Agriculture is considered the backbone of the Indian economy. For informed decision-making in the agriculture sector, research and development is pivotal. It played a crucial role in the green revolution that brought the country out of its food shortage. With emerging new challenges such as climate change, the role of R&D in agriculture has acquired even greater significance. Ashok Gulati, a renowned agriculturist and distinguished professor, ICRIER shares his insights on the importance of increased spending on R&D and reflects on what ails the research institutions in India. He says that ICAR needs to be reorganized and out-of-the-box solutions adopted to give impetus to commercial orientation of research institutions in order to make them self-sufficient. On climate resilient seeds released by the government, he says that it should be supplemented by a robust mechanism to reach the farmers. Gulati says that to shift farmers in Punjab and Haryana from paddy to other crops, an equivalent amount of benefit and same market reliability should be ensured by the government.
Q/ It was expected that the allocation for R&D in agriculture will go up in the Union budget, but it was marginal. Your views?
A/ Instead of looking just at the absolute, one should look at the per cent of agri-GDP, which is also important. It is generally believed that developing countries should have at least one per cent of agri-GDP spent on agri-R&D. In the new budget, it is about 0.42 per cent even after including the states share, which is very less. Given the climate change, you need more in research, which the government has somehow postponed.
Q/ You mentioned climate change. Do you think that agricultural research in India addresses the emerging challenges posed by it?
A/ That is what the entire attempt is. There are two things: one is creating a climate-resilient agriculture through seeds. The other is improving farming practices through climate-smart agriculture by conserving moisture, using technologies like drip irrigation etc. These are the things on which investments have to be made to remain stable in terms of our production and ensure stability in agricultural prices.
Q/ One of the focus areas of the now-repealed farm laws was to change the farming practices in Punjab, specifically where the water levels are going down. Do you think the reluctance of the farming community to shift to improved farming practices is a hindrance?
A/ The farm laws were not targeted as much towards changing the production basket but to give farmers a better share so that there could be more predictability in the market rather than drop-of-a-hat changes brought about by export controls. To reduce the market risk was the objective. But in terms of solving the problem of Punjab and Haryana, a different approach is required. The subsidy to a paddy farmer from power, canal water and fertilizers, particularly urea on per hectare basis comes to about Rs 39,000 per hectare.
Now, if you want the Punjabi farmer to switch from paddy to pulses you have to give the same incentive and at least same profit with same market reliability. If you do not provide an equivalent amount of benefit for the next five years then I do not see Punjabi farmers shifting from paddy to anything else. The Centre and the states can divide 50:50. Power subsidies can be saved by the states and fertilizer subsidy by the Centre as pulses do not need that much of water and fertilizer. Basically, you can reward them for not creating any greenhouse gas emissions and nitrogen fixing themselves.
Q/ Coming back to research, a standing committee report recommended right sizing of ICAR from 113 to 75. Is it right-sizing or downsizing?
A/ ICAR needs to be reorganised. It is in the same situation as Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR). There were 15 of them and each needed a directorate, building, administration, directors, their perks. So, the idea was to consolidate. The case is same with ICAR. The idea is to club them together and reduce the number from 113 to 75 so that you can save on the administrative and infrastructural costs. So, it's not downsizing. It's basically consolidating.
Q/ What about Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs). They are in bad shape financially and struggling to pay for salaries. How difficult the situation becomes in such a case in terms of research?
A/ China was suffering from a similar situation. They decided to use huge land of agricultural institutes to come out of this situation. They created buildings including 30-year maintenance and turned those lands into revenue making places. In India, nobody talks about rationalising the use of that land. If you go to the protected cultivation area of Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), Pusa in Delhi, you see that it is not being used even 30 per cent. They have the resources but not using it properly because of the lack of working capital, salaries or cash. They should learn how to create cash. In the budget if your tax revenue doesn't match with what you want to spend, then what do you do? You either create finances or you sell some of the public sector enterprises who are not performing well. That's how you create money. You have to think out of the box like selling some of the seed technologies that you're developing to private sector and charge them some royalty. Commercial orientation of ICAR is lacking. The present attitude, therefore, is that the government will give the money and there is no accountability on whether the officials perform or not. But times have changed.
Q/ How can we reconcile traditional farming knowledge with agricultural research?
A: Farmers should be free to adopt whatever they like and whatever gives them good profit and sustainability. Natural farming which is traditional knowledge used before the Green Revolution could not produce enough to feed our people and we were on the verge of starvation. Natural farming is justified only if it can give the same productivity or marginally lower. No farmer wants to accept lower profits. Everybody wants to maximise their income, which can come in 2-3 ways. One, increase productivity by investing in R&D. Second, if you can’t give seeds to farmers, at least give them irrigation stability. Third, if you want farmers to move to high revenue agriculture, you should ensure a robust end-to-end value chain because it's not just about production but also about managing distribution and markets. Farmers face a lot of risk due to fluctuation in prices. So, you need to create a proper value chain.
Q/ How does agricultural research impacts farmers' livelihood?
A/ It can help with climate resilience as farmers learn from each other. They follow each other's good work. However, the systems have to be robust. The Centre claims they have developed climate-resilient seeds. If we have so many varieties, why did our production drop last year when there was a heat wave and our agriculture GDP collapsed from 4.7 to 1.4 per cent? Even if you have those varieties in your labs, they are not reaching the farmers' land. It needs massive extension work. Who will do that? That is the job of the KVKs. But they don’t have money for their own salaries, what can you expect from them?
