Odisha Millet Mission

The Odisha Millet Mission (OMM) has faced backlash from tribal communities regarding its recent initiatives. The programme, aimed at reviving millet cultivation, is accused of replacing native seed varieties with high-yielding alternatives. Local farmers and activists express concerns over the potential loss of traditional crops and their suitability for local conditions. The mission, launched in 2017, sought to restore millets to local diets and support farmers in Odisha’s Koraput district, producer of finger millet.

Background of Millets in Odisha

Millets have been a staple in the diets of Odisha’s tribal communities for generations. Varieties like finger millet (ragi) and small millets are well-adapted to local conditions. They are resilient to climate changes and provide essential nutrients. Traditional varieties, such as jam mandia and kalia mandia, are known for their nutritional value. Finger millet contains high levels of protein, fibre, iron, and calcium, making it vital for combating malnutrition.

The Shree Anna Abhiyan

The Shree Anna Abhiyan was introduced to promote millet cultivation in tribal areas. However, the introduction of high-yielding varieties like GPU-28 and KMR-204 has sparked controversy. Critics argue that these non-indigenous seeds may not thrive in local environments. Farmers worry about losing their native seeds and the cultural significance attached to them.

Impact on Local Agriculture

Koraput district is a leading producer of finger millet in India. In the 2021-22 agricultural year, finger millet covered approximately 74,000 hectares. Local farmers traditionally stored seeds from their harvests, ensuring the continuation of indigenous varieties. However, the Odisha State Seed Corporation plans to replace portion of these seeds with high-yielding alternatives, raising alarms about dependency on external seed sources.

Farmers’ Concerns

Tribal farmers have voiced strong opposition to the government’s plans. They argue that the new varieties are unsuitable for local conditions. Traditional crops have proven resilient against drought and poor soil, whereas the high-yielding seeds have not been tested under similar circumstances. Farmers fear losing their agricultural heritage and becoming reliant on corporate seed companies.

Activist Reactions

Activists and local organisations have condemned the government’s shift in policy. They argue that it undermines the original goals of the Odisha Millet Mission, which aimed to protect indigenous cultivation. Critics warn that the introduction of uniform seed varieties threatens local biodiversity and food sovereignty. The move is perceived as a step towards corporatisation of agriculture, potentially endangering traditional practices.

Nutritional and Ecological Implications

The nutritional benefits of traditional millets are . They are a rich source of essential nutrients that contribute to food security. The ecological implications of replacing indigenous varieties with high-yielding seeds could lead to a loss of biodiversity. Critics argue that maintaining traditional farming practices is crucial for sustainable agriculture.

Questions for UPSC:

1. Examine the role of traditional agricultural practices in ensuring food security in tribal communities.
2. Critically discuss the impact of high-yielding seed varieties on local biodiversity and food sovereignty.
3. Analyse the nutritional benefits of millets compared to other staple crops in India.
4. Point out the implications of corporatisation in agriculture on smallholder farmers in India.

Answer Hints:

1. Examine the role of traditional agricultural practices in ensuring food security in tribal communities.

1. Traditional agricultural practices have been tailored to local ecosystems, ensuring resilience against climate variability.
2. Indigenous crops like millets are nutrient-dense, providing essential food security and combating malnutrition.
3. Local knowledge systems contribute to sustainable farming practices, preserving biodiversity and soil health.
4. Farmers’ reliance on native seeds promotes self-sufficiency and reduces dependency on external inputs.
5. Community-based seed saving and sharing reinforce food sovereignty and cultural heritage among tribal groups.

2. Critically discuss the impact of high-yielding seed varieties on local biodiversity and food sovereignty.

1. High-yielding varieties often displace indigenous seeds, leading to a loss of genetic diversity in local agriculture.
2. They may not be suited to local environmental conditions, risking crop failure and food insecurity.
3. The introduction of uniform seed varieties can undermine traditional farming practices and local knowledge.
4. Dependency on external seed sources can erode food sovereignty, making communities vulnerable to market fluctuations.
5. There is a potential threat to local biodiversity, which is crucial for ecological balance and resilience.

3. Analyse the nutritional benefits of millets compared to other staple crops in India.

1. Millets are rich in protein, fiber, iron, and calcium, offering superior nutritional profiles compared to rice and wheat.
2. They have lower glycemic indices, making them beneficial for managing blood sugar levels and preventing diabetes.
3. Millets are drought-resistant and can be cultivated in poor soils, contributing to food security in adverse conditions.
4. Traditional millets provide essential micronutrients that are often lacking in the diets dominated by rice and wheat.
5. Including millets in diets can combat malnutrition and improve overall health outcomes in vulnerable populations.

4. Point out the implications of corporatisation in agriculture on smallholder farmers in India.

1. Corporatisation can lead to increased dependency on commercial seed companies, undermining traditional farming systems.
2. Smallholder farmers may face higher costs for seeds and inputs, reducing their profit margins and economic viability.
3. Loss of control over seed varieties can threaten food sovereignty and local agricultural practices.
4. Corporate interests may prioritize profit over ecological sustainability, leading to environmental degradation.
5. Smallholders could be marginalized in decision-making processes, impacting their livelihoods and community resilience.