‘MILES TO GO BEFORE I SLEEP’
Indian agriculture, after green revolution,
has fallen on to a lower trajectory of growth.
The next option is development of dry farming,
associating resource poor, middle level farmers.
But, this requires a different set of technologies and
different kind of development strategy. This is necessary to
lift sector production, alleviate poverty, regenerate ecology,
and also to cope with climate change.
A formidable but inevitable task.
Climate change has become a fact of life. The concern is assuming threatening proportions by the day. There are several efforts at the global, national and institutional levels to understand the phenomenon and to deal with its impact. At the moment, two dimensions of the problem are engaging the attention – how to mitigate, if possible reverse, the building up processes; and, how to cope with, if possible counter, the effects of climate change on human life, including farming. The answers are vague. So far, South Asia is regarded as one of the most vulnerable areas in the world. Naturally, it has become a matter of great concern, as it pertains to the well-being of the dryland farmers on the upland areas in Karnataka.
Whatever its impact on the other spheres of human life, two features of climate change, in the case of farming, are a matter of grave concern – one, incremental increases in ambient temperatures; and, two, serious aberrations in rainfall. Torrential downpours and prolonged dry spells, in particular, can cause extensive crop damages, while higher temperatures may cause yield reductions. It is considered that survival of farmers, especially the resource poor farmers stuck in fragile eco systems of dry farming, critically hinges on their ability to effectively cope with these two trends. Here, is the real challenge. Is it possible to evolve a working model of a coping mechanism, based on the available knowledge, which can then be progressively improved with growing experience and information? Perhaps, it is possible.
How to handle rising temperatures at the farm level?
Incremental rise in temperatures is not a new phenomenon. It has been happening for quite some time. In the living memory, several crops and varieties have disappeared from a given region. The prevailing crop varieties, perhaps, will last for some more time. In the meanwhile, the hope is that new resilient crops and varieties will become available in the near future. Also, it is possible to restore, to an extent, the ecological adequacy in the terrain (which has been extensively damaged in recent decades), to provide a better micro climate to farm lands. This means devoting efforts both to on-farm operations and off-farm improvements.
How can we handle rainfall aberrations?
Yield losses in dry farming are more often due to moisture stress during the critical stages of growth in the shallow rooted seasonal crops. Situations of excess moisture do occur, but in rare cases. Both these conditions, within limits, can be managed by way of improved agronomic practices. Some two generations ago, the traditional farming practices did include a few of these practices. However, they have been lost sight of by the recent generations, in their expectation of the green revolution visiting dry faming, some day. Meanwhile, SAUs in their dry farming research undertakings have generated a considerable body of valuable knowledge. The Operational Research Projects (ORPs) have proved the feasibility of this knowledge, using an integrated approach, enriching traditional practices with elements of recent research findings.
Innovative development strategies to match
In order to deal with the problems of temperature excesses and rainfall irregularities, within limits, it is possible to contemplate some strategic changes in the prevailing land use practices, based on the available knowledge. But, it is necessary that these measures are simple, inexpensive and acceptable to the middle level farmers in dry farming (with their low economic resilience and limited world view). These innovations must, in fact, become part of their competence. Involved here is an interaction process with local farmers and communities to guide and train them towards learning the modified resource use practices. The starting point for this process is a set of alternative farming practices, visualized in four layers of betterment, to be applied in a location-specific manner. The aim is that these changes must contribute to both food and income security. Incidentally, they also serve the essential purpose of imparting a better stability to dry farming, by addressing the three limitations of moisture stress, low soil fertility and inappropriate cropping practices.
1. On-farm cultural modifications, used in combination
1.1 In-situ moisture management = Early ploughing – Cultivation across the slope –
Periodic deep ploughings – Conservation furrows – Paired rows, if possible
1.2 Upgrading soil productivity = Use of bulk organics – Application of tank silt –
Use of amendments as needed -- Mixing leaf shedding legumes
1.3 Modified cropping systems = Mixed cropping, combining crops that are deep
rooted with shallow rooted, short duration with long duration, and cereals with
legumes – Avoiding mono cropping
2. Support farming activities, ensuring availability of local inputs
Generating more manurial bio mass as border crops, bund crops and inter crops –
Seed production – Mixed farming with livestock
3. Supplementary activities, augmenting routine efforts
Working in farmers groups (SHG like), undertaking operations of mutual help –
Handling group market operations of purchases and sales
4. Regenerating ecological adequacy, improving micro climate
Undertaking terrain improvement, as a community activity, by way of land shaping,
creating more surface water bodies and establishing more vegetative cover –
Improving the micro climate to support dry farming with reduced wind flows,
higher humidity levels and more intensive bio relationships between the crops
and the surrounding bio diversity – Adopting tree crops.
Participatory approaches, Capacity building
In working with dryland farmers, it is essential that not only the innovations are delivered and demonstrated, but also farmers are led to practice them properly. Thus, capacity building becomes a central task. The three established approaches for this purpose are Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), Participatory Technology Development (PTD) and Farmers Field School (FFS). Wherever they have been systematically employed, the results have been satisfactory.
Building upon people’s interests, initiatives
The effort common in any intervention at present is limited to delivering the development products. But, in the end, this approach is not only highly expensive but also its impact will be short-lived. Therefore, involving farmers in development process must also ensure that they become active development players. For this purpose, Five Layers of Social Initiatives are designed and employed to serve as the lasting social assets.
1. Eco Farmer Groups (EFGs) are organized as entry points to the communities, to start with, (on the SHG model). The members are trained and provided with work experience for the entire project period.
2. FFS Trained Farmers Groups are prepared for every GP area. They practice and propagate eco farming practices.
3. Selected Lead Farmers from FFS trained farmers groups will play the role of para- extension functionaries, supporting the Project personnel.
4. Sustainable Agriculture Promoters (SAPs), selected educated youth, settled in farming, will be trained and engaged in Project work as honorary operatives.
5. Local NGO Networks, are organized, expanding the intervention force, availing their social service contacts already established.
Distinguishing features of the approach
In this development approach, farmers are not merely receivers of development benefits, but they also become, in turn, the main development players, or change agents. The entire approach is not so much a technology-driven approach, but a need-based approach, built on the people’s interests and initiatives. Since every farmer has to learn the manner in which the accepted innovation is efficiently put to work, it is a management–driven approach, in effect. Since, after the initial stages, the burden of sharing and spreading the useful practices among other farmers is mainly that of the trained community leaders, the intervention costs remain extremely low. In essence, this is a development approach which has, as its basic aim, capacity building of middle level farmers to choose, adopt and share useful innovations in dryland farming.
No comments:
Post a Comment