The Hindu Business Line : Farm sector unlikely to witness dramatic change

Advertisement

Mumbai Feb. 28 Buckling under continual attack from all directions over its inability to contain inflation, fuelled mainly by shortage of essential food products, the Government seems to be keen to project a pro-poor image. Agriculture is the main challenge, according to the Finance Minister, Mr P. Chidambaram.

No wonder, agriculture is back in fashion.

Why else should the Finance Minister, half way through his 100-minutes Budget speech, draw the attention of the Speaker saying: "Mr Speaker, Sir, I have devoted the last 20 minutes to agriculture. There is no dearth of schemes; there is no dearth of funds. What needs to be done is to deliver the intended outcomes".

If there, indeed, is no dearth of schemes and funds, the Finance Minister ought to have addressed the most critical question - what are the intended outcomes and who will deliver them? Delivery of benefits has been a vexatious issue for many years; and is usually shoved under the carpet. It is time political parties across-the-board came together to evolve a consensus over how to strengthen the farm sector that has grown at a paltry average of 2.3 per cent a year in the Tenth Five Year Plan, little changed from 2.2 per cent of the Ninth FYP.

With rising demand (driven essentially by higher incomes and demographic pressure) and rising prices, food security is increasingly being perceived as the responsibility of the Central Government, while under the Constitution, "agriculture" is a "State" subject. States have to play a more proactive role in promoting farming and related activities. The disconnect between the Centre and the States in the matter of agricultural development needs to be bridged. A national consensus alone can help advance the interests of agriculturists.

It is not that these issues have cropped up overnight. Problems of fragmented landholding, dependence on rain-fed cultivation, inadequate irrigation facilities, low input usage, antiquated agronomic practices and lack of rural infrastructure have been waiting for policy responses for long years.

A number of proposals, with the objective to improve the economic viability of farming and ensure that farmers earn a minimum net income, have been mooted in the Budget. These include enhanced total farm credit with wider coverage of beneficiaries, higher allocation for irrigation and water management, training of farmers, agricultural insurance, rural infrastructure and so on.

One of the specific proposals mooted is the scaling up of the production of breeder, foundation and certified seeds in order to raise the production and productivity of pulses. While this is a welcome step, there are structural and agronomic problems faced by pulses growers including use of marginal lands, rainfed cultivation and pest attacks.

In a candid admission of failure, the Finance Minister said, "Sadly, the extension system seems to have collapsed". Again, the collapse of the system has been happening gradually over years because of official apathy. The complaint of most farmers is that extension workers are seldom seen on farms.

By their very nature, results from investments in and policy initiatives for the farm sector will take time to materialise. But the economy is growing so rapidly that supply-side constraints have become acute. Again, the extant supply-side constraints are the accumulated result of years of indifference.

Clearly, the Budget exercise of the Finance Minister, however well intended, is unlikely to bring any dramatic change to the agriculture sector.