National Food Security Mission [2007]

India’s food security was a matter of concern for the government in the early 2000s. It was a
policy concern to increase crop production to sustain the burgeoning population. Therefore,
the National Development Council (NDC) met for the 53rd time in May 2007 and resolved to
initiate a food security mission for the production of staple crops.

Though both the NDC and five-year plans have both been forsaken by the Indian
government, the NFSM continues to be supported.

Objectives

The NFSM objective was to improve India’s food security for rice, wheat, and pulses. The
plan was to boost the output of – wheat by 8 million, pulses by 2 million, and rice by 10
million tons respectively by the end of 2011-12. This objective was undertaken to keep prices
under control and make India self-sufficient.

Relevance

As per a 2012 report by the Indian Council for Agricultural Research, South Asia had to
increase food-grain production by 55% by 2020. India which relied and still relies on erratic
rainfall patterns had to adopt HYV seeds and improved technology to increase production.

Present Plan

The government plans to increase crop production by establishing1 –

 Cluster Demonstrations – demonstrations on enhanced package and cropping

structures.
 Seed Distribution - Provision of HYV seeds at subsidised rates.
 Farm Machineries – Distribution of farming implements at subsidized costs.
 Plant Protection – Subsidised circulation of plant protection compounds and bio-
pesticides; weedicides.
 Micro-Nutrients and Soil Ameliorants – Supply of subsidised micro-nutrients, liming
materials, etc.
 Local Initiatives – 5% of total state allocation for funding on a project basis.
 Establishing project oversight committees at state and local levels.
Results2

Funds utilized during the XI plan: All the 19 states were allocated an amount of Rs.4510
crore during the five-year period during which an amount of Rs.4382 crore was used. The
overall usage of the funds allocated was acceptable. About 37% of the states had employed
100% of the funds released, 53% had used 90% to 99%, 5% each at 81% and 30%.

Impact of Demonstrations: The demos on enhanced packaging under NFSM-Rice and

Wheat schemes resulted in a yield gain of 12% and 11.46% respectively. The majority of the
beneficiaries of these demonstrations reported an income gain of 10-20%.

Impact of Seed Distribution: The distribution and subsequent utilisation of HYV seeds
caused a 21% and 27% increase in the production of rice and wheat respectively. Farmers
also reported an income gain of approximately 10%, the approval ratings of HYV seeds were
‘good’ for 78-88% of the farmers.
Impact of Micro-Nutrient Distribution: NFSM-Rice and Pulses reported a drastic rise in
output by 23% and 26% respectively, over the non-treated fields. For wheat production -
micronutrient treated fields witnessed a 12% boost in comparison to the non-treated land.
Impact of Plant Protection Measures: Fields treated with pesticides and weedicides reported
a 19-28% increase in output over non-treated fields. The approval ratings for these measures
were ‘good’ for 87% of the beneficiaries who also reported an average increase in income by
10-20%.
Issues and Shortcomings
The possibility of horizontal growth in the area under rice cultivation during the Kharif
season is limited. The only way to meet the needs of the population is either to boost
productivity per unit area or increased area under cultivation. These issues haven’t been
addressed under NFSM.
There was only one Agriculture Officer at the district level dealing with several state
government programmes in most of the districts. The insufficient number of overseeing
workers did not allow proper monitoring of the measures under the NFSM. The inputs and
implements provided were expensive and this discouraged many lower-income farmers from
reaping the benefits of newer technology. Most of the planning in the districts is highly
centralised which involves little outside participation and lacks a ‘bottom-up’ approach as
envisaged in the NFSM.
Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana [2007]
In a conference on 29th May 2007, the National Development Council (NDC), floated the
notion of launching an assistance scheme (RKVY), anxious of the slow progress in the
agricultural and allied sectors. The Council also intended to reorient agricultural development
strategies to meet farmer needs. It granted a great degree of flexibility and autonomy to state
governments for planning and implementing programmes for incentivising investments in
agriculture and agriculture-allied sectors.
Objectives
The goal of the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana is to establish agriculture as the main
economic activity. Its objectives include:

 Risk moderation, increasing the efforts of farmers and endorsing agricultural

business and entrepreneurship ventures through the provision of the necessary
infrastructure.

 Granting autonomy and flexibility to state governments in planning and

implementing programmes to boost investments.

 Boosting agricultural income by increasing productivity and promoting value-

chain-based production models.

 Generating income through mushroom cultivation, floriculture, etc. to mitigate the

risk farmers face.

 Skill development, innovation, and developing agro-business models.

 To incentivise states for increasing public funding of agriculture and allied

sectors.

 Maximising the income of farmers and bridging the yield gap for staple crops.

Relevance
RKVY aids in developing the infrastructure required for the growth of agriculture along with
strengthening the efforts of agronomists and farmers through the provision of market
facilities. It will also aid in increasing private sector participation and investment in the
agricultural sector.
Present Plan

Production Growth: This stream receives 35% of the annual outlay the Centre provides to
states under the RKVY. States can take up any of the projects under this stream. These
include- all crop production activities, distribution of farming inputs, and information
dissemination. Agriculture allied sectors such as animal husbandry, fisheries, skill
development and production related research projects.

Infrastructure and Assets: This stream receives 35% of the annual outlay the Centre
provides to states under the RKVY. Projects under this stream involve both public and
private infrastructure projects. These include – setting up warehouses and cold storages, lab
testing facilities, mobile vans, market facilities, and transportation and communication
infrastructure. A subsidy of up to 25% will also be provided for the projects under this stream
to the states which them up.

Special Schemes: This stream receives 20% of the annual outlay the Centre provides to states
under the RKVY. It contains all the special schemes that the GOI announces based on
national priorities from time to time.

District and State Agriculture Plans (DAPs and SAPs): These include state and district level
programmes in addition to the existing plans such as MGNREGA. These plans will look
comprehensively into the financial, infrastructural and operational requirements of the state
and will be integrated into a state-level State Agriculture Plan (SAP).

Results

The RKVY has resulted in a significantly large increase in agricultural outlay in many Indian
states. Most notably – As of 2011 - Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Maharashtra, Tripura and Bihar
reported an increase of agricultural funding by 892%, 730%, 605%, 425% and 423%
respectively.

According to the latest reports – 16756 projects in the fields of production related research,
warehousing, animal husbandry etc. have been approved and have received an outlay of Rs.
119977 crores. In addition, there are 7951 ongoing projects and 8239 projects have been
successfully funded and completed.
Issues

The RKVY allows states to utilise only 1% of the provided funds for administrative and
logistics expenses whereas the actual costs exceed the 1% allocated. State governments incur
large levels of administrative expenses. Another issue is that no permanent employment can
be created, nor can vehicles be purchased using these funds. Permanent employment and
transport costs are borne separately. The RKVY Management Information System is web-
based and is often times useless as farmers don’t have sufficient access to internet and
computer facilities to make use of the information system.

A major issue that states have is the requirement of using 25% of the allocated funds for
setting up evaluation and monitoring systems which the Centre should provide.