The other day a BBC Radio correspondent asked: "Why is that the government and the people of the countries where foreign companies are coming and buying the land for producing food to be shipped back, not protesting. Why isn't there an uproar in those countries?" This question was posed in response to my statement wherein I had termed these companies as 'food pirates' -- a new phenomenon that the world is now witnessing.
I too am perplexed. The question did make me sit back and think. Why is that the people of these countries where foreign companies are buying land not protesting? Except for Madagascar, where the new ruler has turned down the Korean company's proposal to buy a huge chunck on land, I don't know of peoples' reaction. Even that seems to be now untrue. Rainforest Rescue claims that despite the violent protests that left 100 dead and led to the ouster of a democratically-elected government, Daewoo still continues to 'surruptiously' hold 218,000 hectares of land (Read full report at http://farmlandgrab.org/5646).
I am aware that in Pakistan too there was some discontent but it did not snowlball into a angry protest forcing the government to scrap the deal.
Oh, my God ! It seems people all over the world are becoming meek and submissive. They are accepting whatever their governments are doing, and that too without voicing any concern. The world has become so self-centred that we have resigned ourself to our fate, the only saving grace being that we want our family to be safe and not to suffer. What happens to our immediate environment, or for that matter to our nation no longer evokes any compassion or anger.
The world certainly has lost its anger. The biggest tragedy of 21st century is that we have lost our anger, and when I say anger I don't mean violent protects or gun-trotting but the ability to stand up and question. What a tragedy.
Anyway, here is the report in The Daily Telegraph, London.
India joins 'neocolonial' rush for Africa's land and labour
India, once the colonial jewel of Britain's empire, has been accused of 'neo-colonialism' in Africa where its business people have joined a race with China, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere to buy up agricultural estates and take advantage of cheap labour
By Dean Nelson in New Delhi
Published: 28 Jun 2009
Indian farming companies have bought hundreds of thousands of hectares in Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Senegal and Mozambique, where they are growing rice, sugar cane, maize and lentils for their own domestic market back in India.
Its government has given soft loans as aid to support the overseas ventures in what has been described as a challenge to China and Saudi Arabia in the new scramble for Africa. China, South Korea, and a several Arab countries have led the way in creating new African mega-farms to outsource domestic food production and use cheaper labour.
Critics have described the development as modern "piracy" and "land grabbing" from countries that have in the past been blighted by famine and severe food shortages.
South Korea has bought just under 700,000 hectares in Sudan, while Saudi Arabia has signed a deal for 500,000 hectares in Tanzania.
India is now catching up fast with its government offering financial incentives for companies to produce food in Ethiopia and other African countries. Pulses, cooking oils and maize are in short supply in India.
More than 80 Indian companies have invested an estimated £1.5 billion in buying huge plantations in Ethiopia. The largest among them is Karuturi Global, one of the world's largest producers of cut roses. It has signed deals for just under 350,000 hectares to create what it claims is the world's largest agricultural land-bank. The Bangalore-based company, which has also bought farm land in Kenya, is growing sugar cane, palm oil, rice and vegetables.
Indian farming is dominated by small, family-run holdings, bullock cart transport, and legions of middlemen. The slow, cumbersome system is cited as the main reason why a large proportion of Indian produce rots before it ever reaches the market – the annual loss is valued at up to £6 billion.
So Indian companies see in Africa the possibility to build more efficient and far larger agricultural operations. This is an separate motivation from that of many Arab countries that buy African land to produce food that their homelands cannot.
Raju Poosapati, Vice President of India's Yes Bank, which advises investors in Africa, said a government ban on non-Basmati rice exports had driven Indian companies to grow it in Africa to sell overseas. Indians are now eating more meat and that has led many companies to grow maize animal feed in Africa as there are no government incentives for Indian farmers to grow it at home.
Sharad Pawar, India's agriculture minister, rejected claims that the government supported a new colonisation of African farmland. "Some companies are interested in buying agricultural land for sugar cane and then selling it on the international markets. It's business, nothing more," he told The Daily Telegraph.
Government documents meanwhile show the details of official support, and just of under £500 million in soft loans to encourage African countries to export food to India. New Delhi has also cut import duties for food produced in Ethiopia.
A report by the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation said more than 2.5 hectares of African land had been bought by foreign companies since 2004 and voiced concerns that poor villagers might be ousted to make way for investments. It also said it feared some of the deals may be open to corruption.
Devinder Sharma of India's Forum for Biotechnology and Food Security said the companies buying up land to export food from Africa were "food pirates" and compared them with the English companies that shipped food from Ireland during the 19th century potato famine.
"There are 80 Indian companies trying to get land in Ethiopia, and it's all to be imported back to India. The government of India has been encouraging them," he said, and warned of danger if famine returned to Africa.
"If food is being shipped out and poor people are dying, what will happen? There would be riots," he said.
Jun 30, 2009
Jun 27, 2009
Soaring heat: Mt Everest will soon be the only place to escape the heat
It isn't unusual for the monsoon rains to be delayed but what makes this aberrant weather conditions appear more hostile is the drop in the water levels of the country's big reservoirs and the exceptionally high temperatures (with very low humidity). It certainly came as a shock yesterday for instance when I read news reports that Shimla, the queen of hill stations in India, has declared holidays for school-going children because of unusually high temperatures.
In the late 1980s, I was posted by the Indian Express at Shimla. I remember how my house used to be packed with friends and relatives every summer. Believe me, I didn't realise that I had so many relatives till I landed in Shimla. They would suddenly appear at my door saying that they came looking for me, and wanted to see how my children were faring, and so on. I knew they had actually come to escape the heat of the plains, and were being polite.
Shimla is no exception. My neighbours are now in Gangotri, and have trekked to Gomukh. While I haven't been in touch with them after they left for the trek -- some 37 kms both ways -- they were telling me on phone how hot it was on their way to Gangotri. Haridwar, the religious city on the banks of river Ganga, and lying at the foothills of the Himalayas, is recording a temperature of 44 degrees. Nainital, another popular hill station, I am told is also simmering with heat. Tourists are grappling with the heat and the non-availability of drinking water in almost all the hill stations.
At this rate I am sure the day is not far when Mt Everest would become the sole destination to escape the heat of the summers!!
Well, you can blame the monsoon for the soaring temperatures and the non-availability of water but the fact remains that we are actually responsible for the prevailing conditions. We have been messing up with nature in our quest for more profits, in our blind chase for a higher GDP. The government, the policy makers and the mainline economists have misled us to believe that a higher GDP is the touchstone of development. You listen to some of the so-called distinguished Nobel laureates, academicians, scientists and others without even thinking twice whether what they are saying makes sense or not. We accept blindly what we are told.
If these Nobel laureates (and business magnates) were so brilliant I wonder why is the world warming up at such an alarming rate. Why is that the IPCC tells that if we don't make a radical correction in our policies, the Earth will become a living hell in another 10-15 years. If these intellectuals from the Harvard, Yale or Cambridge were really so brilliant, I am sure you would agree that we wouldn't have been in such a pitiable condition.
It is big business that is destroying the environment. It is big business that is primarily responsible for the rising temperatures. The government is merely a facilitator for the destruction of the environment. In India, the Ministry of Environment & Forests has been playing to the tune of big business and industry. It is a corrupt body, and I don't understand why people remain soft towards the bureaucrats managing our environment. The Ministry has allowed for large scale chopping of trees, mining for natural resources with impunity, playing havoc with wetlands, completely destroying the water sources in cities for the sake of urban dwelling and supermalls, and excessive use and abuse of water resources (and the destruction of the catchment areas) without even battling an eyelid.
The Ministry for Environment & Forests, which should have acted as a guardian for protecting the environment, had actually been hand-in-glove with the destroyers of the environment. I am told the Ministry had cleard 98 per cent of the proposals that came up before it for environment clearance. What a scandal !
We the people have failed to raise our voice against the wrong doings. When was the last time we demanded strict punishment for the Minister for Environment and the Secretary for Environment? Why shouldn't some of them, at least the past five Ministers' and the Secretary's of Environment be hauled up? Why shouldn't they go to jail for what they have done (or undone) to the environment?
You kept quiet. So you have to pay the price now. Don't crib about the soaring temperatures, and the non-availability of water. In many ways you are responsible for this precarious situation. Don't blame the rain gods, you are equally at blame.
Anyway, I am pasting below a news report from the Indian Express, which tells us about the water levels in the reservoirs. I think this should come as a warning. You can't be a silent spectator anymore.
Reservoirs running dry, half of last year's levels.
By Ravish Tiwari
Indian Express, June 27
Water levels in 81 crucial reservoirs are at just 44 per cent of last year’s levels at this time, and at 65 per cent of the average of the last 10 years, shows government data released Friday for the week ending June 25.
The Krishnaraja Sagar reservoir in Karnataka has practically no water — it is shown as having 0% of its capacity — and the Tungabhadra (also in Karnataka), Tehri (Uttarakhand) and Pong dam (Himachal) reservoirs have only 6 per cent, 1 per cent and 5 per cent of their capacities. At this time last year, thanks to an early monsoon, the Krishnaraja Sagar was 41 per cent full, and Tungabhadra, Tehri and Pong were at 17 per cent, 15 per cent and 22 per cent of capacity levels.
The overall picture is grim: as many as 21 of the 81 reservoirs are just 5 per cent or less full. The total live storage as of date is 14.184 billion cubic metres (BCM) — just 9 per cent of the capacity at full reservoir levels (FRL). This is substantially lower than last year’s 21 per cent, and even the 10-year average of 14 per cent.
Thirteen reservoirs have no live storage; last year, there were just two such reservoirs. Another 27 reservoirs are at less than half of the average storage for the past decade.
Even rivers are running dry. Water levels in the Ganga, Indus, Narmada, Sabarmati, Godavari and rivers of the Kutch were all at levels of 10 per cent or less of their full capacity. Overall, water storage in the 12 major river basin regions across the country stood at 9.3 per cent of full capacity — less than half of last year.
The delayed monsoon has affected the area under the kharif crop — it is down by about 7 lakh hectares from the 25.20 lakh hectares sown at this time last year. The decline is mostly due to reduction the area under paddy in West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa, Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh.
The weather watch group of the Agriculture Ministry mulled over these figures on Friday. Later, Agriculture Secretary T Nanda Kumar briefed the Cabinet Secretary about the progress of kharif sowing, and his Thursday meeting with state representatives, it is learnt. Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar is meeting top officials on Sunday after his return from London.
In the late 1980s, I was posted by the Indian Express at Shimla. I remember how my house used to be packed with friends and relatives every summer. Believe me, I didn't realise that I had so many relatives till I landed in Shimla. They would suddenly appear at my door saying that they came looking for me, and wanted to see how my children were faring, and so on. I knew they had actually come to escape the heat of the plains, and were being polite.
Shimla is no exception. My neighbours are now in Gangotri, and have trekked to Gomukh. While I haven't been in touch with them after they left for the trek -- some 37 kms both ways -- they were telling me on phone how hot it was on their way to Gangotri. Haridwar, the religious city on the banks of river Ganga, and lying at the foothills of the Himalayas, is recording a temperature of 44 degrees. Nainital, another popular hill station, I am told is also simmering with heat. Tourists are grappling with the heat and the non-availability of drinking water in almost all the hill stations.
At this rate I am sure the day is not far when Mt Everest would become the sole destination to escape the heat of the summers!!
Well, you can blame the monsoon for the soaring temperatures and the non-availability of water but the fact remains that we are actually responsible for the prevailing conditions. We have been messing up with nature in our quest for more profits, in our blind chase for a higher GDP. The government, the policy makers and the mainline economists have misled us to believe that a higher GDP is the touchstone of development. You listen to some of the so-called distinguished Nobel laureates, academicians, scientists and others without even thinking twice whether what they are saying makes sense or not. We accept blindly what we are told.
If these Nobel laureates (and business magnates) were so brilliant I wonder why is the world warming up at such an alarming rate. Why is that the IPCC tells that if we don't make a radical correction in our policies, the Earth will become a living hell in another 10-15 years. If these intellectuals from the Harvard, Yale or Cambridge were really so brilliant, I am sure you would agree that we wouldn't have been in such a pitiable condition.
It is big business that is destroying the environment. It is big business that is primarily responsible for the rising temperatures. The government is merely a facilitator for the destruction of the environment. In India, the Ministry of Environment & Forests has been playing to the tune of big business and industry. It is a corrupt body, and I don't understand why people remain soft towards the bureaucrats managing our environment. The Ministry has allowed for large scale chopping of trees, mining for natural resources with impunity, playing havoc with wetlands, completely destroying the water sources in cities for the sake of urban dwelling and supermalls, and excessive use and abuse of water resources (and the destruction of the catchment areas) without even battling an eyelid.
The Ministry for Environment & Forests, which should have acted as a guardian for protecting the environment, had actually been hand-in-glove with the destroyers of the environment. I am told the Ministry had cleard 98 per cent of the proposals that came up before it for environment clearance. What a scandal !
We the people have failed to raise our voice against the wrong doings. When was the last time we demanded strict punishment for the Minister for Environment and the Secretary for Environment? Why shouldn't some of them, at least the past five Ministers' and the Secretary's of Environment be hauled up? Why shouldn't they go to jail for what they have done (or undone) to the environment?
You kept quiet. So you have to pay the price now. Don't crib about the soaring temperatures, and the non-availability of water. In many ways you are responsible for this precarious situation. Don't blame the rain gods, you are equally at blame.
Anyway, I am pasting below a news report from the Indian Express, which tells us about the water levels in the reservoirs. I think this should come as a warning. You can't be a silent spectator anymore.
Reservoirs running dry, half of last year's levels.
By Ravish Tiwari
Indian Express, June 27
Water levels in 81 crucial reservoirs are at just 44 per cent of last year’s levels at this time, and at 65 per cent of the average of the last 10 years, shows government data released Friday for the week ending June 25.
The Krishnaraja Sagar reservoir in Karnataka has practically no water — it is shown as having 0% of its capacity — and the Tungabhadra (also in Karnataka), Tehri (Uttarakhand) and Pong dam (Himachal) reservoirs have only 6 per cent, 1 per cent and 5 per cent of their capacities. At this time last year, thanks to an early monsoon, the Krishnaraja Sagar was 41 per cent full, and Tungabhadra, Tehri and Pong were at 17 per cent, 15 per cent and 22 per cent of capacity levels.
The overall picture is grim: as many as 21 of the 81 reservoirs are just 5 per cent or less full. The total live storage as of date is 14.184 billion cubic metres (BCM) — just 9 per cent of the capacity at full reservoir levels (FRL). This is substantially lower than last year’s 21 per cent, and even the 10-year average of 14 per cent.
Thirteen reservoirs have no live storage; last year, there were just two such reservoirs. Another 27 reservoirs are at less than half of the average storage for the past decade.
Even rivers are running dry. Water levels in the Ganga, Indus, Narmada, Sabarmati, Godavari and rivers of the Kutch were all at levels of 10 per cent or less of their full capacity. Overall, water storage in the 12 major river basin regions across the country stood at 9.3 per cent of full capacity — less than half of last year.
The delayed monsoon has affected the area under the kharif crop — it is down by about 7 lakh hectares from the 25.20 lakh hectares sown at this time last year. The decline is mostly due to reduction the area under paddy in West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa, Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh.
The weather watch group of the Agriculture Ministry mulled over these figures on Friday. Later, Agriculture Secretary T Nanda Kumar briefed the Cabinet Secretary about the progress of kharif sowing, and his Thursday meeting with state representatives, it is learnt. Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar is meeting top officials on Sunday after his return from London.
Jun 26, 2009
Food Pirates: Indian firms buying farm land in Africa
Indian firms are not only buying land in India, but are also moving across the shores. I call them the 'food pirates' and they are on a land grab spree. If you remember, we had a blog sometimes back about outsourcing food production wherein we had listed some Indian firms who were buying land in Latin America.
The list of the 'food pirates' is expanding. Imagine 80 Indian companies buying farmlands in Ethiopia, and that too with the connivance of the Indian government. One of these companies, the Bangalore-based Karuturi Global Ltd., has already acquired 8,50,000 acres of land in Ethiopia for cultivating food crops, sugarcane, palm oil etc. The company has started to farm in 30,000 acres. The same company has also acquired land in Kenya, and claims to to hold "one of the largest agriculture land banks in the world."
These 'food pirates' also have international support. Although the FAO is unhappy with the way these land acquisitions are taking place, calling them 'neo-colonism', the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) in Washington DC., as usual is backing these initiatives. It calls for a 'code of coduct' to be followed by these companies, but otherwise does not see anything terribly wrong with such land grabs. I think the time has come to examine the dubious role IFPRI has played all along in destroying food self-sufficiency in the developing world, more so in the African countries.
Dinesh C Sharma of Mail Today has done an excellent report about how Indian firms are trying to gobble cultivable land in Africa. These companies are going to produce food for shipping it back to India taking advantage of the duty-free options that the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) are being provided with under the WTO negotiations. I wonder whether the international community realises that who will produce food for the people living in the African countries where these foreign companies, including Indian business, will grow food not for the people of Africa but for shipping it backhome.
In India had allowed foreign companies to buy agricultural land and grow food for shipping it backhome, I am sure there would have been an uproar. I wonder why the people (and more importantly the political leaders and elite) of the African and Latin American countries are not opposing and driving these companies out from within their national borders. The reason is simple. The rich and elite of every country is the real beneficiary of the process of globalisation. They see nothing wrong in such destructive policies, as long as they get the benefit. They are willing to compromise on even the national security as long as it brings them profits, visible through the ever-rising stock market.
Anyway, here is the Mail Today report:
Firms buy up African farms to raise crops that will be ‘sold’ to India
By Dinesh C Sharma
Mail Today, June 25, 2009
IN A NEW wave of outsourcing, Indian firms are acquiring swathes of farmland in poor African countries to produce food meant to be exported to India.
But food policy experts are lambasting the strategy as “ neo- colonialist”. They say such deals exploit the natural resources of poor countries who are themselves facing acute food shortages.
Indian firms have signed land deals in Ethiopia, Kenya and Madagascar to produce a range of food crops, including rice, sugarcane, maize, pulses, oilseeds, tea and even vegetables. Some are also investing abroad to grow the biofuel crop jatropha.
More than half of Indian FDI of $ 4.15 billion (Rs 20,000 crore) in Ethiopia at the end of 2008 was in agricultural and floricultural sectors, with investments coming from about 80 companies.
The government is providing cheaper credit lines to Ethiopian entities to produce agricultural products for export to India. It is also backing these investments through schemes like ‘Duty Free Tariff Preference Scheme’, under which Ethiopian agri-products can enter India on lower tariffs.
This indicates the motive behind Indian investments in Ethiopia is to boost agricultural products meant for export to India.
India’s small and fragmented land holdings are unsuitable for large-scale commercial farming.
Water is also in short supply. So these firms are rushing to Africa, where they can acquire large contiguous tracts of cultivable land.
Most of the Indian companies involved in this new wave of outsourcing are entrepreneurial firms engaged in agro-products and floriculture that are now diversifying into agriculture production.
The government seems to be promoting the acquisition of farmland in foreign countries as an alternative to purchasing food from international markets.
Besides limited availability of water and arable land, bottlenecks in storage and distribution and expansion of biofuel production are creating uncertainties and constraints in food production.
But the Food and Agriculture Organisation ( FAO) has dubbed such deals as “land grabbing”. “It is unfortunate that the Indian government is supporting such acts,” said Devinder Sharma of the Forum for Biotechnology and Food Security. “Such deals are bound to result in civil strife in host countries in coming days.”
One of the largest land acquisition deals in Ethiopia has been signed by the Bangalore-based Karuturi Global Limited. The company’s Gambella Agriculture Project was launched by Ethiopian agriculture minister Dr Abera Deresa and Indian ambassador Gurjit Singh jointly in the first week of June.
The company says it has signed an agreement with the Ethiopian government for acquiring 8,50,000 acres of land for cultivation of food grains, sugarcane, palm oil and other crops. Already 30,000 acres of land has been brought under cultivation. And it has acquired land in Kenya too. With these two deals, the company claims to hold “one of the largest agriculture land banks in the world”.
An agribusiness company named Varun Agriculture SARL has signed a contract farming agreement with 13 local landowners’ associations in the Sofia region of Madagascar. The deals, signed on January 26, cover a land area of 1,70,914 hectares.
“We are encouraging more Indian companies to come into mainstream agriculture so they can contribute to local demand and food security,” Indian ambassador Gurjit Singh noted while addressing an Ethiopian parliamentary panel earlier this month.
The government is investing directly as well. A loan of $ 640 million (Rs 3,000 crore) has been provided to Ethiopia to boost sugar production for exports over five years. The soft loans, with an annual interest rate of 1.75 per cent, are to be repaid over 20 years. India had never before offered credit of this magnitude to any single country.
Food-importing countries with land and water constraints but rich in capital, such as the Gulf states, are at the forefront of new investments in farmland abroad, pointed out a recent report from the Washington-based International Food Policy Research Institute.
In addition, countries with large populations and food security concerns such as India and China are seeking opportunities to produce food overseas. These investments are targeted at developing countries where production costs are much lower and land and water more abundant.
Most land deals are taking place in Ethiopia, Ghana, Mali, Madagascar, Mozambique, Sudan and Tanzania.
The FAO report also pointed out that rising agricultural commodity prices make acquisition of land an attractive option. Agribusiness companies, traditionally involved in food processing and distribution, are entering direct production.
Although political risk remains high in many African countries, policy reforms have improved their attractiveness.
These deals have long-term implications for global agriculture.
They may impact the balance between small-scale and largescale farming and the future livelihoods of small-scale farmers. The relative importance of export-led agriculture is bound to grow, and so will the role of agribusinesses in agricultural production, processing and distribution of food.
There are ethical and environmental concerns as well. “Outsourcing food production will ensure food security for investing countries but would leave behind a trail of hunger, starvation and food scarcities for local populations,” Sharma said. “The environmental tab of highly intensive farming — devastated soils, dry aquifer, and ruined ecology from chemical infestation — will be left for the host country to pick up.”
The list of the 'food pirates' is expanding. Imagine 80 Indian companies buying farmlands in Ethiopia, and that too with the connivance of the Indian government. One of these companies, the Bangalore-based Karuturi Global Ltd., has already acquired 8,50,000 acres of land in Ethiopia for cultivating food crops, sugarcane, palm oil etc. The company has started to farm in 30,000 acres. The same company has also acquired land in Kenya, and claims to to hold "one of the largest agriculture land banks in the world."
These 'food pirates' also have international support. Although the FAO is unhappy with the way these land acquisitions are taking place, calling them 'neo-colonism', the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) in Washington DC., as usual is backing these initiatives. It calls for a 'code of coduct' to be followed by these companies, but otherwise does not see anything terribly wrong with such land grabs. I think the time has come to examine the dubious role IFPRI has played all along in destroying food self-sufficiency in the developing world, more so in the African countries.
Dinesh C Sharma of Mail Today has done an excellent report about how Indian firms are trying to gobble cultivable land in Africa. These companies are going to produce food for shipping it back to India taking advantage of the duty-free options that the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) are being provided with under the WTO negotiations. I wonder whether the international community realises that who will produce food for the people living in the African countries where these foreign companies, including Indian business, will grow food not for the people of Africa but for shipping it backhome.
In India had allowed foreign companies to buy agricultural land and grow food for shipping it backhome, I am sure there would have been an uproar. I wonder why the people (and more importantly the political leaders and elite) of the African and Latin American countries are not opposing and driving these companies out from within their national borders. The reason is simple. The rich and elite of every country is the real beneficiary of the process of globalisation. They see nothing wrong in such destructive policies, as long as they get the benefit. They are willing to compromise on even the national security as long as it brings them profits, visible through the ever-rising stock market.
Anyway, here is the Mail Today report:
Firms buy up African farms to raise crops that will be ‘sold’ to India
By Dinesh C Sharma
Mail Today, June 25, 2009
IN A NEW wave of outsourcing, Indian firms are acquiring swathes of farmland in poor African countries to produce food meant to be exported to India.
But food policy experts are lambasting the strategy as “ neo- colonialist”. They say such deals exploit the natural resources of poor countries who are themselves facing acute food shortages.
Indian firms have signed land deals in Ethiopia, Kenya and Madagascar to produce a range of food crops, including rice, sugarcane, maize, pulses, oilseeds, tea and even vegetables. Some are also investing abroad to grow the biofuel crop jatropha.
More than half of Indian FDI of $ 4.15 billion (Rs 20,000 crore) in Ethiopia at the end of 2008 was in agricultural and floricultural sectors, with investments coming from about 80 companies.
The government is providing cheaper credit lines to Ethiopian entities to produce agricultural products for export to India. It is also backing these investments through schemes like ‘Duty Free Tariff Preference Scheme’, under which Ethiopian agri-products can enter India on lower tariffs.
This indicates the motive behind Indian investments in Ethiopia is to boost agricultural products meant for export to India.
India’s small and fragmented land holdings are unsuitable for large-scale commercial farming.
Water is also in short supply. So these firms are rushing to Africa, where they can acquire large contiguous tracts of cultivable land.
Most of the Indian companies involved in this new wave of outsourcing are entrepreneurial firms engaged in agro-products and floriculture that are now diversifying into agriculture production.
The government seems to be promoting the acquisition of farmland in foreign countries as an alternative to purchasing food from international markets.
Besides limited availability of water and arable land, bottlenecks in storage and distribution and expansion of biofuel production are creating uncertainties and constraints in food production.
But the Food and Agriculture Organisation ( FAO) has dubbed such deals as “land grabbing”. “It is unfortunate that the Indian government is supporting such acts,” said Devinder Sharma of the Forum for Biotechnology and Food Security. “Such deals are bound to result in civil strife in host countries in coming days.”
One of the largest land acquisition deals in Ethiopia has been signed by the Bangalore-based Karuturi Global Limited. The company’s Gambella Agriculture Project was launched by Ethiopian agriculture minister Dr Abera Deresa and Indian ambassador Gurjit Singh jointly in the first week of June.
The company says it has signed an agreement with the Ethiopian government for acquiring 8,50,000 acres of land for cultivation of food grains, sugarcane, palm oil and other crops. Already 30,000 acres of land has been brought under cultivation. And it has acquired land in Kenya too. With these two deals, the company claims to hold “one of the largest agriculture land banks in the world”.
An agribusiness company named Varun Agriculture SARL has signed a contract farming agreement with 13 local landowners’ associations in the Sofia region of Madagascar. The deals, signed on January 26, cover a land area of 1,70,914 hectares.
“We are encouraging more Indian companies to come into mainstream agriculture so they can contribute to local demand and food security,” Indian ambassador Gurjit Singh noted while addressing an Ethiopian parliamentary panel earlier this month.
The government is investing directly as well. A loan of $ 640 million (Rs 3,000 crore) has been provided to Ethiopia to boost sugar production for exports over five years. The soft loans, with an annual interest rate of 1.75 per cent, are to be repaid over 20 years. India had never before offered credit of this magnitude to any single country.
Food-importing countries with land and water constraints but rich in capital, such as the Gulf states, are at the forefront of new investments in farmland abroad, pointed out a recent report from the Washington-based International Food Policy Research Institute.
In addition, countries with large populations and food security concerns such as India and China are seeking opportunities to produce food overseas. These investments are targeted at developing countries where production costs are much lower and land and water more abundant.
Most land deals are taking place in Ethiopia, Ghana, Mali, Madagascar, Mozambique, Sudan and Tanzania.
The FAO report also pointed out that rising agricultural commodity prices make acquisition of land an attractive option. Agribusiness companies, traditionally involved in food processing and distribution, are entering direct production.
Although political risk remains high in many African countries, policy reforms have improved their attractiveness.
These deals have long-term implications for global agriculture.
They may impact the balance between small-scale and largescale farming and the future livelihoods of small-scale farmers. The relative importance of export-led agriculture is bound to grow, and so will the role of agribusinesses in agricultural production, processing and distribution of food.
There are ethical and environmental concerns as well. “Outsourcing food production will ensure food security for investing countries but would leave behind a trail of hunger, starvation and food scarcities for local populations,” Sharma said. “The environmental tab of highly intensive farming — devastated soils, dry aquifer, and ruined ecology from chemical infestation — will be left for the host country to pick up.”
Jun 25, 2009
Monsoon delay: Alarm on the farm front
This was something that I was dreading all these days. Even while the media was trying to extract from me the panic button on agriculture, I had refrained myself from making any sensational statement knowing that a revival of the monsoon even after three weeks can bring back some smile on the face of farmers. I had repeatedly said that we need to wait for another week (this I said on June 20/21) before we press the panic button.
Monsoon delay certainly washes the hopes of the farming community. The more the delay the more is the tension on the face of farmers. The Indian Meteorological Department (IMD) has now made it official. The rains would be deficient this year. But what has not been spelled out is the distribution pattern of rainfall. Often the averages looks comfortable, but in some areas it rains very high, and some other regions go completely dry.
I was talking to the Director General of IMD yesterday (we were both on a panel on DD News Channel) and what he told me was encouraging. He said that his department will now be preparing weekly forecasts for not only different regions, but district-wise. I thought this was very important, given that the farmers actually needs to know how will the weather be faring after he has done the sowing. If this information is available, it can certainly help farmers plan accordingly.
I don't know how much of contingency planning that the government is talking about would be really helpful. Since 1987, the year India faced one of its worst droughts, I have seen that these contingency plans mean nothing more than bureaucratic justification for not doing anything. For instance, they are now talking of making drought-resistant varieties available to farmers. Well, if they really had these varieties and spread them earlier, I see no reason why the crisis would have been of such a magnitude now.
Actually, much of the drought-like scenario that stares at us is our own creation. Extended dry spells have been a usual weather phenomenon, but what compounds the crisis is the way we have 'managed' agriculture and farming in the rainfed areas of the country. Common sense tells us that we should be growing crops in drylands that require less water. But for nearly three decades now we grow crops in drylands that actually consume 1.5 to 2 times more water than the improved varieties that we cultivate in the assured irrigation region of Punjab and Haryana. I am talking of the hybrid crops, whether it is hybrid rice, hybrid sorghum, hybrid cotton, hybrid maize, hybrid vegetables -- all kinds of hybrids are grown in the rainfed regions. Every year, dryland farmers are therefore pumping out more water from the ground reserves, and also digging deeper thereby adding to their costs.
In our blind and misplaced quest for GDP, we have forgotton millions of farmers who toil endlessly on parched lands. I find that agriculture has disappeared from the radar screens of economic planning, and also from the small screen of the electronic media. In fact, I feel so angry when reporters ask me what would be the impact of the monsoon delay on the stock markets. What a stupid question to ask. This is the level of ignorance that prevails in the media, and this is also a clear indicator of why and how agriculture has been neglected in India. We will talk more about these issues in the coming days, but meanwhile the news report below would give you an overall picture of the grim situation that prevails ahead.
If you read it carefully, you will see that the speculators have already swung into action. Future stocks are already up, and I strongly recommend banning of futures trading if we really want to minimise the impact of the delayed monsoons.
Its official now: monsoon will be less than normal
Hindustan Times, New Delhi, June 24, 2009:
Monsoon rains will be below normal this year, the government said on Wednesday, in a setback to the Indian economy’s recovery from a global slowdown.
Poor rains could lower agricultural output, push up food prices and dent rural demand that was once a silver lining for India in the face of the global economic downturn.
It could also affect the government’s ambitious plans to provide cheaper rice and wheat to the 250 million people living below the official poverty line.
“Rainfall is likely to be below normal,” earth sciences minister Prithviraj Chavan told reporters.
Monsoon rainfall, which spans from June through September, will be 93 per cent of the normal or the historical average of 89 centimetres of rain. A deviation of more than 4 per cent from this level is considered below normal.
What is worrisome is that the India Meteorological Department (IMD) predicted the northwest region to get only 81 per cent of normal rainfall this season.
The northwest includes granary states of Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh.
The delay and deficiency in monsoon would put pressure on food prices, said Shankar Acharya, a former chief economic adviser in the finance ministry.
“What the exact impact would be depends on how much delay there is and finally how much rain we get,” Acharya said. “But we are lucky to have enough food stocks and if that is managed well, the pressure could ease.”
The news pushed up futures prices of soybean, soyoil, wheat, chana, guar, turmeric, jeera and pepper in Wednesday’s trading on the National Commodity and Derivatives Exchange.
At Azadpur, Asia’s biggest vegetable wholesale market in Delhi, prices of vegetables such as cauliflower, peas, ladyfinger and bottle-gourd have already gone up by about 50 per cent.
Traders estimate that this year supply is down by 25 per cent compared with 2008.
“If you see a poor monsoon heading for a 10 per cent deficiency, you might see a one percentage drop in GDP,” said Mridul Saggar, chief economist at Kotak Securities. “I don’t see a very perceptible drop. You could see a few points coming off.”
Agriculture accounts for a fifth of India’s gross domestic product and provides livelihood to nearly 60 per cent of the 1.1 billion-plus population.
The monsoon is crucial for kharif crops such as rice, soybean, sugarcane and cotton as nearly 60 per cent of the net sown area in the country has no access to irrigation and depends on rains.
Wednesday’s revised forecast of the monsoon came after it became evident that the monsoon was taking longer than expected to revive beyond the southern peninsula.
The monsoon hit Kerala on May 23, ahead of schedule, but got stuck around the Deccan plateau for more than 15 days because no low-pressure area developed in time over the Bay of Bengal to pull it northward.
Now it is slowly advancing and is expected to cover most of central and eastern India over the next week and reach the northwestern states by the first half of July, the IMD said.
The progress of monsoon through July will also depend on a possible El Nino effect. There is a high probability this year of El Nino, a weather condition marked by warming of the eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean waters that could affect the monsoon.
“We will have to keep a watch on El Nino,” Chavan said.
Monsoon delay certainly washes the hopes of the farming community. The more the delay the more is the tension on the face of farmers. The Indian Meteorological Department (IMD) has now made it official. The rains would be deficient this year. But what has not been spelled out is the distribution pattern of rainfall. Often the averages looks comfortable, but in some areas it rains very high, and some other regions go completely dry.
I was talking to the Director General of IMD yesterday (we were both on a panel on DD News Channel) and what he told me was encouraging. He said that his department will now be preparing weekly forecasts for not only different regions, but district-wise. I thought this was very important, given that the farmers actually needs to know how will the weather be faring after he has done the sowing. If this information is available, it can certainly help farmers plan accordingly.
I don't know how much of contingency planning that the government is talking about would be really helpful. Since 1987, the year India faced one of its worst droughts, I have seen that these contingency plans mean nothing more than bureaucratic justification for not doing anything. For instance, they are now talking of making drought-resistant varieties available to farmers. Well, if they really had these varieties and spread them earlier, I see no reason why the crisis would have been of such a magnitude now.
Actually, much of the drought-like scenario that stares at us is our own creation. Extended dry spells have been a usual weather phenomenon, but what compounds the crisis is the way we have 'managed' agriculture and farming in the rainfed areas of the country. Common sense tells us that we should be growing crops in drylands that require less water. But for nearly three decades now we grow crops in drylands that actually consume 1.5 to 2 times more water than the improved varieties that we cultivate in the assured irrigation region of Punjab and Haryana. I am talking of the hybrid crops, whether it is hybrid rice, hybrid sorghum, hybrid cotton, hybrid maize, hybrid vegetables -- all kinds of hybrids are grown in the rainfed regions. Every year, dryland farmers are therefore pumping out more water from the ground reserves, and also digging deeper thereby adding to their costs.
In our blind and misplaced quest for GDP, we have forgotton millions of farmers who toil endlessly on parched lands. I find that agriculture has disappeared from the radar screens of economic planning, and also from the small screen of the electronic media. In fact, I feel so angry when reporters ask me what would be the impact of the monsoon delay on the stock markets. What a stupid question to ask. This is the level of ignorance that prevails in the media, and this is also a clear indicator of why and how agriculture has been neglected in India. We will talk more about these issues in the coming days, but meanwhile the news report below would give you an overall picture of the grim situation that prevails ahead.
If you read it carefully, you will see that the speculators have already swung into action. Future stocks are already up, and I strongly recommend banning of futures trading if we really want to minimise the impact of the delayed monsoons.
Its official now: monsoon will be less than normal
Hindustan Times, New Delhi, June 24, 2009:
Monsoon rains will be below normal this year, the government said on Wednesday, in a setback to the Indian economy’s recovery from a global slowdown.
Poor rains could lower agricultural output, push up food prices and dent rural demand that was once a silver lining for India in the face of the global economic downturn.
It could also affect the government’s ambitious plans to provide cheaper rice and wheat to the 250 million people living below the official poverty line.
“Rainfall is likely to be below normal,” earth sciences minister Prithviraj Chavan told reporters.
Monsoon rainfall, which spans from June through September, will be 93 per cent of the normal or the historical average of 89 centimetres of rain. A deviation of more than 4 per cent from this level is considered below normal.
What is worrisome is that the India Meteorological Department (IMD) predicted the northwest region to get only 81 per cent of normal rainfall this season.
The northwest includes granary states of Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh.
The delay and deficiency in monsoon would put pressure on food prices, said Shankar Acharya, a former chief economic adviser in the finance ministry.
“What the exact impact would be depends on how much delay there is and finally how much rain we get,” Acharya said. “But we are lucky to have enough food stocks and if that is managed well, the pressure could ease.”
The news pushed up futures prices of soybean, soyoil, wheat, chana, guar, turmeric, jeera and pepper in Wednesday’s trading on the National Commodity and Derivatives Exchange.
At Azadpur, Asia’s biggest vegetable wholesale market in Delhi, prices of vegetables such as cauliflower, peas, ladyfinger and bottle-gourd have already gone up by about 50 per cent.
Traders estimate that this year supply is down by 25 per cent compared with 2008.
“If you see a poor monsoon heading for a 10 per cent deficiency, you might see a one percentage drop in GDP,” said Mridul Saggar, chief economist at Kotak Securities. “I don’t see a very perceptible drop. You could see a few points coming off.”
Agriculture accounts for a fifth of India’s gross domestic product and provides livelihood to nearly 60 per cent of the 1.1 billion-plus population.
The monsoon is crucial for kharif crops such as rice, soybean, sugarcane and cotton as nearly 60 per cent of the net sown area in the country has no access to irrigation and depends on rains.
Wednesday’s revised forecast of the monsoon came after it became evident that the monsoon was taking longer than expected to revive beyond the southern peninsula.
The monsoon hit Kerala on May 23, ahead of schedule, but got stuck around the Deccan plateau for more than 15 days because no low-pressure area developed in time over the Bay of Bengal to pull it northward.
Now it is slowly advancing and is expected to cover most of central and eastern India over the next week and reach the northwestern states by the first half of July, the IMD said.
The progress of monsoon through July will also depend on a possible El Nino effect. There is a high probability this year of El Nino, a weather condition marked by warming of the eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean waters that could affect the monsoon.
“We will have to keep a watch on El Nino,” Chavan said.
Jun 20, 2009
The illegal way to promote Bt cotton in Pakistan
China has made a foray into Paksitan's cotton arena. A joint venture for the cultivation of coloured and white cotton in Pakistan's Punjab and Sind regions was launched in May between Pakistan Agricultural Research Council and the Xinjiang Production and Corporation of China.
It is planned to cultivate 800 acres with Bt cotton in Punjab and Sind provinces. China has promised to provide Pakistan with its 'double gene technology'. Unfortunately, China's own track record with Bt cotton has been disappointing. After the initial 'success', attributed more to the biased analysis that appeared in international science journals, cotton growers in China have been repeatedly incurring losses. Pesticides use has also gone up thereby adding to farmers cost.
You would recall a study done by Cornell University along with a Chinese Institute that clearly established that Bt cotton farmers were incurring losses. What was earlier projected as a silver-bullet for small and marginal farmers, had finally busted. The biotech industry hasn't given up. After the single-gene Bt cotton withered, they are now ready with the 'double-gene' Bt cotton. This is what I call as a chakravyuah, a vicious trap in which farmers become the victim of a technology.
It will now be turn of cotton farmers in Pakistan. They will now face the same chakravyuah that farmers in China and India are already in.
And no wonder, while no official agreement is signed with the Government of India, yet Bt cotton seed is being smuggled from across the border into Punjab and Sind regions, forming the cotton belt of Pakistan. According to news reports, more than 60 per cent cotton farmers in Punjab and another 40 per cent are engaged in Bt cotton cultivation, with the seed being smuggled from India. The varieties smuggled from India are ofcourse officially unapproved but find favour with farmers.
Illegal introduction is the first step the companies encourage. This had happened in Latin America, India and now it is happening in Pakistan. Once illegal cultivation becomes widespread, the arguement of the companies is that what can be done now except legalising the cultivation. I wonder why Monsanto refuses to use the provisions of seed laws to stop the sale of unapproved varieties. The reason is simple. It benefits them to look the other way.
Moreover, like in India, Pakistan too faced the problem of a very high royalty being charged by Monsanto on its Bt cotton seed. According to reports, Monsanto had demanded US $ 16 (Indian Rs 768) as royalty per acre. This is considered to be very high, and Pakistan is willing to scrap the deal with Monsanto if it refuses to reduce the royalty. My friend and colleague Najma Sadeque from Karachi tells me that there has been no further information about the Monsanto deal. It was anticipated that the deal would be scrapped after Pakistan enters into a joint collaboration with China. I shall be grateful if anyone from Pakistan can update us on the latest position.
Royalty (also called 'technology fee') was also a big issue in India. Monsanto and its subsidiaries were initially charging Rs 1200 per acre as royalty fee. This was exceptionally high considering that in China, Monsanto used to charge a royalty of Rs 38 and in the US approximately Rs 108. But in India where the seed laws are silent on seed pricing, Monsanto extracted its pound of flesh from the cotton growers. It was only after the Andhra Pradesh government intervened and after a prolonged litigation, royalty has been brought down to Rs 300 or so.
Interestingly, Business Reporter says that Pakistan laws has made it mandatory for the owners of transgenic seeds to 'guarantee that the crop variety will have no harmful and disastrous impact on the environment as wellas human beings' (Read the full report at http://www.yarnsandfibers.com/news/index_fullstory.php3?id=18029).
It is planned to cultivate 800 acres with Bt cotton in Punjab and Sind provinces. China has promised to provide Pakistan with its 'double gene technology'. Unfortunately, China's own track record with Bt cotton has been disappointing. After the initial 'success', attributed more to the biased analysis that appeared in international science journals, cotton growers in China have been repeatedly incurring losses. Pesticides use has also gone up thereby adding to farmers cost.
You would recall a study done by Cornell University along with a Chinese Institute that clearly established that Bt cotton farmers were incurring losses. What was earlier projected as a silver-bullet for small and marginal farmers, had finally busted. The biotech industry hasn't given up. After the single-gene Bt cotton withered, they are now ready with the 'double-gene' Bt cotton. This is what I call as a chakravyuah, a vicious trap in which farmers become the victim of a technology.
It will now be turn of cotton farmers in Pakistan. They will now face the same chakravyuah that farmers in China and India are already in.
And no wonder, while no official agreement is signed with the Government of India, yet Bt cotton seed is being smuggled from across the border into Punjab and Sind regions, forming the cotton belt of Pakistan. According to news reports, more than 60 per cent cotton farmers in Punjab and another 40 per cent are engaged in Bt cotton cultivation, with the seed being smuggled from India. The varieties smuggled from India are ofcourse officially unapproved but find favour with farmers.
Illegal introduction is the first step the companies encourage. This had happened in Latin America, India and now it is happening in Pakistan. Once illegal cultivation becomes widespread, the arguement of the companies is that what can be done now except legalising the cultivation. I wonder why Monsanto refuses to use the provisions of seed laws to stop the sale of unapproved varieties. The reason is simple. It benefits them to look the other way.
Moreover, like in India, Pakistan too faced the problem of a very high royalty being charged by Monsanto on its Bt cotton seed. According to reports, Monsanto had demanded US $ 16 (Indian Rs 768) as royalty per acre. This is considered to be very high, and Pakistan is willing to scrap the deal with Monsanto if it refuses to reduce the royalty. My friend and colleague Najma Sadeque from Karachi tells me that there has been no further information about the Monsanto deal. It was anticipated that the deal would be scrapped after Pakistan enters into a joint collaboration with China. I shall be grateful if anyone from Pakistan can update us on the latest position.
Royalty (also called 'technology fee') was also a big issue in India. Monsanto and its subsidiaries were initially charging Rs 1200 per acre as royalty fee. This was exceptionally high considering that in China, Monsanto used to charge a royalty of Rs 38 and in the US approximately Rs 108. But in India where the seed laws are silent on seed pricing, Monsanto extracted its pound of flesh from the cotton growers. It was only after the Andhra Pradesh government intervened and after a prolonged litigation, royalty has been brought down to Rs 300 or so.
Interestingly, Business Reporter says that Pakistan laws has made it mandatory for the owners of transgenic seeds to 'guarantee that the crop variety will have no harmful and disastrous impact on the environment as wellas human beings' (Read the full report at http://www.yarnsandfibers.com/news/index_fullstory.php3?id=18029).
Jun 19, 2009
India buckles, WTO Doha Round set to sail through
I wasn't wrong. When I said a few days back that Kamal Nath was shifted from Trade and Commerce under pressure from the United States and the WTO, I could see where we were heading towards. The new Commerce Minister Anand Sharma has spilled the beans even before he could learn to handle the intricacies of diplomacy. A few days back, before he left for the US, he told Reuters that the impasse between US-India on farm trade has been broken. And today's Times of India carries a report from Washington in which he is believed to have indicated that India may dilute its stand on market access for foreign products in an effort to breathe new life into the Doha Round.
Anand Sharma is merely doing what he has been asked to do.
As early as in March 2007, I had warned that India had taken a U-turn in its position and was actually looking for a face-saver ( See my analysis: Under pressure, India makes U-turn http://www.indiatogether.org/2007/mar/dsh-dohaindia.htm). What Kamal Nath had done in the last two years was to actually hold on and give an impression that India was not caving in. He did it deftly, and with a media which looks for exciting sound bytes he was able to get away. Brick by brick, India's position on agriculture had been diluted.
I would like Anand Sharma to tell the nation as to what would be the gain for India from the Agreement on Agriculture that has almost been concluded under the Doha Round of negotiations. You will be not only surprised but shocked to know that India actually does not even know as to what would be the gains and losses from the farm agreement.
When Anand Sharma said that he is willing to provide more market access, what probably we don't realise is that India has already gone in for an autonomous liberalisation and has opened up its market. This happened in Mar 2008 when George Bush wanted India to open up, before the US could reciprocate. The import tariffs for the most important farm commodities have already been brought down to zero. Wheat import tariff is zero, rice is at zero, maize is at zero, pulses is at zero, edible oils is practically zero (or 7.5 per cent as the case may be for some categories), what further reduction do we expect now.
India opened up, but the US did not reciprocate. The US in fact approved the US Farm Bill 2008 that makes a provision for an additional farm subsidy of $ 307 billion for the next five year.
What equally disappoints me is the bystander role the negotiators of the developing countries played all along. In my subsequent writings I have said that the real culprits are the developing country negotiators who are more keen to stay put in Geneva and enjoy the perks they are being endowed with by their respective governments. This is a chance of their lifetime and they are not willing to forgo it at any cost. If WTO fails, they will have to return back. They don't want to take that risk. And who is bothered as to what happens to food security and the livelihoods of the farming communities back home. What a shame.
Nevertheless, the few remaining hurdles before the upcoming 7th WTO Ministeral in November this year are being cleared expeditiously. With India throwing in the towel, I think the resistance that came from the developing countries to an unjust and inequal multi-lateral trade regime comes to an end. The world must do what the rich and industrialised countries want them to do.
India may dilute stand on farm product imports
19 Jun 2009, 0233 hrs IST, Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN
WASHINGTON: India has indicated that it may dilute its stand on market access for foreign farm products in an effort to breathe new life into the Doha Round of WTO trade talks that were stalled due to New Delhi's previously strong opposition on the issue.
India's new commerce minister, Anand Sharma, conveyed New Delhi's position to US interlocutors, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, on Wednesday, telling them that "while a perfect solution may be elusive, it should be possible to find a fair solution acceptable to all parties, while keeping in mind that development was central to the Doha Round."
The US-India breakthrough on the issue sent ripples of excitement in trade circles where David Walker, New Zealand's ambassador to the WTO in Geneva, who steers its negotiations on agricultural goods, was quoted as saying the pledges were "very much music to my ears." But given the strong sentiments in the still largely agricultural India over the issue of foreign food imports, Sharma (and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh) may have to carefully caliberate the move.
In a statement following his meeting with Clinton, Sharma said he "briefed her about the programmes being undertaken by the Government to stimulate domestic demand while providing a social security net to the most vulnerable sections of the society, including through the successful implementation of the national Rural Employment Guarantee Program," — an euphemism really for "we still need to move slowly on farm imports and cannot simply throw open the door."
The statement was issued before Clinton had an unfortunate fall at the White House after her meeting with Sharma, resulting in a broken elbow that is expected to put her out of commission — and foreign travel — for at least three weeks. Doctors have said she may need surgery.
The Indian stand was anticipated in some quarters ever since the new government took office with a renewed mandate and the cabinet appointments saw Anand Sharma replace Kamal Nath as the commerce minister. Kamal Nath was credited with taking a strong, protectionist stand that did not go well with the Americans.
In effect, the scuttlebutt was that Kamal Nath was eased out because he had soured things with Washington over Doha, although in all other aspects, he forged closer trade ties with the US and counted many friends here.
Sharma also said New Delhi was looking forward to Clinton's forthcoming visit to India in July and expressed confidence that "her leadership would give a special impetus to the relations between the two countries."
Anand Sharma is merely doing what he has been asked to do.
As early as in March 2007, I had warned that India had taken a U-turn in its position and was actually looking for a face-saver ( See my analysis: Under pressure, India makes U-turn http://www.indiatogether.org/2007/mar/dsh-dohaindia.htm). What Kamal Nath had done in the last two years was to actually hold on and give an impression that India was not caving in. He did it deftly, and with a media which looks for exciting sound bytes he was able to get away. Brick by brick, India's position on agriculture had been diluted.
I would like Anand Sharma to tell the nation as to what would be the gain for India from the Agreement on Agriculture that has almost been concluded under the Doha Round of negotiations. You will be not only surprised but shocked to know that India actually does not even know as to what would be the gains and losses from the farm agreement.
When Anand Sharma said that he is willing to provide more market access, what probably we don't realise is that India has already gone in for an autonomous liberalisation and has opened up its market. This happened in Mar 2008 when George Bush wanted India to open up, before the US could reciprocate. The import tariffs for the most important farm commodities have already been brought down to zero. Wheat import tariff is zero, rice is at zero, maize is at zero, pulses is at zero, edible oils is practically zero (or 7.5 per cent as the case may be for some categories), what further reduction do we expect now.
India opened up, but the US did not reciprocate. The US in fact approved the US Farm Bill 2008 that makes a provision for an additional farm subsidy of $ 307 billion for the next five year.
What equally disappoints me is the bystander role the negotiators of the developing countries played all along. In my subsequent writings I have said that the real culprits are the developing country negotiators who are more keen to stay put in Geneva and enjoy the perks they are being endowed with by their respective governments. This is a chance of their lifetime and they are not willing to forgo it at any cost. If WTO fails, they will have to return back. They don't want to take that risk. And who is bothered as to what happens to food security and the livelihoods of the farming communities back home. What a shame.
Nevertheless, the few remaining hurdles before the upcoming 7th WTO Ministeral in November this year are being cleared expeditiously. With India throwing in the towel, I think the resistance that came from the developing countries to an unjust and inequal multi-lateral trade regime comes to an end. The world must do what the rich and industrialised countries want them to do.
India may dilute stand on farm product imports
19 Jun 2009, 0233 hrs IST, Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN
WASHINGTON: India has indicated that it may dilute its stand on market access for foreign farm products in an effort to breathe new life into the Doha Round of WTO trade talks that were stalled due to New Delhi's previously strong opposition on the issue.
India's new commerce minister, Anand Sharma, conveyed New Delhi's position to US interlocutors, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, on Wednesday, telling them that "while a perfect solution may be elusive, it should be possible to find a fair solution acceptable to all parties, while keeping in mind that development was central to the Doha Round."
The US-India breakthrough on the issue sent ripples of excitement in trade circles where David Walker, New Zealand's ambassador to the WTO in Geneva, who steers its negotiations on agricultural goods, was quoted as saying the pledges were "very much music to my ears." But given the strong sentiments in the still largely agricultural India over the issue of foreign food imports, Sharma (and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh) may have to carefully caliberate the move.
In a statement following his meeting with Clinton, Sharma said he "briefed her about the programmes being undertaken by the Government to stimulate domestic demand while providing a social security net to the most vulnerable sections of the society, including through the successful implementation of the national Rural Employment Guarantee Program," — an euphemism really for "we still need to move slowly on farm imports and cannot simply throw open the door."
The statement was issued before Clinton had an unfortunate fall at the White House after her meeting with Sharma, resulting in a broken elbow that is expected to put her out of commission — and foreign travel — for at least three weeks. Doctors have said she may need surgery.
The Indian stand was anticipated in some quarters ever since the new government took office with a renewed mandate and the cabinet appointments saw Anand Sharma replace Kamal Nath as the commerce minister. Kamal Nath was credited with taking a strong, protectionist stand that did not go well with the Americans.
In effect, the scuttlebutt was that Kamal Nath was eased out because he had soured things with Washington over Doha, although in all other aspects, he forged closer trade ties with the US and counted many friends here.
Sharma also said New Delhi was looking forward to Clinton's forthcoming visit to India in July and expressed confidence that "her leadership would give a special impetus to the relations between the two countries."
Jun 17, 2009
How not to fight hunger
Food Security Act
How not to fight hunger
By Devinder Sharma
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/8494/how-not-fight-hunger.html
Introducing a revamped PDS is unlikely to make any meaningful difference to the hungry and the malnourished.
When Atal Bihari Vajpayee for the first time unfurled the national flag from the ramparts of the Red Fort in New Delhi, he promised to turn the infamous Kalahandi hunger belt in western Orissa into a food bowl. If only Vajpayee had made a serious attempt to wipe out hunger from Kalahandi, and follow it up with a nationwide programme to feed the hungry millions, the BJP wouldn't have been in a pitiable condition today.
And when President Pratibha Patil reiterated her government’s resolve to bring in a National Food Security Act in a bid to provide every hungry family with 25 kg of foodgrains priced at Rs 3 a kilo, it was certainly an exciting news. After all, 62 years after Independence, the government finally makes a promise to feed the hungry nation. For the 320 million who are officially categorised as hungry, nothing could be more heartening. And for another 600 million, who are able to spend less than Rs 20 a day, there appears to be some hope.
Barely in saddle, have mandarins in the food and agriculture ministry and in the Planning Commission swung into action, working overtime to give shape to the promise made by the Congress in its election manifesto. And if what we read in the newspapers is any indication, we have all the reasons to be worried. There appears to be little hope for the hungry. They must live and die in hunger.
Modelled along the lines of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS), the proposed National Food Security Act does not see beyond rights. While the success of the NREGS is still debatable, and we all know is mired in corruption and large-scale siphoning-off of the funds designated for the unemployed poor, the proposed National Food Security Act too is drawn more or less on the pattern of an equally corrupt and ineffective Public Distribution System (PDS). And this is where ends the promise of feeding a hungry nation.
Home to the world’s largest hungry population, India’s record on hunger is worse than that of nearly 25 sub-Saharan African countries. Ranked 66th among 88 vulnerable countries in the Global Hunger Index prepared by the International Food Policy Research institute, none of the states is categorised under ‘low hunger’ or ‘moderate hunger category.’ Let us not forget, the abysmally low ranking of India in the Global Hunger Index is despite the PDS, which is supposed to act as a safety net for the vulnerable sections of the society.
In fact, if the PDS had been even partially effective, there is no reason why Punjab and for that matter Kerala, the best performing states in terms of hunger, should be ranked below Gabon, Honduras and Vietnam.
Extending the same PDS or introducing a revamped PDS to meet the objectives of the National Food Security Act is therefore unlikely to make any meaningful difference to the plight of the hungry and malnourished.
At present, the government provides 35 kg of food grains, including wheat and rice, to 65.2 million families classified as living below the poverty line (BPL). These subsidised rations are made available at a price of Rs 4.15 per kg for wheat and Rs 5.65 per kg for rice. For the 24.3 million families classified under the Antyodya scheme (also part of the BPL category), the price of grains is reduced to Rs 2 for wheat and Rs 3 for rice.
Now let us look at the situation with above the poverty line (APL) families. There are roughly 115.2 million APL card holders. They get wheat at Rs 6.10 and rice at Rs 8.30 per kg, respectively. I am not sure what kind of tinkering the government is likely to do when it comes to the monthly ration for the APL families, the fact remains that foodgrains are being made available at a price much lower than the market price.
PDS on paper
The public distribution system caters to 115.2 million APL families and another 65.2 million BPL families. In others words, subsidised food is being available to a total of 180.4 million families. If you consider each family to comprise on an average of five persons, the PDS on paper meets the food requirement of 900 million people.
If this is true, there’s no reason why the country should have the largest population of hungry in the world.
The food requirement would be drastically reduced from the existing 27 million tonnes to about 20 million tonnes, and the annual subsidy outgo would also be lowered by an estimated Rs 5,000 crore. It surely is a win-win situation for the government. What happens to the poor and hungry is a different question.
Since hunger proliferates, and malnourishment thrives extensively, any effort to extend the PDS is not less than a crime. I don't know what objective the National Food Security Act would achieve by revamping the existing system. Whether it is by better targeting or by cash transfer to the vulnerable section of the population, Sonia Gandhi's desire to provide food to the hungry millions would remain a dream.
How not to fight hunger
By Devinder Sharma
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/8494/how-not-fight-hunger.html
Introducing a revamped PDS is unlikely to make any meaningful difference to the hungry and the malnourished.
When Atal Bihari Vajpayee for the first time unfurled the national flag from the ramparts of the Red Fort in New Delhi, he promised to turn the infamous Kalahandi hunger belt in western Orissa into a food bowl. If only Vajpayee had made a serious attempt to wipe out hunger from Kalahandi, and follow it up with a nationwide programme to feed the hungry millions, the BJP wouldn't have been in a pitiable condition today.
And when President Pratibha Patil reiterated her government’s resolve to bring in a National Food Security Act in a bid to provide every hungry family with 25 kg of foodgrains priced at Rs 3 a kilo, it was certainly an exciting news. After all, 62 years after Independence, the government finally makes a promise to feed the hungry nation. For the 320 million who are officially categorised as hungry, nothing could be more heartening. And for another 600 million, who are able to spend less than Rs 20 a day, there appears to be some hope.
Barely in saddle, have mandarins in the food and agriculture ministry and in the Planning Commission swung into action, working overtime to give shape to the promise made by the Congress in its election manifesto. And if what we read in the newspapers is any indication, we have all the reasons to be worried. There appears to be little hope for the hungry. They must live and die in hunger.
Modelled along the lines of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS), the proposed National Food Security Act does not see beyond rights. While the success of the NREGS is still debatable, and we all know is mired in corruption and large-scale siphoning-off of the funds designated for the unemployed poor, the proposed National Food Security Act too is drawn more or less on the pattern of an equally corrupt and ineffective Public Distribution System (PDS). And this is where ends the promise of feeding a hungry nation.
Home to the world’s largest hungry population, India’s record on hunger is worse than that of nearly 25 sub-Saharan African countries. Ranked 66th among 88 vulnerable countries in the Global Hunger Index prepared by the International Food Policy Research institute, none of the states is categorised under ‘low hunger’ or ‘moderate hunger category.’ Let us not forget, the abysmally low ranking of India in the Global Hunger Index is despite the PDS, which is supposed to act as a safety net for the vulnerable sections of the society.
In fact, if the PDS had been even partially effective, there is no reason why Punjab and for that matter Kerala, the best performing states in terms of hunger, should be ranked below Gabon, Honduras and Vietnam.
Extending the same PDS or introducing a revamped PDS to meet the objectives of the National Food Security Act is therefore unlikely to make any meaningful difference to the plight of the hungry and malnourished.
At present, the government provides 35 kg of food grains, including wheat and rice, to 65.2 million families classified as living below the poverty line (BPL). These subsidised rations are made available at a price of Rs 4.15 per kg for wheat and Rs 5.65 per kg for rice. For the 24.3 million families classified under the Antyodya scheme (also part of the BPL category), the price of grains is reduced to Rs 2 for wheat and Rs 3 for rice.
Now let us look at the situation with above the poverty line (APL) families. There are roughly 115.2 million APL card holders. They get wheat at Rs 6.10 and rice at Rs 8.30 per kg, respectively. I am not sure what kind of tinkering the government is likely to do when it comes to the monthly ration for the APL families, the fact remains that foodgrains are being made available at a price much lower than the market price.
PDS on paper
The public distribution system caters to 115.2 million APL families and another 65.2 million BPL families. In others words, subsidised food is being available to a total of 180.4 million families. If you consider each family to comprise on an average of five persons, the PDS on paper meets the food requirement of 900 million people.
If this is true, there’s no reason why the country should have the largest population of hungry in the world.
The food requirement would be drastically reduced from the existing 27 million tonnes to about 20 million tonnes, and the annual subsidy outgo would also be lowered by an estimated Rs 5,000 crore. It surely is a win-win situation for the government. What happens to the poor and hungry is a different question.
Since hunger proliferates, and malnourishment thrives extensively, any effort to extend the PDS is not less than a crime. I don't know what objective the National Food Security Act would achieve by revamping the existing system. Whether it is by better targeting or by cash transfer to the vulnerable section of the population, Sonia Gandhi's desire to provide food to the hungry millions would remain a dream.
Jun 16, 2009
Are banks and micro-finance responsible for farmer suicides?
Every time there is a discussion on farmer suicides, I find the blame would normally shift to private money-lenders. All fingers point at them. I have seen distinguished academicians, so-called grass-root activists and well-informed journalists and media personalities always agreeing that the private money-lender is the culprit. What emerges clearly and loudly from these conferences/seminars is that if the government was to extend the reach of banking credit to the poor and hapless farmers, they would be out of the grip of money-lenders and can be pulled out of the suicide trap.
Is it really so?
In my travels and interactions with farmers and others I increasingly realise that there is more than what meets the eye. There is more than what we want to see. It is not only the private money-lenders who are the culprits, the nationalised banks and the emerging class of organised money-lenders, better called as micro-finance, are equally responsible for the plight of the farming community.
At the height of the hunger crisis in Kalahandi in western Orissa sometimes around 1996-97, I remember meeting farmers who had taken loan from private money-lenders with an interest rate of 460 per cent. In the Palamu region of Jharkhand, it hovered around 280 per cent. In neighbouring Chhatisgarh, in the tribal belt, the rate of interest was roughly around 160 per cent. The more the poor you are the higher the rate of interest. And I am sure you will agree that if you and me were to pay the same rate of interest, we would never be out of the hunger trap, and would have probably ended our lives by now.
In the metros and the urban centres, we crib if the banks charge a high EMI for the home loan we have taken. There is a talk of an economic stimulus to banks to ensure that the home loan becomes cheaper to the urban middle class. In addition, we get cheaper loans for buying a car, and almost interest-free loans for buying gadgets like a refrigerator, TV and so on.
But to the poorest of the poor who avail micro-finance we are not ashamed in charging an interest rate which varies on an average between 20 to 48 per cent. Some micro-finance organisations have reduced the interest rate to less than 20, but still it is way above what we in the cities/towns pay. And when I ask these companies as to why are they charging such high interest rate, the answer is: we are empowering the poor.
What a way to empower the poor. The word loot in the dictionery surely has a new synomyn: empower.
No wonder, many of these micro-finance companies are listed on the stock exchange. It reminds me of the evil character Shylock that Shakespeare had created in Merchant of Venice. I have not forgotten that he always managed to get his pound of flesh from every borrower.
The banks normally lend for micro-finance through self-help groups (SHGs). On an average these banks charge 12 per cent from the SHGs (some say it has now been reduced to 9 per cent but I am not sure). This is perhaps the safest and the easiest of the lending that the banks indulge in. They know that this will never be defaulted. The SHGs have an inbuilt system where the village samaj recovers the pending amount from a defaulter. It is through social coercion.
In the cities, they give you a loan at a much lower rate of interest, and still they are not sure if the amount can be recovered. They apply all kinds of uncivilised means to make you cough out the amount, often agreeing for a one-time settlement.
And what about banks? Have we ever tried to ascertain their role in farmer suicides?
Kishor Tiwari's latest dispatch (taken from his blog) from the suicide-prone Vidharba belt in Maharashtra provides us the necessary insight. It is not even the tip of an iceberg, of what is wrong with the banking system when it comes to farmers and agriculture. There is a lot more that needs to be unearthed, investigated and studied in detail. I have pasted the blog as such so please pardon me for the typos.
I have always admired Kishor Tiwari and his Vidharba Jan Andolan Samiti for keeping the issue alive. It is not an easy task, and I must congratulate him for putting farmer suicides on the top of the political agenda.
Credit starved farmer commits suicide in Vidarbha : Due to bank apathy to start fresh crop loan farm suicide spiral will start in vidarbha
Nagpur, 15th June 2009
The first victim of vidarbha farm credit crisis has been reported today. One Lakhama Namdeo Tekam tribal farmer of village khusal-wagholi in yavatmal district of vidarbha committed suicide due debt trap and failed to get fresh crop loan from his coopretative bank. “Lakham was daily going to bank and he was also asking local money lender for handy loan to purchase the cotton seed and when his all attempts failed, he killed himself” informed Prem Rathode village sarpanch.
“Lakhama Tekam is not single case in isolation all farmers of that area have not received the fresh crop loan and bankers are asking us wait till 30th june as they have not received orders for crop loan disbursement” Prem Rathode added.
As per district administration reports now it’s official crop loan disbursement is less than 50% in comparison to last year disbursement . There is huge cry all vidarbha fresh crop loan to all illegible farmers after loan waiver but bankers are facing liquidity crunch due insufficient fund sanctioned by apex bank NABARD as agriculture credit has been reduced to 40% in comparison to agriculture credit to given to farmers in year 2006 after prime minister of India Dr.Man Mohan Singh visited vidarbha and announced to relief package of Rs.3750/- crore .
‘After the interest waiver of Rs.1080 crore in 2006 followed by complete loan waiver of Rs.71,000 crore in march 2008 added to maharashtra Govt.’s extended loan waiver of Rs.6208 crore in December 2008 ,it was told that in vidarbha at least 3 million farmers will get farm credit from financial institutes but non-professional attitude and non-cooperation of bankers the complete exercise of loan waiver has been failed ” Kishore tiwari of VJAS informed in press note.
“We want vidarbha farm suicide saga as part of history and we don’t want to count further farm suicide in vidarbha but corrupt officials and non-functional public leaders are not allowing us to do so .It’s very much humiliating and disturbing to count the farm suicide and then put it of international radar but in order to save dying farming community ,we will continue to do,” kishore tiwari added.
Is it really so?
In my travels and interactions with farmers and others I increasingly realise that there is more than what meets the eye. There is more than what we want to see. It is not only the private money-lenders who are the culprits, the nationalised banks and the emerging class of organised money-lenders, better called as micro-finance, are equally responsible for the plight of the farming community.
At the height of the hunger crisis in Kalahandi in western Orissa sometimes around 1996-97, I remember meeting farmers who had taken loan from private money-lenders with an interest rate of 460 per cent. In the Palamu region of Jharkhand, it hovered around 280 per cent. In neighbouring Chhatisgarh, in the tribal belt, the rate of interest was roughly around 160 per cent. The more the poor you are the higher the rate of interest. And I am sure you will agree that if you and me were to pay the same rate of interest, we would never be out of the hunger trap, and would have probably ended our lives by now.
In the metros and the urban centres, we crib if the banks charge a high EMI for the home loan we have taken. There is a talk of an economic stimulus to banks to ensure that the home loan becomes cheaper to the urban middle class. In addition, we get cheaper loans for buying a car, and almost interest-free loans for buying gadgets like a refrigerator, TV and so on.
But to the poorest of the poor who avail micro-finance we are not ashamed in charging an interest rate which varies on an average between 20 to 48 per cent. Some micro-finance organisations have reduced the interest rate to less than 20, but still it is way above what we in the cities/towns pay. And when I ask these companies as to why are they charging such high interest rate, the answer is: we are empowering the poor.
What a way to empower the poor. The word loot in the dictionery surely has a new synomyn: empower.
No wonder, many of these micro-finance companies are listed on the stock exchange. It reminds me of the evil character Shylock that Shakespeare had created in Merchant of Venice. I have not forgotten that he always managed to get his pound of flesh from every borrower.
The banks normally lend for micro-finance through self-help groups (SHGs). On an average these banks charge 12 per cent from the SHGs (some say it has now been reduced to 9 per cent but I am not sure). This is perhaps the safest and the easiest of the lending that the banks indulge in. They know that this will never be defaulted. The SHGs have an inbuilt system where the village samaj recovers the pending amount from a defaulter. It is through social coercion.
In the cities, they give you a loan at a much lower rate of interest, and still they are not sure if the amount can be recovered. They apply all kinds of uncivilised means to make you cough out the amount, often agreeing for a one-time settlement.
And what about banks? Have we ever tried to ascertain their role in farmer suicides?
Kishor Tiwari's latest dispatch (taken from his blog) from the suicide-prone Vidharba belt in Maharashtra provides us the necessary insight. It is not even the tip of an iceberg, of what is wrong with the banking system when it comes to farmers and agriculture. There is a lot more that needs to be unearthed, investigated and studied in detail. I have pasted the blog as such so please pardon me for the typos.
I have always admired Kishor Tiwari and his Vidharba Jan Andolan Samiti for keeping the issue alive. It is not an easy task, and I must congratulate him for putting farmer suicides on the top of the political agenda.
Credit starved farmer commits suicide in Vidarbha : Due to bank apathy to start fresh crop loan farm suicide spiral will start in vidarbha
Nagpur, 15th June 2009
The first victim of vidarbha farm credit crisis has been reported today. One Lakhama Namdeo Tekam tribal farmer of village khusal-wagholi in yavatmal district of vidarbha committed suicide due debt trap and failed to get fresh crop loan from his coopretative bank. “Lakham was daily going to bank and he was also asking local money lender for handy loan to purchase the cotton seed and when his all attempts failed, he killed himself” informed Prem Rathode village sarpanch.
“Lakhama Tekam is not single case in isolation all farmers of that area have not received the fresh crop loan and bankers are asking us wait till 30th june as they have not received orders for crop loan disbursement” Prem Rathode added.
As per district administration reports now it’s official crop loan disbursement is less than 50% in comparison to last year disbursement . There is huge cry all vidarbha fresh crop loan to all illegible farmers after loan waiver but bankers are facing liquidity crunch due insufficient fund sanctioned by apex bank NABARD as agriculture credit has been reduced to 40% in comparison to agriculture credit to given to farmers in year 2006 after prime minister of India Dr.Man Mohan Singh visited vidarbha and announced to relief package of Rs.3750/- crore .
‘After the interest waiver of Rs.1080 crore in 2006 followed by complete loan waiver of Rs.71,000 crore in march 2008 added to maharashtra Govt.’s extended loan waiver of Rs.6208 crore in December 2008 ,it was told that in vidarbha at least 3 million farmers will get farm credit from financial institutes but non-professional attitude and non-cooperation of bankers the complete exercise of loan waiver has been failed ” Kishore tiwari of VJAS informed in press note.
“We want vidarbha farm suicide saga as part of history and we don’t want to count further farm suicide in vidarbha but corrupt officials and non-functional public leaders are not allowing us to do so .It’s very much humiliating and disturbing to count the farm suicide and then put it of international radar but in order to save dying farming community ,we will continue to do,” kishore tiwari added.
Jun 15, 2009
Do exports benefit farmers? Let us look at cotton
There is general feeling that agricultural commodity exports translate into higher income for farmers. It may be true in some cases, but by and large I have always seen that the benefit actually accrues only to the exporters. They are often able to export more because of the price difference, taking advantage of the low domestic prices vis a vis the international prices.
Take the case of cotton. I think it is an excellent case study to know who earns from exports. I remember the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP) had several years back in one of its reports said that cotton growers were deliberately paid 20 per cent less so as to keep the textile industry globally competitive. This policy has continued thereafter. In other words, it is the cotton farmers who have actually been subsidising the textile industry all these years.
No wonder, nearly 70 per cent of the farmers who have committed suicide were cotton growers.
All these years, cotton farmers were paid low prices. Then suddenly, in 2008-09, the cotton year that just passed, the procurement price of cotton were raised substantially -- from Rs 2050 to Rs 3000 -- a quantum jump something not witnessed in the recent past. This 40 per cent increase in procurement price certainly did not find favour with the textile industry, and of course the exporters. There were demands for lowering the price, and also for more incentives to exporters who were finding it uneconomical to export cotton in view of the high domestic prices.
Lesson 1: Exporters need cotton at low prices. So obviously it is not the cotton growers who benefit if exports increase.
While farmers gained, and this is also reflected in the way the electorate has voted in the suicide-prone cotton belt of Vidharba, the industry wasn't happy. But now let us look at the production figures. In 2007-08, the area planted under cotton was 94.39 lakh hectares. In 2008-09, it remained almost same at 93.73 lakh hectares. You would generally not expect much variation in production given that the area had remained almost static. And also let us not forget, considering the claim that production was actually increasing because of Bt cotton, if it holds true, there is no reason why cotton production in 2008-09 shouldn't have kept pace with the recorded harvest a year earlier in 2007-08.
As per the Cotton Corporation of India (CCI), cotton production in 2007-08 was a record 315 lakh bales (each bale weighing 170 kgs). This was attributed to a massive coverage of the cotton area with Bt cotton varieties, which is believed to have translated into higher productivity. The CCI also acknowledges that the agro-climatic conditions in 2007-08 had remained favourable.
In 2008-09, production drastically fell to 290 lakh bales. This was of course blamed on adverse weather conditions during the crop season. Well, did you notice that when the production is high, the credit goes to Bt cotton varieties; and when production falls, it is invariably the inclement weather to be blamed. The fact remains that if the weather is fine, it doesn't matter whether you are cultivating Bt cotton or non-GM cotton. Production will remain high in both the cases.
In that case, why not give credit to the weather for higher production?
If higher production in 2007-08 is attributed to increased productivity from Bt cotton; shouldn't the fall in production in 2008-09 also be linked to the declining performance of Bt cotton? Why I am specifically tallking about Bt cotton is because despite the claims by the seed industry and the government, the fact is that Bt cotton does not increase productivity. It only reduces crop losses.
Lesson 2: It is the weather which is actually responsible for higher production, and similarly it is the weather which can reduce crop productivity and thereby lower total production.
Coming to exports. This is where you see an interesting trend. In 2007-08, India exported 85 lakh bales. This year, the expectations have nose dived. Although the expectation is that India should be able to export 50 lakh bales this year, Cotton Association of India (CAI) estimates that by August 2009, the actual exports may touch only 40 lakh bales.The textile industry blames the high domestic cotton prices for the decline in exports, and estimates that the final figure may not even touch 30 lakh bales. The office of Textile Commissioner has figures upto July 2009, and it shows that so far permission for only 28 lakh bales exists including 16 lakh bales to be exported to Bangladesh, Pakistan, China and Indonesia.
Whatever be the final figures, exports have come down heavily from 85 lakh bales in 2007-08 to 50 lakh bales (if we accept the estimates drawn for the year) in 2008-09. While the industry may crib and cry, the fact remains that farmers are a happy lot. They never had it so good. And this was primarily because of a higher procurement price and not because of the high exports undertaken in the past.
Lesson 3: Exports do not benefit farmers. If cotton exports had benefitted farmers, there is no reason for the suicides to be so high. And secondly, farmers would have demanded an export-oriented marketing system rather than high procurement prices.
Take the case of cotton. I think it is an excellent case study to know who earns from exports. I remember the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP) had several years back in one of its reports said that cotton growers were deliberately paid 20 per cent less so as to keep the textile industry globally competitive. This policy has continued thereafter. In other words, it is the cotton farmers who have actually been subsidising the textile industry all these years.
No wonder, nearly 70 per cent of the farmers who have committed suicide were cotton growers.
All these years, cotton farmers were paid low prices. Then suddenly, in 2008-09, the cotton year that just passed, the procurement price of cotton were raised substantially -- from Rs 2050 to Rs 3000 -- a quantum jump something not witnessed in the recent past. This 40 per cent increase in procurement price certainly did not find favour with the textile industry, and of course the exporters. There were demands for lowering the price, and also for more incentives to exporters who were finding it uneconomical to export cotton in view of the high domestic prices.
Lesson 1: Exporters need cotton at low prices. So obviously it is not the cotton growers who benefit if exports increase.
While farmers gained, and this is also reflected in the way the electorate has voted in the suicide-prone cotton belt of Vidharba, the industry wasn't happy. But now let us look at the production figures. In 2007-08, the area planted under cotton was 94.39 lakh hectares. In 2008-09, it remained almost same at 93.73 lakh hectares. You would generally not expect much variation in production given that the area had remained almost static. And also let us not forget, considering the claim that production was actually increasing because of Bt cotton, if it holds true, there is no reason why cotton production in 2008-09 shouldn't have kept pace with the recorded harvest a year earlier in 2007-08.
As per the Cotton Corporation of India (CCI), cotton production in 2007-08 was a record 315 lakh bales (each bale weighing 170 kgs). This was attributed to a massive coverage of the cotton area with Bt cotton varieties, which is believed to have translated into higher productivity. The CCI also acknowledges that the agro-climatic conditions in 2007-08 had remained favourable.
In 2008-09, production drastically fell to 290 lakh bales. This was of course blamed on adverse weather conditions during the crop season. Well, did you notice that when the production is high, the credit goes to Bt cotton varieties; and when production falls, it is invariably the inclement weather to be blamed. The fact remains that if the weather is fine, it doesn't matter whether you are cultivating Bt cotton or non-GM cotton. Production will remain high in both the cases.
In that case, why not give credit to the weather for higher production?
If higher production in 2007-08 is attributed to increased productivity from Bt cotton; shouldn't the fall in production in 2008-09 also be linked to the declining performance of Bt cotton? Why I am specifically tallking about Bt cotton is because despite the claims by the seed industry and the government, the fact is that Bt cotton does not increase productivity. It only reduces crop losses.
Lesson 2: It is the weather which is actually responsible for higher production, and similarly it is the weather which can reduce crop productivity and thereby lower total production.
Coming to exports. This is where you see an interesting trend. In 2007-08, India exported 85 lakh bales. This year, the expectations have nose dived. Although the expectation is that India should be able to export 50 lakh bales this year, Cotton Association of India (CAI) estimates that by August 2009, the actual exports may touch only 40 lakh bales.The textile industry blames the high domestic cotton prices for the decline in exports, and estimates that the final figure may not even touch 30 lakh bales. The office of Textile Commissioner has figures upto July 2009, and it shows that so far permission for only 28 lakh bales exists including 16 lakh bales to be exported to Bangladesh, Pakistan, China and Indonesia.
Whatever be the final figures, exports have come down heavily from 85 lakh bales in 2007-08 to 50 lakh bales (if we accept the estimates drawn for the year) in 2008-09. While the industry may crib and cry, the fact remains that farmers are a happy lot. They never had it so good. And this was primarily because of a higher procurement price and not because of the high exports undertaken in the past.
Lesson 3: Exports do not benefit farmers. If cotton exports had benefitted farmers, there is no reason for the suicides to be so high. And secondly, farmers would have demanded an export-oriented marketing system rather than high procurement prices.
Jun 11, 2009
Food-for-all is possible
The largest selling Hindi daily Dainik Jagran (also the world's most read newspaper) recently launched its national edition. It has carried a detailed report/analysis on the need for the Food Security Act that the government is contemplating. I was asked whether this scheme is feasible. My reply is that this is a programme that the nation was awaiting for over 60 years now.
For nearly 320 million people who go to bed hungry everynight, the number of hungry being almost equal to the entire population of the United States, food is God. I admire Sonia Gandhi for showing what Indian politicians of all colours lacked -- the political will to feed the nation. I always used to wonder why can't successive Prime Ministers ever think of feeding the nation, a task they are supposed to undertake if they really were to go by the Directive Principles, if they really believed in democracy being for the people.
Anyway, better late than never. The National Food Security Act has to be planned first very meticulously, based on the foundations of sustainability, and cannot be a stand-alone kind of a programme. It will need integration with several other schemes, and even revisiting some of our international commitments mainly in the arena of trade. It is a programme that has to be planned by people who care for the hungry, and not by bureaucrats and policy planners. If they were capable of doing it, there wouldn't have been any hungry by now. India wouldn't have been ranked below countries of the sub-Saharan Africa in the Global Hunger Index.
I am so excited at the prospect the Food-for-all programme offers. This was my dream (like many of you) all these years. I never thought India would in reality ever launch such a programme, which can be easily turned into a Zero Hunger programme. This is the right investment a hungry nation like India has to make. Invest on people. People are your biggest asset. They are not a burden.
Jai Ho !!
देवेंद्र शर्मा 1984 में मैं राजीव गाधी के साथ देश के एक सुदूर गांव की यात्रा पर था। राजीव ने गांव की एक वृद्ध महिला से पूछा, मैं आपके लिए क्या कर सकता हूं? उस महिला ने एक वाक्य में कहा, बेटा अनाज दे दो। राजीव ने बहुत दुखी मन से कहा कि आजादी के इतने साल बाद भी देश का यह हाल है कि लोग अनाज के लिए तरस रहे हैं। यह एक कड़वा सच है। आज भी इस स्थिति में कोई सुधार नहीं आया है। ऐसे में यह सरकार जिस राष्ट्रीय खाद्य सुरक्षा कानून को लाने की बात कर रही है, उससे आशा की कुछ किरण नजर आती है। सबको भोजन मिले, आम जनता के लिए यही सबसे बड़ा अधिकार है। एक सवाल उठता है कि जीने का अधिकार तो हमारा मूल अधिकार है, लेकिन जिस भोजन के माध्यम से जीवित रहेंगे, उसकी तो कोई बात ही नहींकर रहा। अगर इतने सालों बाद अब यह आवाज सरकार के कानों तक पहुंची है तो यह देश की भूखी जनता की जीत है। सार्वजनिक वितरण प्रणाली के तहत कई सरकारें अपने-अपने राज्यों में दो-तीन रुपये किलो के हिसाब से प्रत्येक परिवार को 25-25 किलो चावल और गेहूं दे रही हैं, लेकिनइसके पीछे एक बड़ा सवाल है कि यह अनाज वे किसे दे रही हैं? यह एक बड़ी समस्या है कि असली जरूरतमंद को वह चीज नहींमिल पाती है, जिसके लिए उसे आरंभ किया गया है। इसलिए मेरा सुझाव है कि बीपीएल (बिलो पॉवर्टी लाइन) और एपीएल (अपर पॉवर्टी लाइन) से ऊपर उठकर हंगर प्रोग्राम चलाया जाए। जो भूखा हो उसे भोजन मिले, चाहे वह जो भी हो। गावों में अनाज वितरण की एक प्रणाली का जिक्र करना चाहूंगा और वह है गोला प्रणाली। इस व्यवस्था में चाहे कोई अमीर हो या गरीब, अगर उसके पास अनाज अधिक है तो वह जरूरतमंद को देता है और जब वह लिया हुआ अनाज वापस करता है तो कुछ अधिक मात्रा में। इससे एक चेन बनी रहती है। ऐसे ही फूड गेन सिस्टम पर जोर देना होगा। कालाहांडी में अकाल पड़ा तो वे जगहें अप्रभावित रहीं,जहां फूड गेन सिस्टम चल रहा था। गांधी जी कहा करते थे कि महत्वपूर्ण यह नहींहै कि लोगों द्वारा अनाज पैदा किया जाए, बल्कि महत्वपूर्ण यह है कि लोगों के लिए पैदा किया जाए। यही बात राइट टू फूड के बारे में भी कही जा रही है कि फूड सिक्योरिटी से ज्यादा जरूरी है फूड सावरिनिटी। फूड सिक्योरिटी का लक्ष्य होता है कि अनाज मिले, चाहे वह देश में पैदा हो या विदेश से आए। वर्ल्ड बैंक ने वर्ष 1996 में कहा था कि 2015 तक भारत के 40 करोड़ लोग गांवों से शहरों की ओर पलायन करेंगे यानी अमेरिका की जनसंख्या के बराबर लोग। जाहिर है, जब इतनी भारी तादाद में लोग शहर जाएंगे तो नि:संदेह खेती करने वाले लोगों में भी कमी आएगी। ऐसी स्थिति में बताइए कौन-सा ऐसा देश है, जहां से आप इतना अनाज ले आएंगे? अमेरिका में मात्र सात लाख किसान हैं, जबकि हमारे देश में इनकी संख्या साठ करोड़ है। उन्हें खेत से निकाल देंगे तो देश को अन्न कहां से मिलेगा? फूड सावरिनिटी का लक्ष्य है देश के ही लोग, देश के लिए अन्न पैदा करें। मैं एक बात फिर से दोहराना चाहूंगा कि सरकार का यह प्रयास प्रशंसनीय तो है, लेकिन इसे लागू करने में कोई हड़बड़ी न दिखाई जाए। पहले उत्पादन और वितरण की प्रणाली को सुधारा जाए। सरकार कहती है कि हम तो किसानों को सब्सिडी दे रहे हैं। अरे, किन किसानों को सब्सिडी दे रहे हैं? देश का 60 प्रतिशत किसान तो बाजार तक पहुंच ही नहीं पाता। हमारे यहां चतुर्थ श्रेणी के सरकारी कर्मचारी को भी एक निश्चित वेतन मिलता है, लेकिन किसानों के लिए ऐसी कोई व्यस्था नहीं है। उनके लिए भी ऐसा कुछ होना ही चाहिए। जरूरी यह भी है कि जनता ऐसी योजनाओं के लिए सरकार पर दबाव बनाए। हजारों करोड़ की योजनाएं आती हैं तो उसकी सफलता-असफलता पर हम सवाल खड़े नहीं करते और जब गरीबों के लिए दो-तीन रुपये की योजनाएं आती हैं तो हम सवाल खड़े करने लगते हैं। याद रखिए ऐसे प्रोग्राम भी हमारे देश का भविष्य तय करेंगे। इसलिए इनकी सफलता की कामना कीजिए।
(लेखक खाद्य एवं कृषि नीतियों के विशेषज्ञ हैं)
For nearly 320 million people who go to bed hungry everynight, the number of hungry being almost equal to the entire population of the United States, food is God. I admire Sonia Gandhi for showing what Indian politicians of all colours lacked -- the political will to feed the nation. I always used to wonder why can't successive Prime Ministers ever think of feeding the nation, a task they are supposed to undertake if they really were to go by the Directive Principles, if they really believed in democracy being for the people.
Anyway, better late than never. The National Food Security Act has to be planned first very meticulously, based on the foundations of sustainability, and cannot be a stand-alone kind of a programme. It will need integration with several other schemes, and even revisiting some of our international commitments mainly in the arena of trade. It is a programme that has to be planned by people who care for the hungry, and not by bureaucrats and policy planners. If they were capable of doing it, there wouldn't have been any hungry by now. India wouldn't have been ranked below countries of the sub-Saharan Africa in the Global Hunger Index.
I am so excited at the prospect the Food-for-all programme offers. This was my dream (like many of you) all these years. I never thought India would in reality ever launch such a programme, which can be easily turned into a Zero Hunger programme. This is the right investment a hungry nation like India has to make. Invest on people. People are your biggest asset. They are not a burden.
Jai Ho !!
देवेंद्र शर्मा 1984 में मैं राजीव गाधी के साथ देश के एक सुदूर गांव की यात्रा पर था। राजीव ने गांव की एक वृद्ध महिला से पूछा, मैं आपके लिए क्या कर सकता हूं? उस महिला ने एक वाक्य में कहा, बेटा अनाज दे दो। राजीव ने बहुत दुखी मन से कहा कि आजादी के इतने साल बाद भी देश का यह हाल है कि लोग अनाज के लिए तरस रहे हैं। यह एक कड़वा सच है। आज भी इस स्थिति में कोई सुधार नहीं आया है। ऐसे में यह सरकार जिस राष्ट्रीय खाद्य सुरक्षा कानून को लाने की बात कर रही है, उससे आशा की कुछ किरण नजर आती है। सबको भोजन मिले, आम जनता के लिए यही सबसे बड़ा अधिकार है। एक सवाल उठता है कि जीने का अधिकार तो हमारा मूल अधिकार है, लेकिन जिस भोजन के माध्यम से जीवित रहेंगे, उसकी तो कोई बात ही नहींकर रहा। अगर इतने सालों बाद अब यह आवाज सरकार के कानों तक पहुंची है तो यह देश की भूखी जनता की जीत है। सार्वजनिक वितरण प्रणाली के तहत कई सरकारें अपने-अपने राज्यों में दो-तीन रुपये किलो के हिसाब से प्रत्येक परिवार को 25-25 किलो चावल और गेहूं दे रही हैं, लेकिनइसके पीछे एक बड़ा सवाल है कि यह अनाज वे किसे दे रही हैं? यह एक बड़ी समस्या है कि असली जरूरतमंद को वह चीज नहींमिल पाती है, जिसके लिए उसे आरंभ किया गया है। इसलिए मेरा सुझाव है कि बीपीएल (बिलो पॉवर्टी लाइन) और एपीएल (अपर पॉवर्टी लाइन) से ऊपर उठकर हंगर प्रोग्राम चलाया जाए। जो भूखा हो उसे भोजन मिले, चाहे वह जो भी हो। गावों में अनाज वितरण की एक प्रणाली का जिक्र करना चाहूंगा और वह है गोला प्रणाली। इस व्यवस्था में चाहे कोई अमीर हो या गरीब, अगर उसके पास अनाज अधिक है तो वह जरूरतमंद को देता है और जब वह लिया हुआ अनाज वापस करता है तो कुछ अधिक मात्रा में। इससे एक चेन बनी रहती है। ऐसे ही फूड गेन सिस्टम पर जोर देना होगा। कालाहांडी में अकाल पड़ा तो वे जगहें अप्रभावित रहीं,जहां फूड गेन सिस्टम चल रहा था। गांधी जी कहा करते थे कि महत्वपूर्ण यह नहींहै कि लोगों द्वारा अनाज पैदा किया जाए, बल्कि महत्वपूर्ण यह है कि लोगों के लिए पैदा किया जाए। यही बात राइट टू फूड के बारे में भी कही जा रही है कि फूड सिक्योरिटी से ज्यादा जरूरी है फूड सावरिनिटी। फूड सिक्योरिटी का लक्ष्य होता है कि अनाज मिले, चाहे वह देश में पैदा हो या विदेश से आए। वर्ल्ड बैंक ने वर्ष 1996 में कहा था कि 2015 तक भारत के 40 करोड़ लोग गांवों से शहरों की ओर पलायन करेंगे यानी अमेरिका की जनसंख्या के बराबर लोग। जाहिर है, जब इतनी भारी तादाद में लोग शहर जाएंगे तो नि:संदेह खेती करने वाले लोगों में भी कमी आएगी। ऐसी स्थिति में बताइए कौन-सा ऐसा देश है, जहां से आप इतना अनाज ले आएंगे? अमेरिका में मात्र सात लाख किसान हैं, जबकि हमारे देश में इनकी संख्या साठ करोड़ है। उन्हें खेत से निकाल देंगे तो देश को अन्न कहां से मिलेगा? फूड सावरिनिटी का लक्ष्य है देश के ही लोग, देश के लिए अन्न पैदा करें। मैं एक बात फिर से दोहराना चाहूंगा कि सरकार का यह प्रयास प्रशंसनीय तो है, लेकिन इसे लागू करने में कोई हड़बड़ी न दिखाई जाए। पहले उत्पादन और वितरण की प्रणाली को सुधारा जाए। सरकार कहती है कि हम तो किसानों को सब्सिडी दे रहे हैं। अरे, किन किसानों को सब्सिडी दे रहे हैं? देश का 60 प्रतिशत किसान तो बाजार तक पहुंच ही नहीं पाता। हमारे यहां चतुर्थ श्रेणी के सरकारी कर्मचारी को भी एक निश्चित वेतन मिलता है, लेकिन किसानों के लिए ऐसी कोई व्यस्था नहीं है। उनके लिए भी ऐसा कुछ होना ही चाहिए। जरूरी यह भी है कि जनता ऐसी योजनाओं के लिए सरकार पर दबाव बनाए। हजारों करोड़ की योजनाएं आती हैं तो उसकी सफलता-असफलता पर हम सवाल खड़े नहीं करते और जब गरीबों के लिए दो-तीन रुपये की योजनाएं आती हैं तो हम सवाल खड़े करने लगते हैं। याद रखिए ऐसे प्रोग्राम भी हमारे देश का भविष्य तय करेंगे। इसलिए इनकी सफलता की कामना कीजिए।
(लेखक खाद्य एवं कृषि नीतियों के विशेषज्ञ हैं)
Jun 9, 2009
Micro-insurance -- another deceptive channel aimed at selling costly farm inputs
I fail to understand. Why do some of the better sounding initiatives, which seem to be addressing the livelihood concerns of the poor, including farmers, eventually end up selling consumer goods and/or agricultural inputs? Why do such projects/programmes have to turn into a marketing channel? And that too for unwanted farm inputs and technologies, which ultimately ends up doing more damage not only by way of introducing unsustainable farming practices but also fleecing farmers in the name of capacity building.
It happened earlier with self-help groups (SHGs). What was conceived as an apparently wonderful initiative, aimed at building up entrepreneurship amongst the poorest of the poor women, finally turned out to be a marketing chain for selling consumer products. Micro-finance too followed the same route. In Bangladesh, micro-finance is invariably tied with the sale of pesticides, hybrid seeds and costly but unwanted farm equipments.
Look at this latest initiative. Micro-insurance is being pushed not only as an insurance against bad weather and resulting crop failure, but also is being promoted in the name of climate change adaptive measures for small farmers in Asia, Africa and Latin America. I haven't yet studied it in detail, but what caught my eye when I read the news report pasted below was the statement: as well as insuring against crop failure, the scheme also helps farmers access larger loans to pay for seeds and equipments, Leftley said, citing previous trials that saw banks lend 15-40 per cent more to farmers who have insurance.
Hope you got my point. The micro-insurance scheme will insure farmers with one hand, and take back whatever he saves in the name of resulting crop security by forcing him (by tying easy bank loans with input dealers) to buy unwanted and expensive inputs and technologies. I wouldn't be surprised if the sales of hybrid seeds, GM seeds, pesticides and fertilisers now get a boost in Kolhapur district of Maharashtra where the scheme is being introduced.
Intensive farming only acerbates global warming. All the inputs that the farmers will buy with increased bank loans will only end up adding to greenhouse gas emissions. Let us not be befooled therefore in accepting micro-finance as a central component of climate change adaptation measures.
Indian farmers to insure themselves against climate change crop failures.
UN negotiators at Bonn consider micro-insurance schemes among daptation measures for Africa, Asia and Latin America
James Murray
Monday 8 June 2009 10.58 BST
For more than half a million farmers in rural India the age old fear of crops failing due to bad weather could soon be banished, thanks to an innovative insurance scheme that UN negotiators gathering in Bonn
this week are considering as a central component of climate change adaptation measures in Africa, Asia and Latin America.
Following a successful trial last month, MicroEnsure, a company specialising in providing insurance to poor communities, plans to launch a scheme next year for up to 600,000 farmers in India's Kolhapur province allowing them to insure against their rice crops failing due to drought or heavy rains during the plants' flowering period.
Chief executive Richard Leftley said micro-insurance policies — so -called because of their relatively low premiums — will be offered to farmers with loans from the local Kolhapur District Cooperative Bank.
The firm will then pay out to farmers when weather stations show crops are likely to have been damaged by rain or drought, making it possible for smallholders to support their families and continue loan
repayments even when crops fail.
The scheme, which is receiving funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, will be promoted using comic books designed to explain visually how insurance works to farmers who have previously had no
access to insurance cover. It will also be supported by finance from the Indian government that will effectively halve the price of premiums to around 2.5% of the value of the loan.
Leftley is anticipating huge demand from farmers in the region. "We ran a pilot scheme last month for 5,000 farmers and it sold out in two days," he said, adding that after similarly successful trials in Malawi, Ethiopia and the Philippines the company was now looking to rove micro-insurance schemes could work on a large scale.
As well as insuring against crop failure, the scheme also helps farmers access larger loans to pay for seeds and equipment, Leftley said, citing previous trials that saw banks lend 15% to 40% more to farmers who have insurance.
MicroEnsure's plans come as delegates at this week's UN climate change talks in Bonn debate whether rich countries should provide financial support to the fledgling sector. The official negotiating text [pdf], which forms the basis of an international climate change deal that is expected to be finalised in Copenhagen later this year, includes proposals to support micro-insurance projects.
Read the full report at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/08/farming-india
It happened earlier with self-help groups (SHGs). What was conceived as an apparently wonderful initiative, aimed at building up entrepreneurship amongst the poorest of the poor women, finally turned out to be a marketing chain for selling consumer products. Micro-finance too followed the same route. In Bangladesh, micro-finance is invariably tied with the sale of pesticides, hybrid seeds and costly but unwanted farm equipments.
Look at this latest initiative. Micro-insurance is being pushed not only as an insurance against bad weather and resulting crop failure, but also is being promoted in the name of climate change adaptive measures for small farmers in Asia, Africa and Latin America. I haven't yet studied it in detail, but what caught my eye when I read the news report pasted below was the statement: as well as insuring against crop failure, the scheme also helps farmers access larger loans to pay for seeds and equipments, Leftley said, citing previous trials that saw banks lend 15-40 per cent more to farmers who have insurance.
Hope you got my point. The micro-insurance scheme will insure farmers with one hand, and take back whatever he saves in the name of resulting crop security by forcing him (by tying easy bank loans with input dealers) to buy unwanted and expensive inputs and technologies. I wouldn't be surprised if the sales of hybrid seeds, GM seeds, pesticides and fertilisers now get a boost in Kolhapur district of Maharashtra where the scheme is being introduced.
Intensive farming only acerbates global warming. All the inputs that the farmers will buy with increased bank loans will only end up adding to greenhouse gas emissions. Let us not be befooled therefore in accepting micro-finance as a central component of climate change adaptation measures.
Indian farmers to insure themselves against climate change crop failures.
UN negotiators at Bonn consider micro-insurance schemes among daptation measures for Africa, Asia and Latin America
James Murray
Monday 8 June 2009 10.58 BST
For more than half a million farmers in rural India the age old fear of crops failing due to bad weather could soon be banished, thanks to an innovative insurance scheme that UN negotiators gathering in Bonn
this week are considering as a central component of climate change adaptation measures in Africa, Asia and Latin America.
Following a successful trial last month, MicroEnsure, a company specialising in providing insurance to poor communities, plans to launch a scheme next year for up to 600,000 farmers in India's Kolhapur province allowing them to insure against their rice crops failing due to drought or heavy rains during the plants' flowering period.
Chief executive Richard Leftley said micro-insurance policies — so -called because of their relatively low premiums — will be offered to farmers with loans from the local Kolhapur District Cooperative Bank.
The firm will then pay out to farmers when weather stations show crops are likely to have been damaged by rain or drought, making it possible for smallholders to support their families and continue loan
repayments even when crops fail.
The scheme, which is receiving funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, will be promoted using comic books designed to explain visually how insurance works to farmers who have previously had no
access to insurance cover. It will also be supported by finance from the Indian government that will effectively halve the price of premiums to around 2.5% of the value of the loan.
Leftley is anticipating huge demand from farmers in the region. "We ran a pilot scheme last month for 5,000 farmers and it sold out in two days," he said, adding that after similarly successful trials in Malawi, Ethiopia and the Philippines the company was now looking to rove micro-insurance schemes could work on a large scale.
As well as insuring against crop failure, the scheme also helps farmers access larger loans to pay for seeds and equipment, Leftley said, citing previous trials that saw banks lend 15% to 40% more to farmers who have insurance.
MicroEnsure's plans come as delegates at this week's UN climate change talks in Bonn debate whether rich countries should provide financial support to the fledgling sector. The official negotiating text [pdf], which forms the basis of an international climate change deal that is expected to be finalised in Copenhagen later this year, includes proposals to support micro-insurance projects.
Read the full report at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/08/farming-india
Jun 6, 2009
GM fire spreading in India
The fire has spread to the Ministry for Environment and Forests. Now, don't get me wrong. I am not talking about forest fires. I know this is the season -- dry and hot months of the summer -- for forest fires. There is another fire that is spreading throughout the country. Yes, you got it right. I am refering to the GM fire that Mahesh Bhatt has been talking about.
Mr Jairam Ramesh, the Minister for Environment and Forests, on June 5 told a delegation of the Coalition for GM Free India that he too has concerns on GM foods and stressed the need for a comprehensive policy level decision on GM foods. He also promised to hold an environment audit of the Bt cotton experience. The Minister had earlier said that he was not in favour of the commercialisation of Bt brinjal, a food crop, and the jury about its safety is still out.
Far away in Thriruvanthapuram, the Kerala Agricultural Minister Mullakkara Ratnakaran, launched a State-wide programme to protect and conserve natural resources and food cultures. Terming it as a beginning of a new agriculture in Kerala, God's Own Country, that a network of 100 neighbourhood groups were being formed to to encourage sustainable agriculture and thereby protect fields, waterbodies and trees.
Speaking at the inaugural address at a conference organised on the occasion of the World Environment Day, the minister accused multinationals of promoting 'food terror' through Genetically Modified (GM) crops. "Corporate agenda should not be allowed to dictate agricultural practices and dietary habits," he was quoted as saying in a news report.
On June 7, Mahesh Bhatt is travelling to Jaipur to formally launch his documentary film Poison on the Platter in Rajasthan.
The GM fire is spreading. Despite Mahyco's efforts to create public opinion through media conferences in various cities, the opposition to GM foods is growing. In fact, the media too has now begun to understand the politics behind GM crops. In New Delhi, Thiruvantapuram, Bhubaneshwar and elsewhere, reports say that Mahyco representatives faced really tough questions resulting in abrupt ending of the press conferences.
Mr Jairam Ramesh, the Minister for Environment and Forests, on June 5 told a delegation of the Coalition for GM Free India that he too has concerns on GM foods and stressed the need for a comprehensive policy level decision on GM foods. He also promised to hold an environment audit of the Bt cotton experience. The Minister had earlier said that he was not in favour of the commercialisation of Bt brinjal, a food crop, and the jury about its safety is still out.
Far away in Thriruvanthapuram, the Kerala Agricultural Minister Mullakkara Ratnakaran, launched a State-wide programme to protect and conserve natural resources and food cultures. Terming it as a beginning of a new agriculture in Kerala, God's Own Country, that a network of 100 neighbourhood groups were being formed to to encourage sustainable agriculture and thereby protect fields, waterbodies and trees.
Speaking at the inaugural address at a conference organised on the occasion of the World Environment Day, the minister accused multinationals of promoting 'food terror' through Genetically Modified (GM) crops. "Corporate agenda should not be allowed to dictate agricultural practices and dietary habits," he was quoted as saying in a news report.
On June 7, Mahesh Bhatt is travelling to Jaipur to formally launch his documentary film Poison on the Platter in Rajasthan.
The GM fire is spreading. Despite Mahyco's efforts to create public opinion through media conferences in various cities, the opposition to GM foods is growing. In fact, the media too has now begun to understand the politics behind GM crops. In New Delhi, Thiruvantapuram, Bhubaneshwar and elsewhere, reports say that Mahyco representatives faced really tough questions resulting in abrupt ending of the press conferences.
Jun 3, 2009
Calling for a national mourning -- Five IIM-A students have not got jobs !
Oh ! my God !! What a tragedy !!! Five students from Indian Institute of Management in Ahmedabad (IIMA) have not got jobs.
Shouldn't the nation be alarmed? Isn't it breaking news? Shouldn't the Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh call an emergency session of Parliament? After all, as PSN writes from Bhubaneshwar: "A chance for honey and milk to flow across this land is lost."
The Hindu reports today from Ahmedabad under the headline 5 IIM-A Students Yet to Get Jobs: Five of the 77 students of the one-year post-graduate programme in management for executives at the IIM-A are yet to find jobs even after completing the course in March. I don't remember when was the last time The Hindu carried a news report on the growing unemployment among doctoral and post-graduate students passing out from agricultural universities every year. When was the last time you saw a report in any of the newspapers about the worsening unempoyment scenario in this country. I am sure you need to think deeply, and you must be scratching your head again and again.
What is it that makes the IIM-A so special? Well, you guessed it right. They are the new movers and shakers. They are new holy cows of modern India. The entire national economy, many believe, is being run by them or their collective wisdom. No wonder, the Moily committee had recomended in 2006 setting up of three more IIMs to ensure "more balanced access to management education in the country'. Each IIM needs an investment of Rs 200-300 crore.
On the other hand, agricultural universities, which directly impact 600 million farmers, and more importantly the country's food security, are starved of funds. Most of the universities are running on artificial respiration being provided by the World Bank through the National Agricultural Innovation Project (NAIP). Such is the worsening financial condition that many universities are now selling-off their crop research lands to raise funds for paying staff salaries.
Hundreds of Ph.Ds in agricultural are unemployed.
These universities are therefore looking at private funding, thereby allowing the agribusiness giants -- both national and international -- to take control. Research is getting privatised, and so are the research faculties. But who cares? As long as the IIMs are in a healthy state, the country seems to be on a growth path. The rest of the education is simply junk. It has no productive value. At least that's what our planners, policy makers and the media leaders think, and strangely enough they have begun to think alike.
Shouldn't the nation be alarmed? Isn't it breaking news? Shouldn't the Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh call an emergency session of Parliament? After all, as PSN writes from Bhubaneshwar: "A chance for honey and milk to flow across this land is lost."
The Hindu reports today from Ahmedabad under the headline 5 IIM-A Students Yet to Get Jobs: Five of the 77 students of the one-year post-graduate programme in management for executives at the IIM-A are yet to find jobs even after completing the course in March. I don't remember when was the last time The Hindu carried a news report on the growing unemployment among doctoral and post-graduate students passing out from agricultural universities every year. When was the last time you saw a report in any of the newspapers about the worsening unempoyment scenario in this country. I am sure you need to think deeply, and you must be scratching your head again and again.
What is it that makes the IIM-A so special? Well, you guessed it right. They are the new movers and shakers. They are new holy cows of modern India. The entire national economy, many believe, is being run by them or their collective wisdom. No wonder, the Moily committee had recomended in 2006 setting up of three more IIMs to ensure "more balanced access to management education in the country'. Each IIM needs an investment of Rs 200-300 crore.
On the other hand, agricultural universities, which directly impact 600 million farmers, and more importantly the country's food security, are starved of funds. Most of the universities are running on artificial respiration being provided by the World Bank through the National Agricultural Innovation Project (NAIP). Such is the worsening financial condition that many universities are now selling-off their crop research lands to raise funds for paying staff salaries.
Hundreds of Ph.Ds in agricultural are unemployed.
These universities are therefore looking at private funding, thereby allowing the agribusiness giants -- both national and international -- to take control. Research is getting privatised, and so are the research faculties. But who cares? As long as the IIMs are in a healthy state, the country seems to be on a growth path. The rest of the education is simply junk. It has no productive value. At least that's what our planners, policy makers and the media leaders think, and strangely enough they have begun to think alike.
Jun 1, 2009
शिक्षा में सुधार की शर्त
एक समय था जब किसी विश्वविद्यालय के कुलपति से मुलाकात बड़ी प्रेरणादायी होती थी। आप खड़े होकर पूरे मान-सम्मान के साथ उन्हें सुनते थे। दुर्भाग्य से अब ऐसा नहीं है। वजह जो भी हो, कुलपति अब प्रेरित नहीं करते। ईमानदारी से कहा जाए तो आज एक हद तक स्थिति यह है कि आप कुलपति से मुलाकात करने के बजाए उनसे बचना चाहेंगे। कुलपति के रूप में एक संस्था में पतन का सिलसिला कुछ समय पहले शुरू हुआ। इस संस्था को लगा रोग संभवत: आखिरी चरण में प्रवेश कर गया है। शिक्षा व्यवस्था में रुचि रखने वाले सभी लोगों को इस पर चिंतित होना चाहिए कि कभी संस्थान का पर्याय माने जाने वाले कुलपति पद की गरिमा बड़ी तेजी से गिरी है। अगर कोई शैक्षिक संस्थान अपना पुनरुद्धार चाहता है तो उसे कुलपति कार्यालय में सुधार से इसकी शुरुआत करनी होगी। कोई भी आर्थिक राहत और शिक्षा के क्षेत्र में सुधारों की तीव्र गति तब तक संभव नहीं है जब तक कुलपति के पद की खोई हुई गरिमा फिर से पुनस्र्थापित न की जाए। भारतीय शिक्षा के भविष्य का प्रत्यक्ष संबंध संस्थान के कुलपति पद के सम्मान से जुड़ा है। यह सुधार कार्यक्रम नई सरकार की प्राथमिकताओं में आना चाहिए।
दस केंद्रीय विश्वविद्यालयों के कुलपतियों की नियुक्ति विवादों से घिरी रही है। जिस तत्परता के साथ तत्कालीन मानव संसाधन विकास मंत्री अर्जुन सिंह ने ये नियुक्तियां की थीं उससे भौंहें तननी ही थीं। जिस प्रकार से कुलपतियों की नियुक्तियां की जा रही हैं उससे सामान्य विश्वविद्यालयों की साख पर गंभीर संकट खड़ा हो रहा है। निजी विश्वविद्यालयों की हालत तो और भी दयनीय है। सर्वोच्च पद सामान्यतया उस व्यक्ति के पास होता है जिसकी काबिलियत विश्वविद्यालय के प्रवर्तक का करीबी और वफादार होना है। मुझे अधिक चिंता कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों की है। कृषि विज्ञान और अनुसंधान प्राथमिक रूप से कुलपति की नेतृत्व क्षमता पर निर्भर करता है। यह न केवल अनुसंधान की उपयोगिता और महत्ता निर्धारित करता है, बल्कि एक तरह से देश की खाद्य सुरक्षा और 60 करोड़ किसानों की आजीविका के लिए भी जिम्मेदार है। कुछ समय पहले तक कृषि विश्वविद्यालय के कुलपति की नियुक्ति एक राजनीतिक कवायद मानी जाती थी। कई सालों से मैं देख रहा हूं कि कुलपतियों की एकमात्र योग्यता राजनीतिक नेतृत्व से निकटता रह गई है। इसके कुछ अपवाद हो सकते हैं, लेकिन आम तौर पर कुलपति का नामांकन और चयन प्रक्रिया महज एक स्वांग में तब्दील हो गई है। उदाहरण के लिए तमिलनाडु के कोयंबटूर में तमिलनाडु एग्रीकल्चर यूनिवर्सिटी का मामला देखें। यह बेहद प्रतिष्ठित संस्थान रहा है। टीएनएयू देश के सर्वाधिक प्रतिष्ठित कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों में से एक था। देश के अन्य शिक्षण संस्थानों की तरह टीएनएयू में भी शोध और शिक्षा के स्तर में गिरावट आई है, किंतु मैंने यह अपेक्षा नहीं की थी कि यह गिरावट इस सीमा तक पहुंच जाएगी कि कृषि मंत्री का निजी सचिव खुद को इस पद पर नियुक्त कराने में करीब-करीब कामयाब हो सकता है। यह तो टीएनएयू के शिक्षकों की तरफ से उठे तीव्र विरोध के कारण ही ऐसा होने से बच गया। टीएनएयू एक अपवाद है। अधिकांश विश्वविद्यालयों में ऐसे कुलपतियों की नियुक्ति की जा रही है जो इनके लायक नहीं हैं। यही प्राथमिक कारण है कि कृषि विश्वविद्यालय सार्थक शोध में विफल हो रहे हैं। असल में अधिकांश कृषि विश्वविद्यालय निजी बीज कंपनियों के क्रियाकलापों को दोहरा भर रहे हैं।
कुलपति के प्रति आदर भाव अब बीते दिनों की बात हो गया है। कुछ साल पहले जब हरियाणा कृषि विश्वविद्यालय, हिसार के कुलपति डीआर भुंबला ने अचानक इस्तीफा दे दिया था तो इसके विरोध में वहां के छात्रों ने हड़ताल कर दी थी। यह एक असाधारण घटना थी। मैंने ऐसा पहले कभी नहीं देखा कि छात्र एक कुलपति को रोकने के लिए आंदोलन शुरू करें। हां, ऐसे तो बहुत से मामले हैं जब छात्रों ने कुलपति को हटाने के लिए हड़ताल की हो। पंजाब एग्रीकल्चर यूनिवर्सिटी, लुधियाना के कुलपति के पद पर कार्य कर चुके विख्यात प्रशासक डा. एमएस रंधावा ने एक मजेदार घटना सुनाई थी। एक दिन हिमाचल प्रदेश के राज्यपाल ने वाईएस परमार यूनिवर्सिटी आफ हार्टिकल्चरल साइंस एंड फोरेस्ट्री, सोलन के कुलपति की नियुक्ति के संबंध में उनसे सलाह मांगी। राज्यपाल ने तीन नामों का विकल्प रखा। डा. रंधावा को जो उपयुक्त लगा उसका सुझाव दिया। कुछ दिनों बाद वह अखबार में यह पढ़कर दंग रह गए कि इस पद पर किसी अन्य व्यक्ति की नियुक्ति कर दी गई थी।
अगर आप चकित हैं कि किस प्रकार कुलपतियों की नियुक्ति होती है तो इस प्रक्रिया की तह में जाने की जरूरत है। दिखावे के लिए तो चुनाव प्रक्रिया योग्यता के आधार पर होती है। द इंडियन काउंसिल फार एग्रीकल्चरल रिसर्च सामान्य तौर पर तीन नामों का एक पैनल बनाती है। ये नाम उस राज्य के राज्यपाल के पास भेजे जाते हैं जिसमें विश्वविद्यालय होता है। विश्वविद्यालय के कुलपति होने के नाते उपराज्यपाल ही अंतिम फैसला लेते हैं, जबकि व्यवहार में प्रदेश के मुख्यमंत्री की राय ही सर्वोपरि मानी जाती है। सच्चाई यह है कि मुख्यमंत्री की पसंद आईसीएआर को पहले ही बता दी जाती है और उम्मीदवारों का चुनाव करते समय इस बात को ध्यान में रखा जाता है। कुछ समय से पेशेवर योग्यता को ताक पर रख दिया गया है। सच यह है कि विश्वविद्यालय में प्रोफेसर के मुकाबले कुलपति बनना आसान है, किंतु मुझे यह बात परेशान करती है कि जिस पद की कभी अभिलाषा की जाती थी, अब वह बिकाऊ हो गया है। राजनीतिक निकटता ही एकमात्र मापदंड नहीं है। आप कितना खर्च कर सकते हैं, इससे भी अंतिम फैसला प्रभावित होता है। कई कुलपतियों ने मुझे बताया है कि विश्वविद्यालय के प्रमुख होने के लिए कितनी रकम खर्च करनी पड़ती है। आम चुनाव की तरह ही कृषि व्यवसाय से जुड़ी कंपनियां खास उम्मीदवारों के लिए माहौल बनाने तथा उसके पक्ष में दबाव डालने के काम में लग जाती हैं। शोध कार्ययोजना से उन्हें क्या लेना-देना! उन्हें तो बस कंपनी के व्यापारिक हितों की चिंता होती है।
यद्यपि यह हरेक मामले में सही नहीं है, किंतु यह विडंबना है कि अधिकांश मामलों में कुलपति रुपयों से भरे सूटकेस लेकर चलते हैं। मैं किसी भी तरह कुलपति पद की अवमानना करना नहीं चाहता, क्योंकि इस पद को धारण करने वाले सभी व्यक्तियों को एक ही श्रेणी में नहीं रखा जा सकता, किंतु गलत कार्र्यो की अनदेखी करने से कुछ भी हासिल नहीं होगा। पता नहीं इस सड़न को कौन बंद करेगा, किंतु इस पर असहमति की गुंजाइश नहीं है कि इस संस्थान को बचाने की सख्त जरूरत है। देश का भविष्य इस पर निर्भर है कि यहां शिक्षा का क्या स्तर होगा? शिक्षा की गुणवत्ता मुख्यत: कुलपतियों की योग्यता पर निर्भर करती है। घटिया श्रेणी के कुलपतियों के भरोसे हम महाशक्ति बनने की उम्मीद नहीं कर सकते।
http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/news/opinion/general/6_3_5510944.html
[देविंदर शर्मा: लेखक कृषि एवं खाद्य नीतियों के विश्लेषक हैं]
दस केंद्रीय विश्वविद्यालयों के कुलपतियों की नियुक्ति विवादों से घिरी रही है। जिस तत्परता के साथ तत्कालीन मानव संसाधन विकास मंत्री अर्जुन सिंह ने ये नियुक्तियां की थीं उससे भौंहें तननी ही थीं। जिस प्रकार से कुलपतियों की नियुक्तियां की जा रही हैं उससे सामान्य विश्वविद्यालयों की साख पर गंभीर संकट खड़ा हो रहा है। निजी विश्वविद्यालयों की हालत तो और भी दयनीय है। सर्वोच्च पद सामान्यतया उस व्यक्ति के पास होता है जिसकी काबिलियत विश्वविद्यालय के प्रवर्तक का करीबी और वफादार होना है। मुझे अधिक चिंता कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों की है। कृषि विज्ञान और अनुसंधान प्राथमिक रूप से कुलपति की नेतृत्व क्षमता पर निर्भर करता है। यह न केवल अनुसंधान की उपयोगिता और महत्ता निर्धारित करता है, बल्कि एक तरह से देश की खाद्य सुरक्षा और 60 करोड़ किसानों की आजीविका के लिए भी जिम्मेदार है। कुछ समय पहले तक कृषि विश्वविद्यालय के कुलपति की नियुक्ति एक राजनीतिक कवायद मानी जाती थी। कई सालों से मैं देख रहा हूं कि कुलपतियों की एकमात्र योग्यता राजनीतिक नेतृत्व से निकटता रह गई है। इसके कुछ अपवाद हो सकते हैं, लेकिन आम तौर पर कुलपति का नामांकन और चयन प्रक्रिया महज एक स्वांग में तब्दील हो गई है। उदाहरण के लिए तमिलनाडु के कोयंबटूर में तमिलनाडु एग्रीकल्चर यूनिवर्सिटी का मामला देखें। यह बेहद प्रतिष्ठित संस्थान रहा है। टीएनएयू देश के सर्वाधिक प्रतिष्ठित कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों में से एक था। देश के अन्य शिक्षण संस्थानों की तरह टीएनएयू में भी शोध और शिक्षा के स्तर में गिरावट आई है, किंतु मैंने यह अपेक्षा नहीं की थी कि यह गिरावट इस सीमा तक पहुंच जाएगी कि कृषि मंत्री का निजी सचिव खुद को इस पद पर नियुक्त कराने में करीब-करीब कामयाब हो सकता है। यह तो टीएनएयू के शिक्षकों की तरफ से उठे तीव्र विरोध के कारण ही ऐसा होने से बच गया। टीएनएयू एक अपवाद है। अधिकांश विश्वविद्यालयों में ऐसे कुलपतियों की नियुक्ति की जा रही है जो इनके लायक नहीं हैं। यही प्राथमिक कारण है कि कृषि विश्वविद्यालय सार्थक शोध में विफल हो रहे हैं। असल में अधिकांश कृषि विश्वविद्यालय निजी बीज कंपनियों के क्रियाकलापों को दोहरा भर रहे हैं।
कुलपति के प्रति आदर भाव अब बीते दिनों की बात हो गया है। कुछ साल पहले जब हरियाणा कृषि विश्वविद्यालय, हिसार के कुलपति डीआर भुंबला ने अचानक इस्तीफा दे दिया था तो इसके विरोध में वहां के छात्रों ने हड़ताल कर दी थी। यह एक असाधारण घटना थी। मैंने ऐसा पहले कभी नहीं देखा कि छात्र एक कुलपति को रोकने के लिए आंदोलन शुरू करें। हां, ऐसे तो बहुत से मामले हैं जब छात्रों ने कुलपति को हटाने के लिए हड़ताल की हो। पंजाब एग्रीकल्चर यूनिवर्सिटी, लुधियाना के कुलपति के पद पर कार्य कर चुके विख्यात प्रशासक डा. एमएस रंधावा ने एक मजेदार घटना सुनाई थी। एक दिन हिमाचल प्रदेश के राज्यपाल ने वाईएस परमार यूनिवर्सिटी आफ हार्टिकल्चरल साइंस एंड फोरेस्ट्री, सोलन के कुलपति की नियुक्ति के संबंध में उनसे सलाह मांगी। राज्यपाल ने तीन नामों का विकल्प रखा। डा. रंधावा को जो उपयुक्त लगा उसका सुझाव दिया। कुछ दिनों बाद वह अखबार में यह पढ़कर दंग रह गए कि इस पद पर किसी अन्य व्यक्ति की नियुक्ति कर दी गई थी।
अगर आप चकित हैं कि किस प्रकार कुलपतियों की नियुक्ति होती है तो इस प्रक्रिया की तह में जाने की जरूरत है। दिखावे के लिए तो चुनाव प्रक्रिया योग्यता के आधार पर होती है। द इंडियन काउंसिल फार एग्रीकल्चरल रिसर्च सामान्य तौर पर तीन नामों का एक पैनल बनाती है। ये नाम उस राज्य के राज्यपाल के पास भेजे जाते हैं जिसमें विश्वविद्यालय होता है। विश्वविद्यालय के कुलपति होने के नाते उपराज्यपाल ही अंतिम फैसला लेते हैं, जबकि व्यवहार में प्रदेश के मुख्यमंत्री की राय ही सर्वोपरि मानी जाती है। सच्चाई यह है कि मुख्यमंत्री की पसंद आईसीएआर को पहले ही बता दी जाती है और उम्मीदवारों का चुनाव करते समय इस बात को ध्यान में रखा जाता है। कुछ समय से पेशेवर योग्यता को ताक पर रख दिया गया है। सच यह है कि विश्वविद्यालय में प्रोफेसर के मुकाबले कुलपति बनना आसान है, किंतु मुझे यह बात परेशान करती है कि जिस पद की कभी अभिलाषा की जाती थी, अब वह बिकाऊ हो गया है। राजनीतिक निकटता ही एकमात्र मापदंड नहीं है। आप कितना खर्च कर सकते हैं, इससे भी अंतिम फैसला प्रभावित होता है। कई कुलपतियों ने मुझे बताया है कि विश्वविद्यालय के प्रमुख होने के लिए कितनी रकम खर्च करनी पड़ती है। आम चुनाव की तरह ही कृषि व्यवसाय से जुड़ी कंपनियां खास उम्मीदवारों के लिए माहौल बनाने तथा उसके पक्ष में दबाव डालने के काम में लग जाती हैं। शोध कार्ययोजना से उन्हें क्या लेना-देना! उन्हें तो बस कंपनी के व्यापारिक हितों की चिंता होती है।
यद्यपि यह हरेक मामले में सही नहीं है, किंतु यह विडंबना है कि अधिकांश मामलों में कुलपति रुपयों से भरे सूटकेस लेकर चलते हैं। मैं किसी भी तरह कुलपति पद की अवमानना करना नहीं चाहता, क्योंकि इस पद को धारण करने वाले सभी व्यक्तियों को एक ही श्रेणी में नहीं रखा जा सकता, किंतु गलत कार्र्यो की अनदेखी करने से कुछ भी हासिल नहीं होगा। पता नहीं इस सड़न को कौन बंद करेगा, किंतु इस पर असहमति की गुंजाइश नहीं है कि इस संस्थान को बचाने की सख्त जरूरत है। देश का भविष्य इस पर निर्भर है कि यहां शिक्षा का क्या स्तर होगा? शिक्षा की गुणवत्ता मुख्यत: कुलपतियों की योग्यता पर निर्भर करती है। घटिया श्रेणी के कुलपतियों के भरोसे हम महाशक्ति बनने की उम्मीद नहीं कर सकते।
http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/news/opinion/general/6_3_5510944.html
[देविंदर शर्मा: लेखक कृषि एवं खाद्य नीतियों के विश्लेषक हैं]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)