A scathing report from the Committee on Estimates (2024-25), chaired by Dr. Sanjay Jaiswal, has cast a critical eye on India's agricultural policies, exposing significant shortcomings in the nation's push for climate-resilient agriculture and the promotion of natural and organic farming.
While acknowledging some commendable initiatives, the report, titled "Promotion of Climate Resilient Agriculture, Natural and Organic Farming through KVKs," delivers a stark warning: without urgent and substantial reforms in funding, implementation, and infrastructure, India's agricultural future, particularly for its most vulnerable farmers, remains precarious.
Climate Adaptation: A Half-Hearted Commitment?
The report highlights a deeply concerning disconnect between the identified scale of climate vulnerability and the actual on-ground adaptation efforts. While the National Innovations in Climate Resilient Agriculture (NICRA) project is lauded for its impressive 95% fund utilization rate (₹219.25 crore out of ₹231.85 crore over five years), this efficiency masks a critical flaw: a severely limited budget.
"Despite conducting risk assessments for 573 out of 651 agricultural districts, which revealed 310 districts as 'very highly vulnerable' or 'highly vulnerable' to climate change, NICRA's adaptation activities have only reached a mere 151 of these high-risk areas," the report states. This leaves a staggering number of vulnerable regions exposed, directly imperiling agricultural livelihoods. The Committee strongly advocates for a "phased and rotational approach" and, more importantly, a "substantial increase in funding for NICRA" to truly match the immense scale of the climate challenge. The current commitment, it implies, is simply not enough.
Slow Progress on Sustainable Seeds and Natural Farming
While the development of climate-resilient seed varieties under NICRA is a positive step, the report identifies significant barriers to their widespread adoption. Low farmer awareness, slow uptake, and inadequate distribution networks are hindering progress. The Committee's recommendations for decentralized seed hubs, aggressive awareness campaigns, and better coordination among stakeholders underscore a perceived lack of urgency and effectiveness in current dissemination strategies.
Similarly, the push for Natural Farming (NF), a chemical-free approach, faces its own set of hurdles. Despite the National Mission on Natural Farming (NMNF) and promising results from pilot projects (showing 3% to 55% reduction in cultivation costs), the report points to a critical flaw: "concerns regarding stable income persist, posing a barrier to widespread NF adoption." This highlights a fundamental oversight in financial security for transitioning farmers.
Furthermore, a particularly damning observation reveals that some Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs), intended as beacons of agricultural innovation, are "still primarily engaged in chemical farming with limited NF demonstrations." This suggests a disconnect between policy ambitions and ground-level execution, raising questions about the effectiveness of existing directives.
Organic Transition: Underfunded and Undermined
India's ambition for a broader shift to organic farming is also reportedly hampered by insufficient support. While schemes like PKVY and MOVCDNER exist, the Committee believes the current financial assistance of ₹31,500 to ₹46,500 per hectare over three years "might not be sufficient to fully alleviate the financial strain farmers experience during the first three to four years, a period in which yields tend to be lower and the economic burden heavier."
The report calls for increased direct financial incentives, extended support periods, and stronger market linkages with premium pricing for organic produce. It critically suggests that the PM-PRANAM scheme, aimed at reducing chemical fertilizer use, should adopt a "performance-based grants incentive structure" to truly motivate states, implying the current model lacks sufficient teeth to drive meaningful change.
Even the much-lauded Sikkim Model of organic farming, while successful, faces challenges like high labour costs, difficult terrain, and a "shortage of essential organic inputs, particularly bio-fertilizers." This reveals a systemic weakness in supporting the very foundation of organic agriculture.
Certification Chaos and Cold Storage Stagnation
The report takes aim at the existing organic certification processes, NPOP and PGS-India, stating that while effective, they can be "complex and expensive, posing a significant barrier for smaller farmers." The lack of a unified organic label further complicates market confidence. The Committee's recommendations for simplification, reduced costs, financial assistance, and full digitization underscore the current cumbersome nature of these vital processes.
On cold storage infrastructure, despite the success of a PPP model for onions (reducing losses from 40-60% to less than 15%), the report notes a "limited" adoption for other perishable crops. This points to a failure in scaling up successful models, leaving vast quantities of fruits, vegetables, and high-value crops vulnerable to post-harvest losses. The call for more financial incentives for private sector participation and research into crop-specific technologies highlights a current inertia in addressing this critical bottleneck.
Pesticides: A Perilous Persistence
Perhaps one of the most alarming revelations in the report is the "serious concerns about the excessive and irresponsible use of pesticides" and the "persistently high levels of pesticide residues found in various food products," including vegetables, grains, fruits, and even milk and eggs.
Despite the Ministry's stated efforts to promote safe practices and bio-pesticides, the Committee expressed "dissatisfaction with the Ministry's inability to effectively implement these recommendations," leading to continued overuse. Even the "Monitoring of Pesticide Residues at the National Level (MPRNL)" project, running since 2005-06, has apparently failed to curb the detection of harmful residues.
The report demands "immediate and effective action" to better implement safety recommendations and "strengthen the enforcement of provisions under the Insecticides Act, 1968," to protect public health. This suggests that existing regulations are either weakly enforced or simply inadequate.
Adding to this, the proliferation of counterfeit pesticides is identified as a significant threat. The report highlights an alarming low conviction rate for offenses related to "misbranded" insecticides, with only 185 convictions out of 2,588 prosecutions from 2019-2024. This abysmal record underscores the urgent need for "stringent penalties" and a complete overhaul of the Insecticides Act, 1968, to deter offenders effectively.
KVKs: Understaffed, Underfunded, and Underperforming?
The report paints a worrying picture of Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs), the very institutions tasked with agricultural extension and farmer empowerment. The last comprehensive ranking was a decade ago (2012-2017), with 9% of KVKs falling into "underperforming" categories due to "vacant staff positions and incomplete infrastructure."
The Committee's demand for a "periodic district-wise ranking system" and consistent performance reviews signals a current lack of accountability and targeted support. While acknowledging a slight increase in KVK budget allocations, the report labels the funding trajectory "insufficient for the growing demands". The proposed ₹2,500 crore one-time grant is dismissed as a "short-term patch" that fails to address "the underlying issue of underfunding." The Committee calls for a "robust and consistent funding strategy with long-term vision", warning that without it, KVKs "will be unable to keep pace with infrastructure and technological demands."
Perhaps most critically, the report reveals a "critical staff shortage at KVKs, with approximately 30% of positions unfilled, totalling around 3,500 vacancies." This crippling shortage directly impairs KVKs' ability to provide expert guidance and support fto armers. The Committee’s insistence on an "immediate recruitment drive" and the need for specialists in emerging technologies like AI and precision agriculture underscores the severe human resource deficit.
Finally, the "lack of standardization in the service conditions" across KVK employees, leading to disparities and potential morale issues, further compounds the operational inefficiencies. The Committee strongly recommends immediate action to standardize service conditions across all KVKs, including making uniformity a "mandatory precondition" for grant-in-aid.
AI and "Lab to Land": Potential Unlocked?
The report commends efforts to integrate AI and digital technologies for climate resilience, recognizing their potential for real-time information and precision farming. However, it implicitly warns that this potential remains largely untapped due to barriers like affordability, user-friendliness, and inadequate internet connectivity in rural areas. The call for partnerships with tech companies and extensive training programs highlights the gap between aspiration and practical implementation.
Similarly, while "Lab to Land" initiatives have yielded positive results, the Committee emphasizes the crucial need for "consistent follow-up support" for long-term adoption, suggesting that current support mechanisms are insufficient.
In essence, the Committee on Estimates' report serves as a critical wake-up call, urging the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare to move beyond piecemeal solutions and embrace a comprehensive, well-funded, and strategically executed approach to secure India's agricultural future against the escalating challenges of climate change. The path forward, it implies, requires not just more initiatives, but a fundamental reassessment of current strategies and a renewed commitment to the nation's farmers.