Marginal farmers are becoming unwitting pawns in the Govt’s cost-cutting process as they are staring at the MSP going down on one hand and negotiating with big corporates on the other
The recently-passed three farm laws — the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, the Farmer’s Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act and Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act — have catapulted India’s agricultural sector into national news. The three Act, which have received both parliamentary and presidential assent, ostensibly seek to change the condition of the beleaguered farmers for the better. However, the Acts have run into rough weather in a short span of time as the farming community does not seem to agree with the Government’s views.
However, the fact of the matter is that on paper, they allow the farmers to sell their produce outside the APMCs without paying any necessary taxes to the Government. The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act on the other hand facilitates contract farming and direct marketing. The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act deregulates the production, storage, movement and sale of several major food items such as cereals, pulses, edible oils, onion and so on. With major changes pertaining to the way agricultural produce is marketed, sold and stored, the Government maintains that these Acts will improve the conditions of the farmers.
However, the farmer community across India seems to think otherwise and one of the main concerns of the growers is the ambiguity regarding continued protection of the Minimum Support Price (MSP) and Government procurement of the produce. The farmers also want the MSP regime to be extended outside the APMC market so that the MSP is observed as a minimum floor price, whether the farmer chooses to sell to a private buyer or a Government one. Adding to the dissent against the Acts is the tussle between the Centre and States as some non-BJP ruled States have pointed out that agriculture is a State subject and the Centre has no locus-standi to take a decision on the same. Amid protests by farmers’ organisations across the country, the Governments of Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra and Punjab have said they might not implement the new laws while Kerala and Punjab intend to challenge them in the Supreme Court. In fact, Congress MP from Kerala, Prathapan TN, has already done so.
As the debate rages regarding the Acts and their impact on growers, one cannot help but notice how many other issues plaguing the farmers are being ignored. Marginal farmers with small tracts of land are possibly the worst affected as they neither have the quantum produce nor the financial muscle to bypass low-balled offers on their produce and wait for better quotes. These marginal farmers are not directly benefitted by these Acts as they are not extricated from the vice-like grip of the money lenders. It is these entities who most of the time are the reason why growers end their lives as they are unable to come out of the never-ending debt cycle. The Acts may have all the good intentions of the Government behind them but they may also usher in bigger private players with considerable financial heft into the agricultural produce market dynamics. This may further diminish the say of the marginal farmers whose negotiating powers would get eclipsed by the dealings between big buyers and big producers.
The architects of these farm “reforms” seem to have entirely missed the medium and small farmers and their woes. The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) statistics show that in 2019 about 10,000 farmers committed suicide due to agrarian distress. This colossal loss of life is not an issue to gloss over especially when a national policy with lasting impact is being drafted. But that is what has happened.
Instead of strengthening the middle and lower rung farmers with a slew of special measures aimed at stemming the suicide rates and instilling confidence, the Acts actually direct their attention towards making the playing field more suitable for bigger players while marginalising small stakeholders further. How these apparent woes of the small farmers escaped the Government’s attention is unclear.
Through these Acts, the Government is not only trying to bring down its financial costs by gradually limiting the MSP but also driving down storage costs at the Food Corporation of India (FCI) warehouses. However, the marginal farmers are becoming unwitting pawns in this cost-cutting process as they are staring at the major possibility of the MSP going down on one hand and negotiating as equals with big corporates on the other hand. More likely than not the small farmers will be dictated terms by the big players on a “take it or leave it basis.”
Yet another hurdle facing the farmers is their lack of education and awareness, which stops them from organising themselves into a meaningful forum that can put forward their opinion in one voice. As a result, this hard-working community that forms the spine of India falls prey to dodgy schemes of political parties which aim at leveraging their suffering for personal gain. A more intriguing aspect of this entire episode is the speed with which these Bills went through the draft stage and approval in a remarkably short time, including presidential assent.
The moot question in such a situation is why were the farmers not given time to respond and convey their concerns? Is this the way a Government in a large democracy like ours should take decisions regarding a sector which is the mainstay of our economy? Because about 60 per cent of our population depend directly or indirectly on agriculture and contribute about 16 per cent to the country’s Gross Domestic Product. Plus, the farm sector provides raw materials to the major industries and India earns foreign exchange by exporting agricultural products. So, would it not have been prudent to involve all the stakeholders before bringing in these Acts? Only the Government can answer these questions.
The farm reforms were a great opportunity to provide a much-needed balance to the Indian crop calendar besides ensuring protection of the environment. The choice of crops over time in the country has become lopsided in growers’ preference for a certain category of crops that are water-intensive. This has not only resulted in unequal prosperity among the farming community but is also contributing to environmental degradation and water shortage.
There is an urgent need to divert the efforts and the precious finances of the farmers towards other non-water intensive crops so that the excess production of rice, sugar and wheat is adequately counterbalanced with non-water intensive crops such as pulses and oilseeds whose reserves are noticeably less.
Too much focus on water-intensive crops such as paddy and wheat over the past decades has resulted in the Indian agricultural system drawing nearly 89 per cent of the ground water. To make matters worse, the provision of incentives from the Government in the form of free electricity has resulted in over-exploitation of ground water and has put the country’s future water security in major jeopardy. The subsidised canal water facilities provided by the Government have added to the problem.
The fact that water-intensive crops such as paddy and wheat consume nearly 10 times the water needed for oilseed and pulse crops and around 500-600 litres of water is required to produce one kilogram of grain has to be taken seriously. This extreme consumption is inadvisable for the environment which is struggling to bridge the gap between demand and supply of precious water resources that are increasingly becoming stressed. In order to diversify crop choice, protect natural resources and ensure environmental resilience, the Government must set up policies that, instead of depending on the prices based on the previous year’s production period, are based on the MSP that is backed by enough procurement. This will enable the farmers to take acreage decisions based on the MSP rather than basing their decisions on last year’s prices. For this precise reason, the MSP is critical and the fact that it might get impacted due to the farm Acts is an unsettling aspect.
Government policy plays an important role in providing much-needed confidence to farmers, be it in the form of extending stable prices, assured procurement or weeding out bottlenecks pertaining to finances. An efficiently-drafted and implemented policy can also safeguard the environment by rationalising the use of natural resources and curbing their exploitation.
The three farm Acts have put the spotlight on the agri-sector which is besieged by challenges for farmers and implications for the environment. The Acts could have provided innovative ecological solutions for the farm sector besides seeking to solve some of the chronic problems facing the Indian growers. Sadly, this has not happened.
(The writer is an environmental journalist)
