PremiumLet the agricultural universities and the research ecosystem develop India-specific testing and standardizing protocols for old and new pesticide molecules, let those tests be conducted and their results evaluated. Hold the ban till then
The ministry of agriculture should wait for the current global mini-crisis in food production to subside, before undertaking its proposed review of a proposal to ban 27 pesticides that together account for some 50% of the pesticides in use in the country. Rushing in to ban pesticides and seeing sharp declines in crop output at a time of a spike in global food and fertilizer prices would not be the most prudent way to protect our people.
In the wake of the war in Ukraine, food and fertilizer prices have gone up. Russia and Ukraine are the world’s largest and fifth-largest exporters of wheat. Russia is one of the foremost exporters of fertilizers and fertilizer inputs. Ukraine is a major supplier of sunflower seeds (this is what prompted a Ukrainian woman to tell a Russian soldier to carry a handful of sunflower seeds in his pocket, “so that some good would grow out of you when this war is over").
The Economist’s commodity price index for food was up 30% over a year ago, end-March. Wheat prices went up 45%, as shipments out of the Black Sea ports used by Ukraine and Russia stopped. Palm Oil prices shot up, as the supply of sunflower from Ukraine tanked.
Sri Lanka, in our neighbourhood, created a food crisis all by itself, suddenly ditching fertilizer and insecticide use, in favour of organic farming.
It is in this context that a long overdue review of a proposal to ban 27 pesticides comes up. Many of these pesticides have been in use for 20-30 years. If their use is extended by a year more, the heavens will not fall. The sensible thing to do is to not make agricultural production any more difficult than it already is, given the higher prices of fertilizers, fiscal pressures on the government and the window of global export opportunities for Indian farmers and the beleaguered Food Corporation of India (FCI), which holds two and a half times as much grain as it needs to statutorily as a buffer. FCI can easily offload quite a bit from its stocks to meet the needs of African countries, the World Food Programme and Afghanistan and Sri Lanka in the neighbourhood.
Most people love to hate the pesticide industry, shuddering at the reports of DDT traces in mothers’ milk, toxic residue on grapes and eggplant (baingan), and marvel at the promise of wholesome health from organic foods. Most such credulous, uncritical faith in pop culture that breeds demonization of chemical pesticides and fertilizers, comes often from ignorance rather than science.
But for the availability of pesticides, locusts would wipe out large swathes of farm produce, condemning millions to starvation. Agricultural output and productivity would be depressingly small, in the absence of weed- and pest-killing chemicals. We need pesticides and weedicides, to feed a large and growing population.
The point is to use fertilizers and pesticides intelligently, to derive optimal benefits, and avoid overuse. Different pesticides have different target sites and different modes of action to knock out the pests. There are neurotoxins; there are growth inhibitors; there are desiccators. Among neurotoxins, there are calcium channel blockers and sodium seekers. At different stages of a pest’s evolution from egg to larva, and pupa to adult, different kinds of pesticides work in different modes of action. Farmers must be trained as to which pesticide to use at what time. Educating farmers about the proper use of the appropriate pesticide at the right time is time-consuming and difficult. Banning classes of pesticides is far simpler, makes for better headlines and scores brownie points on ESG counts. But the risk is that a ban could also destroy a whole lot of agricultural output, livelihoods, and, in some cases, lives.
Any time, that some other country has banned a pesticide is not a good reason for India to ban it here. That country might not grow the crop for which the pesticide in question is important. The pesticide might take far longer to break down in frigid temperatures than in a country like India. India-specific studies, as per India-specific test protocols, must be carried out, before the government decides to ban chemicals. Farmers must be consulted on the availability of viable alternatives.
The pesticide industry must be forced to invest in R&D and adopt the latest technologies to let Indian agriculture be globally competitive. The ongoing food shortage has thrown open an opportunity to increase food exports from India. But that does not mean that countries that set a high bar on sanitary and phytosanitary conditions would abandon them. Indian agri-exporters would have to meet those norms, and our pesticide industry would have to be mindful of this constraint. Several of the items on the 27-strong list of chemicals proposed to be banned help Indian farmers meet such norms in importing countries.
Let the Ukraine crisis on the food front blow over. Let the agricultural universities and the research ecosystem develop India-specific testing and standardizing protocols for old and new pesticide molecules, let those tests be conducted and their results evaluated. Hold the ban till then.
Download the App to get 14 days of unlimited access to Mint Premium absolutely free!