India, like most countries, understands agriculture through the golden metric of ‘yield’— the kilogramme of output produced per unit of land, usually counted as kg/hectare. This needs to change.
In independent India, the focus on yield ensured food for a growing population. Historically, the emphasis on yield stemmed from the fact that land is usually considered the most scarce resource among all the inputs essential for agriculture. Now, the other inputs, such as water, plant nutrition, and labour, are also becoming scarce. Moreover, solely maximising yield adversely impacts the health and economic well-being of the producers and consumers at times — the very outcomes that yield maximisation should contribute to.
High yield, many losses
This doubling down on yield has led to a singular emphasis on enhancing the quantity of output with little attention to the nutritional profile of the food being grown. A recent study by the Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR) found that the chase for high-yielding varieties of rice and wheat has reduced micronutrient densities, with zinc levels dropping by 33% in rice and 30% in wheat, and iron dropping by 27% in rice and 19% in wheat. Plant breeders developing newer varieties of grains are not even mandated to publish the nutritional profile of the variety. This lack of nutrition in Indian food leads to micronutrient deficiencies. According to the latest National Family Health Survey report, a third of Indian children under five are stunted, and two-thirds are anaemic.
Conventional wisdom is that maximising yields maximises farmers’ net income. Not always. The marginal cost at which the additional yield comes is important to consider. With crops’ response to fertilizer declining by more than 80% since the 1970s, farmers are putting more fertilizers to get the same yield.
Additionally, a singular focus on maximising yield may help with seasonal outputs but may not maximise output the whole year round. Agricultural scientists, while designing seed varieties, pay little regard to the on-field symbiotic relations between crops within and across seasons. Often, the combination of crops in a season and across seasons may not maximise yield in one season but may maximise overall nutritional output and profit over the year (across seasons). A study from Andhra Pradesh highlights the economic benefits of intercropping sugarcane with chilli, eggplant, tomato, and coriander, providing year-round stable farm income while enhancing profitability.
Moreover, a singular focus on yield maximisation structurally promotes only a few high-yielding varieties of seeds everywhere, leading to biodiversity loss. For instance, India has lost about 1,04,000 varieties of rice since the Green Revolution. This has undermined agricultural resilience, especially in the wake of intensifying floods, droughts, and heatwaves due to climate change. Many local varieties have proven to be more resilient to such extreme conditions.
The chase for high-yielding crops has also led to the decline of resilient and nutritious ones. For instance, the area sown under coarse cereals such as millets has dropped by 10 million hectares since the 1950s, whereas the share of rice and wheat has gone up by 13 million hectares and 21 million hectares, respectively. This diversity loss in production reduces the diversity in the Thali of an average Indian.
Looking at better indicators
A few principles can help us shape better indicators for India’s agriculture system. First, our food system impacts the health of our nation and is dependent on critical natural resources. Thus, agriculture indicators should not be determined only by the Ministry of Agriculture or its associated ICAR institutions, but collectively by the Ministries of Health, Agriculture, Water, and Environment.
Second, the indicators should directly address the outcomes. If nutritional security is the goal, the indicator could be nutritional output per hectare per year (and over the years).
Third, metrics such as soil biological activity, water-use efficiency, and farm biodiversity must be mainstreamed. For example, the inclusion of soil organic carbon in soil health cards is a good step. Similarly, the AI-powered ‘Saagu Baagu’ pilot project in Telangana’s Khammam district focuses on improving water-use efficiency and enhancing farm biodiversity by providing farmers with real-time data and recommendations for optimal irrigation and crop management practices.
Fourth, we must measure not only crop diversity at the farm level but also capture a ‘Landscape Diversity Score’ (assessing the regional diversity of crops) and degree of income diversification (tracking economic resilience through multiple income streams, like intercropping and livestock rearing). For instance, a region with only one dominating crop is much more susceptible to price shocks and pest attacks.
A single indicator cannot do justice to the multiple outcomes that the agriculture system is supposed to serve. Chasing yields has pulled India away from devastating famine. But that cannot be the only goal going forward, with increasing climate threats and declining natural resources making our food systems vulnerable. It is time to champion a new paradigm where agricultural success is measured by its ability to nourish people, sustain livelihoods, and protect our planet for future generations.
Abhishek Jain, Fellow and Director at the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW). Views are personal; Anjaly John, Former Programme Associate at CEEW. Views are personal
Published – October 16, 2024 12:48 am IST
