Drift in agriculture research

The other day, a poor farmer from the interior of Kerala asked me, “Sir, in summer when we have severe water scarcity, even for drinking, besides for our marginal farming, can we get some from the moon, where scientists said water is available in plenty more than five years ago?” An innocent question, but it speaks volumes for the relevance and impact of Indian science to the life of the common man. Come summer, Kerala, despite receiving the second highest rainfall in the country, next only to Cherrapunji in Meghalaya, suffers the most acute water scarcity,  in spite of the presence of a huge centre exclusively for research and development in water management in northern Kerala, functioning for almost half a century.

Not long ago, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), with much fanfare and a colossal sum of money invested from the national exchequer, told us it has been able to detect water on the surface of the moon (the Americans had done it decades ago). Now, the media hype on the ISRO mission to Mars makes me think, what next? Surprisingly, the former ISRO chief who marshalled thousands of crores for the moon mission now points a finger at the current one to say that the Rs 450 crore-plus spent on the Mars mission is a waste of money.

Ironically, the principal scientific adviser to the prime minister comes to the defence of the new chief saying that “Rs 450 crore is peanuts compared to the central fund allocation for science”. As an honest taxpayer, and one who does not understand space science, I am aghast at the  thought that the country seems to be awash with so much cash that it simply can dole out Rs 450 crore as though doling out a morsel of peanuts!

Like the poor illiterate farmer who questioned me about bringing water from the moon to his parched fields and thirsty mouth, I am concerned about what is happening to the crores spent on agricultural research, as I am back in India, having spent over three decades in Europe, Africa and other parts of Asia. I have been closely following the so-called green revolution, euphemistically called thus, for a high-input industrial type of agriculture, transplanted on Indian fields,  which had nothing truly “green” about it (the term itself was originally coined by an American scientist working for the US Department of Agriculture, USDA for short, surreptitiously lifted by someone here, which became a household term subsequently) that in essence was nothing but a combination of a short type of wheat (again imported from the International Research Centre for Maize and Wheat Research {CIMMYT)} in Mexico), unbridled use of chemical fertilisers, water and pesticides. And the adverse environmental fallout is all there for one to see. Please go to Punjab the “cradle” of the green revolution, the reader will understand what I say here.

My real worry is that those who boss over the agricultural research set-up in India seem unable to answer some very difficult and uncomfortable questions. Let us take a bird’s eye view of the monolith, the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). There are 98 institutes of one kind or the other, which have been set up or were subsumed by ICAR after it was given full control over all the research institutes under the ministry of agriculture in 1966.

The term coined then was the National Agricultural Research System (NARS). Additionally, ICAR funds and oversees about 56 State Agricultural Universities (SAUs), besides four deemed universities and a Central Agricultural University for the Northeast. With 24,000 scientists and a 12th Five-Year Plan budget of Rs 25,000 crore (initial request was Rs 50000 crores!), this is “no peanut”. Yet, what does the common man reap? The ICAR often boasts one of the largest national agricultural systems in the world. My finding is that in terms of its geographical spread, manpower, budget allocation and infrastructure, it takes the third spot behind USDA and the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS). 

But there it stops. Both USDA and CAAS have made spectacular contributions to agricultural science. The spectacular fundamental research in soil science (where I had the privilege to collaborate) of USDA and the American varsities and the hybrid rice of CAAS are just two examples. And what do we have to show to the world except a failed “green revolution”? The problem arises when one a takes a very hard look at a balance sheet — input and output. Take the case of a country like Brazil, with far less manpower and budget, which has made a lot more impact on farming of the poor peasants. The current director-general of ICAR admits that present challenges to Indian farming are daunting. He cites soil degradation (thanks to the so-called green revolution) and the consequent plateauing of crop yield, specially in rice and wheat, as examples. What have the scientists of ICAR and SAUs done to mitigate the problem? Put another way, the dwarf “miracle” wheat imported from CIMMYT (it was no innovation here) did the wonder for about two decades, but what have the subsequent ones offered? A yield difference of 1-5 per cent, one way or another. Is there any spectacular one that helps a yield jump of 300 per cent over those currently cultivated? This is a question Indian scientists cannot face.

More importantly, when we take up a project to emulate others, it turns out to be not just a failure, but a real fraud. Almost a decade ago, when Monsanto-peddled Bt Cotton made headlines, ICAR began foraying into a desi Bt Cotton. Alas, the “Bikaneri Narma” (BN Bt) Cotton turned out to be not just a failure, but a fraud and flew in the face of the DG. Monsanto made profit of Rs 2000 crore-plus from its royalties. A former vice chancellor and his top colleagues of University of Agricultural Sciences in Bangalore are facing criminal charges for clandestinely letting Mahyco (a Monsanto subsidiary) poach Indian brinjal violating agricultural biodiversity norms. Is there a greater shame? Here is what an official of the agriculture ministry said: “Cotton is a good example of what is happening in agricultural science. Pitted against companies with a turnover of Rs 4000-crore plus annually, our research has faltered and fallen by the way side.” Is there a worse indictment than this, coming as it is, from our countryman? Unless fresh ideas and brilliant minds combine, Indian agricultural research will go down the drain, squandering public money.

(The author is an international agricultural scientist and can be reached at drkppnair@gmail.com)

Related Stories

No stories found.
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com