Fact Checking Government claims on initiatives related to Agriculture – Part 1﻿
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 6, 2019
Here is a 2-part series
on the claims made by the current government on the initiatives related to
Agriculture.
The BJP government has published an infographic on the 48-months portal. The info-graph is a part of a larger sub section on the government’s commitment to farmers. It makes seven claims about the government’s focus on doubling farmers’ incomes. This article is a fact check of the claims made in the infographic.
What is the PMKSY?
‘The Pradhan Mantri
Krishi Sinchai Yojana (PMKSY) was launched in July 2015 for providing end-to
end solutions in irrigation supply chain, viz. water sources, distribution
network and farm level application’ states a response in Lok Sabha.
According to the PMKSY website, ‘It
has been conceived amalgamating ongoing schemes viz. Accelerated Irrigation
Benefit Programme (AIBP) of the Ministry of Water Resources, River Development
& Ganga Rejuvenation (RD&GR), Integrated Watershed Management Programme
(IWMP) of Department of Land Resources (DoLR) and the On Farm Water Management
(OFWM) of Department of Agriculture and Cooperation (DAC). The scheme will be
implemented by Ministries of Agriculture, Water Resources and Rural
Development. Programme architecture of PMKSY will be to adopt a ‘decentralized
State level planning and projectised execution’ structure that will allow
States to draw up their own irrigation development plans based on District
Irrigation Plan (DIP) and State Irrigation Plan (SIP). It will be operative as
convergence platform for all water sector activities including drinking water
& sanitation, MGNREGA, application of science & technology etc. through
comprehensive plan. State Level Sanctioning Committee (SLSC) chaired by the
Chief Secretary of the State will be vested with the authority to oversee its
implementation and sanction projects.’
A response in the Lok Sabha further stated that, ‘the program is composed
of three components namely Accelerated Irrigation Benefit Programme (AIBP),
River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation (RD & GR), PMKSY (Per Drop More
Crop, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare and (Watershed Development) PMKSY.
Ministry of Agriculture is the nodal ministry for implementing PMKSY.’
Has there been a special focus on irrigation?
The first claim is that there is a ‘special
focus on irrigation with the aim of ‘per drop more crop’.
The report of the committee for doubling farmers’ income states that ‘water source creation, conservation and efficient use
(by a blend of systems like micro-irrigation and technology like crop
alignment) can promote more crop per drop. PMKSY is based on this principle.
There could be a lifesaving or supplementary irrigation during post rainy or
fall months which would possibly sustain productive potential of crop through
alleviation of moisture stress under conservation agriculture (CA). Local water
harvesting by constructing small ponds and using the water via a sprinkler has
demonstrated the useful in protecting pulse, crops, during periods of monsoon withdrawal
or delay in Karnataka’.
The volume on strategies for sustainability in agriculture provides the strategies for improving irrigation inrain-fed agriculture areas. A response in LokSabha from December 2017 states that ‘Rs. 1550.00 crore and
Rs. 1990.00 crore were allocated under the Per Drop More Crop component of
PMKSY in the year 2015-16 and 2016-17 respectively’.
Claim: Special focus on irrigation with the aim of ‘per drop more crop.’
Fact: Water source creation, conservation and efficient use (by a blend of systems like micro-irrigation and technology like crop alignment) can promote more crop per drop. PMKSY is based on this principle. However, the scheme itself is an amalgamation of existing schemes, implying that there is not a new focus, but continuation of existing programs. Hence, the claim is MISLEADING.
Have quality seeds and nutrients been provided based
on soil health cards?
The second claim is thatthe government is enabling ‘provision of
quality seeds and nutrients based on soil health of each field’.
The website of thesoil health cards describes that the ‘National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture(NMSA) will be implemented
during 12th Plan with the objectives to make agriculture more productive,
sustainable and climate resilient; to conserve natural resources; to adopt
comprehensive soil health management practices; to optimize utilization of
water resources; etc. Soil Health Management (SHM) is one of the most important
interventions under NMSA. SHM aims at promoting Integrated Nutrient Management
(INM) through judicious use of chemical fertilisers including secondary and
micro nutrients in conjunction with organic manures and bio-fertilisers for
improving soil health and its productivity; strengthening of soil and
fertiliser testing facilities to provide soil test based recommendations to
farmers for improving soil fertility; ensuring quality control requirements of
fertilisers, bio-fertilisers and organic fertilisers under Fertiliser Control
Order, 1985; upgradation of skill and knowledge of soil testing laboratory
staff, extension staff and farmers through training and demonstrations;
promoting organic farming practices etc.’
According to a response in Lok Sabha, ‘the Government has introduced Soil Health
Card (SHC) Scheme during 2015 to assist State Governments to provide Soil
Health Cards to all farmers across the country’. Another answer states that ‘Soil Health Card Scheme plays a vital role
in enhancing agricultural production in a sustainable manner. The Government
has introduced Soil Health Card (SHC) Scheme to assist State Governments to
provide Soil Health Cards to all farmers across the country once in a cycle of
2 years. Soil Health Card provides information to farmers on nutrient status of
their soil along with recommendations on appropriate dosage of nutrients to be
applied for improving soil health and its fertility, which results in enhanced
agricultural productivity’.
So, while the governmentis providing soil health cards and giving recommendations, there is no evidenceto prove that it is not providing seeds and nutrients based on the soil health.It also has to be noted that soil health cards are being provided to farmersfor a long time now.  Soil Health Cards(SHCs) were also distributed during the previous UPA government. According toan answer provided in the Rajya Sabha, the UPA government had setup1206 Soil Testing Laboratories across the country and issued 5.69 crore SHCs byMarch 2013.
Claim: Provision of quality seeds and nutrients based on soil health of each field.
Fact: Soil health is being analysed and soil health cards are being provided by the government to the farmers by the state governments and this is being supported by the central government. However, there is no provision of seeds and nutrients based on these cards. Hence, the claim is FALSE.
Have there been large investments in warehousing and
cold chains?
The third claim is thatthere is ‘Large investments in
warehousing and cold chains to prevent post-harvest crop losses’.
Report of the Committee for Doubling Farmers’ Income in Volume III titled ‘Post-production Agri-logistics: maximising gainsfor farmers’ states that ‘the primary
development focus for agricultural post-production infrastructure, has been in
the form of warehousing and cold stores, for holding inventory for extended
durations’. The same report also provides data regarding the stock of riceand wheat held in central pool over the years. It shows that there has been aconsistent increase in the central stock since 2011 except for a dip in theyear of 2015.
A response in Lok Sabha from 2013states that ‘generally horticulture
produce require cold storages while grains require warehouses. Development of
cold storages is promoted in the country under the schemes of the Government,
namely, National Horticulture Mission (NHM), Horticulture Mission for North
East and Himalayan States (HMNEH), Capital Investment Subsidy for
Construction/Expansion/Modernisation of Cold Storage and Storage for
Horticulture Produce Scheme of National Horticulture Board (NHB) and
Development/Strengthening of Agricultural Marketing Infrastructure, Grading and
Standardization (AMIGS). Godowns/Warehouses are developed in the country under
the Scheme of Construction of Rural Godowns (RGS), in addition to Food
Corporation of India (FCI). Under AMIGS, total number of projects
sanctioned so far are 8087 involving subsidy of Rs.782.14 crore. Under RGS,
total number of projects sanctioned so far are 30574 with capacity of 383.62
lakh Metric Tonne (MT) involving subsidy of Rs.1294.42 crore. Under the Scheme
of NHM, total number of projects sanctioned so far are 652 with capacity of
401.26 lakh MT involving subsidy of Rs.446.12 crore. Under the Scheme of NHB,
total number of projects sanctioned so far are 2792 with capacity of 180.63
lakh MT involving subsidy of Rs.789.39 crore’.
Another response in Lok Sabha fromJanuary 2018 states that ‘warehouse
Infrastructure Fund (WIF) was constituted in National Bank for Agriculture and
Rural Development (NABARD), out of the priority sector lending shortfall by
Commercial Banks, with a corpus of Rs.5,000 crore for the year 2013-14.
Further, a corpus of Rs. 5,000 crore was allocated for the financial year
2014-15. There was no corpus allocated towards WIF for the year 2015-16,
2016-17 and 2017-18. Thus the cumulative allocation towards WIF was Rs.10,000
crore as on 31.03.2015. Since inception, the cumulative sanction under WIF is
Rs.7,332 crore and the disbursement made is Rs.4,029 crore. Out of this, an
amount of Rs.250.76 crore was sanctioned in 2017-18’.
Claim: Large investments in warehousing and cold chains to prevent post-harvest crop losses.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here