A FEW weeks ago, this column had discussed conservation agriculture - the road that Indian agriculture ought to be taking in the long run. This week, AgriMatters will discuss some practical steps that have been taken in the Indo-Gangetic plains to make conservation agriculture a reality.

 

An important intervention of conservation agriculture is zero tillage technology (ZTT), which involves the direct broadcast of seed into the field burrows, without extensive field levelling and preparation. The main idea is that the ‘soil’ is quite responsible, and does not need intensive ‘tilling’ after every crop. Zero tillage (ZT) is catching up, though not with the same rapidity as the HYV/hybrids in the Green Revolution.

 

The equipment for ZT is compatible for use with tractors, is not very expensive, and well within the affordable range, especially if the local primary agricultural co-op society was to procure one, and lease out the service to the members. The other option is to provide liberal loans to agri –clinics/agripreneurs to buy the equipment and   provide the service to the farmers.

 

The combination of a significant yield effect and cost saving is making adoption worthwhile, but the extension machinery of the agriculture departments and universities have not promoted ZT with the vigour and passion as was seen in the days of the GR. Perhaps one reason is that this time we are not dealing with a visible crisis: food grain production and procurement has seen an all time high, the PDS system is in fine fettle, and no starvation deaths are being reported from anywhere. 

 

The crisis that is brewing is, however, of an invisible nature, more so because it under the soil – the water table is going doing, and the regenerative capacity of soil is getting adversely impacted. Interestingly, while ZT was promoted as a resource conservation strategy, the farmers are adopting it because it makes economic sense, even in the short run. 

 

These are some of the findings of a research monograph on the adoption of ZT in the rice wheat zone of irrigated tract in Haryana published by CIMMYT (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center) .

 

The study also highlights that ZT has been adopted mainly by the larger and the more productive farmers, which is but natural, given the current system of extension. Farmers who have adopted ZT have reported savings in the farmers fields in terms of water, diesel and tractor time for wheat cultivation. These have provided the much needed boost to returns and to the competitiveness of wheat cultivation, Haryana farmers have not reported any significant gains to the rice crop, but reports from rice producing states like West Bengal suggest that ZT makes sense even in the rice-rice cycle. Of course, this data has not been subjected to the same rigour as the CIMMYT data, and more empirical documentation is required before it can be relied upon as a definitive strategy.

 

 

Another point made by the paper under reference is the need to enhance the smallholders’ access to ZT drill service providers. AgriMatters recommends that just as mini-kits are distributed to marginal and small farmers, ZT drill time is offered on their fields. The larger farmers can afford to pay the service provider but the marginal farmer does not have the ready cash (liquidity) to afford this ‘service’. Hence the input management regime in agriculture has to take the next step forward: provide agri services to the marginal and small farmers, or make this equipment available at state farms or KVKs or co-op societies.

 

It may be noted that for ZT to be effective, the service has to be timely, reliable, and affordable. Many of the potential benefits of ZT are easily negated by late or uncertain arrival of the ZTD or its improper use. This also calls for well trained operators and well oiled machines. Individual ownership of ZTD is not recommended

 

 

The paper also suggests that from the viewpoint of conservation agriculture, there is need to maintain some crop residue cover on the soil surface and to   move beyond the wheat crop application alone. The environmental and soil impacts of ZT wheat on the rice wheat system will be short lived if the subsequent rice crop remains intensively tilled and puddled. The optimal amount of residues that ought to be left behind also needs to be studied in detail. Also, the results of this study can be extrapolated for other cycles like the wheat-cotton cycle, and maize wheat cycle in rain fed conditions.  

 

Before closing, it is also important to note that over 10 per cent of the farmers gave up ZT after its initial adoption. While there is no single major constraint, a combination of factors is at work, including technology performance, technology access and seasonal constraints. ZT induced time savings in land preparation did not translate into timelier establishment of ZT plots, thereby contributing to lack of yield increase.

 

Knowledge gap is therefore a critical constraint, and it has to be addressed both through the extension system, as well as the field personnel of the ZTD manufactures. Most of the ZTD manufacturing is in the SME sector, and here again the agriculture and the industries department could work together with financial institutions like SIDBI and NABARD to ensure the spread and reach of this equipment.

 

It is quite clear that the main factor remains access and costs. If these could be addressed, there are immediate savings to be made by the farmer, and long term advantages for the nation. AgriMatters would like to compliment the three authors of the report Olaf Erenstein, RK Malik and Sher Singh for   publishing their study for wider dissemination and debate.