The new agricultural reforms have witnessed strong protests by farmers who apprehend these will undermine interests of small and marginal farmers constituting over 80% of the peasantry. While aiming to enhance efficiency, the laws’ perceived neglect of adequate safeguards has fueled distrust.
- Primary worry is that unregulated markets will lead to farmer exploitation by corporates, apprehension fueled by earlier instances of raw deals like in contract farming of potatoes in UP and Punjab.
- Removing commodities like cereals from MSP ambit and shifting trade areas from mandis to private ‘trade areas’ dilutes existing MSP assurances and weakens mandi procurement infrastructure.
- Contract farming provisions like one-sided termination clauses, dispute settlement only through SDMs and exclusions of civil courts have raised fears of farmer harassment.
- Lack of legal recourse to civil courts perceived as constraining farmer rights, unlike freedom given to corporates.
- Suspension of MSP acquisitions during past bumper crop phases like oilseeds in 1998 and potatoes in 2011 has eroded farmer trust in government assurances.
However, the fears may be overstated as sufficient safeguards exist:
- MSP acquisition by FCI and state agencies will continue and has been growing steadily over years.
- APMC mandi infrastructure will not dismantle since multitudes still depend on it for assured prices. Gradual evolution better than abrupt changes.
- Contract farming regulation can be strengthened by amending related Model APMC Act provisions to protect farmer interests.
Building trust requires focus on farmer welfare alongside efficiency –
- MSP range must be expanded to more crops based on Swaminathan formula of C2+50% returns on costs.
- Mandis need infra upgrade and integration with eNAM for price discovery transparency.
- Statutory provisions for contract farming must balance farmer-corporate interests equitably and empower farmer collectives through FPOs.
With judicious safeguards recalibrating the laws to address farmer apprehensions, the impasse can be resolved to harness the agricultural reforms for farmer prosperity while upholding food security. For lasting change, reform must carry farmers along based on trust rather than be imposed from top.