Agriculture in India

I.P. Abrol
Centre for Advancement of Sustainable Agriculture
Summary
Indias record of progress in agriculture over the past four decades has been quite
impressive. The agriculture sector has been successful in keeping pace with rising demand for food.
The contribution of increased land area under agricultural production has declined over time and
increases in production in the past two decades have been almost entirely due to increased
productivity. Contribution of agricultural growth to overall progress has been widespread.
Increased productivity has helped to feed the poor, enhanced farm income and provided opportunities
for both direct and indirect employment. The success of Indias agriculture is attributed to a series of
steps that led to availability of farm technologies which brought about dramatic increases in
productivity in 7s and !s often described as the Green Revolution era. The ma"or sources of
agricultural growth during this period were the spread of modern crop varieties, intensification of
input use and investments leading to e#pansion in the irrigated area. In areas where $%reen
&evolution technologies had ma"or impact, growth has now slowed. 'ew technologies are needed to
push out yield frontiers, utili(e inputs more efficiently and diversify to more sustainable and higher
value cropping patterns. )t the same time there is urgency to better e#ploit potential of rainfed and
other less endowed areas if we are to meet targets of agricultural growth and poverty alleviation.
%iven the wide range of agroecological setting and producers, Indian agriculture is faced with a
great diversity of needs, opportunities and prospects. *uture growth needs to be more rapid, more
widely distributed and better targeted. These challenges have profound implications for the way
farmers problems are conceived, researched and transferred to the farmers. +n the one hand
agricultural research will increasingly be required to address location specific problems facing the
communities on the other the systems will have to position themselves in an increasingly competitive
environment to generate and adopt cutting edge technologies to bear upon the solutions facing a vast
ma"ority of resource poor farmers.
In the past agriculture has played and will continue to play a dominant role in the
growth of Indian economy in the foreseeable future. It represents the largest sector producing
around 28 percent of the GDP, is the largest employer providing more than 6 percent of the
!obs and is the prime arbiter of living standards for seventy percent of India"s population
living in the rural areas. #hese factors together with a strong determination to achieve self$
sufficiency in food grains production have ensured a high priority for agriculture sector in the
successive development plans of the country.
%n important facet of progress in agriculture is its success in eradication of its critical
dependence on imported foodgrains. In the &'("s nearly ( percent of the total foodgrains
available in the country were imported. #his dependence worsened during the &'6"s when
two severe drought years led to a sharp increase in import of foodgrains. During &'66 India
had to import more than & million tonnes of foodgrains as against a domestic production of
)2 million tonnes. In the following year again, nearly twelve million tonnes had to be
imported. *n the average well over seven percent of the total availability of foodgrains
during the &'6s had to be imported.
Indian agriculture has progressed a long way from an era of fre+uent droughts and
vulnerability to food shortages to becoming a significant e,porter of agricultural
commodities. #his has been possible due to persistent efforts at harnessing the potential of
land and water resources for agricultural purposes. Indian agriculture, which grew at the rate
of about & percent per annum during the fifty years before independence, has grown at the
rate of about - percent per annum in the post independence era.
Agriculture sub-sectors
2
Indian agriculture broadly consists of four sub$sectors. %griculture proper including
all food$crops oilseeds, fiber, plantation crops, fruits and vegetables is the largest accounting
for nearly ) percent of the agriculture sector as a whole. #he rapid growth in this sub$sector
through e,ploitation of wastelands and fallows, spread of irrigation and adoption of
production enhancing technologies was critical in transforming India from a country
vulnerable to food shortages to one of e,portable surplus. %lthough this sub$sector has made
impressive progress its share in the sector as a whole has declined from )8 percent in &'6$6&
to less than ) percent by early 's ,Table -..
/orrespondingly the share of livestoc0 sector has increased considerably. #he
livestoc0 industry has grown from 1s. &( billion in early &'6s to 1s. & billion by &'8$8&
and 1s. 6)2 billion by &''-$'2. In nominal terms the sector grew at almost &( percent per
annum during &'8s. 3il0 production, which was almost stagnant for two decades ending
&'), grew by over ( percent per annum in the 8s. 4imilarly, production of eggs increased
at the rate of about 6.( percent during the same period. %s a result the share of livestoc0
increased from about &) percent till early 8s to 2( percent by &''-$'2.
#hough it plays relatively a minor role within the sector as a whole, fishing sub$sector
activities have been on the rise. #he sub$sector has grown from only 1s. - billion in &')$)&
to nearly 1s. ' billion in &''-$'2. #he growth was particularly rapid in )s and 8s. 5alue
added increased at over ( percent per annum during this period.
In real terms forestry and logging activities have been on the decline since mid
seventies. %s of &''-$'2, the si6e of the industry in terms of value of output was &- billion.
-
*ver the past three decades, the country has successfully transformed itself from a
food deficit economy to one which is essentially self sufficient in availability of foodgrains
and other essential commodities, albeit only at the prevailing level of effective demand.
%nnual aggregate foodgrains production ,Table ./, which averaged about 82 million tonnes
in &'6$6& increased to &2-.) and &)2.( million tonnes for the trienniums ending &'8$8&
and &''$'& respectively. /urrent 7&''8$''. production level is &'( million tonnes and the
country has been able to accumulate substantial, 7-( million tonnes. stoc0s of foodgrains to
cope up with any sudden difficulties arising from drought or a similar situation in any part of
the country.
Increased outputs, have been achieved chiefly by adopting, since mid si,ties, a
strategy aimed at increasing foodgrains production by concentrating public sector efforts and
resources in regions with a high potential for +uic0 and substantial productivity gains through
increased cropping intensity and average yields. #hese were the areas favoured by
agroclimatic resource conditions and where irrigation facilities already e,isted or could be
developed relatively rapidly. #he main elements of this strategy were8 7i. e,pansion of
irrigation coverage, 7ii. increased provision and utili6ation of 0ey inputs 9 mainly high
yielding varieties 7:;5s. of crops, mainly of wheat and rice and chemical fertili6ers and
plant protection chemicals, 7iii. e,pansion and improvement of institutional support services
such as research and e,tension and 7iv. price policies favourable to producers of ma!or
foodgrains.
#he success of this strategy was made possible by development and availability of
replicable production technology pac0ages, so called <Green 1evolution" technologies.
Irrigation facilitated double cropping and widespread adoption of :;5s. #he :;5s
2
performed particularly well under irrigated conditions, were highly responsive to fertili6ers
and their short duration permitted increases in cropping intensities.
Irrigation development was the cornerstone of the strategy. =ndivided India was
amongst the largest irrigated areas in the world. >ith partition nearly one$third of the
irrigated area went to Pa0istan. %t the time of independence the net irrigated area was 2.'
million ha 7gross irrigated area 22.6 million ha.. 1ecogni6ing large$scale development of
irrigation facilities as critical to rapid agricultural growth, the country has spent about 1s.
2(, crores on irrigation development in the first four decades after independence. During
the period &'($(& to &'6($66 development of irrigation through government canals grew
from ).2 million ha to '.8 million ha 9 a growth rate of 2.& percent per annum. During &')s
this pace dropped slightly to &.' percent. In &'8s the rate of increase dropped significantly
to &.& percent per annum. #he growth of tube$well irrigation, however, increased rapidly
from 2.( million ha in &')$)& to '.( million ha in &'8$8& and then to &2.- million ha by
&''$'&. #he net irrigated area increased from -& million ha in &')$)& to (-.( million ha in
&''($'6 which corresponds to 22 percent of the net sown area in &')$)& and -).6- percent
in &''($'6 ,Tables 0, 1/. >ith improvements in irrigation efficiency the gross irrigated areas
has increased to )&.(& million ha. #he percentage of gross cropped area service by irrigation
increased from &8.- percent in &'6$6& to 2-. percent in &')$)& and to over -8 percent at
present.
?ertili6ers have constituted yet another 0ey input in addition to e,panded irrigation
and spread of :;5s in achieving goals of high production and productivity. India currently
occupies third position in the world, after /hina and =4%, in terms of fertili6er production
and consumption. /onsumption of fertili6ers has increased from &.(2 million tonnes in &'6)$
(
68, representing the pre green revolution era, to &).-& million tonnes currently 7&'')$'8..
#he average per hectare use of fertili6ers currently around 8( 0g per hectares is the lowest
among several %sian countries. :owever, rice and wheat account for a ma!or fraction,
around 6( percent of the total fertili6er consumed in the country, with very little fertili6ers
going to the rainfed areas. %ccording to some current pro!ections, fertili6er"s use will need to
increase to -$-( million tonnes to meet the foodgrains need of 22. #he demand for
nutrients will stretch by almost another &( million tonnes if re+uirements for horticulture,
vegetables and plantation and commercial crops are included. %t present domestic
production of @ and P fertili6ers 7&-.22 million tonnes. falls short of consumption by over 2
percent. In addition the entire re+uirement of A fertili6er is imported.
3ost agricultural development programmes initiated in &'6s were concentrated in
regions of high potential. #hus five states, Pun!ab, :aryana, =ttar Pradesh, %ndhra Pradesh
and #amil @adu account for ( percent of the country"s net irrigated and (- percent of the
gross irrigated area. #he combination of e,panding irrigation coverage and widespread
adoption of short duration :;5s led to significant increases in cropping intensities. %creage
cropped more than once per year increased from &- million ha in &'($(& to about 22 million
ha at present ,Table 2/. %verage cropping intensity for the country as a whole rose from &&(
percent in &'6$6& to &-& in &''-$'2. By &''-$'2 cropping intensity has risen to &8)
percent in Pun!ab, &6) percent in :aryana and &22 percent in =ttar Pradesh.
%n important conse+uence of the strategies adopted since si,ties has been to boost
production of, chiefly, two crops rice and wheat. #heir share in total foodgrains production
went up from () percent in &')$)& to more than )( percent in &''$'& ,Table 3/.
Production of foodgrains other than rice and wheat did not increase significantly ,Table 7/
6
and in the eastern region even the yield of rice did not increase. %gricultural production and
income rose substantially in the north$western states of Pun!ab, :aryana, >estern =ttar
Pradesh, parts of 1a!esthan, #amil @adu and %ndhra Pradesh. By contrast productivity and
output growth have been modest in eastern and central India and in deccan plateau. Progress
was particularly slow in rainfed areas, which account for over 6 percent of the cropped area
and where a great ma!ority of rural poor are concentrated. %n important impact of the
strategies pursued in the <Green 1evolution" period has been intensification of regional
disparities and imbalances in agricultural development and food availability and hence levels
of food security. ?or the country as a whole while per capita availability of cereals has
increased substantially, that of pulses has decreased significantly ,Table !/.
In summary ,Table 7/ an annual increase in foodgrains production of -.22 percent
during fifties was mainly because of e,pansion in area. 4i,ties recorded a low annual growth
rate of &.)2 percent necessitating large$scale imports of foodgrains. %nnual growth of 2.8
percent was recorded during seventies. #his decade was the turning point in India"s
foodgrains economy leading to self$sufficiency through significant productivity increase first
in wheat and later in rice in the eighties. %n annual growth of -.( percent in foodgrains in
eighties was the hallmar0 of green revolution that enabled India to become self$sufficient and
even a marginal e,porter. #he pace of growth slowed in nineties barely ma0ing or even
slower than the population growth rate. #his is a matter of concern.
Horticulture
#he diversity of physiographic, climate and soil characteristics enables India to grow
a large variety of horticultural crops 9 fruits, vegetables, flowers, spices, aromatic and
medicinal plants, plantation crops etc. India is the largest producer of fruits in the world and
second largest producer of vegetables. #he area under fruits estimated at &.2( million ha in
)
&')$)& grew to 2.8 million ha in &''&$'2 and then more rapidly to ( to 6 million ha by
&''2$'(. #his sector is li0ely to grow rapidly in the future both on account of internal
demands and e,port opportunities.
Animal Husbandry and Fisheries
%nimal husbandry and dairying sub$sector plays an important role in overall economy
and in social development. #he contribution of the sub$sector is estimated to be about 2(
percent of the total value of output of agricultural sector. #he sector also plays a significant
role in supplementing family incomes and generating employment in the rural sector
particularly among the land$less, small and marginal farmers and women besides providing
nutritious food. Production of suitable cross breeds and their wider adoptions has contributed
to increasing country"s mil0 production, which has now reached )( million tonnes annually.
4imilarly, genetic improvement and better management practices have mar0edly pushed up
production of poultry and eggs.
#hrough the overall contribution of fisheries sub$sector is small, development of
prolific and fast growing forms of several common fish species coupled with brea0through in
breeding under captivity, fish seed production and multi$layer fish culture has resulted in
registering a very high annual growth of && percent in a+uaculture production during the past
decade 7Table 4/.
Sustainability Concerns
4everal indicators highlight increasing concerns of sustainability in areas which have
largely contributed to increased production in the <Green 1evolution" era. %doption of high
yielding cultivators is virtually complete. %lmost entire wheat and rice crops in the states of
8
Pun!ab, :aryana and >estern =ttar Pradesh are irrigated. In the higher production regions
yields are plateauing and most traditional sources of productivity growth having been
e,hausted future gains in production have to come from elsewhere.
%t farmers" level concerns are being e,pressed in several ways. 3any farmers
believe that the input levels have to be continuously increased in order to maintain high
yields. In si,ties and seventies most farmers used only nitrogenous and phosphate fertili6ers
to achieve high yields. Due to widespread deficiencies of several secondary and
micronutrients ,*ig.-/, most farmers now have to apply higher doses and a greater variety of
fertili6ers to maintain crop yields. 1esults from many long term studies on rice$wheat
cropping system show a declining yield trend when input levels were 0ept constant 9 thus the
growth rate of system productivity has been declining relative to growth rate of nutrients use.
Cowering of groundwater tables due to intensive rice$wheat system in many areas is resulting
in increased costs of lifting water in the intensively cultivated high production areas, diseases
and pest problems are turning more serious than ever before and pose both short and long
large problems. It is reported that some weeds have developed resistance to the commonly
used herbicides. >hat this implies is that the farmers are applying increasing amount of
herbicide incurring increasing cost without the benefit of effective control. Pesticide residues
entering the food chain and overall safety in use of pesticides continue to be serious
problems.
*ther emerging problems threatening sustainability of intensive cropping system e.g.
rice$wheat include loss in biodiversity related issues. Carge areas planted to a singleDfew
varieties of a crop is a potential cause of concern. %s the diversity is reduced natural
processes that control and affect habitat +uality and genetic e,pression wea0en and for this
'
reason internal and natural control mechanisms must be replaced by more e,ternally applied
artificial controls in the form of management and inputs which in due course lead the system
towards unsustainability.
Groundwater is the ma!or source of meeting the irrigation needs of irrigated
agriculture. /urrently about half the area under irrigation in the country is irrigated from
groundwater sources. Carge$scale groundwater development has led to fall in the water table
in many areas. *ver pumping is leading to declining water table levels and failure of tube$
wells. Pumping costs are increasing, as is the energy consumption. In the coastal areas this
has led to ingress of sea water, with serious environmental implications.
/hanges in water +uality are adversely affecting agriculture and vice$versa.
Inefficient andDor over use of fertili6ers and pesticides in agriculture and untreated disposal of
industrial and urban wastes are leading to increasing contamination by such elements as lead,
6inc, copper, chromium, cadmium particularly in areas having high industrial activity e.g. in
districts of Cudhiana, ?aridabad, Aanpur, 5aranasi etc.
%n increase in the content of arsenic has been reported in several of the districts of
>est Bengal. #his is attributed amongst other causes to the lowering of groundwater table
due to e,cessive groundwater withdrawal and is leading to serious and widespread to,icity
problems adversely affect the health of hundreds of thousands people of the region.
Changing Land-Use and Future of Agriculture
*ne of the most important conse+uences of growing pressure on land is the declining
trend in the average farm si6e and the pattern of holdings 7Tables - and --/. %ccording to
&
the latest %gricultural /ensus in &')$)& there were ) million holdings operating &62
million ha. By &''$'& there were &( million holdings operating &6( million ha. #he
average farm si6e decreased from 2.- ha in &')$)& to &.() ha in &''$'&. %s of &''$'&
about )8 percent of holdings were small 7&. to 2. ha. and marginal 7E&. ha.. % little more
than 2 percent of the farmers were semi$medium 72. to 2. ha. and medium 72. to &.
ha.. Carge farmers 7F&. ha. constituted only &.6 percent of the total holdings. *ver the
twenty$year period since &') the proportion of marginal farmer has increased from ( to ('
percent and that of large farmer has declined from about 2 to &.6 percent. #he proportion of
total area operated by marginal farmers increased from nine percent in &')$)& to nearly &(
percent in &''$'& while the proportion of large farmers declined from about -& percent to
&) percent in the same period. #he si6e of average holding is very unevenly distributed
among the states. 4tates with relatively large average si6e of operational holding are a mi,ed
lot 9 they include states with large tracts of barren lands e.g. 1a!asthan, 3aharashtra and
3adhya Pradesh on the one hand and agriculturally advanced state li0e Pun!ab on the other.
#hese trends in farm si6e changes will have a profound effect on the future agricultural
development strategies.
%lthough India"s population growth rate has slowed from 2.& percent in &'8s to &.8
percent in the &''s and is e,pected to slow further in the coming decades, yet the population
is pro!ected to reach &.-- billion by 22 from the current one billion. #he urban share of
total population is pro!ected to increase from 26 percent to -( percent of the total population.
%lthough incidence of poverty is falling, it is estimated that in '-$'2 7upto which data is
available. -2 million people constituting -6 percent of the population were below the
officially defined poverty line.
&&
#he nature of the poverty line has been shifting. %bout - years ago 28.2 percent of
those living in rural areas were poor and 2 percent of those living in the urban areas were
classed as poor. 1ecent studies show that the number of poor in urban areas have been
increasing at relatively higher rate compared to the rural areas. %t present those below the
poverty line in rural sector constitute -) percent of the population while in the urban sector
the percentage is -2 percent. In the conte,t of poverty alleviation, therefore, emphasis will be
re+uired to be placed both on production of food by the poor as well as on the availability of
food for the urban poor. It needs to be recogni6ed that a large proportion of the rural poor are
located in regions of low potential for food production e.g. arid and semi$arid areas, hilly
regions, degraded land and forest areas. >idespread hunger and malnutrition are the direct
manifestation of poverty and will call for increasing efforts to produce more food at
affordable price.
Increasing population and economic growth are changing patterns of land use ma0ing
potentially unsustainable demands on the country"s natural resources.
4ince early fifties the net area sown was e,panded rapidly at first but at a
diminishing rate since &') to reach appro,imately &22 million ha at present.
During &'(s and &'6s areas under agriculture e,panded substantially as the
fallows were reduced and cultivable wastes were put under the plough. #he net
area sown increased from &&' million ha in &'($(& to &-- million ha by &'6$6&
and further to &2 million ha by &')$)&. ?allow lands declined from 28 million
ha in &'($(& to 2 million ha by &')$)&. /ultivable wastelands declined from
2- to &).( million ha.
&2
Cand use intensity i.e. fraction of net sown area to total geographical area increase
from -6 percent in &'($(& to 2.( percent in &'6$6& and 2- percent by &')$)&
where it has since stabili6ed.
/ropping intensity i.e. gross sown area as percent of net sown area increased from
&&& percent in &'($(& to &&( percent in &'6$6&, &&8 percent in &')G)& and
&- percent by mid &''s.
>hile the contribution of increased area in the growth of agriculture has declined
over time, that of productivity has increased. #he yield of all crops grew at &.(
percent per annum between early &'(s and mid &'6s. the pace accelerated to
&.) percent in the &')s and then to - percent per annum between early &'8s and
mid 's. =nli0e the gains in area, which benefited non$foodgrains, the gains in
productivity accrued mostly to foodgrains.
India"s forest resources have been dwindling. %ccording to the <4tate of ?orest
1eport" 7&''). the total forest cover of the country is estimated at 6-.-2 million
ha i.e. &'.2) percent of the geographic area of the country. *f these the dense
forest 7crown density more than forty percent. and open forest 7crown density &
to 2 percent. occupying about && and 8 percent of the geographic area
respectively and mangroves occupy .&( percent of the geographic area. #he
country has lost about (282 s+. 0m. of forest cover since the &''( assessment. By
any estimate the area under forest is far below the national policy goals and many
areas nominally under forest are being used for non$forest purposes. 4imilarly
<uncultivated lands" such as permanent pastures, miscellaneous tree crops,
cultivable wastes and fallow is sub!ect to increasing competition from uses other
than feeding livestoc0.
&-
#he growth of livestoc0 population is an important source of competition for land.
#he increase in number of ma!or classes of livestoc0 are shown in table -0.
#he area sown to fodder crops is not recorded. Information available from other
sources provide an estimate ranging from 2 to (.( percent of the net sown area and
suggest that the area under fodder crops will have to increase to & percent or
more to support increasing livestoc0 based activity.
#he pressure on India"s land and water resources is seriously threatening native plant
and animal diversity. India has uni+uely rich and diverse genetic base. >ith increasing
agriculture and economic development the genetic pool is declining. #his decline, if
unchec0ed and poorly managed can have unforeseen and adverse conse+uences for the
sustainability of agriculture of the region.
Agriculture in the Changing Global Scenario
4teady globali6ation of trade has profound implications for future agricultural
development. #he diversity of India"s agro$ecological setting, high bio$diversity and
relatively low cost of labour provide potential for agricultural competitiveness in a globali6ed
economy. It is e,pected that with increasing globali6ation of mar0ets over the years there
will be demands for agricultural intensification. #his will also be favoured because of greater
bac0ward and forward lin0ages between agriculture and food industry. #herefore, increase in
production and productivity are bound to be strategically important to economy.
Intensification will not only favour alleviation of rural poverty but will also improve resource
conservation particularly in the small farming sector where farmers can be encouraged to ta0e
up organi6ed production of high value crops such as fruits, specialty vegetables, flowers
medicinal and aromatic herbs etc. 4tronger demands for crops of the small farmers" will not
&2
only improve incomes and welfare but will also ma0e investments in technology and resource
conservation more attractive.
#he General %greement on #ariff and #rade 7G%##. and liberali6ation of global
trade is bound to have impact on future land use and production pattern. =nderstanding the
local, national and international environment under which agricultural production is ta0ing
shape will be crucial in developing our own strategies.
Etension Strategies
4ince early fifties a number of public by funded agricultural development
programmes have been sponsored. #hese have included programmes li0e the @ational
H,tension 4ervice 7@H4. Bloc0s in &'(-, the Intensive %gricultural District Programme
7I%DP. in &'6&$62, the Intensive %gricultural %rea Programme 7I%%P. &'62$6(, the :igh
;ielding 5ariety 7:;5. programme &'66$6) and the 4mall and 3arginal ?armers"
Development Programmes 743?DP. in &'6'$). #hough these programmes had a
perceptible impact the efforts did not get replicated over different areas and categories of
farmers. In mid seventies based on pilot level pro!ect in 1a!asthan /anal and /hambal
command area a <#raining and 5isit" 7#I5. system of e,tension was promoted in different
states. H,tension efforts of the Indian /ouncil of %gricultural 1esearch through its research
Institutes and the 4tate %gricultural =niversity were largely limited to demonstration of new
technologies through such programmes as @ational Demonstration Pro!ect, *perational
1esearch Pro!ect, the Cab to Cand Programme and the Arishi 5igyan Aendras. :owever,
there appears much to be desired in the way that e,tension programmes are conceived and
implemented.
&(
%t present e,tension programmes are implemented in largely a top$down fashion
leaving little scope for locali6ed planning and action. ?armers are almost passive receivers
and their involvement in the process of technology generation and adoption is almost absent.
H,tension services, at present, are almost e,clusively in the public sector domain and there is
no effort or institutional support for other operators e.g. the @G*s, the corporate bodies etc.
H,tension programmes sponsored by the government operate largely in isolation and
there appears a strong need to view the e,tension programmes as an integral part of the
research and development process.
#he challenges facing agricultural development call for fundamental changes in our
approach to technology transferDe,tension programmes. /hanges are necessary in the conte,t
of changing economic environment following policy ad!ustments in relation to privati6ation,
deregulation and globali6ation calling for greater efficiency and effectiveness of the
e,tension system. 3ore importantly there is need for
Greater emphasis on providing producers with 0nowledge and understanding
needed to overcome the problems or to e,ploit opportunities of their own specific
production systems. /orrespondingly there will be a need to de$emphasi6e
<pac0age of practices" or the blan0et recommendations, top down approach
followed thus far.
4hift in the focus of public e,tension systems from promoting inputs use to one on
sustainable management of resources and improvements in the production system
as a whole.
&6
/loser interaction between farmers, e,tension scientists and production system
researchers in diagnosing problems and identifying location specific
recommendations emphasi6ing participation and education rather than being
prescriptive.
>idening the range of e,tension delivering agencies. >hile the publicly operated
e,tension systems will continue to be important, there will appear a greater role
for @G*s, farmers" associations and corporate sectors in particular situations.
1ole of commercial suppliers of seeds, agrochemicals, machinery, vaccines and
medicines in providing advisories, as is already being done in a limited way, will
need to be encouraged and factored into public system"s own priorities.
>ider and more creative use of mass media in tune with current developments in
information technology to get information across to the farming community
whose ability to overcome constrains at farm level will increasingly depend on
access to reliable and up$to$date information.
!echnological "eeds and Future Agriculture
It is apparent that the tas0s of meeting the consumption needs of the pro!ected
population are going to be more difficult given the higher productivity base than in &'6s.
#here is also a growing reali6ation that previous strategies of generating and promoting
technologies have contributed to serious and widespread problems of environmental and
natural resource degradation. #his implies that in future the technologies that are developed
and promoted must result not only in increased productivity level but also ensure that the
+uality of natural resource base is preserved and enhanced. In short, they lead to sustainable
improvements in agricultural production.
&)
Productivity gains during the <Green 1evolution" era were largely confined to
relatively well endowed areas. Given the wide range of agroecological setting and producers,
Indian agriculture is faced with a great diversity of needs, opportunities and prospects.
?uture growth needs to be more rapid, more widely distributed and better targeted.
1esponding to these challenges will call for more efficient and sustainable use of increasingly
scarce land water and germplasm resources.
#echnical solutions re+uired to solve problems will be increasingly location$specific
and matched to the huge agroecologicalDclimatic diversity. Detailed indigenous 0nowledge
and greater s0ills in blending modern and traditional technologies to enhance productive
efficiency will be more than ever before, 0ey to the farming success and sectoral growth.
3ost technological solutions will have to be generated and adapted locally to ma0e them
compatible with socio$economic conditions of farming community.
@ew technologies are needed to push the yield frontiers further, utili6e inputs more
efficiently and diversify to more sustainable and higher value cropping patterns. #hese are
all 0nowledge intensive technologies that re+uire both a strong research and e,tension system
and s0illed farmers but also a reinvigorated interface where the emphasis is on mutual
e,change of information bringing advantages to all. %t the same time potential of less
favoured areas must be better e,ploited to meet the targets of growth and poverty alleviation.
#hese challenges have profound implications for products of agricultural research.
#he way they are transferred to the farmers and indeed the way research is organi6ed and
conducted. *ne thing is, however, clear 9 the new generation of technologies will have to be
much more site specific, based on high +uality science and a heightened opportunity for end
&8
user participation in the identification of targets. #hese must be not only aimed at increasing
farmers" technical 0nowledge and understanding of science based agriculture but also ta0ing
advantage of opportunities for full integration with indigenous 0nowledge. It will also need
to ta0e on the challenges of incorporating the socio$economic conte,t and role of mar0ets.
>ith the passage of time and accelerated by macro$economic reforms underta0en in
recent years, the Institutional arrangements as well as the mode of functions of bodies
responsible for providing technical underpinning to agricultural growth are proving
increasingly inade+uate. /hanges are needed urgently to respond to new demands for
agricultural technologies from several directions. Increasing pressure to maintain and
enhance the integrity of degrading natural resources, changes in demands and opportunities
arising from economic liberali6ation, unprecedented opportunities arising from advances in
biotechnology, information revolution and most importantly the need and urgency to reach
the poor and disadvantaged who have been by passed by the green revolution technologies.
%nother important implication of increasing globali6ation relates to the need for
greater attention to the +uality of produce and products both for the domestic and the foreign
mar0ets. #his would imply that production must be tuned to actual rapidly changing product
demand. 4uch adaptation to global mar0ets would re+uire state of the art research, which can
be achieved only by setting global standards of research, focus on well defined priorities and
mechanisms which permit close interaction of farmers with researchers, the private sector and
mar0ets.
&'
#eferences
Indian /ouncil of %gricultural 1esearch, &''88 'ational )gricultural Technology 5ro"ect, pp
-40,
IC)&, 'ew 6elhi.
/3IH &'')8 6irectory of Indian )griculture, pp 1. Centre for 7onitoring Indian 8conomy
5vt.
9td., 7umbai.
Indian %griculture in Brief 28 6irectorate of 8conomics and :tatistics, 6epartment of
)griculture
and Cooperation, 7inistry of )griculture, %ovt. of India, 'ew 6elhi.
2
Table 1. Agriculture sub-sectors value of output (%)
Sub-sector 1960-61 1970-71 1980-81 199-9!
Agriculture 78.0 79.3 75.3 68.5
Livestock 16.6 15.1 17.2 24.5
Forestry 4.4 4.4 5.9 3.8
Fisheries 1.0 1.2 1.6 3.2
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Total value at 89 "18 61# "7!0
$urre%t price
(&s. 'illio%)
Table ". (oo)grai%s *ro)uctio%
+ear Area *ro)uctio% +iel)
(millio h!" (millio toes" kg#h!
1950$51 97.32 50.82 522
1960$61 115.58 82.02 709
1970$71 124.32 108.42 872
1980$81 126.67 129.59 1023
1990$91 127.84 176.39 1379
1998$99 124.0 195.25 1574
2&
Table . ,%)ia irrigate) area
+ear -et .ross -et as % .ross as %
of net sown of gross cropped
$$$$$$ millio h! $$$$$$ $$$$$$$$ % $$$$$$$$$
1970$71 31.10 38.19 22.17 23.04
1980$81 38.72 49.78 27.66 28.83
1990$91 48.02 63.20 33.61 34.03
1995$96 53.51 71.51 37.63 38.33
Table !. Sources of irrigatio%
+ear -et ,rrigate) Sources
Are! (millio h!"
&!!ls '!ks 'u(e$)ells *ther )ells *ther +ources
(% et irrig!te, !re!"
1960$61 24.80 10.4 4.6 0.2 7.2 2.4
1970$71 31.10 41.28 13.22 14.34 23.88 7.29
1980$81 38.72 39.49 8.22 24.62 21.08 6.59
1990$91 48.02 36.34 6.13 29.69 21.73 6.11
1995$96 53.01 32.04 5.81 33.52 22.16 6.47
22
Table #. $roppi%g i%te%sit/
+ears -et so0% .ross croppe) Area croppe) $roppi%g
area area 1ore t2a% o%ce i%te%sit/
33333333333333333 millio h! 3333333333333333333 -------- (%" --------
1950$51 118.8 131.9 13.1 111.1
1960$61 133.2 152.8 19.6 114.3
1970$71 140.3 165.8 25.5 118.2
1980$81 140.0 172.6 32.6 123.3
1990$91 143.0 185.7 42.7 129.9
1993$94 142.0 186.4 44.4 131.2
Table 6. &ice a%) 42eat *ro)uctio%
*ro)uctio% (1illio% to%%es)
+ear &ice 42eat (oo)grai%s &54 as % of (oo)grai%s
333333333333 millio toes -----------------
1970$71 40.80 20.86 108.4 57.4
1980$81 49.91 34.55 129.6 65.4
1990$91 72.78 53.03 176.4 75.0
1996$97 81.74 69.35 199.4 75.0
2-
Table 7. A%%ual co1pou%) gro0t2 rate of foo)grai%s pro)uctio%
$rop 19#0-#1 to 1960-61 to 1970-71 to 1980-81 to 1990-91 to
19#9-60 1969-70 1979-80 1989-90 1997-98
.ice 3.28 $ 8.05 1.91 4.29 1.53
/he!t 4.51 5.90 4.69 4.24 3.67
&o!rse 2.75 1.48 0.74 0.74 $ 0.49
cere!ls
'ot!l cere!ls 3.00 2.51 2.37 3.63 1.84
0ulses 2.72 1.35 $ 0.54 2.78 0.76
'ot!l 3.22 1.72 2.08 3.54 1.66
1oo,gr!is
Table 8. *er capita %et availabilit/ of cereals a%) pulses per )a/ (g)
+ear $ereals *ulses Total
1951 334 61 395
1961 400 69 469
1971 418 51 469
1981 417 38 455
1991 468 42 510
1998 451 33 484
22
Table 9. *ro)uctio% of 1il67 eggs a%) fis2 i% ,%)ia
+ear 8il6 pro)uctio% 9 availabilit/ (is2 :ggs
million tonnesDannum g.Dday 7 tonnes. 7million.
1950$51 17.0 124 752 1832
1960$61 20.0 124 1160 2881
1970$71 22.0 112 1756 6172
1980$81 31.6 128 2442 10060
1990$91 53.9 176 3836 21101
1998$99 75.0 210 5388 28400
Table 10. -u1ber of 2ol)i%gs (1illio%)
$ategor/ of
(ar1ers 1970-71 1980-81 1990-91
2!rgi!l 35.7 (50.6"3 50.1 (56.4" 62.1 (59.0"
+m!ll 13.4 (19.0" 16.1 (18.1" 20.0 (19.0"
+emi$me,ium 10.7 (15.2" 12.5 (14.0" 13.9 (13.2"
2e,ium 7.9 (11.2" 8.1 (9.1" 7.6 (7.3"
L!rge 2.8 (3.9" 2.2 (2.4" 1.7 (1.6"
All groups 70.# (100) 89.0 (100) 10#. (100)
*Figures in parenthesis represent the percentage of holdings.
2(
Table 11. Area operate) - % of total area
$ategor/ of
(ar1ers 1970-71 1980-81 1990-91
2!rgi!l 9.0 12.1 14.9
+m!ll 11.9 14.2 17.3
+emi$me,ium 18.5 21.1 23.1
2e,ium 29.7 29.6 27.2
L!rge 30.9 23.0 17.4
All groups (1illio% 2a) 16".1 (100) 16.8 (100) 16#.6 (100)
Table 1". ,%)ia ;a%) <se $ategories (1illio% 2a)
$lassificatio% 1960-61 1970-71 1980-81 1990-91 199-9!
.e4ortig !re! 298.5 305.0 305.0 305.0 305.0
Are! u,er o$
!gricultur!l uses 14.8 16.5 19.7 21.1 22.0
5!rre !,
u$cultiv!(le 35.9 28.2 20.0 19.4 19.0
&ultiv!(le )!ste 19.2 17.5 16.7 15.0 14.5
*l, 1!llo) 11.2 8.8 9.9 9.7 9.7
Forests 54.1 63.9 67.5 67.8 68.4
0erm!et 4!stures 14.0 13.3 12.0 11.8 11.2
L!, u,er misc.
trees etc. 4.5 4.3 3.6 3.8 3.7
6et so) !re! 133.2 140.3 140.0 143.0 142.1
&urret 1!llo) 11.6 11.1 14.8 13.7 14.3
26
Table 1. ;ivestoc6 a%) poultr/ populatio% (1illio%)
$ategor/ 198" 1987 199"
&!ttle 192.45 199.69 204.53
5u11!loes 69.78 75.96 83.49
+hee4 48.76 45.70 50.79
7o!ts 95.25 110.20 115.28
'ot!l (Livestock" 419.59 445.28 470.15
'ot!l 0oultry 207.74 275.32 307.10
(ig 1. *rogressive :=pressio% i% t2e >ccurre%ce of -utrie%t ?eficie%cies i% -ort2er% ,%)ia
"U!#IE"! $EFICIE"C%
JJ
3n 3n 3n
B B B B
4 4 4 4 4
A A A A A A
?e ?e ?e ?e ?e ?e ?e
Kn Kn Kn Kn Kn Kn Kn Kn
P P P P P P P P P
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @

;ear &'6 &') &'8 &'' 2
2)