Towards an extra green revolution

Almost immediately, the National Food Security Act will become law. The ruling United Progressive Alliance flagship social security programme of providing every Below the Poverty Line (BPL) family with 25 kg of rice or wheat at Rs 3 per kg per month is a welcome step to alleviate some of the human trauma that haunts the poor in our country. The government also hopes that the Act will secure freedom from hunger for 40 per cent of the population. But a successful implementation of the Act requires a boost in food production. Can it be done today?
It has happened once before in our country. India's food output, which was 72.3 million tonnes in 1966, rose to 108.4 million tonnes by 1971. It was made possible by two men with distinct rural backgrounds Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri and food and agriculture minister C Subramaniam. Subramaniam, brought in by Shastri to tackle the looming food crisis, was the architect of reforms in the agriculture sector. He shook up the bureaucracy, introduced yield increasing technologies, created producer price incentives and established new institutions like the Agriculture Price Commission and Food Corporation of India during this period. This transformed India from a food-deficit to food-surplus nation in a short span of five years in what is now popularly known as the 'era of the Green Revolution'.
Today, agriculture is 18 per cent of the gross domestic product and the country is in the midst of transitioning into a market economy. To repeat the success of the 'Green Revolution', the agriculture sector too needs to be subjected to market forces. But many of the public institutions functioning in a market economy that can be expected to bring about major policy changes lack board representation for the agriculture sector. This has proved to be a hindrance to sustainable agriculture and improving food production. Important public institutions like the RBI and nationalised banks, the country's premier stock exchanges BSE and NSE and associations like the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) and Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) should be mandated to fulfil their obligations to the agriculture sector.
Lack of representation on the boards of the RBI and nationalised banks has denied the farming community the necessary financial instruments required for farming to be profitable. Many of the credit schemes like Kisan Credit Card, investment schemes like Rural Infrastructure Development Fund and insurance schemes like crop insurance throughout the production process have failed because of a lack of initiative from nationalised banks. While micro-payment systems and mobile banking are flourishing in Africa, the RBI has continued to shun technology options to reach rural customers. When it is time to appoint the next RBI governor, the government must give serious consideration to an eminent agro-economist heading the central bank. As a shareholder in nationalised banks, the government must nominate representatives from the agriculture sector to the boards of these banks. This could send the right message to the farming community and to the country at large that the government is serious about tackling agriculture sector finance problems.
When it comes to the Bombay and national stock exchanges, everyone recognises the need for private investment in the agriculture sector. But the sector is unrepresented in these freest of the free market institutions. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the exchange authorities have neither introduced an agro-index nor do agro-companies find representation in the Sensex or Nifty. Despite the listing of multibillion- dollar agro companies like Jain Irrigation, Tata Tea and United Phosphorus, authorities at the stock exchanges do not see merit in representing 18 per cent of the economy in the indices that are supposed to be barometers of the entire Indian economy. Introducing an agro-index along with agro-companies finding representation in Sensex and Nifty will go a long way in bringing much-needed private investment to the agriculture sector.
offers and discounts on Hotels In Shimla
The stated mission of FICCI and the CII is to work closely with the government on policy issues, competitiveness and expanding business opportunities for industry. But rarely do these industry associations advocate agriculture reforms and their silence was palpable during the BT-technology debate. Indian agriculture suffers from a distorted market, laws that stifle private investment, controlled prices and poor infrastructure that requires policy changes from the central government. Land consolidation and marketing reforms are needed at the state level. FICCI and CII can be ardent advocates for policy changes at the Centre while their state chapters can do the same with local governments. To proactively recommend policy changes, due representation should be given to the agriculture sector on the boards of these two industry associations.
Effective implementation of the Food Security Act along with India's desire to achieve double digit economic growth and keep food prices in check will require food output to be doubled in the next decade. In order to boost agriculture output, major policy changes are required at every level of government. Agriculture needs board representation proportionate to its strength in the economy in important public institutions to triumph the multidimensional problems afflicting the sector.