The lack of remunerative prices for the crops is one of the main reasons for Agrarian distress in India today. The various options like Minimum Support Price for about 25 crops, Farm Loan Waiver schemes undertaken by various state governments have failed to alleviate the problem. The NSSO Situation Assessment Survey of Agricultural Households (2013) shows that 52% of farming households are indebted, with rates as high as 89-92% in some States.

Body:

Direct Cash/Intervention Scheme:  This involves the Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) of the cash to the farmers.

• It can be enforced to include almost all the farmers who have access to formal banking channels (Jan-Dhan Accounts).
• Provides financial help at proper time/ season and would also spur the investment cycle in the farm economy.
• Helps large as well as small farmers and can even be capped to limit unwarrantedly huge transfers to rich farmers.
• The corruption issue can be eliminated as farmers directly get the cash in their accounts.

Examples of Direct Intervention Schemes:

• Pradhan Mantri Kisan Samman Nidhi will provide assured income to small and marginal farmers. The amount will be transferred directly into their account in 3 equal instalments. With this decision, all land holding eligible farmer families (subject to the prevalent exclusion criteria) would avail of the benefits under this scheme. It would not only provide assured supplemental income to the most vulnerable farmer families, but would also meet their emergent needs especially before the harvest season.
• The Telangana government’s income/investment support through the Rythu Bandhu Scheme (RBS). Telangana started RBS in May 2018, whereby it gave Rs 4,000 per acre to every farmer. This transfer is made twice a year, coinciding with the two cropping seasons. By directly giving cash, the government aims to support the input purchases of farmers. The scheme is said to have reached almost 93 per cent of landowners.
• Odisha has launched the KALIA scheme that will provide Rs. 10,000 to about 3 million small and marginal farmers for the Rabi and kharif crops.
• Jharkhand has announced a Rs. 5,000-per-acre payment to 2.3 m medium and marginal farmers from the next financial year.
• West Bengal has announced two new schemes for farmers and farm labourers in the state that entail a payment of Rs.5,000 per acre every year in two instalments besides Rs.2 lakh to the kin of farmers who die due to any reason, including suicide.

However, the other problems like Rigid Market Structure, Middlemen issues, Poor infrastructure and logistics, Information Asymmetry, Government Policies also reveal that the Agricultural Marketing has remained a weak point. This has resulted in poor incomes to farmers despite good produce, gluts in the market leading to price crashes, high amount of food rotting and wastage.

Therefore, there is a need to improve the agricultural marketing too by taking up following measures:

• It is imperative to bring agriculture marketing into the Concurrent or Union list to benefit farmers. This will guarantee remunerative prices to farmers.
• The Committee on Doubling Farmers’ Income under the chairmanship of Ashok Dalwai justifies the recommendation saying marketing has no boundaries; this necessitates a pan-India operation to meet the demand across the country.
• NITI Aayog’s model Agricultural Produce and Livestock Marketing Act should be implemented by the states. Further the provisions like facilitating single-point levy of taxes, promoting direct interface between farmers and end-users, and give freedom to farmers to sell their produce to whomsoever and wherever they get better prices.
• e-NAM is a good step in this way. Budget 2018 announced developed GRAMS which would be integrated to the e-NAM Structure.
• Promoting warehouse receipts, agro-processing and exports. Warehouse receipts will help framers defer their sale immediately post harvest, when prices are at their lowest level.
• This will require a consolidation of farm produce, which can be successfully done through farmer-producer organisations.
• Agro-processing and trade will require investment in developing infrastructure.
• Existing agri-export zones need to be revisited and strengthened in this changing scenario.
• States alone cannot revamp the agricultural marketing sector, primarily due to paucity of funds and technology.
• Private investment on a massive scale needs to be invited to upgrade and build large storage and warehousing systems that are climate resilient.

Conclusion:

The agrarian distress is a result of combination of factors. Thus, the need of the hour is a multi-pronged approach tackling the structural issues.  It is time to concede that production and marketing should march together in order to benefit farmers and consumers. A co-ordinated effort with good policies bolstered by logistics of the private players can help in achieving the goal of doubling farmer’s income by 2022.