National Mission on Natural Farming

The cabinet finally approves the National Mission on Natural Farming (NMNF) with an outlay of ₹2,481 crore (which incluses states share of Rs. 897 Cr) to cover over one crore farmers and 7.5 lakh ha. 15,000 clusters (each covering 50 ha).

Earlier under various names Government of India tried to initiate organic farming under Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana, Bharatiya Prakritik Krishi Paddati and few others. Farmers in rural areas enrolled in these programs faced various challenges that impede their access to essential services and inputs, potentially leading to the discontinuation of their practices. Small and marginal farmers, in particular, are susceptible to these stress factors. The initiatives are discontinued after the projects/programs are completed/discontinued.  The scaling up of Non Pesticidal Management in Telangana after 2014 is one such example.   Here is a compilation of the difficulties experienced in sustaining such initiatives:

Farmers in rural areas enrolled in these programs face various challenges that impede their access to essential services and inputs, potentially leading to the discontinuation of their practices. Small and marginal farmers, in particular, are susceptible to these stress factors. The initiatives are discontinued after the projects/programs are completed/discontinued.  The scaling up of Non Pesticidal Management in Telangana after 2014 is one such example. Here is a compilation of the difficulties experienced in sustaining such initiatives:

  1. Absence of an Effective Scientific Knowledge Management System: Many innovations in organic/natural farming are developed by farmers but lack proper documentation. When assessed through a modern scientific lens or replicated without considering local conditions, these innovations often prove unsuccessful. Without a robust curation process, advice to farmers is sometimes influenced by belief systems, leading to conflicting messages from various stakeholders.
  2. Skewed Policy Support: In India, chemical fertilisers are subsidised (nearly 90% for urea). A bag of urea is subsidised by over Rs. 2800. Farmers shifting to organic/natural farming are given only extension support at the most and have to bear all the other costs.
  3. Lack of household income focus: The predominant emphasis on crop production overlooks the importance of adopting an integrated approach for small holders that maximizes available resources to enhance household income and ensure nutrition security. This critical aspect is often neglected and warrants greater attention.
  4. Lack of Access to Appropriate Extension and Advisory Services: Farmers struggle to access extension and advisory services that cater to their specific problems and location-based practices. This lack of tailored guidance can hinder the effective implementation of organic/natural farming techniques.
  5. Last-Mile Delivery Challenges: Obtaining necessary services such as extensions, loans, insurance, and inputs can be cumbersome and dysfunctional. Farmers often face bureaucratic hurdles and find it difficult to access services due to inefficient processes.
  6. Multiple Inputs and Knowledge Gap: Accessing various inputs in addition to homemade ones can be a challenge for farmers. Proper knowledge on how and when to use these inputs is critical for successful organic/natural farming. Moreover, finding skilled farm labor poses another obstacle.
  7. Market-Production Disconnect: The market plays a vital role in the success of organic/natural farming. However, current prices for farm produce are often not remunerative, and middlemen further exploit farmers by adding little value to the produce. This discourages farmers and affects their income.
  8. Lack of Market Integration at the project level: The project often lacks integration with the market right from the beginning. Efforts to understand consumer needs and explore new markets, establishing systems including quality assurance to improve market access have been insufficient, impacting the marketing of organic/natural produce.
  9. Confusions with certification systems: While govt of India, made organic certification mandatory for selling in the market (with few exceptions), it could not establish credibility of the existing certification systems (NPOP and PGS systems) in the market. After the withdrawal of the equivalence by EU and US, the export market also is affected.
  10. Comprehensive Data Management Systems: Without an all-encompassing data management system, we face challenges in tracking changes, evaluating impacts, learning from experiences, and establishing market connections. Dealing with multiple data systems that lack interoperability and data trust further complicates the process.
  11. Sustainability After Project Timeline: When the project’s timeline ends, farmers may revert to conventional farming practices due to the withdrawal of support from NGOs and implementing agencies. The sustainability of organic/natural farming practices can be at risk without ongoing assistance and encouragement.

The NMNF seems to correct some of these and introduce equitable support for making the transition in the form of transition incentive of Rs. 15,000 over three years. Support to establish 10,000 Bioresource Centres is also a welcome step. This help to build small enterpreneurs locally who can produce and supply inputs.

However, the costs on trainings budgeted are very low and the expectation that transition will happen without much support on markets is not going to happen. Even if program succeds in helping farmers to make the transition, it may not sustain post project if the marketing is not sustained. The assumption that it is all for self consumption is not the reality.

Here are some suggestions

1) An incremental approach to scaling: Program design should prioritize an incremental change in production practices that moves from improving efficiency in input use, substituting synthetic inputs, and gradually moving towards agroecological practices.  At the state level the Department of agriculture and horticulture should focus on Good Agricultural Practices and Sustainable Agriculture practices in all the cultivated areas to reduce agrochemical and water use.  The Natural Farming program should promote moving towards regenerative agriculture by adopting organic/natural farming practices.

2) Differentiated Strategy Based on Regions and Crops: India’s agricultural production systems can be categorized into three distinct types, each requiring a tailored approach:

a. Low Input – Low Output – Low Environmental Impact Areas: These include predominantly tribal regionshill areas such as north eastern states, jharkand, chhattisgarh etc. Characterized by rainfed farming with crops like pulses, oilseeds, and millets, these areas require a focus on cropping intensification and soil fertility enhancement to boost productivity.

b. High Input – High Output – High Environmental Impact Areas: Found in highly irrigated, fertile zones such as Punjab, Haryana, parts of Karnataka, Telangana, Maharashtra etc, these regions primarily produce paddy, cotton, chilies, and turmeric, with high agrochemical and water usage. The strategy here should focus on transitioning to sustainable practices, with an emphasis on organic or natural farming. Products from these areas, if certified organic, have strong potential in national and international markets.

c. High Input – Low Output – High Environmental Impact – High Risk Areas: Covering a large portion of the country, these areas face high risk, where input costs are high, but returns are not proportional, often leading to farmer losses. Predominantly rainfed and with poor soil quality, the focus here should be on improving input efficiency, enhancing soil organic matter to increase water retention, and implementing soil and water conservation techniques. Mixed cropping systems with millets, pulses, oilseeds, and/or fruit trees should be integrated to diversify and stabilize income.

3) Building on existing community groups: A key strategy for scaling up natural farming would be to leverage existing Women Self-Help Groups (SHGs) and Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs) to mobilize the natural farming initiative. This would significantly reduce transition time and costs compared to establishing new mobilization efforts.

4) Community-centric management to ensure post-project sustainability: Program staff at the field level, i.e., Community Resource Persons (CRPs) should be hired and managed by community groups like FPOs and mandal-level federations of SHGs to ensure that they are accountable to the community and that their extension services remain relevant. This will also contribute to the longer-term sustainability of program goals, as extension can continue to be supported by the community on a demand basis after the government-sponsored program winds down.

5) Building Convergence with other schemes: Ongoing schemes like Agri Infra Fund, Central Sector Scheme on 10,000 FPOs etc can also be converged.

6) Ecosystem Services: The ecosystem services payments like carbon credits etc and incentives for reducing fertiliser use like PM PRANAAM, Green Credits for conservation etc can all be combined and delivered to the famers and for this a single certification sytem should help.