We need a national framework to address agricultural problems.

The government must decide that it must do brilliantly with regard to farming. India lacks a focused managerial framework to usher in the transformation that agriculture requires. That framework is what the Sarthak Krishi Yojana advocates (www.rallis.co.in/sarthakkrishiyojana.html).

Common readers may not have used the word “mathiness”. University of Chicago economist Richard Thaler said that economists increasingly suffer from theory-induced blindness, ignoring real-world phenomena; Paul Romer coined “mathiness” to label the misuse of mathematics in economic analyses. Mathiness is a smokescreen of equations that disguises an ideological agenda through unrealistic assumptions.

And what is “truthiness”? “Truthiness” was coined for truth that comes from the guts, not from books. American comedian and talkshow host Stephen Colbert popularised the word truthiness, thanks to the reach of television. Truthiness presents stories which are consistent with the worldview of the person telling the story. When data manipulation becomes dodgy, truthiness steps in.

If there is one subject in India’s economic agenda that is a victim of mathiness, it is farming and agriculture. My sense of truthiness hollers that India lacks a credible and focused managerial framework to usher in the transformation that agriculture requires. That is why Y.S.P. Thorat, former chairman of Nabard, and I wrote the Sarthak Krishi Yojana, meaning mindful agriculture. A 29-page booklet with appendices is indeed brief for agriculture.

India does brilliantly when the government decides to do brilliantly — green revolution, dairy revolution, Param supercomputer, Mars mission. The time has come for the government to decide that it must do brilliantly with regard to farming. India is faced with a serious crisis in farming. I wonder why our national programmes like Digital India, Skill India and Make in India have so little discourse with respect to farming, considering that over half the working population is employed in agriculture and we have over $40 billion of farm exports.

The Sarthak Krishi Yojana notes the following: One, from 1999 till 2012, India’s farming sector has experienced about the best record of growth, production and farmer income, compared to India’s record in previous comparable periods. Two, India’s “best” records of productivity lag other nations by a large margin. Three, during the last two agricultural seasons, India’s farming (and, therefore, farmers) has been devastated by inclement weather — patchy rains, drought, unseasonal weather, you name it. We, doubtless, have a crisis in a sector that employs more than half of our workforce. Four, India does not lack funds or skills. India needs an integrated, managerial framework for agriculture — state-led entrepreneurial risk-taking with respect to farming (not farmers, please note).

Eleven fine and technically sound players do not make a great cricket team — it requires a great captain, a manager and teamwork. This metaphor illustrates the problem of agriculture.

Notwithstanding the availability of several expert reports, the paper suggests a framework to be populated with expert recommendations.
Unlike industry and telecom, agriculture is a state subject. The solutions as well as actions with regard to agriculture tend to get political and fragmented. They do not lend themselves naturally to a holistic design by a single agency. In this context, it is worth noting what Y.K. Alagh has said: “The future of agriculture is not in the stars, even in a country deeply committed to the inevitability of predictable karmic outcomes… pull together the main analyses and place them in a holistic framework… Indian agriculture responds well to well-thought-out policy stimuli.”

Developing a consensus with the states and executing a national agenda is an urgent option to be exercised by the Central government.

A holistic national framework to address agricultural problems could derive structural lessons from the way India industrialised. There were four pillars on which the industrialisation strategy was based. These played out over 60 years, admittedly with flaws and strengths, but today, India is counted among the top industrial powers in the world.

Putting together a similar set of pillars for agriculture is essential for aggregating the wisdom that already exists and for addressing the development issues that the nation faces. The holistic plan should encompass technology, risk, institutions, policy and skills, and the nation needs a forward-looking Sarthak Krishi Yojana that encompasses five pillars: One, technology incubation — outcome-based technology policy encouraging research, innovation and incubation. Two, risk institutions and financing — banks and financial institutions to help promote technology infusion, insurance and mechanisation. Three, institutions of governance — promote farmer producer organisations to be agri SMEs/ MSMEs. Four, policy for farming — focus on improving human and farm productivity. Five, Skilling — agricultural technical training institutes

To ensure the success of the Sarthak Krishi Yojana, it should be a collaboratively driven project with the states similar to the Jan DhanYojana, Atal Pension Yojana and Swachh Bharat Abhiyan. The government must articulate the features and components that would constitute these five pillars, seek consensus with states and implement it as a comprehensive national agricultural mission. This has the chance to instil enthusiasm in the agricultural sector and invite wide participation.

The post Farm vision statement appeared first on The MindWorks.

Huge gains can be made by giving agriculture disproportionate priority, even more than GST

India has more than 140 million farm holdings, of which 20 million account for 80 per cent of the area. Imagine a community of these 20 million farmers connected digitally – as change agents, leaders and a consumer community. It should be the most thrilling start-up in India and should dominate the national narrative.

Apathetic folks tend to be cynical about new ideas. The word “cynic” is derived from the Greek school at Cynosarges that was run by philosopher Antisthenes, who lived around 400 BC. He was a pupil of Socrates and famously said, “In public life, you must be guided by virtue and not by laws.”

In my last Innocolumn, I referred to a paper jointly authored by Y S P Thorat and me, titled, “Sarthak Krishi Yojana”, which has been circulated to more than 100,000 people interested in agriculture. Agriculture is staid compared to magical themes like start-ups, so I expected a weak response from readers. Surprisingly, the column got a stronger response than my earlier 30 columns. Readers’ responses reminded me never to be cynical or apathetic.

Most readers commented positively about “Sarthak Krishi Yojana” and hoped the current crisis in agriculture would serve as a wake-up call to governments at all levels. Other responses were doubtful or cynical. A senior journalist observed that we should not rely on the government; one agricultural scientist berated me, “You should give practical suggestions instead of writing about frameworks”; another tired moan was “another yojana will not succeed because there are already 445 yojanas (institutions, schemes, awards, stadiums, airports) bearing the names of a celebrated father, his daughter or his grandson.”

Apathy is a poison for innovation because it leads to low expectations and the broken window syndrome. New York was bedevilled by crime in the 1980s and citizens were cynical about a solution. When Rudolph Giuliani became the mayor in 1994, he was determined to break the apathy. His team invoked the words of two criminologists, James Wilson and George Kelling: “If a window is broken and left unrepaired, people walking by will conclude that no one cares and that no one is in charge… The impetus to engage in a certain type of behaviour comes not from a certain type of person but from a feature of the environment.” The story of how the environment was changed and crime in New York was curbed has been told by Malcolm Gladwell in The Tipping Point.

Farming is the nation’s broken window – regrettably, not the only broken window. Public interest about how food gets to the table is low; Indian farming policy has been unfocused despite the governments’ good intentions. This is because there has been no overarching and integrated framework for agricultural development as there has been for industrial development. Political and economic institutions make the difference between a system’s success and failure, and systemic change requires a holistic understanding of the problem.

In The Turn of the Tortoise, T N Ninan wrote, “What commentators often ignore is the enormous untapped potential of Indian agriculture… Changes in agriculture will directly affect half of the country’s workforce… The reform of factor markets (land, labour, capital and technology) and improvement of governance standards are central to the question of rapid growth… China began under Mao (Tse Tung) by emphasising change in the countryside while India sought industrialisation.”

Two questions arise: Does our nation have a holistic approach to farming and agriculture? If not, what could constitute a holistic approach? “Sarthak Krishi Yojana” attempts to address these.

Although agriculture is a state subject, there is political sagacity for both the Centre and the states to strategically (not mendacious subsidies) promote rural and agriculture. Look how agriculture grew in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh by about eight to 10 per cent per annum during the last decade and how the ruling party got repeatedly re-elected. Writing about Madhya Pradesh, Ashok Gulati, Infosys chair professor for agriculture at Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, stated, “There are several factors driving agri-growth but the most important one is leadership and its focus.”

The focus should be on farming, not farmers. The passion of the governments, both at the Centre and in the states, should shift from the yogic state of kshipta (unfocused and scattered) to niruddha (focused and controlled). “Sarthak Krishi Yojana” suggests how. The Centre must embrace states, irrespective of political differences. There will be huge gains by giving farming and agriculture disproportionate priority and attention, even more than the important goods and services tax.

The post Shed apathy, embrace innovation appeared first on The MindWorks.

Farming and agriculture are crying out for business model innovation. India is not short of good farmers, funds, schemes or experts and, in a sense, has too much of these valuable resources; the country needs a unified framework to execute actions in a coordinated manner.

Election fever and Deepavali are behind us, so it is time for mundane things. Humble pulses have become a pulsating national issue. Over the years several commentators, including the present writer, have anticipated the impending crisis; however, as with other crises, each recurrence delivers its own message.

The urban excitement about start-ups, entrepreneurship and innovation is totally absent in farming. Try compiling a repertoire of ‘bottom of the pyramid’ innovation articles on farming. Agri-business correspondents write very reasoned columns. However policy makers seem more interested in lofty programs with little reference to the farming sector. Logically Digital India should connect progressive farmers with smart phones; agriculture should be a Make in India candidate because it delivers 15% of India’s exports, valued at $ 40 billion; agriculture should be a Skills Mission candidate because it employs 260 million people, over half of India’s workforce. Experts suggest that India’s agricultural exports can be double to $ 80 billion, and that the increased output can be produced by fewer, better-trained farm workers.

In a recent article, Narendra Pratap Singh, Director of the Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur concluded: “It is not lack of research as much as policy support that is presently missing in pulses.” The message from this senior scientist seems to be, ‘The pulses problem is not because of us scientists; the problem is with regard to policy and inter departmental coordination.’ Truth be told, apart from technology, the business model (=way of doing things) can be a huge source of innovation. Farming and agriculture are crying out for business model innovation.

So what is the farming problem? Is India short of good farmers, funds, schemes or experts? Not at all. India in fact has too much of these valuable resources; but they work in an uncoordinated and unfocused manner. As pointed out in a recent book (The Silo Effect, Gillian Tett, Little Brown, 2015),”Silos are cultural phenomena…they arise because social groups have particular conventions about how to classify the world…people tend to assume that their way of behaving is natural and the way other people behave is not…occasionally we can imagine a different way of organizing our world.”

Farming and agriculture need an alternative national framework. If you search for an explicit National Agricultural Policy, similar to India’s Industrial Policy Resolution of 1950s, you will encounter a strange phenomenon–the NDA government may mention a 2005 UPA draft, which anyway needs updating.

Sixty items such as law and order, police and agriculture are pure state subjects under our constitution; if so, what is the Union Agriculture Minister accountable for? The country needs an Agriculture Czar, who has to do different things, differently–intelligent and innovative agriculture. Implementation of a collaborative program with the States can replicate the dramatic results achieved by three earlier agricultural revolutions—food grains, milk and poultry. It is an innovation priority that the nation cannot keep waiting for. What can be done?

Dr YSP Thorat, former CMD of NABARD, and I have co-authored a paper titled Sarthak Krishi Yojana, which is accessible.**The paper suggests a coherent framework to transform agriculture and is inspired by the national industrialization experiences through five pillars–technology, risk, institutionalization, policy and skills. Some of its ideas: adopt a formal technology policy with regard to soil health, crop protection chemicals, crop nutrients and seeds; second, actively promote Sec 8 companies in which farmers can be shareholders, a bit like the SME equivalent for farmers; third, set up ATTIs, a bit like the ITIs, to promote advanced skills for the farm; fourth, as part of Digital India, connect up 10 million progressive farmers to access knowledge, experiences, markets and technology.

The post Intelligent Farming appeared first on The MindWorks.

We both come from very different professional backgrounds. We have had a common interest in agriculture, farmers and rural India. Between us we share many years of rural exposure and luckily have experienced complementary facets. We have had a common association working on corporate boards. Our exposure of several years to Indian agriculture has enabled us to share perspectives about issues facing Indian agriculture and what India can do about
them.

Certain questions on agriculture arise naturally. First, more than half the workforce — 260 million people — is deployed in agriculture and allied sectors. There is an urgent need to upgrade skills in agronomic practices, soil / water / pest / nutrient management and post-harvest technologies. Yet, in the national discourse on skill uilding we hear very little about upgrading agricultural skills. Second, India’s agricultural exports account for about USD40 billion, which is 12-13% of India’s exports. It surely has potential to increase if we can improve roductivity and management systems. Yet, there is very little talk about agricultural production in the Make in India programme. Third, there is urgent need to expand financial inclusion in India. This can be significantly advanced if the farmer awareness is increased to form farmer producer organisations (FPOs) under the Companies Act. Such organisations can also become employers of trained and skilled agriculture workers. Yet, the drive to increase
FPOs in India is not clearly visible.

Such questions generated much discussion between us. We have been struck by the fact that India has outstanding experts in all aspects of agriculture – farm economics, agricultural markets, finance and risk management, marketing of input and output, as well as science and technology. Agriculture and farming are connected to livelihood and social mores, which makes them very complex, with interconnections among various constituents.

Together we tried to answer three questions –

1. Although the past couple of years have been difficult for Indian agriculture, has it performed well in this millennium?
2. Indian agriculture productivity does not compare well with other countries. What is the problem with Indian agriculture?
3. In agriculture we must do things differently. What can be a national framework to execute a “mindful agriculture“ programme (Sarthak Krishi Yojana) by better co-ordination among independent agencies and institutions?

Our conclusion is that agriculture does not suffer from a lack of ideas, funds or government initiatives. Current initiatives and institutions are fragmented and work in silos. There is need to work together, do things differently and get centres of expertise in credit, rural development, risk management, technology and training to work together. What could be strengthened is an integrated and holistic framework, which provides a managerial
way of implementing changes.

We’ve tried to articulate an integrated framework in this paper and summarise key pillars of the framework. Many details remain, about which much has been written by experts. If the framework is worthy, then the details can be worked out and an implementation plan can be made.

To ensure the success of Sarthak Krishi Yojana, it should be a collaboratively driven project with the states, like Jan-Dhan Yojana, Atal Pension Yojana and Swachh Bharat Abhiyan. The nation may benefit by having a high level, collaborative organisation, like a Krishi Aayog, to articulate features and components of the pillars, seek consensus with states and implement them as a comprehensive National Agricultural Mission. Such a move may instil enthusiasm in the sector and may invite participation.

implement them as a comprehensive National Agricultural Mission. Such a move may instil enthusiasm in the sector and may invite participation.

We are grateful to several experts for contributions to this paper. To mention a few, we acknowledge the influence of Dr YK Alagh’s book, The future of Indian Agriculture, the significant contribution of experience by V Shankar (MD and CEO, Rallis India), KR Venkatadri (COO, Rallis India), Dr KK Narayanan (MD and CEO, Metahelix Life Sciences), Dr Siddhartha Roy (economic advisor, Tata group), and the research assistance of Aruna Parimi (Tata
Services) and Rajiv Desai (Tata Sons).

R Gopalakrishnan, Dr YSP Thorat
Mumbai
October, 2015

Read More

The post What India can do differently in agriculture appeared first on The MindWorks.