Maharashtra may have reconciled with farmers but our agricultural policy needs an overhaul
The Devendra Fadnavis government may have agreed to take care of distressed farmers in Maharashtra by addressing their issues in a three-month window but this seems to be a pyrrhic response to a forcing of hands. The acquiescence to their demands for loan waivers, drought insurance and enhanced minimum support price (MSP) overlooks the larger systemic overhaul required in the agricultural economy across the country. For the recurrent protests by thousands marching into Mumbai — the third time in a year — are but symptomatic of a larger malaise that is gathering momentum as a key election issue. Punjab and Karnataka are also witnessing a resurgence of farmer agitations. And despite the firing on a farmers’ protest rally at Mandsaur about a year ago, little seems to have changed on the ground there.
Already burdened by a heavy debt, the existing MSP isn’t enough for the farmers to attempt a recovery. Besides record production of some crops, like the garlic glut in Rajasthan, has put a severe pressure on the price index and fuelled the demand for a higher support price or a government buyout. In Madhya Pradesh, a scheme was introduced to compensate farmers for losses incurred by selling crops at lower prices. But with compensation tied to sales within a defined window and traders using this insurance as an argument to not raise prices in the market, it encouraged distress selling of even high value crops. Which is why protesting farmers across the country are not happy with state-level interventions but insisting upon increasing the base line of the MSP. Loan repayment is a tall order as the agro-capital market, thinly banked and wholly dependent on liquidity and lending by both farmers and traders, is yet to fully recover from the effects of demonetisation. Traders still get away with cartelisation and keep the pressure on prices, argue farmers. Drought has driven farmers in Maharashtra almost to the brink of suicide, that too at a time when the monsoon has been generally satisfactory. But ‘waterman’ Rajendra Singh’s decision to join the protesters gives credence to the theory that this problem has been largely man-made and is a policy lapse that needs to be factored in any revival strategy. Of course, there is the larger issue of implementing the Swaminathan Commission recommendations which prioritise farmers’ control over resources, including land, water, insurance, knowledge management and markets. It had suggested that agriculture be included in the concurrent list, putting the onus on both the Centre and the states. Many protesters in Maharashtra were tribals, who are seeking stakeholdership of forests and their produce and decision-making rights on the commercial exploitation of their natural wealth. Already pilot projects by Central organisations like TRIFED have shown how coopting them in harnessing forest produce and processing at the local level have given them greater leverage in markets. Besides, the needs of the agricultural economy have now moved far ahead of the Commission findings. MNREGA has meant there is a shortage of farm labour while global competitiveness has meant there are technological upgrades in crop-growing patterns, rotations and R&D. An agro-linked industry chain has to be worked out linking procurement, distribution and warehousing. We must also understand that with farmers’ anxiety becoming the new normal, the farming community will parachute out with non-farming alternatives and secure greater value of their land. So no matter which political party champions the cause of farmers’ rights, fact is nobody can selectively tom-tom agenda points. Rescuing the agricultural economy must be a national revival mission now.