Note on Farm Sector

8/22/2019 Note on Farm Sector

1/26

1

NOTE

ONFARM SECTOR

IN

UTTAR PRADESH

SUNIL KUMAR

OCTOBER,2005

Department of Planning,Government of Uttar Pradesh


2/26

2

Note on Farm Sector in Uttar Pradesh

IntroductionThe economy of Uttar Pradesh is predominantly agrarian and performance of

agriculture and allied activities such as horticulture, animal husbandry, dairying andfisheries are critical in determining the growth rate of the State. Primary sector (inclusive

of mining) contributed 36.8% to the States income in 2003-04 and provided employment

to 66% of total workers. However, the share of this sector in State income has beenprogressively reducing.

Table 1: Contribution of various sectors to State income

0

1020

30

40

50

2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Primary

Secondary

Tertiary

Farmers & farming communityOut of an estimated number of 22.15 million rural households in Uttar Pradesh,

77.4% are farmer households. According to data released by NSSO based on 59th

round

of NSS, 24% of UP farmers (27% at all India level) did not like farming and felt thatagriculture was not profitable. In all 41% farmers in UP (40% at all India level) felt that,

given a choice, they would take up some other career. This indicates a serious problem

wherein the main protagonist is suffering from low self esteem and does not believe thatwhat he is doing is worthwhile economically or even socially. In the social hierarchy,

farming as a profession now figures considerably low in the social order.

Data released by NSSO also brings to the fore certain important facets about

farmers, farming community and their awareness of Government initiatives taken in the

sector. Awareness level of UP farmers is close to the all India figures in respect of bio-fertilizers, crop insurance etc. While at all India level, about 18% of farmer households

knew what bio-fertilizers were and 29% understood what minimum support price meant,

in UP these figures were 15% and 33% respectively. At all India level only 4% of farmer

households had ever insured their crops and 57% did not know that crops could be

insured. However, in UP only 1.2% of farmer households had ever insured their cropsand 56% were unaware that crops could be insured. These data clearly highlight that

extension activities in the State need to be revamped.

Investment in Agriculture & Allied Sector

At all India levels, the present actual investment in the agriculture sector is only1.3% of the total Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Position is not much better at the State

level either. As shown in Table 2 below, the percentage expenditure in Agriculture &


3/26

3

Allied sector has declined over the Plan period from a high of about 29% during Second

Five Year Plan and the Annual Plans of 1966-69 to a low of 5.47% during Sixth Five

Year Plan and about 8.6% during Tenth Plan.

Table 2 : Percentage Expenditure on Agriculture & Allied Sector over Plan period

in Uttar Pradesh

Gross Capital formation in agriculture at 1993-94 pricesData reveals that there is declining public investment in agriculture, stagnant

gross capital formation and falling shareof agriculture in the Total Plan outlay. There has

been deceleration in the sector in the past decade.

Table 3: Trend of investment in agriculture at 1993-94 prices

(Rs. Crore)

Percentage share ofYear Total

Public Private

Investment in Agriculture as % of GDP

1994-95 14,969 33.0 67.0 1.6

1997-98 15,942 25.0 75.0 1.4

2000-01 16,906 23.2 76.8 1.3

2002-03 18,657 24.3 75.7 1.3

In case of Uttar Pradesh, gross capital formation in Agriculture at current prices in

the year 2000-01 was Rs.1966 crore of which 44% (Rs.864 crore) was Public investment

and 56% (Rs.1102 crore) Private investment. Gross capital formation in agriculture in

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1st

Plan

2nd

Plan

3rd

Plan

196

6-

69

4th

Plan

5th

Plan

197

9-

80

6th

Plan

7th

Plan

199

0-

92

8th

Plan

9th

Plan

10th

Plan

%


4/26

4

Uttar Pradesh in 2000-01 was just 13.71 percent of gross capital formation in the State.

Private investment in the State in agriculture and allied sector is considerably lower than

the all India figures.

The Committee on Capital Formation in Agriculture set up by Government of

India in its report has noted that the coverage of items and the procedure for compilationof capital formation in agriculture as followed by the Central Statistical Organization is

constrained by the United Nations System of National Accounts (SNA). The present

estimates of capital formation in agriculture does not represent total capital formationaugmenting capacity of agriculture. Expenditures on agriculture education, research and

training help to enrich human capital and lead to break-through in increasing productivity

in agriculture. Although these activities are not taken as capital formation activities in

SNA, it is desirable to prepare a separate estimate of expenditure on R&D for agricultureto keep track of development of agriculture. Further, Public Sector investment in

agriculture mainly consists of investment in irrigation projects (90%) while expenditure

on soil and water conservation etc. are included as capital formation under Public

Administration. With the adoption of new strategy for agricultural growth anddiversification of agriculture from traditional crop cultivation to horticulture etc. which

would require more investments on cold storage, rural roads, communication, marketingnetwork and facilities, warehouses etc., these need to be taken into account while

determining capital formation for agriculture instead of capital formation in

agriculture.

Based on the recommendations of the aforesaid Committee an attempt has been

made by the Department of Economics and Statistics, GoUP to estimate gross capital

formation for agriculture. Details are given in Table 4 below:-

Table 4: Gross Fixed Capital Formation for Agriculture in Uttar Pradesh in 2000-01

(Rs. in lakh)

# Sectors Proportion of GFCF forAgr icult ure

Total GFCF GFCF for Agricultu re

1 Agriculture & Animal Husbandry 1.0 196572 196572

2 Forestry & Logging 1.0 6272 6272

3 Fishing 1.0 1455 1455

4 Mining & Quarrying - 668 -

5 Manufacturing - 330421 -

Agricultural Machinery 1.0 753 753

Fertilizer & Pesticide 0.9616 3549 3413

6 Construction 0.0880 266420 23445

7 Electricity, Gas & Water Supply - 93476 -

7a Electricity 0.0855 80236 6860

8 Transport, Storage & Communication - 152546 -

8a Storage 0.6930 2846 19728b Communication 0.0910 90004 8190

8c Railway 0.0660 46082 3041

9 Trade, Hotels & Restaurants - 38357 -

Trade 0.2450 32544 7973

10 Banking & Insurance 0.0525 26994 1417

11 Real Estate, Ownership of Dwelling & BusinessService

- 416380 -

12 Public Administration - 114499 -

13 Other Services - 19337 -

Total 1663397 261363


5/26

5

Size of HoldingsThe average size of holdings is continually declining in the State. As per latest

available information, 75.4% holdings are of less than one hectare and are marginalfarmers. The average size of 90% of small and marginal farmers is about 0.55 hectares.

Details of size of holdings in Uttar Pradesh are given in Table 5 below.

Table 5: Size of Holdings in Uttar Pradesh

(in thousand hectares)

# Size of Holdings (in hectares) 1985-86 1995-96

1 Less than 1 hectare (marginal) 13782 (72.6%) 16237 (75.4%)

2 1.0 to 2.0 hectare (Small) 2964 (15.6%) 3135 (14.6%)

3 2.0 to 4.0 hectare 1582 (8.3%) 1586 (7.4%)

4 4.0 to 10.0 hectare 602 (3.2%) 532 (2.5%)

5 10.0 hectare and more 55 (0.3%) 39 (0.1%)

Total 18985 (100.0%) 21529 (100.0%)

Indebtedness of farmersThe data released by NSSO also provides useful insights regarding indebtedness

of farmers in the country as a whole as well as Uttar Pradesh. In UP out of 17.16 millionfarmer households, 6.92 million (40.3%) were reported to be indebted while for the

country as a whole, 48.6% (43.42 million) of 89.35 million farmer households werereported to be indebted. Estimated prevalence of indebtedness among farmer households

was highest in Andhra Pradesh (82%) followed by Tamil Nadu (74.5%) and Punjab

(65.4%). In UP, households with one hectare or less land accounted for 74% of all farmerhouseholds and about 39% of them were indebted.

At all India level, more than 50% of indebted farmer households had taken loan

for the purpose of capital or current expenditure in farm business. Such loans accounted

for 584 rupees out of every 1000 rupees of outstanding loan. In Uttar Pradesh indebtedfarmer households which had taken loan for the purpose of capital or current expenditure

in farm business accounted for 609 rupees out of every 1000 rupees of outstanding loan.Marriage and ceremonies accounted for 118 rupees per 1000 rupees of outstanding loans

of farmer households in Uttar Pradesh.

Banks (51%) followed by moneylenders (19%) were the most important source ofloan in terms of percentage of outstanding loan amounts in Uttar Pradesh while for the

country as a whole, the corresponding figures were 36% and 26% respectively. Average

outstanding loan per farmer household was highest in the State of Punjab (Rs.118495)followed by Kerala (Rs.100832), Haryana (Rs.23555), Andhra Pradesh (Rs.12760) and

Tamil Nadu (Rs.11023). Average outstanding loan per farmer household in Uttar Pradeshwas Rs.6706.

Agricultural productionAgricultural production has been fluctuating over the years and there has not been

much growth in the last decade. Total production of paddy in 2004-05 was less than what

had been achieved even in the year 1995-96. Data given in Table 6below clearly points


6/26

6

that there has not been much increase in total Kharif and Rabi food grain production over

the years.Table 6: Agricultural Production over the last ten years

(000 tonnes)

# Crop 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05

1 Paddy 9788 11197 11678 10826 12633 11679 12856 9596 13022 9559

2 Total Kharif

Foodgrains

12967 14374 15082 13212 15681 14998 15877 12003 15996 12498

3 Wheat 21077 23287 22147 22781 25551 25168 25498 23748 25567 22514

4 Total Rabi

Foodgrains

23705 26321 24939 25612 28580 27777 28310 26370 28442 25305

5 Total

Foodgrains

36672 40695 40021 38824 44261 42775 44187 38373 44438 37803

6 Oilseeds 1389 1520 984 1070 1268 1145 1110 851 928 946

7 Pulses 2163 2591 2282 2308 2551 2160 2377 2182 2380 2366

Table 7graphically reflects the production of paddy and wheat in the State and the

graph reflects stagnation or very little growth. Further, production of both main crops hasbeen dipping with fluctuation in rainfall.

Table 7: Production of Paddy & Wheat in Uttar Pradesh

(in thousand tones)

0

5000

10000

1500020000

25000

30000

1995

-96

1997

-98

1999

-00

2001

-02

2003

-04

Paddy

Wheat

Productivity

Even with respect to crop productivity, it is apparent from data in Table 7belowthat there is virtual stagnation with the highest yield of paddy being reached way back in

1996-97, of wheat in 1999-00, oilseeds in 1996-97 and pulses in 1999-00. In all other

years, crop productivity has been fluctuating and, at times, quite sharply.


7/26

7

Table 8: Crop Productivity in Uttar Pradesh

(quintals/ha)

# Crop 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05

1 Rice 18.54 22.21 21.46 19.42 21.85 19.77 21.17 18.41 21.87 17.90

2 Total

KharifFoodgrains

16.06 17.74 18.29 16.04 18.73 17.53 18.25 15.74 18.27 16.01

3 Wheat 24.69 27.00 25.25 25.51 28.03 27.24 27.55 25.91 27.94 25.02

4 Total Rabi

Foodgrains

21.02 23.39 21.99 22.15 24.55 23.59 24.14 22.79 24.75 22.05

5 Total

Foodgrains

18.95 21.02 20.43 19.61 22.12 21.04 21.63 19.99 21.95 19.60

6 Oilseeds 8.67 8.98 6.08 7.01 8.74 8.25 8.69 7.72 8.19 8.40

7 Pulses 7.74 9.32 8.27 8.29 9.57 8.03 8.86 8.26 8.90 8.50

Seed Replacement ratePaddy and wheat are the major food crops in the State and data show that the seed

replacement rate for both paddy and wheat have increased during the last four years and

the target of 20% seed replacement is likely to be reached by the end of the Tenth Planperiod.

Table 9: Seed Replacement rate in Uttar Pradesh

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Paddy

Wheat

Annual Av

Based on situation assessment survey of farmers carried out in the 59th

round of

NSS, it has been reported that at all India level, almost 48% of farmer householdspurchased their seeds and 47% used farm saved seeds. Further, 30% farmers replaced

seed varieties every year while another 32% replaced them every alternate year. But in

UP, almost 47% of farmer households purchased their seeds and 46% used farm savedseeds much in tune with All India average figures. However, only 18% farmers replacedseed varieties every year and another 39% replaced them every alternate year.

Further, at all India level, improved seeds were used by 46% farmer householdsduring the kharif and 34% during the rabi season. They were available within the village

for 18% farmer households. In UP, improved seeds were used by 48% farmer households


8/26

8

during Kharif and 53% during rabi season and improved seeds were available within the

village for only 14% households.

At all India and UP level, 40% and 34% of farmer households accessed varioussources of information for modern technology for farming respectively. Of the sixteen

different sources canvassed for accessing information relating to modern technology for

farming, 16.7% farmers accessed information through other progressive farmers, 13.1%

from input dealers and 13% through radio. In UP, 18.9% farmers accessed informationthrough progressive farmers, 8.3% from input dealers and 15% through radio. Amongthe farmer households accessing information for cultivation from other progressive

farmers, 405 received information on improved seed variety, 31% on fertilizerapplication, 15% on plant protection, and 14% on others. In UP, the corresponding

figures are 59%, 28%, 9% and 10% respectively.

Consumption of fertilizers, pesticidesAt all India level, fertilizers were used by 76% farmer households during kharif

and 54% during rabi season. For 27% households, fertilizers were available within the

village. While in UP fertilizers were used by 78% farmer households during Kharif and

88% during rabi season and for 23% households, fertilizers were available within thevillage. In UP, pesticides were used by 39% farmer households during Kharif and 35%

during rabi whereas at all India level, pesticides were used by 46% farmer householdsduring kharif and 31% during rabi season. Veterinary services were used by 26% during

kharif and 21% during rabi while the figures for the same at all India level were 30% and

22% respectively.

Box : Use of Hybrid seeds by farmers in Uttar Pradesh

In Basrahiya village of Gosainganj Block in Lucknow district, farmersexplained that 11 varieties of hybrid paddy seeds and about 10varieties of HYV seeds were available in the market. Farmers hadtaken a fancy to hybrid seed variety 6444 marketed by Pro-Agro.Although its price was Rs.160 /kg, it sold for Rs.200-220/kg asdemand outstripped supply. About 8 kg of this seed is required in ahectare while in case of HYV seeds, the requirement is about 35-40kg/hectare. Hybrid seeds are fast growing compared to several HYVseeds and productivity is also more. A farmer, Shri Deo Narain Patelhad harvested about 85 quintals of paddy from one hectare of land inBachan khera village of the same Block while Shri Pancham Lal ofBasrahiya village mentioned that about 60 quintals of paddy could be

grown in a hectare of land using hybrid seeds. Further, these seedswere reportedly pest resistant and so farmers saved on pesticides.Farmers were of the view that percentage farmers using hybrid seedscould rise from existing 30% if more seeds became available.


9/26

9

Table 10: Consumption of Fertilizers in Uttar Pradesh

(in thousand metric tones)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Nitrogen

Phosphate

Potash

During the first three years of the 10th

Plan, per hectare consumption of fertilizers has

also increased from 126.72 kg to 134.98 kg. and it may come close to the target of 160 kg

per hectare. In the year 2004, the proportion of NPK consumption in the State was 13:4:1whereas the ideal proportion should be 4:2:1. It has also been observed that soil health

has deteriorated sharply during the last few years and restoring soil health has emerged as

a major challenge before the farmers and the State.

Agriculture Credit

About 90% farmers in the State are small and marginal farmers. The out reach ofcredit institutions, whether commercial banks or cooperative institutions is very low. Out

of 2 crore farmers in the State, the actual coverage of farmers would be less than 20%.

Details of agricultural credit provided in the State in the last three years has been

indicated in Table 11.

Table 11: Agricultural Credit in Uttar Pradesh

# 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Agriculture loan (Rs.in crore)

3880.44 4110.84 5295.51

Kisan Credit Card(in lakh)

32.00 27.20 23.62

It may be noted that the agricultural credit in the country by Cooperative banks,

Commercial banks, RRBs and other agencies increased from Rs.69560 crore during

2002-03 to Rs.86980 crore during 2003-04 and was projected to touch Rs.104500 crore

in 2004-05. Thus, despite the State contributing about 13% in the agricultural gross

domestic product of the country in 2002-03 and about 20% of the total food grainproduction in the country, agricultural loan disbursed in the State was only 5.58% of total

agricultural loans disbursed in the country during 2002-03, 4.72% in 2003-04 and 5.06%in 2004-05.

There are 7479 Cooperative Societies functioning at Nyaya Panchayat level in theState and they constitute the main point of interface between the farmer and the

Cooperative Society for disbursement of short-term, long-term agricultural loans, provide


10/26

10

HYV seeds, pesticides, fertilizers, improved agricultural implements etc. there are 50

District Cooperative Banks which have 124 branches. However, data reveals that there is

virtual stagnation in the functioning of the Cooperative Societies in the State. During2002-03, these disbursed Rs.1249.38 crore as short-term agricultural loan to the farmers

and this came down to Rs.1243.12 crore in 2003-04. Like wise the figures for long term

agricultural loans declined from Rs.716.51 crore in 2002-03 to Rs.711.04 crore in 2003-04. It is also being seen that earlier Cooperative sector was meeting 65-70 percent of the

agricultural credit needs and the rest by the commercial banks. But now the role has been

reversed and presently commercial banks are making available 70 percent of agriculturalcredit and only 30 percent by the Cooperative banks. The average loan being provided to

farmers in the State is only to the tune of Rs.2000 / hectare which is clearly insufficient

for meeting the input cost of HYV seeds, fertilizers, pesticides etc. Thus, it can be safely

asserted that the agricultural sector in the State is under-financed.

Further, an examination of the role of cooperative societies reveals that while

earlier they were providing nearly 75% of the credit, their disbursement has come down

to about 30%. Data released by NSSO further reveals that cooperative societies whichused to play and still play such a key role in disbursement of agricultural credit and other

agri-inputs, do not serve more than 13% of farmer households in Uttar Pradesh. NSSOdata reveal that in UP only 20% of farmer households included a member of a

cooperative society and just 13% had availed themselves of services from a cooperative

while at all India level, about 29% of farmer households included a member of a

cooperative society and 19% had availed themselves of services from a cooperative. Mostof these households availed themselves of either credit facilities or services related to

seeds or fertilizers.

Returns on InvestmentDespite the rise in the cost of all inputs like seeds, power, fertilizers, pesticides

and water, farmers are selling wheat, corn, sugar and meat today at prices that are inreality half of those twenty years ago. Returns on investment are reducing further.

Though retail food prices are significantly higher than ever before, over the past two

decades, the prices of nearly all the major agricultural commodities declined in real

terms, i.e. inflation adjusted or relative to movement in prices overall. A study conductedby UNCTAD reveals that upon comparison of the prices of agricultural raw materials and

food and beverages in 2003 with 1980 prices show a drop of 60% and 73% respectively.

From 1997 to 2001 alone, the combined price index of all commodities fell by 53% inreal terms, that is commodities lost more than half their purchasing power in terms of

manufactured goods. OECD forecasts show that in real terms rice prices are likely to

remain flat over the next ten years while world wheat and maize prices are expected tocontinue their longer term declining trend. Real prices of oilseeds are also likely to

remain flat as productivity and increase in acreage neutralize growth in demand.

In the Indian context too it is clear that the returns on investment to the farmer is

declining. In case of paddy and maize, the Minimum Support Price is less than the cost of

production and in case of wheat, the MSP is only marginally more than the cost of

production.


11/26

11

Table 12: Production cost and Minimum Support Price of various crops

in 2004-05

(Rs. per quintal)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

Paddy

Whe

at

Maize

Arha

r

Musta

rdGram

Prod. Cost

MSP

Since paddy and wheat are the predominant Kharif and Rabi crops in Uttar

Pradesh, there is urgent need to take a fresh look at this situation. It will be futile toexpect the farmer to continue to grow paddy and wheat when his return on investment is

negative.

In case of Uttar Pradesh, data reveals that the Agriculture Parity Index of prices

received and paid by the farmers has declined from 91.3 in 1984-85 to 87.7 in 2003-04.This is evident from the data in Table 13 below:-

Case Study of a marginal farmer in Basrahiya Village

In village Basrahiya of Gosainganj Block, Lucknow District, theaverage size of holdings is about 1.5 acre. After holding discussionswith a farmer who owned two bigha of land (0.5 hectares), it emergedthat the farmer was making an investment of about Rs.12,200 for hisKharif crop in 3 bighas of land (two bigha owned by him and onebigha taken on bataidari) and the returns expected was only aboutRs.20,800. This did not take into account the value of family labourput in by the farmer, his adult son and daughter in law. Thus, afteralmost 5-6 months of labour, his net returns was only Rs.8,600 whichworks out to only Rs.1720 per month. If the farmer and his family hadworked as a wage labourer for 30 days, they would have earnedRs.1800 per person in a month @ Rs.60 / day. This only goes toillustrate that actual returns on investment from farming is negativefor a large number of small and marginal farmers.


12/26

12

Table 13: Agriculture Parity Index of Uttar Pradesh (Base year 1970-71=100)

# Agricultural Year Index of prices

received by the

farmers

Index of prices

paid by the

farmers

Agriculture Parity

Index

(Col.2/Col.3)

1 2 3 41 1984-85 260.4 307.1 91.3

2 2003-04 1112.3 1268.7 87.7

Irrigation

The proportion of net irrigated area to net cropped area has increased from36.12% in 1966-67 to 54.89% in 1980-81 and 76.30% in 2001-02. However, the net

irrigated area by private sources such as private tube well/ pump sets constitute nearly

87.09 lakh hectares, which is 68% of net irrigated area. There are 35 lakh private tubewells/pump sets in Uttar Pradesh of which about 28 lakh are diesel operated and 7 lakh

electricity operated. Canal irrigation provides irrigation facilities to only 27.19 lakh

hectares, which is about 21 % of net irrigated area. 28123 State Tube wells account forjust 8% of net irrigated area. The share of different forms of irrigation in the State has

been depicted in Table 14.

Table 14: Percentage area irrigated by different forms of irrigation in UP

Canal

Pvt. Tubewell

State

Tubewell

others

Area irrigated by canals has been continually declining over the years. Further

water use efficiency in most irrigation systems is low in the range of 30-40 percent as

against an ideal value of 60%. There has also been steady decline in water table due to

over exploitation of ground water and insufficient recharge from rainwater. Declining

trend of groundwater has been observed in 559 of 819 blocks in the State. Between 1987and the year 2000, percentage groundwater used for irrigation has gone up from 30 to

57.31% for the State as a whole.

It is also noteworthy that against created irrigation potential of 31063.73 thousand

hectares, the actual utilization of potential was only 22404.48 thousand hectares in 2002-

03. This lag of nearly 90 lakh hectares is a cause of serious concern. It could be due toseveral reasons such as non-construction of on-farm development works below the outlet,

change in cropping pattern to more water intensive crops, loss in live storage due to

sedimentation, low water use efficiency due to disrepair of the system etc. Heavy load ofsilt in river waters and thereby excessive siltation of the canals has reduced the carrying


13/26

13

capacity of the canal system and hence there is decline of water use at tail end areas of

the canals. Further, the irrigation potential created can be described as protective

irrigation rather than assured irrigation. The difference in operating costs of canalirrigation and tube well based irrigation is in the ratio of 1:7 and rising cost of diesel is

placing a heavy burden on the small and marginal farmers. Consequently, farmers only

provide only that much irrigation as required to save the crop rather than meet the fullrequirement of water for the crop.

Agriculture Extension

The main extension agency is the State Agriculture Department. There is a

separate Extension Directorate within the Agriculture Department. Department ofHorticulture, Soil and Water Conservation and Watershed Development also have some

extension workers. In the 1980s, the State implemented the World Bank funded Training

& Visit system of extension. With external support drying up, the State began to dilutethe rigour of T&V system and the 90s witnessed many States experimenting with new

extension approaches. Currently, a number of organizations are providing extension

services. These include State Agriculture Universities; Commodity Boards (Spices,rubber, tea, coconut, coffee etc.); Krishi Vigyan Kendras; non-governmental

organizations; agri-business companies dealing with seed, fertilizer, pesticides, farm

machinery; media firms etc.

Since 1998, ATMA has been implemented in 28 districts of 7 States as part of a

World Bank funded National Agriculture Technology Project. The Project provided for

pilot testing the following innovations:-

Establishment of Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA)as an autonomous agency at district level and below for technology

dissemination

Moving towards integrated extension delivery Adopting bottom-up planning procedures for setting the research-

extension agenda

Making technology dissemination farmer driven and farmer accountable

Addressing gender concerns in agriculture

Increasing use of information technology for effective disseminationProgramme interventions are based on a strategic research and extension plan prepared ina participatory mode. Farm Information and Advisory Centres (FIAC) are created at the

Block level to act as the operational arm of ATMA. A Block Technology Team,

comprising technical personnel at the block level and a Farmer Advisory Committeecomprising all key stakeholders and farmer representatives are also constituted at the

Block level. Experience so far suggests that the integrated implementation of fieldactivities is workable but depends considerably on the State Governments commitment

to internalize and practice these new concepts. Further, internalization of diversificationand intensification of different farming systems by ATMA is absolutely essential. BTT

and FACs need to play a more active role in preparation of Block Action Plans and

involve NGOs in forming farmer groups. It has also been seen that integrated package ofexposure visit, training and demonstration results in better technology adoption. The

obvious advantages of this system is the flexibility to quickly respond to training and


14/26

14

information needs of farmers, availability of a reasonably good untied operational budget

and participation of farmers through FACs. However, the project suffered from weak

process documentation and internal Monitoring & Evaluation system. Utilization of ITfacility and progress in implementation of adaptive research through State Agriculture

Universities and KVKs has not been up to the mark.

Another innovation in agriculture extension is Agri clinics-agri-business centres.

The main aim of the scheme is to provide accountable extension services to farmers

through technically trained agricultural graduates at the village level. The programme isfinanced through bank loans and Government of India provides 25% of the cost as

subsidy. It is proposed to establish 5000 agri-clinics to provide testing facilities,

diagnostic and control services and other consultancies on a fee-for service basis. The

programme has attracted nearly 16000 agri-graduates. 57 institutions are involved in thismassive training programme. By end of 2002, 2853 graduates had completed or were

undergoing training and 235 agripreneurs had started agri-clinics or agri-business centres

undertaking a variety of agripreneurial activities in different parts of the country.

There is urgent need to revitalize agricultural extension in the State and

incorporate lessons learnt from States own experience in running UP Sodic LandReclamation Project and UPDASP apart from those of other States such as Kerala,

Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Punjab Agriculture University and agencies like ITC.

]

Public private partnerships in agricultural extension in Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh was the first State in the country to have a private extension policy. The

policy states that the private extension would aim for cost reduction, improving the efficiency of

extension system and inculcating accountability in extension services. The first MoU regardingimplementation of public-private partnership in agriculture was signed by the DoA with Dhanuka group

for agricultural extension in Hoshangabad district of MP. Dhanuka is one of Indias leading group incrop protection business. The MoU aims to work together in areas like soil testing, training, farmers

tours, demonstrations, transfer of technology through cyber dhabas, agriculture fortnights,

establishment of markets and providing credit facilities to farmers.

The achievements are as under:

a. Soil Testing

i. Handing over of the soil testing laboratory in Hoshangabad to Dhanuka. DoA meets

the cost of chemicals and equipment and the group employs its own staff and meets

their salary costs

ii. Addition of 8 staff for field extension activities in the district by Dhanuka group

iii. Four fold increase in the number of samples tested

iv. Nine dealers centres of Dhanuka acting as collection centre of soil samples

v. Faster and timely communication of soil test results to farmers

The group considers this investment as way of improving its corporate image. Sponsorship or

oint funding and implementation of extension programme provide them an opportunity to reach new

customers. For the government, its participation with the group provides access to funds to supplement

its limited operational budget and thereby improve programme coverage.


15/26

15

WastelandsThe total wasteland area in Uttar Pradesh is about 38.84 lakh hectares (about 14%

of total geographical area) as per information provided by National Remote SensingAgency. Sodic land cover 5.95 lakh hectare, Agricultural waste land 5.18 hectare and

fallow lands about 16 lakh hectare. State Government has through the Sodic landReclamation Project reclaimed about 1.5 lakh hectares and aims to reclaim another 1 lakh

hectares through the Bhoomi Sena Project started in 2005-06. There is need to put thisvast tract of wastelands to productive use. About 3.37 lakh hectare of sodic land and

agricultural waste land are located in Bundelkhand, Allahabad, Mirzapur and Sonebhadra

districts which are also home to some of the poorest sections of Uttar Pradesh population.Large tracts of wasteland in Kanpur and Agra divisions of the State can also be utilized

for cultivation of bio-fuel such as jetropha. Jetropha has the potential to increase the

income of about 500,000 farmers by about Rs.2400 2500 crore per annum in theseareas.

Sugarcane

Uttar Pradesh is the largest sugarcane producing State in the country. Itcontributes 44% to the countrys total sugarcane production and is also the largest

producer of sugar in the country. About 22.50 lakh hectare is under sugarcane cultivation

and 1240.21 lakh tones of sugarcane was produced in the State in 2004-05. Average yield

of sugarcane has increased from 54.40 tonnes per hectare to 60.65 tonnes per hectare in2004-05. Details are given in Table 15 below.

Table 15: Data relating to sugarcane sector

# Item Unit 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06

1 Area undersugarcane

Lakh hectares 20.54 21.52 24.04 23.04 20.45 22.50*

2 Average

production

Tonne/hectare 54.40 57.85 55.96 54.98 60.65 60.00*

3 Total sugarcane

production

Lakh tonnes 1117.38 1244.91 1345.29 1266.51 1240.21 1350.00*

4 Operational

sugar mills

No. 100 101 101 101 106 115*

5 Sugarcane

processed

Lakh tonnes 451.37 552.09 592.71 463.52 514.72 570.00*

6 Sugar production Lakh tonnes 43.94 52.60 56.51 45.51 50.37 55.85*

* estimated

Farmers are receiving over Rs.6000 crore from the sugar mills as payment forsugarcane purchased by the sugar mills. This sector is contributing about 18% to the State

Domestic Product from agriculture sector. By increasing productivity, there is scope to

further increase the share of sugarcane to State Domestic Product from agriculture sector.


16/26

16

HorticultureIndia is one of the worlds largest producers of farm commodities. Farm sector

takes care of 69% of the population. At present, Horticulture contributes 28% of theagricultural income and 54% of the agricultural exports.

The horticulture sector includes fruit, vegetables, spices, medicinal & aromatic

plants, flowers, mushroom and a variety of plantation crops like coconut, arecanut,

cashewnut and cocoa which has been contributing significantly to the GDP in agriculture(28.5 per cent from 8.5 per cent area).The Mission is in the process of being set up. The

objectives of the National Horticulture Mission will be doubling the horticulture

production, i.e. to achieve a production of 300 million tonnes by 2011-12. The presentshare of Uttar Pradesh in total horticulture production of the country is about 30% (48

million tonnes).

In Uttar Pradesh, the National Horticulture Mission has been launched in 26districts of the State. Presently, it is estimated that horticulture and sugarcane contribute

18.3% each to agriculture income in the State. Studies show that one hectare of land

under horticulture creates 863 man days of employment while it is only 160 man days incase of cereals.

Production of vegetables in UP increased from 0.96 million tones in 1991-92 to13.5 million tones in 1998-99. Uttar Pradesh is the second largest producer of vegetables

in the country after West Bengal. Significant increase in area under vegetables has been

recorded on small and marginal farms. Studies have revealed that small and marginal

farmers were diversifying a part of their land to extra short duration crops like vegetables

to augment and stabilize their income over seasons. Further vegetable production engagesmore labour from vulnerable population groups such as women. It is also beneficial to

soil health and utilizes water more efficiently in terms of both production and economicefficiency. In Eastern Uttar Pradesh and Central Uttar Pradesh, there is tremendous scope

to increase vegetable and fruit production as in several districts upto 90% of farmers are

small and marginal farmers and 70-75% holdings are of one acre or less.

Potato Agri-Export Zone at Agra, Mango Agri-Export Zone at Lucknow and

Saharanpur and a vegetable Agri-export zone at Lucknow have already been set up in theState.

Production of Fruits and VegetablesThere has been tremendous increase in production of vegetables in the State as is

evident from data in Table 16below. Production of fruits has not increased as much. It is

predominated by mangoes, guava, banana and Aonla.


17/26

17

Table 16 : Production of fruits and vegetables in Uttar Pradesh

(in lakh tones)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04

Fruits

Vegetables

As regards productivity, there has not been much change in productivity of fruits

in the State over the last decade. It has increased marginally from 100 quintals per hectare

in 1996-97 to 125 quintals per hectare in 2004-05. Productivity of vegetables has

increased from 160 quintal per hectare in 1996-97 to 171.10 quintal per hectare in 2002-03. Productivity of potatoes has increased from 230 quintals per hectare in 1996-97 to

260 quintals per hectare in 2004-05.

It is useful to keep in mind that as per market information published by theNational Horticulture Board (NHB) over 17% of fruits and vegetables produced in the

country are marketed in 33 major markets within the country and out of these markets43% is the share of four metros viz. Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai. Given thephysical location of the State, Delhi, Kolkata and perhaps Mumbai could be potential

markets for horticultural produce of the State.

Marketing of Horticultural Agri-produce

Marketing of Horticultural Agri-produce in the State is regulated by the Krishi

Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964. The flow of produce from farmer to market varieswith the type of produce and the distance to the market. There are at least 5-6 levels in

the marketing chain in the State. These are as under:

i. Small / Marginal farmerii. Village level trader

iii. Market level Commission Agent

iv. Wholesalerv. Sub-wholesaler

vi. Retailer


18/26

18

In this long marketing chain, the farmer gets only 25-40% of the price paid by the

consumer. Further value loss of the produce is estimated to be 30-40%. Different Studies

show that the mark up in the chain is by as much as 344%.

Table 17: Mark-up in the Marketing Chain

# Farmer Trader CommissionAgent

Wholesaler Retailer

AdditionalCost

5% 2.5% 5% 10%

Wastage 10% 10% 25%

Mark-up 25% 5% 50% 75%

Price 100 125 131 197 344

Major observations regarding the present marketing of horticultural agri-produce

in the State are as under:

The APMC Act discourages private initiative in setting up new marketing systems

Present system is antiquated number of malpractices such as charging ofcommission by the Commission agents from both the seller as well as the buyersis in vogue.

Markets are chaotic, unhygienic and poorly maintained

Market Committees are unaccountable to the main users of the market

Present system focuses on book-keeping. There is no cost or profit centre orientedaccounting system

Need for adoption of modern management system efficient and effectiveinformation system

Government regulated agri-markets have not succeeded in either improving theefficiency in marketing of the produce or in prevention of exploitation of the

farmer by the wholesaler/middlemen.

Animal Husbandry and Dairy sector

The ownership of livestock is much more egalitarian than that of land. Livestockare particularly important in arid and semi-arid areas for strengthening household

livelihood and food security. Dairy and poultry sectors are playing a key role in

enhancing income and nutrition.

India owns the largest livestock population in the world, accounting for nearly

57% of the world buffalo population and 16% of the cattle population. India was thelargest producer of milk in 2002-03 with a total production of 86.4 million tones. During2002-03, the livestock sector accounted for about 5.4 percent of the total GDP and 27.7

percent of the GDP from the agricultural sector. (Source: NABARD). Livestock sector

produces 86.4 million tones of milk, 41.7 million tones eggs, 52.1 million kgs of wooland 4.94 million tones of meat.


19/26

19

Livestock sector has grown impressively in the State. Annually, the State

produces more than 16 million tonnes of milk and over 116 thousand metric tones of

meat from buffalo and small ruminants. The value of livestock output, which was 17percent of the total agricultural output in 1980-81 rose to 27 percent in 1999-00. This

sector still has huge potential to raise income of small and marginal farmers. However,

the productivity per livestock unit is too low in the State as compared to the potential. Atpresent, the average milk production per day of cows is 3.035 kg and of buffaloes is

4.315 kg. The per capita per day milk availability in the State is 272 grams. Likewise,

although Uttar Pradesh is the seventh largest producer of eggs in the country, only fiveeggs and 100 grams of chicken meat is being made available through domestic

production while the consumption level is 18 eggs and 300 gram chicken meat per person

per annum. Consequently, 40 lakh eggs and 2.20 lakh broiler chicken are being imported

in the State every day from other States such as Andhra Pradesh. Thus, there istremendous scope to raise production of eggs and chicken meat in the State. Details of

production are as under:

Table 18 : Production of Milk, Eggs and Wool in Uttar Pradesh

Production# Item Unit Tenth Plan

target 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06

1 Milk 000

tonnes

193 152.90 159.43 165.118 180.00*

2 Eggs millions 968 842.04 873.99 901.81 922.00*

3 Wool Lakh kg 20.81 18.84 19.29 19.65 20.31*

* estimatedIn 2004-05, on an average 10.65 lakh kg of milk was being procured per day from

7.57 lakh members of 15686 Cooperative Milk Societies federated to 51 Milk Unions. In

the Cooperative Sector, 4.60 lakh litres of milk was being sold per day in the State and

another 5 lakh litres was being supplied to the National Milk Grid Mother Dairy andDelhi Milk Scheme. Remaining milk was being processed and sold in the market as milk

products. However, there were 172 units registered under Milk and Milk Product Act

1992 in the Private sector with an installed capacity of 77.99 lakh litre per day. Most ofthese units were installed in western Uttar Pradesh as milk production in eastern Uttar

Pradesh and Bundelkhand is still very low. There is huge potential to increase investment

in these areas.

Intensifying production and distribution of fodder and feed is urgently required as

most of the dairy animals are stall fed. Fodder and Feed Banks operated by SHGs would

help landless labour families to take to animal husbandry. Increase in yield of maize and

soya bean as well as acreage under these two crops are needed to meet the feedrequirement of the growing poultry and dairy business. Presently, the yield of maize is

lowest in the world at 1.4 tonnes per hectare against world average of 4.2 tonnes. There istremendous scope to increase maize production as Rabi crop in Eastern Uttar Pradesh.

FisheriesIndia is the sixth largest producer of fish in the world and second in inland fish

production. The fishery sector has also emerged as an important source of employment


20/26

20

generation. The fishery sector contributes 1.1 percent of the total GDP and 5.4% of the

GDP from agriculture sector. Fish production reached a level of 6.2 million tones in

2002-03. This includes deep sea fishing. However, contribution of Uttar Pradesh to thetotal inland fish production of the country is not very high considering the size of the

State and availability of water bodies.

Uttar Pradesh has 11.52 lakh hectares of water bodies which can be potentially

used for fisheries. Presently only 52.7 percent of total area covered by water bodies is

being utilized for fisheries. In the year 2004-05, the State produced 2.77 lakh metric tonesof inland fish while West Bengal produced 8.66 lakh metric tones and Andhra Pradesh

5.96 lakh metric tones. Based on the assumption that 50% of the States population is fish

eating, per capita consumption of fish in the State was only 3.46 kg/annum whereas

Indian Council of Medical Research has estimated an ideal per capita per annumconsumption level of 13.9 kg. Thus there is tremendous scope to increase fish production

in the State. The productivity level of fish production in the State in 2002-03 was 2700

kg/hectare/annum and it is proposed to raise this to 4000 kg/hectare/annum. This would

still be below the productivity levels achieved in Punjab and some other States. It canthus be safely concluded that Uttar Pradesh is poised for blue revolution wherein

production of freshwater fishery can be raised from 2.77 lakh metric tonnes to around 10lakh metric tonnes with a clear policy of utilizing all water bodies and increasing

productivity.

Strategy to revitalize the Farm Sector

First Report of the Farmer CommissionThe first Report of the Farmer Commission has identified the five basic factors

central to present agrarian crises and these are:

i. Unfinished agenda in land reformsii. Quantity and quality of water

iii. Technology fatigue

iv. Access, adequacy and timeliness of institutional creditv. Opportunities for assured and remunerative marketing.

It has also been observed that adverse meteorological factors and possible climatic

changes tend to further accentuate the problem. The worst affected are small andmarginal farmers, tenants and share croppers, landless agricultural labourers and tribal

farmers since their coping capacity is very limited.

Some of the recommendations made by the Farmer Commission with a view torevitalize the farm sector are as under:-

Ecologically sound agriculture is knowledge intensive. Informationempowerment of farm men and women on agriculture and allied activities, asalso knowledge empowerment on a variety of issues ranging from health,

education, on-farm and off-farm livelihoods, enterprise development, market

linkages and quality literacy is the need of the hour. This can be effectivelydone through a network of Rural/Village Knowledge Centres harnessing ICT


21/26

21

and other modern tools of communication linkage with e-choupal, Lokvani

centres, development under UPSWAN.

Village Knowledge Centres under PPP Farmers Distress Call Centres ineach State to provide timely and effective aid to farmers during periods ofcrises.

Connectivity, Content, Capacity Building and Care & Management linkagewith Panchayats. District level Content Consortium & Capacity BuildingConsortium can be set up.

Beekeeping, vermicompost, production of bio-agents, tissue culture. Younggraduates should be engaged in precision horticulture, e-trading,

establishment and management of agri-clinics and soil and pesticide testing.

The KVKs and ATMAs should also perform the role of Udyog VigyanKendras a post harvest technology wing should be added to each KVK to

bridge the gap between production and post harvest technologies.

Farm schools in the fields of farmer achievers identify at least two in eachBlock to begin with.

Create pulses and oilseeds villages for specialized enhanced production(ensuring full availability of quality seeds and other specified inputs),

efficient processing and remunerative producer-oriented marketing of theselected crops as well as the optimization of producing more crops and

income from every drop of water by cultivating low water requiring crops.

Crop-livestock; crop-livestock-fish integrated systems

Convergence and synergy of all agricultural programmes around a watershed use remote sensing data for every district

Dry farming areas have scope for doubling average yields immediatelythrough addressing the deficiencies of micro-nutrients in the soil in addition

to attending the needs for N, P and K.

At the Agri Summit 2005, it was recommended that New Deal to Rural India

requires the following:

i. Reversing the declining trend in investment in agriculture and alliedsector

ii. Stepping up credit flows to farmers

iii. Increasing public investment in irrigation & wasteland developmentiv. Increasing funds for agricultural research & extension

v. Creating single market for agricultural produce

vi. Investing in rural healthcare & education

vii. Investing in rural electrification

viii. Investing in rural roadsix. Setting up commodities futures markets

x. Insuring farmers against risks

In short, agriculture has to move from sustenance farming to market driven

farming with a view to maximize the returns for the farmer and making farming aremunerative, attractive occupation. It must be remembered that farm sector takes care of


22/26

22

69% of the population. Further, the horticulture sector contributes 28% of the agriculture

income and 54% of the agricultural exports at all-India level.

It has also been suggested at the Agri Summit 2005 that taking into consideration

the 24.03% contribution of agriculture to total GDP (2003-04), minimum 6.0% of the

total GDP should be invested in agriculture & allied activities. The present level ofinvestment by Government of India is around 3.8% of the Total Tenth Plan Outlay.

The suggestions made by the Farmer Commission as well as the Agri-Summit

2005 need to be carefully looked into and acted upon as the problems and solutions are

equally applicable to Uttar Pradesh. The State Government could evolve the followingstrategy to revive the Farm Sector in the State:-

1. Steps to improve self-esteem of the farmers: Scheme to publicly honourfarmers who have achieved success in their sphere of action on lines of

Yash Bharati.

2. Improve seed replacement rate: According to farmers, eleven hybrid

varieties of paddy and about eight High Yielding Varieties of paddy are

now available in the market. Farmers are presently using 25 to 30% hybrid

seeds and about 70% HYV seeds in their fields. Farmers of GosainganjBlock in Lucknow district were of the view that if availability of hybrid

seeds is increased, farmers would be willing to opt for them as apart from

increased productivity, these have also been seen to be resistant to pestsand farmers tend to save on cost of pesticides too. Further, Government

agencies could also store and sell hybrid seeds to farmers as that would

help to keep the market prices of these seeds in check. Hybrid seeds need

to be replaced every year. Thus, improving availability and usage ofhybrid seeds and ensuring replacement of HYV seeds after every three

years could be an useful strategy for Kharif crops. For Rabi crops, efforts

should be made to ensure seed replacement every third year by all farmers.

3. Improve extension activity in the State: Involve all stakeholders,

including the following, for undertaking extensive agri-extension work inthe State progressive farmers in all districts through Farm Schools;

agri-input dealers; extension workers of fertilizer companies; Kisan

Sahayaks; companies like ITC, DCM-Shriram; Cooperative Department;Sugar Cooperatives etc. Adoption of cafeteria approach in agricultural

extension can perhaps deliver better results in the State. The strategyshould be formulated for specific agro-climatic zones taking into accountthe strengths and weaknesses of the extension network in the area.

4. Scheme for increasing profitability of farmers with holdings of 1 acreor less : Provide various options regarding crop mix, choice of inputs,agricultural practices to the farmer with a view to reducing his input cost


23/26

23

and increasing the value of his produce so as to ensure higher returns for

the marginal farmer who are preponderant in the State.

5. Prepare various farm models for different types of farmers indifferent agro-climatic zones Small, marginal, medium and big farmers

where thrust is on increasing income of farmers on a sustainable basis.Apart from proper crop mix with a view to increase productivity and

income, the farm model would also include subsidiary activities like

dairying, goatery, rural backyard poultry etc. so as to maximize returns forthe small and marginal farmer. This would vary for different agro-climatic

zones in the State.

6. Effective steps for restoring soil health Scheme for promotingbalanced use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides etc., promoting use of

organic manure, herbal pesticides, soil testing facilities at doorstep of

farmers. As in case of Madhya Pradesh, Public Private Partnership

initiatives could be taken in Uttar Pradesh.

7. Use Remote Sensing Data to prepare micro-plans for increasing cropintensity The NRSA is preparing a GIS based natural resource map for

all the districts of Uttar Pradesh. This is likely to be completed by the end

of this financial year. In these GIS maps, fields where presently only

single crop is being cultivated and which are ideal for double croppingbased on soil type, availability of water etc. are indicated and these could

become the basis for detailed crop plan of these areas.

8. Optimize use of water for irrigation Success stories in the State like

that of Basrahiya, Amethi, Shekhwapur, Daudpur and Sewapur in

Gosainganj Block of Lucknow need to be replicated and propagatedthroughout the State. They have succeeded in taking water to the tail-end

of the irrigation channel. They have witnessed a three-fold increase in

their income from agricultural produce. Records of water purchased, sold

and cost recovery are being maintained and big as well as small andmarginal farmers are benefiting from the system. Preventing wastage of

canal waters and adoption of better irrigation techniques should also be

insisted upon. Further, Water User Groups could be authorized toundertake repair and maintenance of minors, sub-minors and field

channels from the funds collected by them from the farmers. State

Government could also consider fully giving up collection of irrigationdues and treat expenditure on construction and maintenance of canals as

farm subsidy. Desiltation of canal system should be taken up under

various programmes of the Rural Development Department.

9. Progressively reduce dependence on exploitation of ground water forirrigation Almost 80 percent of irrigation facility in the State is ground

water based and about 28 lakh of 35 lakh existing tubewells are diesel


24/26

24

operated. This means high operational costs due to rising price of diesel

apart from depletion in ground water levels due to over-exploitation. This

strategy is not sustainable over the long term. Hence, public investment insurface irrigation schemes has to rise.

10. Promote cultivation of bio-fuel plantslike Jetropha to increase incomeof farmers from non-productive land holdings and reduce input costsof diesel As per the National Bio-Fuel Mission, production of jetropha

over 11.2 million hectares of wasteland would be required to produceadequate bio-fuel for meeting the requirement of 20 percent blending with

High Speed Diesel by the year 2012. Keeping in view the large tract of

wasteland in the State, it is essential that cultivation of jetropha is taken up

on a big scale. Oil Companies like IOC, Bharat Petroleum have agreed tobuy bio-diesel at the rate of Rs.25 per litre and procurement centres are

being set up at Lucknow and Panki. This would ensure payment of Rs. 6-7

per kg of jetropha seed to the farmer and an income of Rs.20,000-25,000

per acre in case of dense cropping. The farmer would be able to produceabout 150-200 litres of diesel from jetropha seeds even in case of fence

cropping and this works out to a saving in input cost of about Rs.7000 perannum. This means increased profitability for the farmer.

11. Reform agri-marketing Introduce competition so as to ensure better

returns to farmers for their agri-produce. Permission given by the StateGovernment to ITC to set up e-chaupals and e-sagars in the State is a step

in the right direction. Government could also think of introducing Rythu

Bazars in the State on lines of Andhra Pradesh with a view to eliminatingintermediaries and bringing producer and consumer face to face so that

both stand to gain. The price of the produce is generally fixed 25% above

the wholesale price and 25% below retail prices.

12. Improve availability of agricultural credit - The average credit

extended to farmers in Uttar Pradesh is only about Rs.2000 per crop. This

is grossly inadequate and cannot meet even the cost of seeds andfertilizers.

13. Implement scheme on pattern of National Horticulture Mission inremaining districts of Uttar Pradesh In view of the potential to raise

farm income and provide employment, it is essential that horticultural

activities are stepped up in all districts of Uttar Pradesh. Towards this end,State Government could consider taking up horticultural activities on the

pattern of National Horticulture Mission in eight to nine districts in the

State in 2006-07 and eventually extend it to all districts during theEleventh Plan.

14. Increase capital investment in Dairy Sector There has not been any

major capital investment in cooperative Dairy sector in the last ten years


25/26

25

or so. There is urgent need to modernize the existing infrastructure and

make new capital investment with a view to doubling the capacity of the

cooperative sector from 15 lakh litres per day to 30 lakh litres per day inthe next two years.

15. Increase investment in Animal Husbandry sector Keeping in view thefact that the potential clientele of the Animal Husbandry Department

covers nearly 1.60 crore rural households, there is need to focus attention

on this sector. Productivity of cattle is extremely low and towards this end,following need to be focused upon improvement of cattle breed;

prevention of Foot & Mouth disease; availability of quality cattle feed and

fodder; promotion of rural backyard poultry, goatery etc. Schemes for

training of Para vets could be extended and they could be made part ofthe vet nary service in the rural areas.

16. Increase investment in fisheries sector The State has good potential to

usher in blue revolution. The large tract of unutilized water bodiesshould be harnessed for quadrupling fish production in the State.

17. Increase funding for agriculture universities Research activities in the

sector has to be given a fillip and avenues for utilizing the capacity of

Central Government institutions located in the State should also be

explored. However, increased funding should lead to attainment of clearlydefined outcomes in terms of crop yield, reduction in input costs,

sustainability in the long term.

18. Introduce Health insurance schemes for farmers On the pattern of

initiatives taken by Government of Karnataka, a public-private partnership

model could be developed for providing comprehensive health insurancefor heart diseases, cancer, urology, etc. requiring hospitalization in super-

speciality hospitals to farmers. To begin with, the target group could be

farmers who are members of cooperative societies sugar cooperatives,

agri-cooperatives, milk cooperatives etc.

************

References:

1. Rural Economic Environment NABARD2. Summary Report of Agriculture Summit April 2005

3. First Report of National Farmer Commission

4. Report of the Committee on India Vision 20205. Report of the National Bio Fuel Mission

6. Report of the Committee on Capital Formation in Agriculture

7. NSSO Reports

8. Mid Term Appraisal of the Tenth Five Year Plan of Uttar Pradesh


26/26

9. Innovations in agricultural extension in India Rasheed Sulaiman V, ICAR

10. Emerging Trends in Marketing of Agri-Produce Dr.S.P.Singh & Sanjeev

Sharma

Note on Farm Sector

Documents

Transcript of Note on Farm Sector