Recognizing the importance of effective management and integration, the Government has taken a significant step by appointing a single Minister to oversee both agriculture and rural development. This move initiates a concerted effort to unite two departments that have traditionally operated independently, often resulting in inconsistent performance.
The Need for Integration
The discrepancy between the success of rural and agricultural sectors is becoming increasingly apparent. While schemes like “Swachh Bharat” have made considerable strides in rural development, agricultural programmes seem to be lagging behind. Well-funded and target-oriented, rural development initiatives have clear deadlines and dashboards for real-time tracking. However, this level of organisation and commitment has not been replicated in agricultural-specific schemes.
Underperforming Agricultural Schemes
Several schemes initiated by the Agriculture Ministry, including the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana, have ostensibly benefited insurance companies more than intended beneficiaries – the farmers. Gross premiums collected by insurers far outweigh the claims paid out, often delayed due to inadequate mechanisms for timely and accurate crop loss assessment.
Similarly, other schemes such as e-Nam, soil health cards, Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana, and Rashtriya Gokul Mission have failed to make a substantial impact on the ground due to procedural inefficiencies and lack of coordination.
| Scheme | Expected Benefit | Actual Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana | Benefit Farmers | Primarily Benefited Insurance Companies |
| e-Nam | Smoothen Agricultural Trading | Limited Impact |
| Soil Health Cards | Boost Soil Health and Productivity | Limited Usefulness Reported |
| Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana | Promote Organic Farming | Low Adoption Rate |
| Rashtriya Gokul Mission | Enhance Milk Production | Below Par Performance |
Potential Benefits of Integration
Placing agriculture and rural sectors under a single Ministerial purview could potentially bring increased coherence and synergy. This integration could lead to a greater convergence of schemes like MGNREGA with agricultural initiatives, aimed at doubling farm incomes.
Additionally, the focus may shift towards asset creation on individual farms, as opposed to community-based works. Consequently, rural development benefits could be more targeted towards farmers’ welfare, streamlining decision-making processes and eliminating bureaucratic obstacles prevalent in the management of separate ministries.
Existing Fragmentation Issues
Despite intentions to integrate, certain existing issues persist. For instance, despite combining Agriculture and Rural Development under one ministry, a new separate ministry for Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries has been established.
Moreover, the Ministry of Food Processing Industries operates independently of the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution. Similarly, policies related to fertilizer, which are intrinsically tied to the agricultural sector, must be developed in conjunction with the Department of Fertilizers, currently under the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers. Despite ongoing efforts, the desired synchronization appears elusive due to persistent fragmentation.
