The economic loss to farmers has been huge: Devinder Sharma

Make farming viable

The lockdown, imposed during the crucial rabi harvest season, has led to huge suffering for farmers in the country. In an interview with DH’s Anitha Pailoor, noted agricultural economist Devinder Sharma talks about the scale of the problem, its reasons, and the measures the government can take to avert a crisis.

Follow latest updates on the COVID-19 pandemic here

Farmers are among the worst-hit from the lockdown, despite them being allowed to continue farm work and sell their produce...

Agriculture cannot be kept in a lockdown condition. Unlike the industry, where you can pull down the shutter and three months later pull it up and start production, agriculture is a continuous process. If all these factors had been taken into consideration at the time of imposing a lockdown perhaps agriculture would have escaped the kind of suffering farmers have been encountering. The relaxations came subsequently when the policy makers began to realise the importance of keeping food supply chain intact. Even then, it took a lot of time before the implementation of these orders/notifications could be ensured at the ground level.

Even two weeks later, the movement of labour is still not easy, and in the absence of transportation facilities from the villages to the mandis and so on, farmers are bearing the brunt.

Also Read: Coronavirus Lockdown spared no thought for the rural sector

Take the case of combine harvester machines and other agricultural machinery in operation... the closure of repair shops means farmers can’t use them. When the orders came to open the repair shops, the police wouldn’t easily allow farmers to go to the mechanics. Numerous such hiccups have been and are still being encountered by farmers. But things have certainly started to improve with the passage of time. Now we see the combine harvester machines for instance moving easily (with safeguards) to Haryana and Punjab.

Numerous reports of farmers re-ploughing their fields or feeding the produce to the animals have come in...

The lockdown coincided with the harvesting of rabi crops. This is a time when farm activity is at its peak. With the closure of mandis at many places, and with demand from hotels, restaurants, dhabas crashing, farmers were left with no buyers.

We have seen reports of farmers feeding their produce to cattle, reploughing fields by running a tractor over the ripened crop; reploughing the flower fields, trashing flowers; throwing milk in the water channels and so on. In addition, fruits like Alphonso mangoes, grapes, oranges had to be destroyed at many places in the absence of buyers. In a way, the food supply chain had got disconnected because of the lockdown. The demand crashed and the resulting economic loss to farmers has been huge. So while there was no problem with production, farmers paid a heavy price, consumer had to shell out extra. Perishables like fruits, vegetables, milk, and fish suffered a big hit.

Also Read: Coronavirus impact: Food security at risk as crisis engulfs farmers

Should there be a separate plan for the small, marginal and landless farmers who form the majority?

While I agree that extraordinary crisis require extraordinary measures, perhaps the damage to farmers, mostly small farmers, could have been minimised. A separate plan to regulate farming, allowing the movement of labour, opening up of input shops/suppliers of fertilisers, pesticides and mechanic shops, opening of vegetable markets, allowing the free movement of vehicles carrying farm produce etc should have been prescribed earlier. Subsequently, the government did well to ease these norms. Knowing that the coronavirus affected the urban population first, adequate safety norms for villages could have been prescribed, while keeping agriculture out of lockdown conditions. Panchayats and district administration could have been entrusted with the responsibility to operationalise the farm activities.

What should be the immediate priority of the government during the lockdown and afterwards?

The way Punjab and Haryana governments have announced wheat procurement to begin in Punjab and Haryana, shows the way forward. Punjab has doubled the procurement centres from the existing 1,820 to nearly 4,000, by including rice mills as temporary purchase centres to reduce the footfall in mandis; Haryana has increased purchase centres from the existing 477 to 2,000. Similarly, Telangana has announced that it will depute the official machinery to make purchases of the rice harvest right in the villages.

Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh too have announced appropriate measures. These are steps in the right direction.

Also Read: Coronavirus India update: State-wise total number of confirmed cases, deaths

What is the way forward for the farming sector?

While people across the country are confined to their homes, the only immediate requirement they have is for food – that too three times a day. The unprecedented reverse migration that the country has seen also brings to fore how crucial is the role of food when daily wages get snapped. This will perhaps bring back the focus on how to sustain the farming sector, how to ensure that farmers continue to produce food for such a huge large population.

We need to make agriculture economically viable. The Economic Survey 2016 had pointed out that average farm income in 17 states - roughly half the country - was only Rs 20,000 a year, or less than Rs 1,700 per month. This has to change.

I have two suggestions: During the lock down, agriculture too needs an economic stimulus. Provide at least Rs 6,000 (and add tenant farmers to the list) as a one-time package to farmers, under the PM-Kisan scheme. This is in addition to the yearly provision of Rs 6,000 made for the year. Similarly, the provision of Rs 500 per month for the next three months in the Jan Dhan accounts should be raised by three times, and include male beneficiaries too.

Second, set up a Commission for Farmers Income and Welfare, with the
mandate to provide farmers with at least an assured monthly income equalling the income of the lowest government functionary.