Thread by @BaluSreevidya

Having read the Farmers Empowerment Ordinance, I must say that it's a revolutionary change for our farmers for the following reasons. Caveats at the end.

1. For the first time, 'tarakar'/ middlemen as a money lender removed/ disabled from unfair practices

++

2. Produce sold at the farm land is a great revolution. Farmers don't need to worry about crop/ produce going bad due to weather conditions. The moment the produce is ready, it's the sponsor's responsibility to accept and remove from site

3. Instead of randomly purchasing produce post production, the agreement helps farmer assured purchase, guaranteed price and can ask for bonus linked with e-market rates - this is a big plus

++

4. Marginal and small farmers who struggle with no economies of scale and no money for agricultural engineering/ implements to boost productivity can now seek them from Sponsors in the agreement

5. State laws do not supersede this ordinance, so no local thuggery not possible

++

6. The agreement will be the shield of protection to farmers against ALL unfair practices hitherto plagued the sector. Training to farmers on this is another great inclusion

5. No land can be grabbed by the Sponsor, no permanent changes to the land, which is also protection

++

7. Grievance redressal is pro-farmer, fast, threefold to eliminate time delay losses, intervention of political bodies, and might of corporate sector. Especially due to Board composition to be decided by both parties

6. Linked to crop insurance and existing finance options

++

8. Quality and modus of achieving it are pre-agreed, and the expense of verifying, third party verification are all to be sourced by Sponsor, which is good.

Caveats:

a. The Ordinance or guidelines do not define Sponsor appropriately. Corporates being sponsors have risks

++

.. for example, shifting crops to suit changing demands which could or could not help parallel economy

b. If the Sponsor is a middleman, then there is possibility to continue some of the evils of hoarding, resale with varying margins, using loansharks to finance farmers

++

c. In addition, the Sponsor could potentially rig the Quality verification mechanism - by virtue of them being more organised/ financed than an average farmer. Systemic infiltration cannot be stopped in this case

++

d. Although the ordinance speaks about fair farming practices, and highlights the positive side of Sponsor requirements such as organic produce, it does not say how the farmer could protect from temptation of better money vis a vis a condition to use pesticides or GMO

++

Caveats are more about current situation of our farmers. Looks like the intended empowerment needs huge awareness and education to go before implementation, we must ensure the Sponsor should not influence the training or redressal process.

++

Based on that, I recommend the following:

1. Farmer education on the Agreement should be provided by the local Agriculture/ extension offices, not by Sponsors as mentioned in the Ordinance - this is because the entire redressal is limited to the terms of the agreement

++

2. Like in the case of free legal counsel for women, there should be a parallel legal structure to provide free support to farmers - not just around the Agreement

3. GMO or other unfair corporate farming practices should be excluded from Agreements

++

4. In time, the Quality verification body/ agencies should be registered by the same Registration Authority for the Agreement. This will protect farmers from being rejected for low grades unfairly

++

5. Who could be a 'Sponsor' should be clearly defined and clarified further in the amendment. By watching the space, presence of unfair middlemen as sponsor or behind sponsor and any financing mechanism outside of legal limits must be eliminated

++

As said, Caveats are minor and check mechanisms may evolve to help farmers in time. But even before getting there, this Ordinance certainly brings a huge change to our primary sector.

So well done!

++

Well done @narendramodi Ji, @PMOIndia @AgriGoI @nstomar @NITIAayog