Veroli Zhimo
One of the key poll planks of the NDA government was doubling of farmers’ income by 2022. Along the lines, it introduced three laws driven by the logic that the market, not the government, should take a leading role in managing agriculture in the country.
While the Centre maintained that the farm laws are part of its strategy to bring profitability in farming operations and raising incomes, majority of India’s farmers who are small and marginal, perceive the reforms as a death knell for agriculture ; hence, the nation-wide outcry.
In Nagaland, debate on the issue is almost none existent. Not surprisingly, the NDPP-BJP alliance in the State supported the reforms while the opposition party, particularly the Congress followed the national directive.
The nation-wide ‘Bharat Bandh’ also did not evoke much enthusiasm in the State. It can be attributed to the minuscule contribution of Nagaland towards national production and subsistence farming, though the majority of the workforce is engaged in agriculture. However, it does not mean that the impact of the new laws would be less significant.
The first law, The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, stated that controlling the supply of foodstuff can only be done only under ‘extraordinary’ circumstances while giving criteria in case of a steep price rise. It exempted holders of private stocks whose limit has not exceeded the ceiling of installed capacity, basically making hoarding legally justifiable.
For a state like Nagaland, deficient in major staples like cereals and pulses, local consumers are highly vulnerable. The argument of regulation only during ‘extraordinary’ circumstances is highly flawed as daily life is lived in ‘ordinary’ situations. The essential items, cereals, pulses, potato, onions, edible oilseeds and oils are required on a daily basis and for those in the low-income spectrum; they constitute a major portion of their income.
Nagaland comes in 19th place in terms of per capita income among the States and Union Territories (Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, FY 2018-19), denoting that low purchasing power of the majority of the State’s populace. Hence, the common citizens of the State are already in a precarious situation. In any case, it is likely that consumers would be left to fend for themselves, as the Amendment allows private stocking even during ‘extraordinary’ times, provided allotted limit is not exceeded.
The second law ‘The Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill’ encourages contract farming—private companies/players will be encouraged to get into agreement with farmers for buying their produce. This will entail farmers to produce crops under the agreement according to the conditions laid down by the companies/players. This includes management of the whole farming operation (seeds, land preparation, inputs, etc).
The concept of contract farming is not alien to Nagaland or India, with quite a few farmers already engaged traditional forms of it. However, there would be a greater push with the new law. As the State will not be able to compete in terms of food crops, the focus will be on cash crops. This can have tremendous implications for the agro-biodiversity of the State.
According to data available on the portal for the State Department of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change, about 231 species of crops are cultivated Nagaland. This is exclusive of 105 varieties of crops in Jhum fields. Additionally, there are also at least 400 varieties of edible wild fruits and vegetables that are foraged from local landscapes or incorporated into Jhum fields across the state.
In the modern contract farming system, such diversity could be lost.
The Agriculture Produce Market Committees (APMC) and Minimum Support Price (MSP) for crops have been strategies to improve the state of agriculture and farmer incomes. However, both of these strategies appear to be under attack under The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill.
The Act allows anyone with a Permanent Account Number to transact in farm produce outside the APMC jurisdiction which now stands reduced to the physical marketplace and yard. It provides for the payment period, an executive-led dispute resolution mechanism and prohibits any state levies on the trades. It bars civil court jurisdiction and overrides state APMC laws.
With the state of market infrastructure in Nagaland, it can be argued there is a need to expand APMC and bring more farmers, not the other way round.
As a large number of farmers in the State are subsistence-oriented with limited access to roads and markets, it is unclear how these new laws will help to boost farmer incomes. Whether the stakeholders in Nagaland appreciate the gravity of the issue, the potential harm from the three laws on the farmers of the State is real and it will require vigilance.
Feedback and comments can be sent to vzhimolimi@gmail.com
