premium was collected in the last four or five years and over Rs 144 crore was paid back to the farmers. Out of this, about Rs 123 crore has gone to Nagapattinam alone because the Nagapattinam farmers constantly face threats of one type or another. A few modifications have been recommended by a Joint Group at the Government of India level suitable to farmers. As a special measure 1.37 crore was paid to farmers Nagapattinam, Cuddalore and Karaikal. 783 farmers out of over 9800 farmers who lost their crop only benefited as only they had paid the premium.

44

Varsha Bima is a tool to challenge scientifically the crop loss, ultimately the yield, and thus the financial loss due to short of rainfall. The premium is about Rs 500 per acre - this is a reformation measure and is to place the farmer back in the place where he was before the calamity. Ms Subhashini Sridhar, Programme Coordinator, CIKS Tsunami reclamation – a way forward CIKS is the Centre for Indian Knowledge Systems which has been working since 1993 in conservation of traditional paddy varieties and documentation of traditional practices all over India. They have nearly 140 traditional paddy varieties from Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. It was an opportunity after the tsunami for their centre to use the traditional paddy varieties and validate them in the affected soil conditions. She said that there was a need for an institutional linkage between the government, the NGO and the community. For example, a lead came from a farmer in Vedaranyam regarding leaching of salts from the soil. In Tamil literature there is a reference to the leaching concept in purananooru. Now a number of experiments have been conducted by various institutions regarding leaching. This was a traditional practice used by farmers even before the tsunami to treat their salt affected soils. Due to the tsunami, the coastal soil belt was affected by extragenous salts and there was a change in the soil pH and EC. Leaching and surface drainage is an effective method for reclaiming the soil. Leaching is a process whereby water of low salt concentration is applied to displace the relatively high salt concentration in the soil solution. It could be a one time process or practiced over a long term. Universities have suggested flushing and leaching as two methods. For efficient leaching, the field has to be prepared, and the water requirement calculated. The land was leveled and the hardened surface loosened by ploughing. Since smaller plots are more efficient for draining water, the experimental field was divided into small beds and leached. The experimental field was in Kuzhiyar in Sirghazhi taluk. The time of leaching is important and where water is limited, it should be done just before the rains. Ground water table was lower in July when the experiment was done and since salts were removed to a greater depth, upward movement of salts at later stages was slowed. A thumb rule for water was impounding 10cm of water in the field for leaching. Leaching technique could be continuous or combined with rainfall. They found removal of 30-40% salts due to heavy rainfall in their field. They divided the land and analysed the soil characteristics before and after leaching. They tried a technique called SSFWSS = Subsurface fresh water skimming systems, an improvement over the traditional doruvu technology that is used in Bapatla in Andhra Pradesh. This traditional system had drawbacks and hence they had discussions with two institutions that were working on the SSFWSS systems for coastal areas. SSFWSS system works on the principle of rapid phreatic flow in sandy soils under the influence of vertical recharge. The lateral flow is collected in a sump constructed on an impermeable layer. The system has advantages including the ability to use modern irrigation systems like drip and sprinkler systems. She explained in detail about the installation of the

45

SSFWSS and said that it cost about Rs 75,000 – Rs80,000 for installation based on installation depth of the collector line benefitting about 14 acres. Next she discussed a comparison of paddy between traditional and improved varieties. Not all traditional varieties are suitable for use. Sivappukurivikar, a variety cultivated in Ramand district, TRY-2 from Anbil Dharmalingam College and Kundhali from Kollidam district were tried. Kundhali gave twice the yield over TRY-2. A traditional scented variety was kalanamak, a non basmati rice from the eastern Terai region. Trials with this variety are being conducted in the tsunami affected areas. She also spoke about weeds that act as a barrier to tsunami – these include Spinifex littoreus, Phyla nodiflora, Citrullus colocynthis and Pandanus. They stabilize the sand dunes which block waves from the sea. Technical Session IV - Discussion Mr Vivekanandan said that he was unable to get a clear picture about the agriculture insurance and wanted to know from Mr Anbarasu if it was a government charity or insurance business. The response was that the company was formed not only for crop insurance but was going to devise certain other packages as well based on the different kinds of needs of the farmers. It was created for a purpose and was not politically motivated. Mr Vivekanandan wanted to know whether the scheme was expected to be viable in terms of premium collected matching claim or was there going to be a huge payout. Mr Anbarasu said that every year crop insurance resulted in a heavy claim. They were able to survive only because it was government supported. The next question was related to whether the compensation was given based on crop of production or the cost of the produce. The answer was that it was based on the market value of the produce. 150% of yield multiplied by the average market price was given. With regard to non loanee farmers, they are being covered on an optional basis and the agriculture department is being asked to coordinate and ensure wider participation. With reference to the unit area, the participant wanted to know if individual basis coverage was possible considering for example in the case of selective pest outbreak. The answer was that it was being attempted on a trial basis. There was a question regarding extent of claim. The answer was that 100% of claim was rare – only in the case of severe damage of flood or drought. Randomized experiments may show up some yield and hence proportional claim was settled. Reducing the unit area to firkha level makes the analysis and settlement more accurate. Mr Chandra Mohan referred to the Rs 12,500 package for tsunami victims where clearly crop insurance premium was built in. In that case, why did only 700 odd farmers benefit? The response was that the standing crop was the samba crop that was damaged within one month of the harvest. Estimations were made on individual field to field to basis. At that time there was not sufficient awareness and only 783 loanee

46

farmers had taken insurance. Hence only those benefited. Mr Chandra Mohan pointed out that the rest of the farmers were covered in the package and they were once again affected in the 2005 cropping season. To this Mr Anbarasu pointed out that against a premium of less than Rs 3.69 crore, Nagapattinam farmers received Rs 23 crore. He went on to say that bankers are showing lot of negligence with regard to crop insurance. Ms Anuradha Vidyasankar wanted to know if farmers working on leased lands and temple lands could access this insurance. Mr Anbarasu responded that the owners sometimes did not want officially to give the land for cultivation. The landless labourer was working as a cultivator, unfortunately he did not have the right to get into the crop insurance schemes according to their norms. They should be allowed to pay the premium in the bank. Ms Anuradha wanted to know further whether the decision lay with the bank or with the company. Identification of the farmer who had insurable interest in the crop and it should be made possible for him to join in the scheme. Ms Anuradha then said that Mr Anbarasu was urging the NGOs to take a step ahead and urge more farmers to join the scheme but he had also said that the banks were more responsible. If so, what role did he envisage for the NGOs. The response was that under the NAIS only the bankers were allowed to receive premium from the farmers. But the non loanee farmers were not encouraged to join up as it would increase the workload. Hence, to protect the interest of the farmers, he said that NGOs should argue with the bankers since it was a GoI scheme. Since the District Collector is the monitoring authority, he has to take control over this. The District Collector Mr Tenkasi S Jawahar intervened at this point saying that a meeting was scheduled in the last week of August and he had already raised the issue with NABARD. If Mr Anbarasu could also come and address them, then a system of monitoring of applications received could be put in place to ensure that even the non loanee farmers were covered. The fact was that the coverage in Tamil Nadu is low and has to be addressed. Mr Chandra Mohan said that NCRC could organize a separate meeting with Mr Anabarasu if more clarifications were required. PLENARY SESSION Ms Annie George, CEO, NCRC welcomed everyone saying that one of the important reasons for the tsunami response in Tamil Nadu receiving national and international acclaim was the open and highly accepting attitude of the State government. Welcoming Mr CV Sankar, OSD (R&R), Government of Tamil Nadu, she said that he was one of those in the government always accessible to all those working in the tsunami response ready to listen, to share and proactively suggest ideas. She welcomed Mr Tenkasi S. Jawahar, District Collector, Nagapattinam saying that his presence was an indicator of the constant support of the State government and the district administration. She said that Mr V. Vivekanandan would present the

47

recommendations that emerged over the last two days ranging from the pluses and minuses of organic agriculture to whether farmers moving out of agriculture reduced their vulnerability. Mr V.Vivekanandan, Steering Committee Member, NCRC, first gave an overview of what had been discussed over the various sessions before presenting the draft workshop recommendations: Policy level Recommendations:

1. There is an urgent requirement for a State Policy on Disaster management. It should not be left to the different actors to decide on the measures to be undertaken.

2. Need to recognize Nagapattinam as a disaster prone district with respect to Agriculture and in the context of climatic changes- Disaster Management Practices / guidelines for disaster management in agriculture to be developed for different types of crops and disasters

3. Disaster preparedness should necessarily be integrated into the long- term development of a sustainable and remunerative agriculture. Any development plan should necessarily include this component.

4. Relief response code followed is over two decades old and needs to be revisited and updated.

5. Compensation policies to be better designed to include not only loss of assets but also loss of livelihood. These to also focus on lease holders, tenant farmers, agricultural labourers

6. Guidelines to be updated for enumeration of affected land and people. Guidelines to also clarify means of accessing the rehabilitation packages. Mechanisms to be in- built to ensure transparency in provision of relief and rehabilitation.

7. All compensation and rehabilitation packages relating to farmer should come from within the perview of a single department, preferably the department of agriculture.

8. Capacity building for farmers and departmental officials in disaster management to be incorporated as regular component of extension services, especially in disaster prone areas

9. The synergy of public- private partnerships to be recognized and spaces made available for NGO/ CBO involvement in disaster management/ preparedness

10. Primary stakeholder consultations and participation to be ensured at all possible levels of disaster management planning and implementation

11. Shrimp farms/ salt pans and agricultural lands cannot co-exist; need to protect agriculture from any sources of salination/ contamination. Although there exist regulatory mechanisms to ensure this, there is a lack of enforcement of the same. Such regulatory mechanisms need to be enforced, especially in areas where there are chances of such shrimp farms affecting agriculture or drinking water sources.

48

12. Regulation of ground water extraction to be enforced. For eg. Overexploitation of ground water in rural areas to feed the drinking water demand of urban areas leading to salt water intrusion making the water non- usable for agricultural purposes.

13. Rural employment scheme should focus on long term developmental plans for major livelihoods like agri.

Operational Level recommendations Farm related:

1. Farming practices • Promotion of green manuring in-situ; increasing organic matter in soil • Integrated Nutrient Management and Integrated Farming System • Use of saline / flood tolerant crop varieties; local traditional varieties, traditional

varieties from other parts of India • Low external input agriculture and on-farm production of inputs to reduce farmer

vulnerabilities and reduce losses at times of disasters • Need for short duration crop varieties that suits drought/flood conditions • Importance of crop diversification & multiple cropping and alternative cropping

pattern • Farmers capacitated on and made well aware of contingency practices for the

various kinds of disaster, including land reclamation, availability of all inputs and crop management

• Given the fact that most marginal farmers also resort to working as agriculture labourers, they should be involved in NREP processes. There should also be a monitoring mechanism in place to ensure that the NREP scheme is operationalised as per the spirit and letter of the scheme.

2. Common infrastructures / Community based Institutional Mechanisms • Promotion of locally managed seed banks with appropriate infrastructure

provided by Govt./NGOs • Understanding local systems of seed exchange and purchase, plan for seed

support, develop data base of seed producing farmers and agro ecological matching of seeds

• Importance of organizing farmers for forward and backward linkages- like forming producers’ cooperatives/ empowering Farmers’ SHGs

• Collective farming practices to be encouraged to ensure economy of scale • Community based infrastructure to be made functional and handed over to the

community for maintenance with proper support mechanisms in place • Disaster preparedness to be recognized as one of the focus areas in these

community based organizations 3. Support structures

49

• Use of satellite images for disaster preparedness; GIS, data bases, flood simulation models, etc will help; greater need to make this information available in public domain

• Institutionalising farmer consultations and participation in all programmes • Department of Agriculture—NGO linkages to be strengthened and utilised for

providing extension services • Village knowledge centres, etc. to be made logical nodal points for such

extension/ capacity building/ resource centres • Social security nets like insurance to be customized for such specific areas • Disaster responses of financial institutions to be revisited and suitably modified 4. Physical Infrastructure • A comprehensive study to identify the factors that increase the effect of disasters

with specific reference to the defunct drainage and irrigation infrastructure • Comprehensive and multi- sectoral approach to reduce these factors that vitiate

disasters • Identification and revival of traditional drainage and irrigation channels; tackling

issues like encroachments • Maintenance of traditional water bodies/ irrigation and drainage channels • Protecting farms from salt water coming from the sea during storm surges, high

waves, etc.; bio shields, sand dunes, etc. • Construction of other infrastructures like check dams, dykes etc. to protect farms

from back water inundation/ salination • Increasing water harvesting and water recharging structures

Mr CV Sankar released the pilot study conducted by NCRC titled “Understanding Vulnerability of Agricultural Communities to frequent Disasters and Coping Mechanisms -A sample study of Tsunami affected agricultural villages in Nagapattinam district” and the copies were received by Mr Tenkasi S. Jawahar, District Collector. Ms Annie George called for comments and suggestions from the participants on the recommendations presented by Mr Vivekanandan. Mr Rabindranath from Assam made a suggestion about land reforms especially in the light of extensive encroachments and also made a plea for the revitalization of traditional water bodies. Mr Chandra Mohan of NCRC said that capacity building in different forms specifically for the farmers and for all stakeholders in general should be added to the list of recommendations. Ms Annie George then requested Mr Sankar to say a few words. Mr CV Sankar began by saying that the recommendations put together and read out by Mr Vivekanandan had made some very relevant points that indicated the need for certain kinds of action from the government’s side. He said that the State government

50

had immensely benefited from the insights brought in by NCRC and the organizations in the rehabilitation programme. He said that Ms George had mentioned the openness of the government in terms of accepting the suggestions but since the suggestions were not biased and were driven by the interests of the people, and put forth after considerable deliberations and consultations with committed people, the suggestions were worthy of immediate consideration. Some of the government programmes were modified accordingly and agriculture was a specific instance of that. He explained how the packages were evolved after detailed discussion with many people including the MSSRF, Department of Agriculture, TNAU etc. The package was criticized saying that it had nothing but gypsum. They did not agree with that and also cautioned the Agriculture Department that each field should be taken individually for reclamation. Each particular plot required a different type of treatment and soil testing had to be done to create individual packages. The heavy rains also helped in reclamation. He was happy to hear that the yield also had increased post-tsunami and said that while the ‘build back better’ phrase was being repeated ad nauseum, this was perhaps one example where it worked. It was known the three year recovery period that had been originally suggested would not really be required and it has been found in 80-85% of the areas the recovery has been quick. This should not allow us to be complacent as Nagapattinam farmers either receive too much water, or too little water or salt water. They are at the wrong end of the canal system. A whole range of initiatives as mentioned in the recommendations are required to help them out, and time, money and resources should be put into each one of them, whether it is organic farming, desilting canals or improvement to the traditional water bodies. The Collector had enormous scope in linking up many government programmes with this such as the Rashtriya Sam Vikas Yojana that could be used to rejuvenate traditional water bodies. Rural development programmes such as SGRY could be used to create assets to use them to desilt channels etc. Some such as putting regulators in canals to prevent ingress of sea water required greater investment and the Department of Agriculture had given in a proposal to be funded by the World Bank to study what was to be done for agriculture in Nagapattinam. This study would enable arrival at certain measures including concrete measures such as engineering solutions as well as others including capacity building. He emphasized that the Department of Agriculture should give importance to organic farming techniques as they are better especially from environmental and long term point of view. He also referred to the problem of shrimp farms and said that his understanding was that it was fresh water aquaculture that was the norm in most countries. He opined that NCRC and Mr Vivekanandan would have some ideas on this and emphasized the need to ensure that the livelihoods of the people would be protected and the environment not compromised - such as by the possible use of plastic sheets to control seepage. With reference to the salt resistant varieties and traditional varieties, more details are needed as well as information from field demonstrations. With regard to GIS, ISRO had done a huge study on what happened during the tsunami and the floods down to the cadastral level. A suggestion has been made regarding a MoU with ISRO and NCRC about sharing of this information and making it available in the public domain. Currently the maps are available with the District Collector – they can give an accurate picture of the lands that have been salinated so that one could check if anyone

51

had been left out, as well as preventive measures that need to be taken. He was looking at the Agriculture Department to link up the GIS maps with local contour maps to give an idea of the exact status of the area to give a programme of concrete work that could be carried out. With reference to vulnerability maps, Mr Sankar said that the Department of Ocean Development’s Project Directorate in Chennai was the agency with a grant from the DST that had developed vulnerability maps for the 13 coastal districts of TN. They had also got the survey field numbers and after juxtaposing the two, the exact fields that were inundated by the tsunami should be available. This could be a starting point for beginning vulnerability analysis. The Department of Environment had been mandated to produce a vulnerability map for coastal area management. There was a lot of stakeholder participation built into the process. While having people close to the sea, there could be barriers in the form of sand dunes, shelter belts etc. Simultaneously there could be early warning systems that allow people to move away in the event of a disaster. Reducing vulnerability is what has to be aimed at and the minimizing of loss of lives and livelihoods of coastal people. He said that food banks may not be concepts relevant to TN because of the extensive PDS system and the communications system. There is a scope for improving on a continuing basis various forward and backward linkages. He talked about the community based committees and said that they were probably the best way of tackling disaster preparedness. Warning systems were of no use if they did not reach the last person in the line. TN has a UNDP sponsored disaster risk management programme in six districts to be extended to all 13 coastal districts. A detailed task force plan had been prepared by the Nagapattinam Collectorate on a village basis on the different facilities available. The Disaster Risk Management Programme has to be done with the participation of everyone, including children, through curriculum and the psyche itself. Indians are risk takers by nature and as a culture, and if this changed, it was good for everyone. With reference to land reforms, it started in the seventies. The Collector has the powers with regard to clearing channels as the example provided from Nagapattinam showed. But this has to be done on a continuing basis. The tsunami taught a lot of things including learning to work with NGOs, learning to look at communities and people closely. The government gave money for hitherto unheard of expenses such as recanalization operations in women who had lost their children in the tsunami. This came up because of the feedback and the constant dialogue taking place between the people and the government. Mr Sankar said that he hoped that we would be able to build on the knowledge gained in the last one and a half years. He made a special mention of the positive role played by the media who saw how the Collector and the other officials, politicians and NGOs were working day and night and bringing out the right kind of stories that showed how the people were coming out of the disaster. Ms Annie George thanked Mr Sankar for his reactive and pro active words. She then asked the District Collector, Mr Tenkasi S Jawahar to address the gathering.

52

Mr Jawahar started by saying “all has been said and now all will be done”. The District Administration would extend full cooperation in getting all things done. The tsunami had thrown up many challenges and changes in direction in the thinking process. Traditionally NGOs always looked at the government, government departments and government officials with a lot of scepticism. On the other hand, the government officials looked at NGOs with a lot of distrust. Now this had changed. He concluded by saying that there were a lot of examples of public-private partnerships and the government, NGOs and the public would work together as a team for the benefit of the country. The programme ended with Mr Chandra Mohan proposing a vote of thanks on behalf of NCRC, Concern Worldwide and the NGOs working in Nagapattinam in agriculture reclamation.

53