Pakistan’s agriculture is in dire straits and although the growth rates indicate a robust economy that is far from the facts that have been given in the Economic Survey. The indications are that services sector has done well and that in agriculture a sub-sector livestock has shown a reasonable growth rate.
All that aside, the agriculture sector has to perform if the matters are to be improved for the well being of the society. The budget measures cannot be more of the same. There has to be a shift in policy makers thinking and one has to get away from the obsolete and ignorance of the past eight years. That means a complete shift in thinking and a move away from the sordid centralised polices of the past.
On the positive side, agriculture requires investment in institutional development, in human resource development for the farmers and in the marketing structure given the current issues in the transaction sector.
Alternates to existing costly inputs are what the farmer is looking forward to. There are these alternates for fertiliser, for pesticides and for transaction costs. The sector requires a revamp in terms of modifying human and ground realities.
Some of these interventions require financial support but the most challenging are the ones that require no financial support but a more knowledge and ground realities knowledge. One has to have a perception of what is required where and why?
Take the question of factor inputs and the cost factor of fertiliser. There are alternates to chemical fertiliser in the form of organic compost that is especially prepared and that takes only three to four days and can be locally developed and used by the farmers.
If it is to be mineralised, then it is possible to do so with gypsum [phosphate]. The advantage of this is more than what meets the eye. Not only will this improve the soils but also improve the water holding capacity of the soil and thereby creating a water holding area in the root zone. This will mean better water utilisation which at the moment is efficient to the extent of only 27 per cent and that to with the best farmers. The adhesion of molecules enforces that the water is held in that zone.
With this improvement, the water that has been wasted especially in the saline water zone will be reduced. A factory of this nature costs about Rs0.7 million and can be made in different parts of the country in a decentralised manner and according to the nature of the waste material of that area.
The private sector can be made to operate on deferred payment of capital cost for say five years. The cost envisaged per bag of 50 kgs is Rs300; this can vary by ten to fifteen per cent either way. The handling of the material is also easier. So the country can be covered in less than five years and Pakistan can be rid of chemical agriculture. In five years time the protocol for organic agriculture would also be resolved and if Pakistan wants to export this it could do so.
For markets to be operative, there are structural issues that need to be resolved. The market act lays down that markets can only be in the public sector and only the son of an arhti can be an arhti. Why this closed shop? The colonialists had a reason for this as they wanted to lock up the agrarian structure and make sure that it served their purpose.
The policy issue required is very simple and one has to allow the market structure to be liberalised and allowed in the private sector. Agriculture is the largest private sector and all the interventions by governments have been to control the sector.
Pakistan farmers now require a different set of urgent knowledge requirements. These are not going to be met by conventional systems. What is required is that the resources placed at the disposal of the Planning commission by the donor agencies during the last regime should be diverted to farmer’s training and education through specialised polytechnics. These polytechnics would impart hands on training according to the requirements of the area and the production systems. Given Pakistan’s agrarian structure of small farmers, it may now be necessary to work on the occupation of the farmers to see whether they are single occupation farmers, two occupation farmers [livestock and grains] or three occupation farmers [livestock, grains and vegetable] or four occupation farmers [livestock, grains, vegetables and fruits] and so on. Once that stands established a number of training interventions maybe necessary for the training has to be done by master craftsmen and not by inactive PhDs.
The sixty odd human resource development projects that have been placed at the disposal of the Planning commission were nothing but graft situations that the donor agencies provided to the last government. These can be galvanised to better the economic situation for the farmers.
The transaction cost will keep on increasing because the fossil fuel is with the largest crookest cartel that has successfully operated in the world economic structure. This price will keep on increasing.
Pakistan has better options in bio-fuels than any other countries. The successful experiment of the BB times on California and the new intervention in E-grass needs to be taken on board also. It was in 1994-5 that Salicornia was grown with sea water. A 700 mile sea coast is ideal for that purpose.
The last government messed it all up. Imagine the possibilities today for the same bio-fuel. E-grass is something I was involved with bio-fuel in the USA. The same grass is available in Pakistan and growing wild. We have touched upon three major cost factors and these can change the structure of the economy for the benefits of the farmers.
For food security that is listed to heat production, there are functional changes that can be made. Wheat area can be increased. Chagi has 4.5 m ha of land available for winter wheat.
The project that was funded has gone haywire. The minister posted his PS as project Director. That is how it has been done elsewhere also.
Agriculture has been dis-serviced by the policy makers. The institutional changes made were ridiculous as the accountants and B-commerce personal were posted there. So it was the ignorant leading the obsolete.
Agriculture needs are minimal and there for the triggering off of the immense potential that this has for the country. Yes, for these 4.6 million ha, investment would be needed for the purpose of taking the farmer through a productive cycle of wheat production.
For the budget, the requirement is not in financial terms for I feel that the investment has to be in thought process and using resources in such a way that it enhances the productive base of the farmer and the land.
What has never occurred is that the individual factors and the interface of these aspects be worked harmoniously. The motivation of the farmer can be worked through a system of incentives especially if a crop change is required. The humanity in the farmer is different and the effort should be not to brutalise him and create conditions that would work in conflict with country situations.
The new law is the law of increasing returns and not one of the western concept of diminishing returns.