The case of the proposed National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority Bill is getting curiouser (or should I say getting solved). Ever since the controversial provisions in the proposed draft bill became known, the first reaction on everyone's lips was who could be so stupid to incorporate such draconian provisions that puts the critics of the GM technology behind bars. Even communist China does not have such laws in force.
In case you missed it, the specific provision that I am talking about, reads: "Whoever, without any evidence or scientific record, misleads the public against the safety of the organisms and products specified in Part 1, Part II or Part III of Schedule 1, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months, but which may extend to one year and with fine, which may extend to two lakh rupees, or with both."
No sooner the news broke out, the Science & Technology Minister Prithviraj Chavan was quick to deny it saying that the draft bill does not contain any such provisions. I was not amused since I had myself seen the draft bill, but I thought maybe the Minister had probably not read the bill. Or maybe he was trying to buy time by convincing the public that it was merely a diatribe against his ministry, and in the meanwhile drop the controversial provisions from the final draft that has still to be placed in Parliament.
Coomi Kapoor from the Indian Express has perhaps provided us the right answer. In her column "Inside Track" (Sunday Express, Feb 28, 2010), she writes that the bill was actually drafted in March 2008 when Kapil Sibal was the Minister for Science & Technology.
Now I understand why Prithviraj Chavan (he succeeded Kapil Sibal) was caught unaware about the draconian provisions in the proposed draft bill. Well, thank you Coomi for clearing the mist or to put it more succintly for solving the mystery. It is important for the nation to know the extra mile Ministers can walk to back multinationals and big business.
Anyway, discussing Budget 2010 with the yoga guru Swami Ramdev on Aastha TV channel on Feb 26, I brought up the issue of the draconian provisions in the proposed draft bill. Swami Ramdev was shocked to learn that the government could even think of introducing such a law.
Nevertheless, when I said that if the NBRA law was already in force, I as well as Swami Ramdev would have been in jail by now, he warned: "I dare them to arrest me. They will get a taste of what it means to gag independent voices," and added: "My opposition to GM foods will continue."
I hope Kapil Sibal is listening.
Budget 2010: What it means for agriculture
Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee has left the onerous task of increasing agricultural production to the monsoons.
Like all his predecessors, beginning with Mr Manmohan Singh as the Finance Minister in 1991, Mr Mukherjee has also eulogised the farmer and stressed on the need to strengthen farming, but has failed to provide a definite roadmap to boost food production. Nor has he given any fiscal incentive significant enough to the beleaguered farming community, since they are not part of the urban aam admi class that he knows of, to bail them out of the prevailing economic hardship.
The crisis in agriculture is not as much as of stagnating productivity but is essentially driven by falling incomes in farming. There is a complete drought of thinking when it comes to mechanism that can make a definite contribution to farmers’ welfare. Increasing Minimum Support Price (MSP) has outlived its utility since the benefit goes to only about 30 to 40 per cent farmers who have something to sell in the mandis. More than 60 per cent of the farmers have remained outside the gambit of MSP and it is high to make a historic correction.
I wasn’t therefore expecting much from Budget 2010 as far as agriculture is concerned, knowing that policy makers do not have inkling about what is going wrong with agriculture, but considering the phenomenal food inflation and economic distress farmers faced from the extensive drought conditions in Kharif 2009, the Finance Minister could have been a little more generous to announce a slew of stimulus incentives/measures to prop up the sagging farm morale.
I am aware that the Finance Minister has little scope for financial manoeuvrability given the tight fiscal package at his disposal, but there could have been a more drastic cut in the stimulus package that was given to the industry, and these benefits could have been easily passed onto farmers through a bonus on wheat, rice and coarse cereals like jowar, bajra and ragi. Farmers need economic stimulus, and it requires political courage to cutback on the industry stimulus and instead give it to the more needy farmers.
Coming back to the big ticket that the country was waiting for, Mr Pranab Mukherjee has very cleverly announced a four-point strategy to revitalise agriculture which is good on intent, but weak in content. I had expected the UPA government to really focus on rejuvenating agriculture and thereby giving strong signals for taking the farm sector to achieve a growth rate of 4 per cent. At present, agricultural growth rate is minus 0.2 per cent, certainly a drag on the economy.
Except for enhancing the credit package to farmers by an additional Rs 50,000-crore (taking the total credit to 3.75 lakh crores), and providing a interest subsidy of 2 per cent (including 1 per cent given last year) on timely repayment of crop loans, the four-point strategy that he announced is more of a token than anything meaningful. Proving Rs 300-crore for reviving oilseeds and pulses production in 60,000 villages in the dryland regions is also a misplaced strategy.
The shortfall in oilseeds production is not due to the inability of the farmers to increase productivity, but because of the government’s deliberate efforts to reduce import tariffs on edible oils as a result of which cheaper imports have flooded the domestic market. In 1993-94, India was almost self-sufficient in edible oils, but the continuous reduction in import tariffs over the years has turned the country into world’s second biggest importer.
Productivity of oilseeds and pulses therefore cannot be increased unless the government brings back the import tariffs. India can bind import tariff for oilseeds at 300 per cent under the WTO, but has brought it down to zero. Similarly for pulses, the import duty is zero. Unless the tariffs are restored, there is no way Indian farmer can compete with cheaper subsidised imports. Importing cheaper food is like importing unemployment.
Taking the green revolution to the north-eastern states, for which he has provided an allocation of Rs 400 crore, is also a flawed strategy. Why I am saying this is because it is the green revolution technology that has destroyed soil fertility in Punjab, Haryana, Western Uttar Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh. It is because of the devastation that green revolution has caused to the natural resource base that farmers have taken to suicides. To take the green revolution model to the northeast therefore means that the country hasn’t learnt any lessons from the debacle.
Budget 2010 does have some inkling of pragmatic approach. Pranab Mukherjee has done the right thing by not enhancing the llocation under NREGA. In 2009, he had made a budgetary provision of Rs 39,100 crore, and this year kept it at Rs 40,100 crore. This is a wise decision considering that NEGA is a new scheme, and has a lot of problems withimplementation. Making more allocation gives room for more leakage and corruption.
At the same time, I am delighted to find that the Finance Minister has extended the health insurance cover (that was initiated last year to BPL families) to also NREGA workers who have put in a minimum of 15 days of labour. In the years to come, there is a desperate need to extend health insurance cover to the entire farming class also, which has still not been given crop insurance.
Reading the Economic Survey 2010 along with the Budget allocations, it is quite clear that the agricultural reforms that the government is focusing on aim only at allowing more private and corporate control over agriculture. The food policy initiatives that are spelled out in the Economic Survey indicate more thrust on food retail and industrialisation of agriculture, which means more will be the burden on the farmers from external inputs.
This is a misplaced emphasis, and comes from a class of economists who are not in tune with the ground realities. Already, the wish-list spelled out in the Economic surveys of past 3 to 4 years has pushed agriculture to an unmanageable crisis. It is high time that a sincere effort is made to reverse the disturbing trend, and bring back the smile on the face of the farmer. This can be done, provided the political leadership demonstrates willingness.
Like all his predecessors, beginning with Mr Manmohan Singh as the Finance Minister in 1991, Mr Mukherjee has also eulogised the farmer and stressed on the need to strengthen farming, but has failed to provide a definite roadmap to boost food production. Nor has he given any fiscal incentive significant enough to the beleaguered farming community, since they are not part of the urban aam admi class that he knows of, to bail them out of the prevailing economic hardship.
The crisis in agriculture is not as much as of stagnating productivity but is essentially driven by falling incomes in farming. There is a complete drought of thinking when it comes to mechanism that can make a definite contribution to farmers’ welfare. Increasing Minimum Support Price (MSP) has outlived its utility since the benefit goes to only about 30 to 40 per cent farmers who have something to sell in the mandis. More than 60 per cent of the farmers have remained outside the gambit of MSP and it is high to make a historic correction.
I wasn’t therefore expecting much from Budget 2010 as far as agriculture is concerned, knowing that policy makers do not have inkling about what is going wrong with agriculture, but considering the phenomenal food inflation and economic distress farmers faced from the extensive drought conditions in Kharif 2009, the Finance Minister could have been a little more generous to announce a slew of stimulus incentives/measures to prop up the sagging farm morale.
I am aware that the Finance Minister has little scope for financial manoeuvrability given the tight fiscal package at his disposal, but there could have been a more drastic cut in the stimulus package that was given to the industry, and these benefits could have been easily passed onto farmers through a bonus on wheat, rice and coarse cereals like jowar, bajra and ragi. Farmers need economic stimulus, and it requires political courage to cutback on the industry stimulus and instead give it to the more needy farmers.
Coming back to the big ticket that the country was waiting for, Mr Pranab Mukherjee has very cleverly announced a four-point strategy to revitalise agriculture which is good on intent, but weak in content. I had expected the UPA government to really focus on rejuvenating agriculture and thereby giving strong signals for taking the farm sector to achieve a growth rate of 4 per cent. At present, agricultural growth rate is minus 0.2 per cent, certainly a drag on the economy.
Except for enhancing the credit package to farmers by an additional Rs 50,000-crore (taking the total credit to 3.75 lakh crores), and providing a interest subsidy of 2 per cent (including 1 per cent given last year) on timely repayment of crop loans, the four-point strategy that he announced is more of a token than anything meaningful. Proving Rs 300-crore for reviving oilseeds and pulses production in 60,000 villages in the dryland regions is also a misplaced strategy.
The shortfall in oilseeds production is not due to the inability of the farmers to increase productivity, but because of the government’s deliberate efforts to reduce import tariffs on edible oils as a result of which cheaper imports have flooded the domestic market. In 1993-94, India was almost self-sufficient in edible oils, but the continuous reduction in import tariffs over the years has turned the country into world’s second biggest importer.
Productivity of oilseeds and pulses therefore cannot be increased unless the government brings back the import tariffs. India can bind import tariff for oilseeds at 300 per cent under the WTO, but has brought it down to zero. Similarly for pulses, the import duty is zero. Unless the tariffs are restored, there is no way Indian farmer can compete with cheaper subsidised imports. Importing cheaper food is like importing unemployment.
Taking the green revolution to the north-eastern states, for which he has provided an allocation of Rs 400 crore, is also a flawed strategy. Why I am saying this is because it is the green revolution technology that has destroyed soil fertility in Punjab, Haryana, Western Uttar Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh. It is because of the devastation that green revolution has caused to the natural resource base that farmers have taken to suicides. To take the green revolution model to the northeast therefore means that the country hasn’t learnt any lessons from the debacle.
Budget 2010 does have some inkling of pragmatic approach. Pranab Mukherjee has done the right thing by not enhancing the llocation under NREGA. In 2009, he had made a budgetary provision of Rs 39,100 crore, and this year kept it at Rs 40,100 crore. This is a wise decision considering that NEGA is a new scheme, and has a lot of problems withimplementation. Making more allocation gives room for more leakage and corruption.
At the same time, I am delighted to find that the Finance Minister has extended the health insurance cover (that was initiated last year to BPL families) to also NREGA workers who have put in a minimum of 15 days of labour. In the years to come, there is a desperate need to extend health insurance cover to the entire farming class also, which has still not been given crop insurance.
Reading the Economic Survey 2010 along with the Budget allocations, it is quite clear that the agricultural reforms that the government is focusing on aim only at allowing more private and corporate control over agriculture. The food policy initiatives that are spelled out in the Economic Survey indicate more thrust on food retail and industrialisation of agriculture, which means more will be the burden on the farmers from external inputs.
This is a misplaced emphasis, and comes from a class of economists who are not in tune with the ground realities. Already, the wish-list spelled out in the Economic surveys of past 3 to 4 years has pushed agriculture to an unmanageable crisis. It is high time that a sincere effort is made to reverse the disturbing trend, and bring back the smile on the face of the farmer. This can be done, provided the political leadership demonstrates willingness.
Finance Minister and Budget 2010: Khao and Khilao exercise
Feb 26 was the Budget day. For several days, the electronic media had created an unprecedented hype. If you have been following the media, it looks as if on the Budget day Aladdin is going to reveal his magic lamp before the nation. I sometimes wonder why is the Budget treated like an annual carnival, and has turned out to be a media event like never before.
While you listen endlessly to the same experts parroting the same lines throughout the day, it is the TV channels actually who have the last laugh. They walk away quietly to the bank.
The Finance Minister goes to bed very satisfied. He has been the cynosure of all eyes, focal point of attention and enough admiration (for some days prior and after the event). He couldn't have asked for anything more. His advisors are happy at pulling the plugs silently. The senior lot among them are happy at being seen on the TV channels, something that would never happen if they were not associated with the Budget making process.
Listening to them, and realising that their bloated egos border on arrogance, I feel dejected at the class of people who prepare the Budget documents. They are more often than not, senior bureaucrats and economists, who have no idea how the country looks like. Often deliberating the fine prints with them on the TV, I have come to the conclusion that it is this set of advisors who need to be shown the door.
The same arguments. The same analysis. I mean the similarity with the corporate agenda is quite blatant. It is difficult to find out whether they wear the corporate tie or the government's hat. They are all part of the revolving door culture. Their economic understanding not going beyond business deals (call them discussions, if you like) at the regular corporate lunches/dinners.
Still worse are the economists. Over the years, I have realised that the mainline economists are the real problem. Right from Lord Meghnad Desai to Dr B B Bhattacharya (a regular on TV, which makes me wonder what does he do as a Vice Chancellor of the Jawaharlal Nehru University), I am greatly disappointed at the shallow understanding they have about economics.
I know they are distinguished in their respective fields, and I should be holding them in awe. This is what I have never done in my life, and this is what has actually made me stand up for the right cause. I have always questioned their flawed economic thinking (which does not go beyond the textbooks), and I hold them responsible for much of the mess the country is passing through. I can assure you that the world would be a much better place to live if we dump these main stream economists.
Interestingly, I find most of the mainline journalists also have contempt for these economists (except for those who thrive as corporate voices). In person, they often tell me that they actually invite them because they have been directed to do so. They know that what these distinguished economists are telling is nothing but a pack of lies, but the tragedy is that no one stands upto them. No one has the courage to even disagree, politely.
I agree. The tragedy of modern times is that we have lost the ability to stand up and question. Even if we know that what is being told to us is simply a glib talk aimed primarily to patronise industry and business, we remain quiet. We do not stick our neck out, knowing that we might have to face the chopping block sooner than later. By remaining quiet, we actually become a part of the crime that we abhor.
Take the Budget 2010. You saw the Opposition parties walking out over the announcement of a petrol price hike. The economists on the TV shows repeatedly said that it was a difficult task for the Finance Minister, and he was left with no option but to raise the petrol prices given the burgeoning fiscal deficit. None of the political stalwarts, and the economists and analysts on the TV shows, told us that there was a way out.
Instead of passing on the burden to the masses, Finance Minister could have gone in for a more drastic cut on the stimulus package for the industry. More than Rs 3.5 lakh crore has been doled out to the industry in the name of economic stimulus (which is actually a subsidy), and the FM could have easily taken out Rs 1 lakh crore from this stimulus. But he didn't do it, because his advisors and the industry lobbied hard for retaining it. Instead he passed on the burden to the people.
In reality, there is no need for the economic stimulus package. To give you an indication, some of the Indian companies are looking for acquisitions abroad, and the sale of BMWs is picking up fast. Why do they need economic stimulus or in reality such a huge subsidy? This is what Noam Chomsky calls as 'tough love'. Tough for the poor, and love for the rich.
Yes, and it is primarily for this reason that annual Budgets have become a corporate exercise. As someone said, it has actually turned into a khao and khilao (eat and make others eat) exercise. No wonder, the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) and the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) lay out lavish carpets for the print and electronic media.
Not only do the CII and FICCI provide space for the media to set up temporary studios, they also ensure that the media becomes their loudspeaker. Media has always returned the favour. It take two to tango.
While you listen endlessly to the same experts parroting the same lines throughout the day, it is the TV channels actually who have the last laugh. They walk away quietly to the bank.
The Finance Minister goes to bed very satisfied. He has been the cynosure of all eyes, focal point of attention and enough admiration (for some days prior and after the event). He couldn't have asked for anything more. His advisors are happy at pulling the plugs silently. The senior lot among them are happy at being seen on the TV channels, something that would never happen if they were not associated with the Budget making process.
Listening to them, and realising that their bloated egos border on arrogance, I feel dejected at the class of people who prepare the Budget documents. They are more often than not, senior bureaucrats and economists, who have no idea how the country looks like. Often deliberating the fine prints with them on the TV, I have come to the conclusion that it is this set of advisors who need to be shown the door.
The same arguments. The same analysis. I mean the similarity with the corporate agenda is quite blatant. It is difficult to find out whether they wear the corporate tie or the government's hat. They are all part of the revolving door culture. Their economic understanding not going beyond business deals (call them discussions, if you like) at the regular corporate lunches/dinners.
Still worse are the economists. Over the years, I have realised that the mainline economists are the real problem. Right from Lord Meghnad Desai to Dr B B Bhattacharya (a regular on TV, which makes me wonder what does he do as a Vice Chancellor of the Jawaharlal Nehru University), I am greatly disappointed at the shallow understanding they have about economics.
I know they are distinguished in their respective fields, and I should be holding them in awe. This is what I have never done in my life, and this is what has actually made me stand up for the right cause. I have always questioned their flawed economic thinking (which does not go beyond the textbooks), and I hold them responsible for much of the mess the country is passing through. I can assure you that the world would be a much better place to live if we dump these main stream economists.
Interestingly, I find most of the mainline journalists also have contempt for these economists (except for those who thrive as corporate voices). In person, they often tell me that they actually invite them because they have been directed to do so. They know that what these distinguished economists are telling is nothing but a pack of lies, but the tragedy is that no one stands upto them. No one has the courage to even disagree, politely.
I agree. The tragedy of modern times is that we have lost the ability to stand up and question. Even if we know that what is being told to us is simply a glib talk aimed primarily to patronise industry and business, we remain quiet. We do not stick our neck out, knowing that we might have to face the chopping block sooner than later. By remaining quiet, we actually become a part of the crime that we abhor.
Take the Budget 2010. You saw the Opposition parties walking out over the announcement of a petrol price hike. The economists on the TV shows repeatedly said that it was a difficult task for the Finance Minister, and he was left with no option but to raise the petrol prices given the burgeoning fiscal deficit. None of the political stalwarts, and the economists and analysts on the TV shows, told us that there was a way out.
Instead of passing on the burden to the masses, Finance Minister could have gone in for a more drastic cut on the stimulus package for the industry. More than Rs 3.5 lakh crore has been doled out to the industry in the name of economic stimulus (which is actually a subsidy), and the FM could have easily taken out Rs 1 lakh crore from this stimulus. But he didn't do it, because his advisors and the industry lobbied hard for retaining it. Instead he passed on the burden to the people.
In reality, there is no need for the economic stimulus package. To give you an indication, some of the Indian companies are looking for acquisitions abroad, and the sale of BMWs is picking up fast. Why do they need economic stimulus or in reality such a huge subsidy? This is what Noam Chomsky calls as 'tough love'. Tough for the poor, and love for the rich.
Yes, and it is primarily for this reason that annual Budgets have become a corporate exercise. As someone said, it has actually turned into a khao and khilao (eat and make others eat) exercise. No wonder, the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) and the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) lay out lavish carpets for the print and electronic media.
Not only do the CII and FICCI provide space for the media to set up temporary studios, they also ensure that the media becomes their loudspeaker. Media has always returned the favour. It take two to tango.
कृषि का अमेरिकी माडल
For my friends who are a little uncomfortable with English, here is my article in Hindi that analyses a couple of the fundamental reasons behind the prevailing agrarian crisis. The change in the mindset of the agricultural students, made possible through the land-grant system of education that we borrowed blindly from US of A, and on which our agricultural universities are based, is primarily the reason for our obsession with risky alien technologies.
I am therefore not the least surprised when agricultural universities lobby tooth-and-nail to push for harmful technologies like Bt brinjal. They have been programmed to reject anything that is traditional and sustainable. They have been made to believe that following the sophisticated technology model from the US is the only way out for India. They think that the spate of farmer suicides is merely a price that the country has to pay for higher production.
I think the greatest challenge is to reform the prevailing agricultural research and education system. It is time we go in for a complete overhaul of the research curriculum in a manner that we begin to respect our own time-tested technologies, and are able to understand how these technologies/farming systems lead us to sustainable farming, with no addition to global warming, and do not result in farmer suicides.
I am beginning a series on where we went wrong. In the days to come, I will bring you more such articles.
कृषि का अमेरिकी माडल
http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/news/opinion/general/6_3_6207894.html
Feb 24, 2010
स्साकसी शुरू हो गई है। वन एवं पर्यावरण मंत्री जयराम रमेश ने बीटी बैगन पर फैसला टाल कर बर्र के छत्ते में हाथ डाल दिया है। अब तक उनके कम से कम तीन वरिष्ठ सहयोगी शरद पवार, पृथ्वीराज चव्हाण और कपिल सिब्बल इस फैसले के विरोध में खड़े हो चुके हैं। यह जताने की कोशिश हो रही है कि बीटी बैगन को ठंडे बस्ते में डालने से भारत की खाद्य सुरक्षा को आघात लगा है। हमें यह भी बताया जा रहा है कि विज्ञान का समाज से कोई सरोकार नहीं होता और हर सूरत में विज्ञान ही श्रेष्ठ है, चाहे यह दोषपूर्ण और नुकसानदायक क्यों न हो।
नियामक इकाई जेनेटिक इंजीनियरिंग अप्रूवल कमेटी द्वारा बीटी बैगन को हरी झंडी देने में किए गए तमाम भ्रष्टाचार और वैज्ञानिक छल-कपट की अनदेखी करते हुए ये मंत्री बीटी बैगन की व्यावसायिक खेती को अनुमति देना चाहते हैं। यह मिथ्या धारणा कि विज्ञान किसानों के लिए हमेशा फायदेमंद है, पहले ही खेतों को लहूलुहान कर चुकी है। पिछले 15 साल में करीब दो लाख किसान आत्महत्या कर चुके हैं। अगर विकल्प प्रदान किया जाए तो 45 प्रतिशत से अधिक किसान खेती को छोड़ देना चाहते हैं।
पहले ही, रासायनिक पदार्र्थो, जैसे खाद, कीटनाशक और हाइब्रिड बीजों ने मिट्टी की सेहत खराब कर दी है और भूजल को सोख लिया है। किंतु इससे पहले मैं यह बताऊं कि हरित क्रांति ने कृषि को कैसे तबाह किया है फिलहाल यह समझना जरूरी है कि कृषि-व्यापार उद्योग ने किस तरह हमारी सोच को बदल दिया है। किसी न किसी तरह हमारे दिमाग में यह बात बैठा दी है कि प्रौद्योगिकी हमेशा मुक्तिदाता होती है। यह देखना अहम है कि वर्तमान संकट को बढ़ाने में हमारी सोच में बदलाव का कितना बड़ा हाथ है।
बेहद चालाकी से यूएस एजेंसी फार इंटरनेशनल डेवलपमेंट ने अमेरिका के लैंड ग्रांट माडल के आधार पर भारत में कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों की स्थापना की है। यह भारत की आवश्यकताओं के बजाए मुख्यत: अमेरिका की इच्छा के अनुरूप स्थापित किए गए हैं। हमें बताया गया है कि कृषि घटिया और पिछड़ा धंधा है और अकुशल लोगों का काम है। अमेरिकी तर्ज पर हमारे कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों में यही सिखाया जाता है।
कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों में यह भी सिखाया जाता है कि अगर आप भारतीय कृषि में सुधार लाना चाहते हैं तो अमेरिकी कृषि माडल अपनाना होगा। हम आंख मूंदकर अमेरिकी कृषि प्रौद्योगिकी को अपना रहे हैं, नतीजे में भारतीय कृषि को भयानक संकट झेलना पड़ रहा है। अगर कृषि अनुसंधान और शिक्षा का अमेरिकी माडल इतना ही बेहतर है तो खेती बर्बादी के कगार पर क्यों है? किसान आत्महत्या क्यों कर रहे हैं और अन्नदाता भूखा क्यों है? क्या इसका यह मतलब नहीं है कि कोई भयावह गड़बड़ी हो रही है? एक राष्ट्र के रूप में हमें इसकी पड़ताल करनी चाहिए और पलटकर पीछे देखना चाहिए।
किसान जानते हैं कि उन्होंने धरती माता को लूट लिया है और वे अधिक समय तक इससे उपज हासिल नहीं कर सकते। कृषि वैज्ञानिकों को यह स्वीकार करना चाहिए कि जिस प्रौद्योगिकी की वे वकालत कर रहे थे, उसने धरती को बंजर बना दिया है और धीरे-धीरे यह रेगिस्तान में तब्दील होती जा रही है। उन्हें भारत की परखी हुई प्रौद्योगिकी पर भरोसा रखना चाहिए, जिन पर आयातित सोच से आघात पहुंचा है।
अब लैब से जमीन प्रौद्योगिकी की आवश्यकता है। हमने सबसे बड़ी गलती यह की कि परंपरागत खेती और किसानों से सीखने की कोशिश नहीं की। कृषि संकट के तमाम हल उनके पास हैं। हम यह मानकर उन्हें दरकिनार कर देते हैं कि उन्हें कुछ पता ही नहीं। नतीजा यह है कि किसान साल दर साल परंपरागत ज्ञान से विमुख होते जा रहे हैं। हम सब अंधेरे में भटक गए हैं।
कृषि वैज्ञानिक नहीं जानते कि बंजर जमीन में कैसे उर्वरता लाई जाए। कृषि को बचाने के सरल उपाय के रूप में वे परदेसी प्रौद्योगिकी के आयात पर निर्भर रहना चाहते हैं और इसीलिए बीटी बैगन पर जोर लगा रहे हैं। एक बार बीटी बैगन को अनुमति मिल जाती है तो यह अनेक जीएम फसलों की बाढ़ ला देगा। इस प्रकार की फसलें, चाहे इनकी आवश्यकता न हो और इनसे उत्पादन भी न बढ़े, कम से कम कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों का तो कल्याण कर ही देंगी। तब कोई भी यह नहीं कह पाएगा कि ये विश्व विद्यालय हाथ पर हाथ धरे बैठे रहे।
पिछले 40-50 साल से हमें बताया गया है कि जितना रासायनिक खाद डालोगे उपज में उतनी ही बढ़ोतरी होगी। यह एक गलत सोच है और इसने हमारी आशंका से अधिक नुकसान पहुंचाया है। अध्ययन से पता चलता है कि भारत के जिन जिलों में खाद की खपत अधिक है, उनमें उत्पादकता उतनी ही कम है। दूसरी तरफ, जिन जिलों में अधिक उत्पादकता है, वहां खाद की खपत कम है। देश में प्रति हेक्टेयर सर्वाधिक उपज वाला जिला केरल का वायानाद है। जबकि खाद की खपत में इसका स्थान 600 जिलों में से 315वां है। इससे क्या आपको नहीं लगता कि खाद की खपत घटनी चाहिए। किंतु जैसे ही आप यह बात कहेंगे, कृषि वैज्ञानिक हायतौबा मचाना शुरू कर देंगे कि इससे राष्ट्र की खाद्य सुरक्षा खतरे में पड़ जाएगी।
यही हाल बीटी बैगन का है। यह भी कृषि-व्यवसाय उद्योग की पैदावार है। इसीलिए राजनेताओं और कृषि वैज्ञानिकों का इसे जबरदस्त समर्थन हासिल है। हमें इस पर ध्यान देना चाहिए कि औद्योगिक उत्पादों से नुकसान अधिक होता है। अगर आप सही फैसला नहीं लेते तो दूसरो को दोष न देना। हम सबको इसलिए परेशानी उठानी पड़ सकती है कि यह महत्वपूर्ण और नाजुक फैसला वैज्ञानिकों और नीति निर्माताओं के हाथ में है।
I am therefore not the least surprised when agricultural universities lobby tooth-and-nail to push for harmful technologies like Bt brinjal. They have been programmed to reject anything that is traditional and sustainable. They have been made to believe that following the sophisticated technology model from the US is the only way out for India. They think that the spate of farmer suicides is merely a price that the country has to pay for higher production.
I think the greatest challenge is to reform the prevailing agricultural research and education system. It is time we go in for a complete overhaul of the research curriculum in a manner that we begin to respect our own time-tested technologies, and are able to understand how these technologies/farming systems lead us to sustainable farming, with no addition to global warming, and do not result in farmer suicides.
I am beginning a series on where we went wrong. In the days to come, I will bring you more such articles.
कृषि का अमेरिकी माडल
http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/news/opinion/general/6_3_6207894.html
Feb 24, 2010
स्साकसी शुरू हो गई है। वन एवं पर्यावरण मंत्री जयराम रमेश ने बीटी बैगन पर फैसला टाल कर बर्र के छत्ते में हाथ डाल दिया है। अब तक उनके कम से कम तीन वरिष्ठ सहयोगी शरद पवार, पृथ्वीराज चव्हाण और कपिल सिब्बल इस फैसले के विरोध में खड़े हो चुके हैं। यह जताने की कोशिश हो रही है कि बीटी बैगन को ठंडे बस्ते में डालने से भारत की खाद्य सुरक्षा को आघात लगा है। हमें यह भी बताया जा रहा है कि विज्ञान का समाज से कोई सरोकार नहीं होता और हर सूरत में विज्ञान ही श्रेष्ठ है, चाहे यह दोषपूर्ण और नुकसानदायक क्यों न हो।
नियामक इकाई जेनेटिक इंजीनियरिंग अप्रूवल कमेटी द्वारा बीटी बैगन को हरी झंडी देने में किए गए तमाम भ्रष्टाचार और वैज्ञानिक छल-कपट की अनदेखी करते हुए ये मंत्री बीटी बैगन की व्यावसायिक खेती को अनुमति देना चाहते हैं। यह मिथ्या धारणा कि विज्ञान किसानों के लिए हमेशा फायदेमंद है, पहले ही खेतों को लहूलुहान कर चुकी है। पिछले 15 साल में करीब दो लाख किसान आत्महत्या कर चुके हैं। अगर विकल्प प्रदान किया जाए तो 45 प्रतिशत से अधिक किसान खेती को छोड़ देना चाहते हैं।
पहले ही, रासायनिक पदार्र्थो, जैसे खाद, कीटनाशक और हाइब्रिड बीजों ने मिट्टी की सेहत खराब कर दी है और भूजल को सोख लिया है। किंतु इससे पहले मैं यह बताऊं कि हरित क्रांति ने कृषि को कैसे तबाह किया है फिलहाल यह समझना जरूरी है कि कृषि-व्यापार उद्योग ने किस तरह हमारी सोच को बदल दिया है। किसी न किसी तरह हमारे दिमाग में यह बात बैठा दी है कि प्रौद्योगिकी हमेशा मुक्तिदाता होती है। यह देखना अहम है कि वर्तमान संकट को बढ़ाने में हमारी सोच में बदलाव का कितना बड़ा हाथ है।
बेहद चालाकी से यूएस एजेंसी फार इंटरनेशनल डेवलपमेंट ने अमेरिका के लैंड ग्रांट माडल के आधार पर भारत में कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों की स्थापना की है। यह भारत की आवश्यकताओं के बजाए मुख्यत: अमेरिका की इच्छा के अनुरूप स्थापित किए गए हैं। हमें बताया गया है कि कृषि घटिया और पिछड़ा धंधा है और अकुशल लोगों का काम है। अमेरिकी तर्ज पर हमारे कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों में यही सिखाया जाता है।
कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों में यह भी सिखाया जाता है कि अगर आप भारतीय कृषि में सुधार लाना चाहते हैं तो अमेरिकी कृषि माडल अपनाना होगा। हम आंख मूंदकर अमेरिकी कृषि प्रौद्योगिकी को अपना रहे हैं, नतीजे में भारतीय कृषि को भयानक संकट झेलना पड़ रहा है। अगर कृषि अनुसंधान और शिक्षा का अमेरिकी माडल इतना ही बेहतर है तो खेती बर्बादी के कगार पर क्यों है? किसान आत्महत्या क्यों कर रहे हैं और अन्नदाता भूखा क्यों है? क्या इसका यह मतलब नहीं है कि कोई भयावह गड़बड़ी हो रही है? एक राष्ट्र के रूप में हमें इसकी पड़ताल करनी चाहिए और पलटकर पीछे देखना चाहिए।
किसान जानते हैं कि उन्होंने धरती माता को लूट लिया है और वे अधिक समय तक इससे उपज हासिल नहीं कर सकते। कृषि वैज्ञानिकों को यह स्वीकार करना चाहिए कि जिस प्रौद्योगिकी की वे वकालत कर रहे थे, उसने धरती को बंजर बना दिया है और धीरे-धीरे यह रेगिस्तान में तब्दील होती जा रही है। उन्हें भारत की परखी हुई प्रौद्योगिकी पर भरोसा रखना चाहिए, जिन पर आयातित सोच से आघात पहुंचा है।
अब लैब से जमीन प्रौद्योगिकी की आवश्यकता है। हमने सबसे बड़ी गलती यह की कि परंपरागत खेती और किसानों से सीखने की कोशिश नहीं की। कृषि संकट के तमाम हल उनके पास हैं। हम यह मानकर उन्हें दरकिनार कर देते हैं कि उन्हें कुछ पता ही नहीं। नतीजा यह है कि किसान साल दर साल परंपरागत ज्ञान से विमुख होते जा रहे हैं। हम सब अंधेरे में भटक गए हैं।
कृषि वैज्ञानिक नहीं जानते कि बंजर जमीन में कैसे उर्वरता लाई जाए। कृषि को बचाने के सरल उपाय के रूप में वे परदेसी प्रौद्योगिकी के आयात पर निर्भर रहना चाहते हैं और इसीलिए बीटी बैगन पर जोर लगा रहे हैं। एक बार बीटी बैगन को अनुमति मिल जाती है तो यह अनेक जीएम फसलों की बाढ़ ला देगा। इस प्रकार की फसलें, चाहे इनकी आवश्यकता न हो और इनसे उत्पादन भी न बढ़े, कम से कम कृषि विश्वविद्यालयों का तो कल्याण कर ही देंगी। तब कोई भी यह नहीं कह पाएगा कि ये विश्व विद्यालय हाथ पर हाथ धरे बैठे रहे।
पिछले 40-50 साल से हमें बताया गया है कि जितना रासायनिक खाद डालोगे उपज में उतनी ही बढ़ोतरी होगी। यह एक गलत सोच है और इसने हमारी आशंका से अधिक नुकसान पहुंचाया है। अध्ययन से पता चलता है कि भारत के जिन जिलों में खाद की खपत अधिक है, उनमें उत्पादकता उतनी ही कम है। दूसरी तरफ, जिन जिलों में अधिक उत्पादकता है, वहां खाद की खपत कम है। देश में प्रति हेक्टेयर सर्वाधिक उपज वाला जिला केरल का वायानाद है। जबकि खाद की खपत में इसका स्थान 600 जिलों में से 315वां है। इससे क्या आपको नहीं लगता कि खाद की खपत घटनी चाहिए। किंतु जैसे ही आप यह बात कहेंगे, कृषि वैज्ञानिक हायतौबा मचाना शुरू कर देंगे कि इससे राष्ट्र की खाद्य सुरक्षा खतरे में पड़ जाएगी।
यही हाल बीटी बैगन का है। यह भी कृषि-व्यवसाय उद्योग की पैदावार है। इसीलिए राजनेताओं और कृषि वैज्ञानिकों का इसे जबरदस्त समर्थन हासिल है। हमें इस पर ध्यान देना चाहिए कि औद्योगिक उत्पादों से नुकसान अधिक होता है। अगर आप सही फैसला नहीं लेते तो दूसरो को दोष न देना। हम सबको इसलिए परेशानी उठानी पड़ सकती है कि यह महत्वपूर्ण और नाजुक फैसला वैज्ञानिकों और नीति निर्माताओं के हाथ में है।
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)