Binder1 - India Water Portal · M. Girija Shankar, District Collector, Mahabubnagar district, Andhra Pradesh 31 Revitalizing Rainfed Agriculture Network – Malkangiri district, Odisha

2013

Rainfed Farming Systems Program under 12thFYP

Evolving an Operational Framework

National Workshop

CONVENING COMMITTEE• Dr. I.P. Abrol, Chair, Working Group on NRM and RF

• Dr. B. Venkateswarlu, CRIDA

• Dr. Peter Kenmore, FAO

• Dr. Rajeswari S Raina, NISTADS

• Mr. Ravindra A, WASSAN, RRA Network

Venue: CRIDA, Hyderabad

Date: 14th– 15thMay 2013

National WorkshopRainfed Farming Systems Program under 12th FYP:Evolving an operational Framework

Workshop Hosted by:CRIDA

for Private circulation only

Published : August, 2013

Published by:Revitalising Rainfed Agriculture (RRA) Network

With support from:FAO India

For copies contact:WASSAN12-13-452, Street No. 1, Tarnaka, Secunderabad – 500 [email protected]

Abbreviations and Acronyms 5

Background of the Workshop 7

Objectives 8

Welcome Session 9

Session – 1: Emerging Scenario of Rainfed Agriculture Programs 10Introducing the workshop objectives and expected outputs

Dr. Rajeswari S Raina, Scientist, NISTADS-CSIR 10

Emerging opportunities and challenges for Revitalization of RainfedAgriculture (RRA) during 12th Plan

Dr. B. Venkateswarlu, Director, CRIDA 11

Strategy and approach being considered by FAO for Rainfed FarmingSystems – Context – Specific Lessons from Experiences in AndhraPradesh

Dr. Peter Kenmore, FAO Representative in India 13

On-going initiatives on rainfed farming and an outlook for the 12thFiveYear Plan

Dr. J.P. Mishra, Adviser (Agriculture) Planning Commission, GOI 16

An overview of the recommendations of the working group on NRMand Rainfed Farming for the 12thPlan

Dr. I.P. Abrol, Chair, Working Group on NRM and Rainfed Farmingfor the 12th FYP 19

Initiatives on rainfed farming - Ministry of Agriculture (with a focus onRADP program under RKVY)

Dr. B.V.N. Rao, Assistant Commissioner (RKVY), DAC,Ministry of Agriculture 24

Discussion & Summing up with remarksDr. V.V. Sadamate, Additional Commissioner, Ministry of Agriculture 25

Session – 2: Sharing of Experiences 26Convergence for Integrated Development of Rainfed Farming SystemsLessons and Way Forward – Case of National Initiative on ClimateResilient Agriculture

Dr. Sreenath Dixit, Principal Scientist, CRIDA 26

Experiences from NABARD programs in Rainfed Farming SystemsV. Mashar, AGM, NABARD, Mumbai 29

Convergence of MGNREGS and Rainfed AgricultureChandra Prakash, Joint Director of Agriculture (NRM),O/o Commissioner of Agriculture 30

Contents

4 Evolving an Operational Framework

Convergence for Rainfed Agriculture – Issues and Opportunities: Casestudy of RRA Comprehensive Pilot Program

M. Girija Shankar, District Collector, Mahabubnagar district,Andhra Pradesh 31

Revitalizing Rainfed Agriculture Network – Malkangiri district, Odisha(Background, Context and Design)

Ms. Aashima Chaudhary, RRA Malkangiri 34

Inland Tank based Fisheries in Rainfed AreasYakub Basha, Deputy Director, Fisheries Department, GoAP 36

Session – 3: Evolving Modalities – Group work 38

Overview of the Proposed Framework by the Working Group andIntroducing Themes for Group Work

P.S. Vijay Shankar, Samaj Pragati Sahyog 38

Recommendations of the Working GroupA. Ravindra, RRA Network and WASSAN 38

Session – 4: Evolving Operational Modalities: Plenary 40

Group – 1: Location specific technological processes and thrust areasA. Ravindra, Dr. IP Abrol, Dr. B. Venkateswarlu,Dr. K.P.R. Vittal, Dr. K.V. Rao, Dr. Om Rupela and G. Dharmendar 40

Group – 2: InstitutionsProf. Amar Naik, P.S. Vijay Shankar, G.V. Sharat Kumar,Dr. VP Sharma, Dr. Renuka Rani, Dr. J.P. Mishra and Dr. B.V.N. Rao 42

Group – 3: Financing GroupM.V. Ramachandrudu, Rangu Rao, Ms. S. Bhagyalaxmi andMs. Aashima Chaudhary 45

Group – 4: Research and Extension – Promoting relevant collaborativeresearch and extension across institutions

Dr. Sreenath Dixit, Dr. VP Sharma, Dr. Rajeswari Raina,Dr. J. Venkateswarlu, Mukesh Patil and Dr. Rashda Zaffar 46

Session – 5: Open Discussion 50

Annexure – 1: National Rainfed Farming Systems Pilot Program: 56Operational Modalities: Draft based on the Deliberations andRecommendations from the National Workshop

Annexure – 2: Schedule Agenda 71

Annexure – 3: List of Participants 74

5Rainfed Farming Systems Program under 12th FYP

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

APFAMGS Andhra Pradesh Farmer Managed Groundwater SystemsATMA Agricultural Technology Management AgencyBRGF Backward Region Grant FundCBO Community based OrganizationC-DAP Comprehensive District Agriculture PlansCMSA Community Managed Sustainable AgricultureCRIDA Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture (CRIDA)CSIR Council of Scientific and Industrial ResearchCSO Civil Society OrganizationDAC Department of Agriculture & CooperationDST Department of Science and TechnologyDWMA District Water Management AgencyFAO Food and Agriculture OrganizationFPO Farmer Producer OrganizationFYP Five Year PlanGHG Greenhouse GasGIS Geographical Information SystemGNNS Grama Nava NirmanSamithiGoAP Government of Andhra PradeshGoI Government of IndiaGP Gram PanchayatGPS Geographical Positioning SystemIAP Integrated Action PlanIASRI Indian Agricultural Statistics Research InstituteICAR Indian Council of Agricultural ResearchICRISAT International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid TropicsINSIMP Initiative for Nutritional Security through Intensive Millet PromotionIPM Integrated Pest ManagementIWMP Integrated Water Management ProgrammeKVK KrishiVigyanKendrasLEISA Low External Input Sustainable AgricultureM&E Monitoring & EvaluationMANAGE National Institute of Agricultural Extension ManagementMGNREGS Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee SchemeMIP Micro Irrigation ProgramMMS Mandal MahilaSamakhyasMoA Ministry of AgricultureMoFP Ministry of Food Processing


MoRD Ministry of Rural DevelopmentMSME Micro, Small and Medium EnterprisesNABARD National Bank for Agriculture and Rural DevelopmentNDC National Development CouncilNECAP New & Renewable Energy Development Corporation of Andhra PradeshNFDB National Fisheries Development BoardNFSM National Food Security MissionNGO Non Government OrganizationNHM National Horticulture MissionNIAM National Institute of Agricultural MarketingNICRA National Initiative on Climate Resilient AgricultureNISTADS National Institute of Science Technology and Development StudiesNMSA National Mission on Sustainable AgricultureNPM Non-pesticidal ManagementNRAA National Rainfed Area AuthorityNRFP National Rainfed Farming ProgrammNRFP National Rainfed Farming Systems ProgramNRM Natural Resource ManagementPACS Primary Agriculture Cooperative SocietyPD Project DirectorPRI Panchayat Raj InstituteR&D Rural and DevelopmentRADP Rainfed Area Development ProgrammeRARS Regional Agricultural Research StationRF Rainfed FarmingRKVY Rashtriya Krishi Vikas YojanaRRA Revitalization of Rainfed AgricultureSAU State Agricultural UniversitiesSERP Society for Elimination of Rural PovertySFAC Small Farmers’ Agri-Business ConsortiumSHG Self Help GroupSPS Samaj Pragati SahayogSREP Strategic Research and Extension PlanSRI System of Rice IntensificationSSNM Site Specific Nutrient ManagementWASSAN Watershed Support Services and Activities Network (WASSAN)XIMB Xavier Institute of Management, BhubaneswarZARS Zonal Agriculture Research Stations


The workshop stems from the deliberations and recommendations of theWorking Group on NRM and Rainfed Farming Systems constituted by thePlanning Commission for the 12thFive Year Plan. The Working Group proposedfor a National Rainfed Farming Systems Program to be taken up during the12thFive Year Plan. This was also included in the final 12thFYP document as apart of the National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture. The program isenvisaged to depart from the conventional input subsidy centered genericcrop production improvement framework towards more natural resourcesintegrated, decentralized program that makes location specific comprehensiveinvestments for revitalizing rainfed agriculture. The framework was well laidout in the Working Group report.

In the subsequent interactions of the RRA Network with the PlanningCommission, Ministry of Agriculture, FAO and ICAR institutions,consideringthe complexities involved, a need was felt to evolve operational modalities forthe proposed program. The Workshop was proposed to deliberate andrecommend these operational modalities or micro-details.

FAO, India and ICAR came forward to partner with the RRA networkin this.FAO also extended financial support for organizing the workshop.

BACKGROUND OF THE WORKSHOP


OBJECTIVES

Overall objective

To evolve an approach to design rainfed farming systems programunder the 12thFive Year Plan.

Specific objectives1. To synthesize emerging innovative experiences on rainfed farming

systems across the country – under Ministry of Agriculture, ICARand civil society.

2. Revisiting the proposed national rainfed farming systems programframework laid out by the Working Group on NRM and RainfedFarming for the 12thFive Year Plan.

3. To evolve institutional and operational mechanism (s) for facilitatingconvergence of schemes/ investments at Block (and district), basedupon emerging evidences.

4. To explore the possibilities of inter-institutional action research(through collaborative pilots) for generating location specificknowledge and working experiences on sustainable development ofrainfed agriculture.

ORGANISATION OF THE REPORT

Day and Session-wiseproceedings are given with detailed account of thepresentations and deliberations capturing the key points. The Schedule ofthe Workshop is presented in Annexure 2 and Annexure 3 provides the listof participants and their contact details.

A small Core Group was constituted during the concluding session toprepare a draft of the Operational Modalities for the proposed program.The draft (given in Annexure 1) prepared by the Group was shared withthe Planning Commission and MoA.

This report and the power point presentations made will be made availablefor download in the website www.rainfedindia.org, website of the RRANetwork, possibly along with the voice recording of the presentations.


Welcoming the participants to the workshop Dr. B. Venkateswarlu,Director, CRIDA, stressed on the need for having specific field level targetedallocations to rainfed agriculture in the 12th Five Year Plan (FYP). Heappreciated the positive response from the Ministry and the PlanningCommission on the recommendations of the Working Group on NRM andRainfed Farming (Working Group) constituted by the Planning Commissionfor the 12th Five Year Plan. The deliberations in this workshop are meant totake this consensus to the next logical level of ‘evolving operationalguidelines’. The workshop materialised with support from FAO after muchbackground work from the convening committee for the last few monthsin contacting various people including Commissioners of state agriculturedepartments, district collectors, ICAR scientists, experienced civil society,senior officials of the Ministry and the Planning Commission. The workshophas representation from all these quarters.

WE L C O M E SE S S I O N


Dr. Rajeswari explained the wide ranging consultations during the WorkingGroup’s deliberations, series of meetings at the Planning Commission andwith the Ministry of Agriculture, the deliberations within the RRA networkand all the efforts to evolve a decentralized and location specific approachto development of rainfed agriculture. Through these efforts, an approachwas crystallized in the form of recommendations of the Working Group fora National Rainfed Farming Programme (NREP), and found its place inthe 12thFive Year Plan document. However, to be operational it needs tocross 3 to 4 stages at the Ministry and Planning Commission levels. Thisbackground work brought all of us to this workshop to initiate the processof ‘evolving operational guidelines’ which is the central agenda of thisworkshop.

The envisaged design implicit into the recommendations of the WorkingGroup, differs from the conventional approach to agriculture development.References on the need to act differently on rainfed agriculture can be foundas early as 1970’s. In spite of several experiences available, why do onlycertain technologies, and centralized technology and input supplyframeworks persist? Why states are not able to formulate, access resources

Introducing the workshopobjectives and expected outputs

D r. R a j e s w a r i S R a i n a , S c i e n t i s t ,N I S TA D S - C S I R

SESSION – 1EMERGING SCENARIO OF RAINFED AGRICULTURE

PROGRAMS

Chaired by Dr. V.V. Sadamate, Additional Commissioner, MoA


for and work on their own agricultural development plans? Building onthe wide range of experiences available locally rainfed systems need to bedecentralized – both on accounts of ‘what’ should be done and ‘how’. GreenRevolution brought in strategic changes in research, education andextension in particular ways.What strategic changes do we need for revivingrainfed agriculture in the framework we envisage for a larger paradigmshift?

Dr.Rajeswari elaborated on the four specific objectives of the workshopand how the two days deliberations were structured (see Annexure 2). Theworkshop will conclude with specific recommendations of the fourdiscussion groups on technology process, institutions, finance, and researchand extension. These will feed into the preparation of draft operationalguidelines for wider discussion with State and Central agencies.

Dr. Abrol observed that there is enough consensus on the subject already,and ‘action’is required.

Dr. V.V. Sadamate, Chair, stressed that the action in rainfed areas mustbe more at local, preferably at Block level, depending on the typologieswithin the Block. Demonstrating such action as a pilot within governmentin partnership with NGOs is a good starting point for NMSA. Degradation,and high vulnerability of the natural resources requires local action in aparticipatory approach. The issue of post-project sustainability need to bespecially focused.

Dr. B. Venkateswarlu, shared his views on the subject. Sizeable investmentswere made in rainfed areas by various ministries during various Five YearPlans. But, much of the resources went for watershed development. Thereare differentiated capacities across the states resulting in some states like

Emerging opportunities andchallenges for Revitalization of

Rainfed Agriculture (RRA) during12th plan

D r . B . Ve n k a t e s w a r l u , D i r e c t o r, C R I D A


Andhra Pradesh accessing more resources, while others lag behind.Capacities in such states were built with programs like AP Rural LivelihoodsProgram, Western Orissa Rural Livelihoods program, etc. But states withoutsuch capacities even now suffer with basic problems such as identifyinga good PIA and preparation of project plans.

Watershed program made substantive impacts in the worst drought affecteddistricts in Maharashtra such as Jalna, Aurangabad and Beed districts.Comparing the droughts of 1972 and the recent one in 2012,Dr. Venkateswarlu, further observed that shortage of food grains wasa major problem in 1972. There was not much distress on drinking waterand fodder. To the contrary, while food grain availability was not much ofa problem in 2012, the distress on drinking water and livestock was severe.Heavy investments on groundwater and phenomenal increase in thehorticulture (sweet oranges in particular) were the prime reasons for lackof any buffers.

Reliance on groundwater increased and the livestock composition changedover time. Farmer’s responded to the market signals shifting their croppingpattern; expansion of maize and cotton in kharif into all ecosystemsirrespective of their suitability is largely the trend. Such trends pose difficultquestions to the researchers. Would the farmers correct such mistakes andgo back to the previous, more sustainable crop systems? Whether researcherswould go against such (unsustainable) choices made by farmers or wouldthey work on risk minimisation only?

Second issue is the challenges in scaling up. A closer look at the CommunityManaged Sustainable Agriculture (CMSA) program, for example, broughtout several challenges related to the interventions on NPM and nutrientmanagement. Even in NICRA, though some changes were happening atvillage level, scalability of the same was proving to be a challenge at theBlock level.

Market demand for specific crops increases the uptake of technologies.Farmer’s choices and state priorities are driven by market as in the case ofpigeon pea crop in 2005. The alignment of research with market trends is


important. Some technologies such as micro irrigation promoted universally,have long-term concerns of their impact on sustainability.

Finally, there is a general disinterest in agriculture despite subsidies, loanwaivers, and other policy measures when compared to other livelihoodoptions. What should be done to motivate farmers?

Strategy and approach being considered byFAO for Rainfed Farming Systems –

Context Specific Lessons from Experiences

in Andhra PradeshD r . Peter Kenmore, FAO Representat ive in India

Dr. Kenmore laid out the ‘big problem’ now as the tremendous tensionbetween the reality which is highly location specific, and goals and objectivesof the central government set by the Ministry of Agriculture and PlanningCommission that demand ‘scale’.We have to work within this tension aswe have run out of silver bullet answers to most of the questions.

Stagnant employment opportunities in the manufacturing sector, shrinkingemployment in farm sector, share of farm economy sliding to about 10% ofthe total have left the farmers and the growing numbers of agriculturelabour to sustain them. Market is not able to build up rural non-farmemployment. Unless corrections are made there, we cannot pull off povertythrough farming systems alone. The farm initiatives, therefore, cannot bedesigned only from the question of ‘scalability’. This leads us to the challengeof looking at what’s happening within a Block more closely.

The priorities for India on pulses production, supporting farmers in groupsand climate proofing of agriculture are obvious. Dr.Kenmore observed thatmarket failures are common. In pesticides, the markets failed in every singlecountry in the world as it did not take into account the costs that pesticidesimpose on production, ecosystem services and human health in general.We cannot say that the direction set by market is always correct. Scientistspursuing a market driven approach to technology generation must be waryof these failures.


Illustrating the diversity in impact (800% difference) of pest incidence inan experimental plot, Dr. Kenmore emphasised that the expertise to manage,the concept to manage and the ecological technology to manage need to beferociously decentralized so that farmers can make decisions on a day today basis. National centres producing technology for national distributionis fine, but this is not the same as the question on how to optimizemanagement in fields which are less than 100 sq.m!

‘Supporting farmers’needs an understanding that farmers need more time,expertise and that information should reach them in right time. Farmersneed to understand the dynamics of pests, rains and need to diversify theirsystem to respond to the needs of the markets. This needs a decentralisedapproach.

Dr. Kenmore explained the approaches of Farmers’ Field Schools, Agro-Ecosystems Analysis, farmer water scientists and farmer climate school withexamples drawing upon the FAO’s experiences in Andhra Pradesh - APFarmer Managed Groundwater Systems (APFAMGS) and experience ofSERP in Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture (CMSA).

APFAMGS made impact on lakhs of farmers though local measurement ofgroundwater, assessment of water balance and community level dialogueon groundwater management.The experience of SERP in Andhra Pradeshshowed that social mobilisation, financial inclusion, livelihood promotion,accessing entitlements and building safety nets in sequence could makedifference in the livelihoods of poor. These approaches are robust and aretranslating well in other regions such Bihar.

Further, drawing lessons from these experiences Dr.Kenmore observed thatthe question is about assessing the trade-off between providing informationand decision making support to farmers in very location specific way versusa broad brush approach of breeding a variety, multiplying and distributionalover -kind of solutions. Agriculture is essentially a ‘performance’ at the endof every season that changes in every season and in every meter. On thelocation specificity, we need to get a grasp on the challenge of households’livelihood improvement with worst market possibilities, in the face ofuncertainties arising out of climate change, and in market prices, tremendous


variation in soils, water, biotic stresses, incidence of diseases and pests. Theneed is to work at that level supporting farmers with the kind of informationthey need. Studies have shown that even small pieces of informationprovided at the right time can make an impact.

If we are serious about rainfed agriculture we should not go by the GreenRevolution – it has to be highly location specific. Location specific knowledgeand skill base are important. Providing a variety that has performed wellon an average over multi-location trials across the country is notsufficient…we need to deal with the problems farmers face locally.Environmental management, natural resources management and how cropschange over seasons need to be looked at.

There should be a paradigm shift from the dominant and conventional“external input driven agriculture” to “knowledge, skill-based and localnatural resource based” models.

Some studies (for instance Ostrom’s Nobel Prize winning community basedgovernance of resources) showed that complementary inputs by citizensenhance the effectiveness of government investments and efforts and alsoreduce the total costs. Lower contribution by citizens requires higherinvestments from the Government to achieve the same level of productivity.


On-going initiatives on RainfedFarming and an outlook for the

12th Five Year PlanD r . J . P. M i s h r a , A d v i s e r ( A g r i c u l t u r e )

P lann ing Commiss ion , Go I

We need to look at what is more effective and sustainable in specificlocations.

The lessons from Andhra Pradesh point out to the need for both ecologicaland institutional context specificity. Ecological context specificity is requiredto respond to location specific changes. Institutional context specificityprovides us a platform to respond to the variations at Block/Mandal- GramPanchayat – field levels. We need to move in the direction of high degree ofecological specificity with high degree of institutional specificity in designingthe programs.

The 12th Plan would be a crucial venture to address the rainfed farmingsystem with greater focus, investments and with greater impetus on thetechnology frontier. Investments are not just on technology but also inimproving agricultural research capacity, enhancing sustainability of thefarming systems and capacity building at local level.

NaturalResources

Cost andPrices

FarmOperations

Extremeweather events

Shrinkingland base

Dwindlingwater resources

Shortages of farmlabour

Youth’s participationin agriculture

Narrowing sowingwindows

Inadequatemechanization

Pricevolatility

Increasingcosts of inputs

Major Challenges


Performance of RKVY in states like Kerala where Comprehensive DistrictAgriculture Plans (C-DAP) were taken up rigorously is much better. Inseveral states these plans were not well prepared and also, programimplementation was not linked to the plans. Poor capacity available at thedistrict level is the prime reason for poor C-DAP preparation. Variationamong the villages, even below the Block level, is so high that requiresenormous capacities to understand and plan. There is need for buildingcapacities at the local level.

Dr. Mishra shared the achievements during the 11th Five Year Plan comparedto the 10th in aspects related to GDP growth rate, employment andproductivity. The drivers of growth in the 11thFive Year Plan which willcontinue in the 12thFive Year Plan are:

The viability of the farm enterprise and returns in terms of scale, marketaccess, price and risk.

Availability and dissemination of improved technologies through thequality of research and skill development.

Plan expenditure in agriculture & infrastructure through thefunctioning of markets and efficient use of natural resources.

Better delivery of credit services and quality inputs through governanceand institutions.

In the agriculture sector, on an average 45.4% investments are made inthe crop sector and 7% on soil and water conservation. The priorities interms of investments and capacity building for all the sectors need to berevisited. The programmes and schemes in the ministry are now groupedinto the following:

National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA) is in the processof finalization. The program interventions from NMSA are -synergizing resource conservation, improved farm practices andintegrated farming in rainfed areas. And the key deliverables will bedeveloping rainfed agriculture, natural resource management, waterand nutrient use efficiency, soil health and conservation agriculture.


In the National Food Security Mission (NFSM), the basket has beenbroadened to include coarse cereals, cotton and sugarcane. NFSMincludes all the food grain crops and some of the commercial crops.

National Horticulture Mission (NHM) in the 12th FYP will focus primarilyon value addition in terms of processing and storage while the 10thand11th FYPs focussed on area expansion.

National Mission on Oilseeds & Oil palm is the restructured missionwhich mainly focuses on the area expansion on the key oilseeds andoil palm.

In the National Mission on Extension and Technology Management, sofar the technology part has been missing on the extension system,now that has been synergized and converged.

Different schemes in the 12th FYP plan which will continue are:

Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY): The funding pattern and theguidelines will be linked to the Comprehensive District AgriculturePlans (C-DAP). A major problem here is to energize local institutionsand local level field workers to give inputs for the preparation of C-DAPs.

Integrated scheme for farmers’ income security

Integrated scheme on agricultural marketing

Integrated scheme on agricultural cooperation

Integrated scheme on Agricultural Census and Statistics

The Planning Commission looks the NMSA in the following four broadcontours:

1. Knowledge on climate change and its impact on agriculture throughcredible information (Research on Climate Change).

2. Assessment of natural resources which determine the opportunitiesfor livelihood where it includes the aspects of soil, water, biodiversityand climate for better capacities in dissemination of the information.

3. Mainstreaming the learning of NAIP and NICRA.


4. Overall expectation of NMSA is

a. to make the farmers able to absorb the ill effects of climate change,weather aberration and

b. enable farmers respond through adaptation of good practicesparticularly the climatic variability and adaptability concerns.

Agronomic/ Management innovations- Sustainability of natural resources- Reducing costs, increase efficiency of resource

use- improve total factor productivity

Strengthen the extensivelivestock systems

Iterative planning - implemen-tation-learning cycles.

Stabilise diverse Cropping– Rainfall use Efficiency– In-situ conservation/ efficient use of rainwater– Invest in shared and protective irrigation

Enhance institutional capacities inlocal governance and resource

management

An overview of the recommendations of theWorking Group on NRM and Rainfed

Farming for the 12th PlanDr. I .P. Abrol , Chair, Working Group on NRM and

Rainfed Farming for the 12th FYP

The problems in (rainfed) agriculture sector have been fairly wellhighlighted. The question before us is how do we move forward with thecurrent understanding. Though funding is a major constraint, it alone willnot be a good help either. What is that something that should be done to


shift things towards the positive side? This is the key concern with whichthe Working Group has put together its recommendations.

Responding to Dr.Venkateswarlu’s question during his presentation on theneed to work on short-term solutions, Dr.Abrol indicated that it is also theduty of scientist to advise the government appropriately on long-termconsequences and needs of wrong choices in the short term.

Dr. Abrol shared the main recommendations of the Working Group.

The key recommendation from the Working Group is to initiate acomprehensive National Rainfed Farming Systems Program (NRFP) as partof the National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA) to be rolledout as a learning ground in selected Blocks to understand and establish anew paradigm focusing on rainfed areas. The aim will be to evolve a set ofinstitutional, technological, financial and human resource protocols towardsa relevant paradigm shift to be universalized during 13th FYP.

Rainfed areas, constituting 60 percent of the cropped area and supporting40 percent of population, have largest concentration of poverty andbackwardness. Despite cumulative policy neglect and low investments,recent trends are indicative of the high growth potential of these areas tocontribute to national food security. There is need for a paradigm shift thatwould help evolve a policy framework that permits meaningful investmentin the rainfed areas.

Reasoning out the need for a paradigm shift, Dr. Abrol emphasized onthe following:

The issues of resource conservation, sustainable use and managementand enhanced productivity need to be seen in unison. Integration ofproductivity enhancement concerns with those of sustainable use andmanagement of natural resources has to be the core strategy fordevelopment of rainfed areas.Move away from the current single commodity centric approach toenhance productivity to one which focuses on optimal use of naturalresources to achieve sustainable intensification of production systems andhousehold income growth in the context of the farming systems.


Climate change led increased variability and accelerated resourcedegradation call for efforts to build system resilience with capacity toadapt and contribute to carbon sequestration and GHG emissionreduction.Need for a platform which permits convergence of the multiplecontexts in which rainfed farming issues are viewed and addressed.Recognize the need to increasingly involve non-traditional players(CBOs, CSOs, private) in research and extension for larger and fasteroutreach.

The overall paradigm shift also warrants a new focus on the activityareas:

Water: The emphasis on stabilizing and securing diverse cropping byfocusing on ‘Rainfall Use Efficiency’ must be central to policies relatedto water as against just efficiency of applied water. The shift calls forpromoting measures for in situ rain water conservation and efficientuse of stored soil water. Further, investments are needed in protective/supportive irrigation development programs considering farmingsystem/ livestock/household needs using groundwater and surfacewater bodies.

Soils: A comprehensive strategy is needed to focus on improving soilhealth centered on improved biomass availability. Crop residuesshould be recycled to build soil organic matter content. Such strategyrequires appropriate incentives. The soil health issues are at the coreof achieving sustained productivity gains. Thus far issues of soil healthhave been viewed solely from the limited aspect of nutrients supplyto crops ignoring their larger and more critical role in providingecological and environmental goods and services.Sustainable Agronomic and Management Innovations: Farmerparticipatory adaptive research linked to extension efforts to promoteintegrated soil, crop, water, nutrient and pest managementinnovations need to be mainstreamed. The main aim is to addresslocation specific problems in an integrated way. Principles ofconservation agriculture together with learning from successful


experiences of initiatives like LEISA, SRI, NPM and building onfarmers’ knowledge and experiences will provide a sound basis forreducing production costs, increasing efficiency of resource use,enhancing overall sustainability and resilience to climatic variations.The context indicates that the lack of organic link between the researchsystem and extension machinery constitutes a critical systemic gapwhich limits the research system’s ability to prioritize research agendaand focus on finding solutions to the identified problems. The problemsof farmers are not amenable to the ‘discipline-bound’ approach ofresearch.Seed Systems: A robust seed system that meets the requirements ofrainfed agriculture is fundamental. Timely availability of locallyadapted seeds to make the best use of the short ‘sowing time-window’is crucial in rainfed agriculture. Maintaining seed buffers forcontingencies is a prerequisite.Farm Mechanization: Considering critical role of machinery in timelyseeding, seed placement, etc., for efficient use of soil moisture andnutrients, there is need to evolve suitable models for appropriate farmmechanization in partnership with farmers & local manufactures.There is a need for institutional innovation for improved farm powerutilization involving farmer’s organizations and local industry.Strengthen Agro-met Advisory System: There is need to strengthenand improve agro-met advisory dissemination through preparingweather forecasts at Block level for greater outreach. Advisory systemshould be backed by expert teams engaged in action research andcommunication activities involving KVKs, ATMA, CBOs, farmergroups, etc. The latter also need to be involved effectively to getfeedback on the agro-advisory bulletins and farmers expectations.Strengthening Extensive Livestock System: There is a need for astrong support to the animal husbandry programs especially in relationto management of natural resources, common pool and animal healthcare services. Specific investments will be required to improve feedand fodder base (pastures, shrubs, fodder trees) in common and privatefallows.


Commons: There is a need for a clear programmatic focus aimed atevolving and promoting state level policies and programmes oncommons through a national consultative process.Rainfed water bodies and Fisheries: An estimated 1.2 million ha ofwater bodies holds a large potential for fisheries development.Realizing this potential will call for a multi-pronged approachinvolving inventorying water bodies, landscaping for fish production,reforming institutions, engaging with CBOs, providing technicalbackstopping. There is a need for adequate investments for this activity.Minimizing risks: There is a need for a comprehensive riskmanagement strategy that includes diversification, removingconstraints for timely sowing, cost reduction, improved soil moisturemanagement to sustain short dry spells, access to supplementaryirrigation.Institutional development: A strong interface between ATMA andfarmer’s institutions is needed to ensure stakeholder participation indecision making on matters such as investment needs, incentives,credits, etc. A comprehensive land and water use policy need to beprepared at district level with flexibility in deciding programs andschemes. There is a need to enhance capacity at village, grampanchayat, Block and district levels for decentralized planning andimplementation. Panchayat Raj institutions should undertake NRMactivities in an integrated manner and develop coherence andconvergence between different programs and schemes.

The program architecture envisaged by the Working Group is as follows:

Prioritize and identify 1000 development blocks to integrate variousactivities into relevant paradigm.Create ‘Rainfed Windows’ in each of the relevant mainstreamprograms (including RKVY, MoA, MoRD, Food and Civil supplies,Water Resources, etc).Promote intensive engagement at central and state level to evolvesupportive policies particularly in the areas of strengthening farmers’institutions, commons, groundwater access and management etc.


Enhance Watershed Program investments with strong scientificbacking and expedite its implementation.Bring convergence of several existing programs into the Rainfedfarming program.

The Group also looked into the required institutional architecture forimplementing the program at various levels starting from the block, district,state and national level.

After a brief overview of the characteristics of the rainfed areas,Dr. B.V.N. Rao shared the program guidelines of the Rainfed AreasDevelopment Program (BADP) under RKVY and provided glimpses of someof the programs taken up.

The rainfed areas, constituting 60% of the net area sown, have high scopefor productivity enhancement through mitigating risks, crop diversificationand farmer centric interventions. The main objectives under RADP programare to transform rainfed agriculture into ‘Low Risk- High Yield’ activitythrough improving agricultural productivity in a sustainable manner andmitigating the risks associated with climate variability; and providing moreoptions for income generation.

The coverage of the program includes identified arid, semi-arid, sub-humidand backward humid districts which come under different agro-ecologies.The approach to increase prosperity and to maximize output value isthrough location specific farming system, institutional support anddiversification through integrated farming system.

Initiatives on rainfed farming - Ministry ofAgriculture (with a focus on RADP program

under RKVY)DR.B.V.N. Rao , Assistant Commissioner (RKVY),

DAC, Ministry Of Agr icul ture


Highlighting the key points made by the speakers, Dr. Sadamatesummarised and concluded the session. The challenges he identified are:developing project planning capacities on ground and integrating C-DAP,SREP and purpose linked credit plans into the mainstream programs. ICARsystem need to take into account the Farmers’ Field School methods as ameans of understanding the climate complexities at local level and the interdependencies among various livelihoods – agriculture, livestock, fisheries,etc., in rainfed areas.

Discussion & Summing up withremarks

D r. V. V. S a d a m a t e , Add i t i ona lC o m m i s s i o n e r, M i n i s t r y o f A g r i c u l t u r e


Dr. Abrol reiterated the need for and centralityof location specific design of initiatives andactions, decentralized planning and the need toconfront climate change. Dr. Abrol opened theafternoon session by inviting the presenters tofocus on specific action areas and ‘how do wego about’ rather than the content part.

SESSION – 2SHARING OF EXPERIENCES

Chaired by Dr.I.P. Abrol, Chair, Working Group on NRM and Rainfed Farming for the 12th FYP

Dr. Sreenath Dixit pointed out that the absence of clear demand and accessmechanisms, and lack of coordination and cooperation amongimplementing agencies is leading to multiplicity and duplication of efforts.The NAIP project, implemented by CRIDA in partnership with NGOs andKVK in 8 backward districts of Andhra Pradesh, has taken convergence asa core mandate.

Farm ponds in Adilabad to provide critical irrigation to rainfed crops withMGNREGS, community and household biogas units with NEDCAP,horticulture with National Horticulture Mission, exposure visits withATMA, groundwater sharing with APMIP are some of the examples ofconvergence. For reviving ‘sunk or defunct-investments’ tank de-silting was

Convergence for Integrated Developmentof Rainfed Farming Systems – Lessons andWay Forward – Case of National Initiativeon Climate Resilient Agriculture (NICRA)

D r. S r e e n a t h D i x i t , P r i n c i p a l S c i e n t i s t , C R I D A


undertaken through convergence with MGNREGS. A community biogasproject, in convergence with NEDCAP, provided cooking gas to 45households and energized 13 HP motor with 15 kva genset. An initiativeon collectivizing groundwater pooled 6 borewells and 18 farmers (bothborewell owners and non-owners) to provide critical support irrigation to45 acres of rainfed agriculture. In all, about 2.07 crore rupees of convergenceinvestments were mobilized by the program.

The strategy of convergence expanded even to the NICRA programimplemented through KVKs in 100 most climate- vulnerable districts in thecountry. Each village has a climate risk management committee which alsoruns custom hiring centres. More than technology, Dixit felt, institutionsrequired for the process of enabling technology adoption are crucial.

Dr. Abrol said that technology generation, transfer and adoption arecontinuous processes and one should not wait till the technology is perfected.Dr. J.P. Mishra cautioned that creating new institutions for convergencemay create conflict with the existing ones such as ATMA, PRIs andsuggested that the programs need to work with the existing institutions.Prof. Amar Naik suggested taking stock of institutional deficiencies andrecasting the existing ones as per the emerging needs. Delivery is not takingplace because of institutional deficiencies. The institutions at the grassrootslevel should be reconstituted and rearranged so that the investments madeare effective. Lack of institutions at grassroots level reduces the absorptioncapacity of investments.

P.S. Vijay Shankar stressed on the need to have a new institutionalframework as the existing institutions at the district level are inadequate tohandle the challenges of rainfed agriculture. Extension system played animportant role during Green Revolution period. This has now been reducedto transferring subsidies rather than knowledge. Most farmers getknowledge from the neighbouring farmers. Pointing to theinappropriateness of replacing public institutions with private ones, VijayShankar emphasised the need to strengthen public institutions of extension/service delivery. Dr. Mishra also echoed this sentiment on reviving theexisting knowledge institutions.


Dr.V.P. Sharma argued for the capacity building of human resourcesdeployed with ATMA for preparation of participatory development plansinstead of creating new institutions. FPOs, CBOs should be taken on boardand their capacities built. He also suggested a certifier agency at the districtlevel for assessing their capacities. He felt that 10-20 Blocks in the countryfor the proposed National Rainfed Farming Systems Program is tooinadequate and suggested that the number be increased for generating goodexperiences.A. Ravindra brought out the need for differentiating the decision making,administration support and program implementation roles of institutions.The Department of Agriculture has three different roles - subsidyadministration, regulatory and technical extension; and more than 95 percent of their time is spent on administration of subsidy. We have to analysewhy we failed in delivering quality C-DAPs across the country in the11th plan. The need of the hour is building institutional capacities for locationspecific planning at the lower level.Observing that the present extension is more prescriptive at a general level,Dr. Mishra stressed the need for more decentralized planning and theiraggregation at Block level. This also complements the direct subsidy deliveryto farmers’ accounts. Chandra Prakash from the Department ofAgriculture, Andhra Pradesh brought out the burden of subsidyadministration impacting negatively on the technical extension capacitiesof the Department. For example, the distribution of drought relief of rupees1682 crores falls onto the Department’s extension people. Both theDepartment and their Unions made a representation to the ministry in thisregard.Dr. Rama Rao from CRIDA brought out the need for workingwith locationspecific institutional contexts, and innovations related to it rather than goingfor singular institutional designs. Dr. Om Rupela, observed the need formore grassroots institutions and informed that guidelines for such a programwere recently circulated by the Ministry of Agriculture.Reflecting on the institutions, Prof. Amar Naik from XIMB shared theexperience with SFAC. After deliberations they have arrived at a cluster of1000 farmers as a viable entity. Farmers’ Producer Organisations over time


have become more of product-companies than producer organisations;markets convert them into mere product distribution companies. This isthe case with all the 21 Producer Organisations started in Madhya Pradesh.Farmers require scope not scale; for their own income and food security.Designing such institutions with farmers’ food security as the priorityobjective is the challenge. The way Unilever, Monsanto or Microsoft lookat market will be different from a small farmers’ organisation perspective.We need to create a single window institution for the farmers to serve alltheir needs at an optimal scale– accessing subsidy, seeds, etc. With thisperspective, the SFAC may need to experiment and think about a paradigmshift.Dr. Rajeswari brought out the need for the agriculture extension movingfrom the present centralized technology dissemination towardsdecentralized natural resources management approach. Dr.Abrol said thatthe institutional changes become a prerequisite to technology changes.Drawing out from the experiences of groundwater management inAPFAMGS, Peter Kenmore from FAO emphasised the need for building‘trust’ among farmers enabling them to make decisions. Accountablefarmers’ groups should be provided with decision support system fordeciding on technologies. There are bad single windows - money lendersfor example; but we need to create positive ones. The trust that the farmersgroups show is one of the indicators of success in pilot projects.

Experiences from NABARD programs inRainfed Farming Systems

V. M a s h a r, A G M , N A B A R D , M u m b a i

V. Mashar from NABARD, Mumbai shared the program framework,achievements and impacts of the Participatory Watershed DevelopmentPrograms of NABARD including Indo-German Watershed DevelopmentProgram. These programs cover 1.78 m.ha spread in 16 states of the countryand are implemented in partnership with the NGOs. Self-selection through


qualifying shramdaan, management of the projects directly by the WatershedCommittees of the community, contributory approach, ridge to valleytreatment and transparency measures are the key features of the watershedprojects of NABARD. The project budgets are given into the hands of thecommunity.In addition to the watershed programmes, NABARD has taken up LeadCrops scheme, where all the critical gaps in the crop systems are identifiedand addressed. NABARD also has initiated several schemes useful forrainfed areas including renovation of defunct warehouses. Mashar alsoexplained initiatives of NABARD to revive the Primary AgricultureCooperative Societies following Vaidyanathan Committeerecommendations.

Convergence of MGNREGS and RainfedAgriculture

Chandra Prakash, Joint Director of Agr icul ture(NRM), O/o Commissioner of Agr icul ture

After a brief overview on the contribution of rainfed agriculture in AndhraPradesh, Chandra Prakash representing the Commissioner, Agricultureshared various rainfed agriculture programs of the Department. Prominentamong them are NWDPRA, River Valley Project, Construction of farmponds, Rainfed Area Development Program (RADP), Revitalizing RainfedAgriculture (RRA), INSIMP on millets promotion and Seed Village Program.

Chandra Prakash provided an overview of each of these programs andtheir physical and financial coverage. Farm ponds provided critical irrigationleading to enhanced incomes, RADP program, covering 4738 ha and 4603farmers in 6 districts, implemented a range of interventions around specificfarming systems. The RRA program in Anantapur district implemented inpartnership with the NGOs is promoting collectivisation of groundwaterthrough pooling of borewells to provide critical irrigation to the selectedblocks of rainfed areas. INSIMP program targets millet promotion includingestablishing infrastructure related to post-harvest processing.


Girija Shankar, District Collector, Mahabubnagar shared the emergingexperience of the Revitalising Rainfed Agriculture (RRA) Comprehensivepilot program initiative taken up in Doulatabad Mandal by the district incollaboration with WASSAN. The program is modelled on therecommendations of the Working Group as part of the national initiativeof the RRA Network.

With low literacy and poor development indicators Mahabubnagar districtis one of the poorest districts. It is also known for its ‘Palamoor labour’. Ithas about 76% area under rainfed agriculture and about 8.5 lakh farmers.Annual average rainfall is around 600 mm. 78% of the livestock populationconstitutes small ruminants. Rainfed agriculture forms the major source oflivelihood in the district. Hence, development of the district depends on thedevelopment of rainfed agriculture.

Out of the budget of rupees 335 crores under MGNREGS, Rs. 285 croresare spent on wages alone. MGNREGS budget in the district is more than50% of all other districts combined. Last year the district stood first inimplementing micro irrigation scheme.

As Gram Panchayats are too small in AP, Mandal is taken as a unit forplanning and implementation; it also provides diversity of situations. 18Villages in the Doulatabad Mandal were taken in the first phase to beexpanded to the entire Mandal in course of time.

The RRA- pilot program in Doulatabad Mandal envisages evolving locationspecific strategic plans for strengthening local production systems. Giventhe community organisation base existing in the Mandal, the program willbe implemented by the CBOs and their plans will be integrated into theexisting programs of the Departments.

Convergence for Rainfed Agriculture –Issues and Opportunities: Case study of

RRA Comprehensive Pilot Program

M. Gir i ja Shankar, Distr ict Col lector,Mahabubnagar distr ict , Andhra Pradesh


Facilitated by WASSAN, the pilot program involves a range of primarystakeholder groups – farmers, sheep rearers, ram-lamb rearers, goat rearers,fisheries cooperative societies and Mandal Mahila Samakhyas (MMS). Thethrust areas of the program are improving soil health, establishing seedsystems, expansion of protective irrigation for securing kharif rainfed crops,establishing support systems for sustainable agriculture, streamlininglivestock services and strengthening value chains.

A state level convergence meeting was facilitated by the Principal Secretary,Rural Development, followed by convergence meetings at the district levelwith all the Departments. WASSAN was asked to facilitate preparation ofdevelopment plans with different producer groups. These plans wereaggregated and representatives of these community producer groups andthe MMS presented these plans at the district level convergence meeting.The meeting, attended by the Mandal, District, Division level officers; waschaired by the District Collector. Sectoral plans were presented at theMandal. Departments’ officials assessed the availability of resources andworked out possible allocations for the Mandal from their respective

S. No. Program Approximate Importance fromAnnual Budget for rainfed agriculture

the district perspective(Rs. in crores) (high/ medium/ low)

1. MGNREGS 335.0 High

2. RKVY 20.0 High

3. IWMP 25.0 High

4. ATMA 1.0 High

5. Indira Jala Prabha 5.0 High

6. AP Micro Irrigation Project 75 Low

7. National Horticulture Mission 6.0 Medium

8. Pashu Kranthi/ Jeeva Kranthi 0.5 Medium

9. Milk Mission 3.0 Medium

Table: Development/ Agriculture related Programs in the District withapproximate annual budged:


programs. In cases where the regular Departments did not have adequatefunds, IWMP funds on productivity enhancement etc., were provided.

As the major funds were sourced from DWMA (District Water ManagementAgency is the district office implementing the IWMP and MGNREGS, IJPand other natural resources related programs.) programs, it has been chosenas the Nodal Agency and the Additional Project Director was made thedistrict convenor. CRIDA was approached for technical support facilitatedby WASSAN. The strategic convergence from various programs and thebudgets sourced from them were presented.

Mr. Girija Shankar opined that the program is partly technical but mostlya management job; especially for bringing in convergence. District levelconvergence is possible as it is centred around the Collector. However,convergence should be institution dependent rather than person dependent.State can form a working group at the district level which can be given aformal mandate for the program implementation by a Government Order.

There is a great need for channelizing funds to areas of poverty which aresynonymous to the rainfed areas. Sourcing the gap funds is most crucial.These gaps are filled to a certain extent by the RRA program. Communitybased organisations need to play an important role in implementing theprogram.

Responding to aquestion, Mr.Girija Shankar said that this is not a meredelivery of scheme- inputs to the farmer, the issues of production and valueaddition need to be addressed. Continuous monitoring from state anddistrict level is necessary. This initiative has happened in less than 10 months;but, it requires at least one meeting every fortnight (video conference, etc.)for at least for one to two years to make it a regular activity.

Dr. Venkateswarlu suggested that the processes in this program need tobe properly documented. Perhaps a Block level administrative set up orinstitutional arrangements will be needed. Dr. Prasad from CRIDA wantedthat 20% of the budgets of line departments be mandated for suchconvergence programs. Mr. Girija Shankar felt that to scale-up such aprogram in another 12 Mandals in the district the available budgets wouldbe inadequate and Centre should provide funds to cover larger areas.


A. Ravindra pointed out that apart from the input subsidies the AgricultureDepartment does not have money for any of the relevant investments.Substantial investments for the program came from other departments.Backward rainfed Mandals like Doulatabad will benefit from the AgricultureDepartment’s budget when it converges with others to mobilise relevantinvestments for agriculture growth. He also noted that this initiative is aboutthe relevant interventions needed for the Mandal for which variousprograms need to converge.

The RRA-Malkangiri network has evolved in the context of Odisha TribalEmpowerment and Livelihoods Program and MGNREGS. It is a districtlevel network of NGOs working in close coordination with the districtadministration anchored by Parivarthan as its Secretariat. It is supportedby the National RRA Network. In consultation with the district Collector,the network evolved a comprehensive district level RRA program integratingvarious mainstream programs such as MGNREGS, RKVY, IAP, NFSM,ATMA, INSIMP, NHM, Fisheries development, OTELP etc. During the firstyear of the formation of the network, various thematic initiatives (on soils,seeds, SRI, fisheries, etc.) were started at a local level to generate primaryexperience. Some of these initiatives were in collaboration with themainstream programs. The initial experiences were shared with the districtadministration followed by series of district level consultations.

These led to the formulation of district level RRA pilot program with twomajor initiatives: (a) enhancing food security through integratedproductivity improvement covering 14 Gram Panchayats and 268 villagesin 5 Blocks facilitated by 6 NGOs in the field, and (b) a program to realisefisheries potential in 50 Gram Panchayats in almost all the Blocks of thedistrict.

Revitalizing Rainfed Agriculture Network– Malkangiri district, Odisha (Background,

Context and Design)M s . A a s h i m a C h a u d h a r y, R R A M a l k a n g i r i


District Fisheries Resource Centre and Farmers’ Resource Centre are beingestablished by the network in collaboration with the Fisheries andAgriculture Department. For the food security program, the AgricultureDepartment will be the nodal agency to process proposals from the GramPanchayats and to pool budgets from various programs across departmentsagainst the action plans from the field. Collaboration with the Departmentsand programs at Block and GP level are established. The Resource Centresat district level with professionals provide support and also help in liaisonwith the Departments. A district level core committee is also formed. Theproposals are now being generated. Community Resource Persons at theGP level supported by the NGOs will be trained to generate proposals. Abroad framework for seeking proposals was agreed upon by theDepartments and the district Collector. The Departments at district andBlock levels will help in the preparation of proposals and also providetechnical support, where required.

District Realizing Rainfed farming potential inMalkangiri (Enhancing Food Security)Line Departments

(Agri, Horti,animal husbendryDRDA, IAP etc.)

Technical &Financial,extensionsupport

Convergence ofvarious schemesand departments RRA Program

(Process, planning & systemset up)

Farmers Resource CentreProgram:

14 GP, Communityresource personstrained by various

dept., RRA nodes andtechnical institutes

Facilitateimplementation of

sanctionedproposals

Information andsupport point

Proposals atGram

Panchayat

Single windowclearance system

for panchayatplansFarmers Producer

organisation at Panchayat/Block level, at later stage

Convergence propos-als form GP:

MGNREGA, SEED Bank,Millet promotion, ATMA,

RKVY, Horticulture,DAH, NABARD etc.


Fisheries Department Technical &Financial support

RRA Program(Process & Services)

District Fisheries Resource CentrePROGRAM:50 GPs50 water bodies/ GP= 2500 water bodies@ approx Rs. 15000 per eachPotential gross income:

Rs. 3.75 cr

Block level Fisheries Officer

GramPanchayat

Fisheries Resource PersonTrained at CIFA

One FingerlingProduction farmer

♦ Fish fry- support♦ Nets (for won use and hiring)

♦ MGNREGS:Renovation of pond

♦ Technical training♦ Growth Monitoring Support♦ Marketing (at later stage)

Realizing Fisheries Potential in Malkangiri

Fish farmer

Dr. Rajeswari stressed on the need for acknowledging the good investmentsmade by the NGOs in mobilising communities and their efforts in bringingout the participatory plans. These efforts are critical for the success of suchprograms and need to be recognised by the Agriculture Department, inparticular.

Yakub Basha shared the initiative of the Fisheries Department inconvergence with Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty, WASSAN andKVK (GNNS) to improve tank based fisheries in rainfed areas in threedistricts. He shared the statistical details of fish production in AP. Seasonal

Inland Tank based Fisheries in RainfedAreas

Ya k u b B a s h a , D e p u t y D i r e c t o r, F i s h e r i e sD e p a r t m e n t , G o A P


Capital

Infrastruc-ture

Capacitybuilding & IB

Credit

Market

Technicalsupport

FisheriesResource Centre

(FRC)-lech,institutions related

activities

Process:and ‘cyclical’ filling of the rainfedwater bodies need specialtechnical packages for harnessingtheir potential. They are also in thecommon property and theDepartment has to give the leaserights. Increasing the dead storagewith support from MGNREGS,tank management such as clearingweeds, pre-stocking programs likefertilisation, stocking of stuntedfingerlings to realise the potentialof seasonal water storage, diversification with locally suitable species,disease management, supplementary feeding are some of the interventionsplanned. Capacity building is attempted through district Fisheries ResourceCentres, which are established as part of the program. About 349 tanks in300+ villages are targeted in the program. Developing satellite rearing tanksto rear fish to fingerling size to supply to the tanks is one of the coreintervention area. NFDB (Capacity Building), MGNREGS (physicalinvestments), SERP and Zilla Samakhya (support for institution building),KVKs (implementation/ technical support) and WASSAN (overall programmanagement) are the partners.B. Ramachandrudu, from WASSAN, explained that a team of 4 personsare responsible for 100 tanks. These are employed by the Zilla Samakhyas.Fisheries Development Officers from the Department provide the technicalsupport and inputs in disease management.


A. Ravindra briefed about the recommendations of the Working Group.He explained the proposed framework for the National Program on RainfedFarming Systems. A new paradigm evolved during the deliberations of the

Recommendations of the Working Group

A . R a v i n d r a , R R A N e t w o r k a n d W A S S A N

P.S. Vijay Shankar briefed the group on the idea and context of theworkshop. The workshop is about evolving operational mechanisms forthe proposed rainfed farming systems program with Block as a unit –modalities of planning, implementation, institutional mechanisms,structuring of investments, fund flow. In the backdrop of the consensusarrived at during the first day, and the practical examples that were shared,the group is expected to put together a set of recommendations. Theserecommendations would be useful for the Ministry of Agriculture and thePlanning Commission for framing the program under the 12th FYP. VijayShankar emphasised on the need to focus on evolving operational modalities.

SESSION – 3EVOLVING MODALITIES - GROUP WORK

Chaired by Dr. K.P.R. Vi t ta l , Former Director, NIAM

Overview of the Proposed Framework bythe Working Group and Introducing

Themes for Group WorkP. S . V i j a y S h a n k a r, S a m a j P r a g a t i S a h y o g


Working Group pegged into the 12 propositions. The propositions distilledthe discussion and debate around the broader issues and arrived at specific‘policy outcomes’ that need to be targeted for achievement. For example,increasing the organic matter content in the rainfed soils and ensuringextensive protective irrigation at scale need to be the ‘policy outcomes’. TheWorking Group suggested a Block level program where the Governmentinvests about 10 crore rupees in the new framework with a mandate toconverge about 40 crore rupees over the 12th Plan period to achieve theoutcomes. Though there is consensus on these objectives, the content andthe technical options, the modalities of converting these into a locationspecific Block level program are to be decided. It is recommended that sucharchitecture be tried out during the 12th Plan period to generate experiencesthat can be used to evolve a universal program by the 13th FYP. The protocolsof financing, institutions, HR deployment, technology sourcing, etc., canbe evolved through such a pilot program recommended for the 12th FYP.

The house then was divided into four groups to continue with the groupwork viz.,

1. Technological processes2. Institutions3. Finances4. Research and extension.

After working in the groups the discussions and recommendations wremade in the plenary.


Sharing the group work A Ravindra stated that the program should not belooked at as a ‘Technology Delivery Program’ the group urged for a‘technology process’ and laid out some guiding principles:

Location/ context specificity, taking into account the characteristicsof the local natural resources endowments at the landscape level.The technological choices must be ‘integrative and interactive’ acrosssectors and production systems.Appropriate choices that make ‘optimal’ use of these resources (ratherthan exploitative) and sequential interventions (as against one timeintervention).Sustainable intensification i.e. enhancing productivity whileconserving the resources.Making use of the interplay of ecosystems services and productivitycan minimise external costs.Minimising risks and resilience building and longer term desirabletrends becoming the policy outcomes, ensuring benefits to non-landowning farmers or labour and commons centric investment ratherthan private benefits must be the guiding principles informing decisionmaking on the technology front.

SESSION – 4EVOLVING OPERATIONAL MODALITIES: PLENARY

Chaired by Dr. S.M. Virmani,Former Principal Agroclimatologist, ICRISAT

Co-chaired by BhaskarGoswami, Policy Specialist, FAO India

Group – 1: Technological processesA. Ravindra, Dr. IP Abrol, Dr. B. Venkateswarlu,

Dr. K.P.R. Vittal, Dr. K.V. Rao, Dr. Om Rupela and G. Dharmendar


While many of the production systems in rainfed areas are commons based,be it goats, sheep or fisheries, the government schemes are individual based.This needs to change and appropriately captured in developing the programguidelines.

The technological focus must be on enhancing ‘system productivity’ as awhole rather than looking at individual commodity productivity. Similarly,rainfall use efficiency rather than water use efficiency need to be one of thebenchmarks for choice making and assessment.

The group suggested for a Central Program Management Unit under NMSAspecially constituted for this program with active partnership of MANAGEand/or CRIDA. A place for harvesting and synthesising lessons emergingfrom the experiences is needed. This is envisaged as a participatory, bottomup process where ‘problem solving’ will be at the centre stage rather thantechnology delivery. To make such a shift – the present guidelines for variousschemes become contradictory as the choice of technology is not with people.Technologies that have not yet found place in the formal system need to beapproved by a clear mechanism of State Agriculture University and ICARby involving the local Joint Director of Agriculture. Some generic templatesfor making technical choices (not technologies) may be developed to enableflexibility and local decision making.

Considering the lack of adequate technical resources at grassroots level,the group strongly recommended well trained, local para-professionals (inhydrogeology, agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries etc.) as part of theHR deployment strategy. Relating to the thrust areas – the members of thegroup suggested introducing tree-component into the farming system, focuson commons, multiplier effects on off-farm enterprises and harnessingecosystem services as areas of focus to be considered along with the othersidentified by the Working Group.

The group indicated 5 key impact indicators to measure the success of theprogram viz.,1. Rain water (system) productivity2. Improved natural resource base (health of natural resources)


3. Resilience of the production systems4. Enhanced natural resources based livelihoods/ incomes and extent

of spin-offs/ multiplier effects – particularly on off-farm incomes5. Extent of harnessing ecosystem services (cost reduction/ farm viability)Reinforcing the recommendations of the group, Dr.Virmani in the Chairsaid that harnessing ecosystem services assumes greater significance in thecase of climate change. All these initiatives need to be integrated into the‘ecology of the land’ and must be tuned to what is available in that landscape.He also emphasized on the need to focus on long term productivity.Dr. Sikka reinforced on the need to focus on common lands andgroundwater.

While summarising, Dr. Virmani explained about the concepts of LimitedIrrigation Drylands (LID) and Partially Irrigated Drylands (PID). He siadthese play an important role and have contributed to the success of drylandagriculture in several places.

Group – 2: InstitutionsProf. Amar Naik, P.S. Vijay Shankar, G.V. Sharat Kumar,

Dr. VP Sharma, Dr.Renuka Rani, Dr. J.P. Mishra andDr. B.V.N. Rao

Prof. Amar Naik shared the group recommendations. The importance ofinstitutions and the need for a paradigm shift in their structures and systemsis well understood. Existing institutions with different capacities andcompetencies cannot be ignored. These need to be leveraged, improvedand transformed so that they can respond effectively to the emergingchallenges of the farmers. This is more like the transitional strategy wherewe move from improvising or complementing the existing institutions totransforming them in a period of 5 to 7 years.

The group flagged the following key issues for revisiting the institutions:1. Improving efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability and well being of

the farmers should be the overall objective of institutional intervention.


2. Delivery of the proposed institutions should be different from theexisting institutions and should be a means of measuring performance.

3. The proposed institutions should integrate with the existing systemsotherwise they will become dysfunctional.

The guiding principles are mainly to look at how we deliver the ecosystemservices with farmer in focus and how to get good value for the produce.The group proposed the following structure:

Key Institution Executive Chairperson Activities

District District Project Director, District Planning, Level Convergence Cell ATMA Collector Resource

sanctioning,Convergence,Monitoring and Audits

Block Project 5 Persons Block Planning, Level Implementation Development Ensuring

Unit Officer Implementation

GP Level Current or new GP Level Input/delivery (Critical is Producer Peoples’ and marketing; 1000 HH) Institution 1 Person preparing

perspective plans

Knowledge Technology Support development and Institutions innovations at

Block level

There are different institutions like FPOs, PACs, Producer Companies, etc.,either already existing or which can be initiated during the program. Thecentral focus is producers’ organisation, which needs to drive the system.The group looked at Block as an institutional unit to deliver the ecosystemservices. The Block level institutions need to deliver through the producers’organizations at the GP level.There should be one producer organizationfor every 1000 to 1200 households and responsible for delivering the services.

Under the program rupees 10 crores might be allocated and about rupees40 crores need to be mobilized. Hence, the Block Development Officer (BDO)


should chair the institutional arrangement at the Block level and work inclose interface with the District Collector to mobilise these resources.The group proposed 5 persons including a team leader, an agriculture person,social worker, marketing person and an accountant at the Block level. Suchexpertise will help the producer organisations to perform better. At thedistrict level institutional arrangement the Collector will be the Chairpersonand Project Director of ATMA the Executive.Most of the key innovations are below the Block level. One person isproposed for each GP to facilitate the processes. These persons are catalyststo facilitate the processes and activate the delivery institutions. The existingproducers’ organisation can be involved in the programme. If necessary,new producers’ organizations can be registered within one and half yearsof starting of the program. The producers’ organizations, both existing andnew, need to be strengthened over the next two and half years to serve asa single window delivery for all services required by the farmers. Eventuallythere can be one single institution at the Block level providing all the servicesto the farmers.P.S. Vijay Shankar suggested that that availability of a good producers’organisation at the Block level must be taken as a selection criteria. Bringingabout the problem of multiplicity of institutions, Dr. Sikkaemphasised onthe need to work with the existing institutions. He also pointed the workoverload at BDO level and wondered if PD, ATMA would be an appropriateentity. Prof. Amar suggested starting with the existing institutions andtransforming them over time. Where such institutions do not exist, newones can be initiated. Another suggestion was to establish a NRMcoordinator at the Block level.Rangu Rao suggested looking at the Kerala model on making GramPanchayats as the centre. However, for scaling up, BDO as an institution isessential and this program can be made mandatory for the BDOs.A. Ravindra pointed the need for multi-sectoral technical expertise to grounda comprehensive farming systems program. He also brought out the needfor effective service (like livestock vaccination) based institutions; these arepublic services meant for all and mandate of the government. Service deliveryinstitutions need to be clearly thought about.


Summarising the discussion, Dr. Virmani observed that the proposedstructure is complex. He suggested looking at the Chinese Communes modeland the Korean models.

Group – 3: FinancesM.V. Ramachandrudu, Rangu Rao, Ms. S. Bhagyalaxmi

and Ms. Aashima Chaudhary

M.V. Ramachandrudu made the presentation on behalf of the group. Thepilot programs require costs of facilitating agencies for human resourcesdeployment, particularly for qualified young professionals, for cadres oflocal, well-trained barefoot professionals (agriculture, livestock,hydrogeology, etc.). The other requirement is financial incubation of thecommunity based organizations till they become credit worthy, includingtheir capacity development.

Critical gaps in investments that may not be provided for in the mainstreamprograms is a crucial requirement. Funds are also required for evolution ofaction plans and for orientation of the community organisations, facilitatorsand even the government departments. Additional funding for researchand innovation is required to bring in best experiences that may not beprovided for in the ongoing programs. Ministry of Agriculture should takekeen interest in this program as much of complementary funding is sourcedfrom other departments to make the agriculture programs more effective.As this program eventually influences the Agriculture Department’s wayof supporting rainfed agriculture, it is appropriate that the departmentinvest on the facilitation requirements.

The group suggested ATMA to be the district level anchor, which mayestablish a Project Management Cell. A facilitating agency can be chosenat Block level which can enter into an agreement with ATMA. Actualimplementation can be done by a CBO- producer company, cooperative,watershed committee, etc., existing in the Block. Existing institutions needto partner at the village level. GP, working closely with the CBOs, can playthe role of approving proposals and monitoring. Plans prepared at village/


GP or even at a farm level should be aggregated at the apex level, whichwould be the basis for convergence funding. While CBOs implement, GPcan provide broader governance.

The existing fund routing mechanism for mainstream programs willcontinue. The process of linking with banks through various means –financial inclusion, business correspondents, etc., can be followed. At thedistrict level, a committee chaired by the Collector needs to establish a singlewindow mechanism for sanctioning the plans/ proposals.

The pilot programs should NOT be seen as disconnected entities across thecountry’s landscape. Knowledge and research support for institutions atnational level like CRIDA, MANAGE is important. These pilot initiativesneed to be synergetic and must have good backstopping arrangements suchas the Thematic Nodes of the RRA network providing thematic support tothe individual pilot programs. These are important support systems whichhave funding implications. The group recommended adequate funding forcapacity building.

Dr. JP Mishra suggested that it is important to route the fund through thestate treasury and it is not possible to directly fund the ATMA. Dr. Virmaniin the Chair, concluded saying that the earlier development in rainfed areasis totally subsidy driven. He opined that innovations, capacity building,renovating water bodies, etc., can be supported, while looking for bankableprojects.

Group – 4: Research and ExtensionDr.Sreenath Dixit, Dr. VP Sharma, Dr. Rajeswari Raina,Dr. J. Venkateswarlu, Mukesh Patil and Dr. Rashda Zafar

Dr. Sreenath Dixit representing the group presentedthe following:

Reforms needed for public extension:Enhance Extension Officers’ capacity to take up adaptive research atthe GP level. This is essential to fulfill the “extension” feedback andlearning loop.


Improve the mobility for public extension personnel with (i) specificfunding for mobility, and (ii) funding and institutional support forlearning exercises (intervals/formal may be location specific).

Extension roles for learning, interaction and communication must begiven priority; with a hike in remuneration. (Options for raising localresources for incentivizing extension may be explored.) Farmer FieldSchools in every Panchayat with professional support and localknowledge teams.

Any other jobs like drought assessment, relief disbursement, etc. tobe taken up with additional manpower without disturbing theextension persons.

Development of inter disciplinary and local knowledge teams as para-extension workers for rainfed agriculture especially in Livestock,hydrology, pest surveillance, and others.

Data bases on all biophysical & socio-economic parameters aremaintained at the block level. Such data may include status of naturalresources, external and internal input flows, status of consumptionpatterns/calorie intake/ nutrition, livestock, fisheries, infrastructure.

One Krishi Bhavan in every cluster of 8-10 villages, as in Kerala, withInternet connectivity and professionally qualified extension staff inAgriculture, Livestock, any other critical allied activity (fisheries,sericulture, etc.). This will function like a mini-ATMA – a “villageplanning unit”.

Extension officers to align with and support other organizations tocreate entrepreneurship around agriculture, especially on inputs andagro-processing (funded by DST, MSME, MoFP, etc.), enableinfrastructure like rural energy, roads, storage, drying, processing,packaging, etc., within the Block to create and sustain short valuechains with local value addition and employment.

Institutional mechanisms to ensure support systems for local capacitiesin evolving technological options and knowledge generation:

All research issues and knowledge generation activities should bebased on issues arising from village plans and/ or adaptive research


findings at the Panchayat and Block levels. ATMA at the district leveland the Block Facilitation Unit at the Block level to be a repository oflocal databases and research questions. And also, function like a local“solution exchange”.

Monitoring, evaluation exercises related to natural resources andproduction systems can flag research questions and feed them to theformal research organizations, in particular the district level KVK/RARS.

Research on enhancing system productivity and sustainability to betaken up in each GP. This must be inter-disciplinary; scientists engagedwith such research that cannot be normally published be accordedspecial incentives in their career advancement.

Scientists’ Assessments should be based on locally relevant and inter-disciplinary research outcomes and processes facilitated (coalitionsbuilt for watershed based research, FS based research, etc.) andlinkages/interventions made (funding agencies, GPs, Farmerorganizations, etc.). (Matrix of excellence and relevance to bedeveloped with the help of professional management experts.)

Training, capacity building and information support for employingnew tools like GIS/GPS for resource mapping and monitoring(Physical verification, social auditing of various interventions,assessment of commons, etc. to promote transparency, and strengthenmeso-level data bases and accountability).

Enhanced capacity for socio-economic and policy research on gender,nutrition, markets, labour and livelihoods – on location/regionalproblems, issues relevant to production, distribution and consumption.

Specific funding on priority for “Crop - livestock systems” research,and rural energy/renewable energy.

Promoting inter-institutional research partnerships and a strong M&Eand learning system to refine the framework and experiences:

Specific investments be made on inter-institutional Research andExtension; including collaboration on global South - South basisacknowledging rainfed agriculture problem as a global development


problem – poverty alleviation, employment, health, natural resources,etc.

Strong programs on state level inter-Block exchange/ exposure visits– led and hosted by local Farmer Field Schools – with leading expertsfrom research organizations, industry and policy makers involved inthese learning exercises. This is essential to strengthen farming systems’learning, and to identify further research questions that need to beaddressed.

Local/regional ownership of research findings over and aboveorganizational/ individual scientist’s ownership, with scientiststhemselves becoming stakeholders in the research projects, i.e. findways to strengthen client-scientist relationships built into the researchproject design.

Dedicated funding and S&T manpower for 73 ZARS (Rainfedagriculture) for inter-institutional, inter-disciplinary research with afocus on drawing more expertise to address regional (district level)production problems and sustainable resource management questions.

Scientific research in rainfed agriculture to be reorganized into the followingcore programs:

1. Genetic materials/resources/biodiversity

2. Production systems

3. Natural resources

4. Socio-economic and Policy research, for e.g. Centre-staterelationships in R&D

This programmatic reorganization should cut across advanced/strategicresearch and applied research.

Dr. Sikka opined that the group should have talked about more innovativeways of extension including public-private partnerships.


Dr. VP Sharma, Director MANAGE said that since 1997,MANAGE has provided substantial participatory inputsto the evolution of ATMA. Drawing from the experiencesof SREP, MANAGE has tried to develop C-DAP planswith the existing government machinery. Now thatseveral credible civil society organisations are joining in,the potential is much larger. With good para-

professionals like in the case of BAIF, JK Trust’s work areas in Chhattisgarhand Madhya Pradesh, we can prove that extension can be delivered withpara-professionals. These para-professionals can also contribute to adaptiveresearch. Earlier we were strictly with the government system, but now asthe civil society collaboration is open MANAGE will be happy to join.Mahabubnagar collector has given very good account of how convergencecan happen. If ATMA and the department can give good guidance andleadership to the civil society the job can be done. MANAGE will be happyto be associated in capacity building even in the field areas of Malkangiri orother places. MANAGE is ready to commit 50% of the resources to thisprogram.

Dr. V.V. Sadamate, Ministry of Agriculture hadthe following points to share:

It is broadly agreed that reforms in rainfedagriculture must happen below the Blocklevel. Under ATMA there is already anexisting provision for Block Technical

SESSION – 5OPEN DISCUSSION

Chaired by Dr.A.K. Sikka, Deputy Director General (NRM), ICAR

Co-chaired by Dr. J.P. Mishra, Adviser (Agriculture), Planning Commission


Manager supported by two subject matter specialists. This team canbe assigned NRM responsibility and the number may be increased asper the need.

‘Aggregative models’ have been promoted in various places like theFPOs in Madhya Pradesh; scaling up of such models can be thoughtabout.

General prescription of extension will not work in rainfed areas asrisk factors, investment patterns, etc. are quite different; so also thestandard models of Agriculture Officers, AEOs. We need largenumbers of non-government players to have a better reach tocommunities.

Though watershed development is considered to be an entry pointinitiative, it is not followed up with rest of the interventions. We needa systems approach to develop rainfed areas. How to build localcapacities is most important as programs collapse when handholdingsupport is withdrawn.

Combining enterprises with extension at the micro-level, systemsapproach to agriculture extension, replication of successes, humanresources development of development organisations, horizontallinkages among departments that operate in vertical silos are the majorchallenges. The experiences of NAIP and NICRA may be captured inthis context for improvement in NMSA.

Need based technical backstopping and feedback loops are grosslymissing.

Several instruments are available at district and few at Block level –such as C-DAPs, SREP, Potential Linked Credit Plans; the programsneed to build on them at their respective levels.

Refined extension strategies are much needed in the case ofdisadvantaged areas.


Dr. BN Rao said that good recommendations have evolved in the workshopand he would take up these issues to the appropriate authorities.

Dr. Om Rupela expressed that need to move fromResearch & Extension to a paradigm of Research forDevelopment. The need for location specificity hasemerged sharply in the deliberations. It is also flaggedthat harnessing and enhancement of ecosystemservices is a key thing. Once we accept this we needto bring in changes in agri-practices and things need

to be done differently. No rainfed system or drought can be managed betterwithout trees in the system, in the alleys and boundaries. These trees canbe sources for crop nutrients, fruit and fodder. Integration of the trees andanimals in the same crop lands is an area that has not received attention.This brings in diversity in the system. Weeds themselves bring in biomass(measure upto 2 tons of biomass), they bring in ecosystem services as theyhost parasites and predators to the pests.

Dr. Bhaskar Goswami, Policy Specialist, FAO India,said that FAO has a long history in working on thedrylands. Dryland areas are going to be a priorityarea for FAO in its country’s program in India andthis makes NMSA and the pilots of keen interest toFAO. A positive development of this program is tosee Blocks as a unit of implementation. It is important

to list a few pre-qualification criteria to select the Blocks for implementingthis decentralized rainfed farming programme. Running the pilots in suchnumber of Blocks hopefully will throw experiences for the Ministry to scaleup. The pilots offer a ground for testing various models of convergence;this is going to be a key challenge. If there are any specific areas whereFAOs technical expertise is of help, FAO would be very happy to collaborate.

Dr. KPR Vittal opined that biomass is needed for livestock as well as forsoils. As we are dealing with topo-sequences (called landscape) wheremultiple demands are arising on a single piece of land - master plans haveto come up on a topo-sequence basis.


A. Ravindra narrated the importance of the proposed National RainfedFarming Systems stems from the larger failure of RKVY to deliver for rainfedareas even when it is supposed to be decentralised and location specific.All other schemes are just crop based and have little to offer to rainfedareas. Though watershed development is area based, it has very meagreinvestments on productivity enhancement. The proposed program offers aunique opportunity to synthesise experiences from research system andcivil society so that something meaningful can be done for rainfed areas.

Dr.Alok Sikka felt that there is no disagreement on the potential of thisprogram to provide a good platform for trying out innovative ways ofaddressing rainfed areas issues, but the issue is how to go about it. Thisprogram uniquely helps in superimposing the production systemsapproaches onto NRM area programs.

Dr. Abrol argued that there is need for change and the change from Cropbased planning to natural resources based program planning is a bigchange in itself. This has implications for development, research andextension departments. In this process, we are bound to make mistakes.We need a learning ground for trying out this approach. How to make thishappen is absolutely the need of the hour.

Dr. JP Mishra expressed that the planning Commissionis bound by the NDC’s recommendations. As far asthe recommendations of the Working Group areconcerned, it is very well built into the 12th Plandocument. There is a strong case for its considerationfor its ecological services and other reasons. But, weneed a much more detailed program – we need micro-

details of institutions. There is also a strong case for identifying the capacityof non-government organisations and an assessment of the capacities ofthe extension system in those selected Blocks. If we want to have long-termsuccess, invariably we have to involve Panchayati Raj Institutions. About30% of fund flow is for rainfed areas as RKVY has a built in bias towardsrainfed areas. Planning Commission fully supports this program.


Dr.Alok Sikka said that there is a general agreementon all these propositions. Another Working Groupheaded by Sri. Deep Joshi, also recommended takingup large scale comprehensive pilots. The report mayalso be looked into for details. In the 12th Plan proposalof NRAA similar proposals were made. How we goabout it is the most important issue. Sustainabledevelopment of Rice fallow areas through

convergence pilot program was also taken up by NRAA in Jharkhand andChhattisgarh states. Dr.Sikka detailed the model and suggested that suchconsortium based model can be followed. Through convergence theprogram has mobilised much larger resources than what NRAA hasproposed. He suggested to make use of the existing institutions and inparticular, emphasised the need for good NGOs presence. Along with this,the Gram Panchayats must be involved and make the best use of theirfunctional committees for sustainability. Existing institutional forms in IWMPareas can be used.

For selection of the 40 odd Blocks, the work of CRIDA, IASRI and NRAAin prioritizing rainfed areas may be used by a combination of naturalresources and livelihood indices. C-DAP, SREP are quite broader, whileaction plan is too micro-level. Regionally differentiated interventions andidentifying target specific interventions assume a critical role in the proposedprogram. ICAR would be very much willing to collaborate and provideback-stopping support in this process. Some sort of farmers’ participatoryaction research can evolve. Creating and involving a cadre of para-professionals in a multi-disciplinary mode is important. BTMs inATMAs,which are being doubled during this plan period, can besupplemented with this program. Capacity building and institutionalbuilding are the most important aspects in rainfed areas. ICAR is advocatingintegration of tree based systems into rainfed systems by. NAC is discussingon having a national agro-forestry policy. Whatever we are doing must berooted into the local ecology and natural resources. Happy that ecosystemservices and capacity requirements for ecological planning are flagged asimportant aspects in this workshop. How best agriculture improves the


ecosystem services is one thing coming out of this workshop. We need tolook into several related research questions.

It is a good beginning with intensive discussions. We need to make it morepractical and take it to the ground level. He promised that ICAR will bewilling to provide technical backstopping to this program and CRIDA willcontinue to be intensely associated with this effort. He also looks forwardto both NRAA and RRA working together.

Dr. B Venkateswarlu felt that the guidelines arewell done, but are also half done. We must makeuse of the existing systems rather than going fornew ones. He suggested locating these Blocks in theareas where IWMP watersheds are in place. Thescope of watershed guidelines can be enlargedtohave more flexibility.

Even if we keep the benefits of increase in production aside, the carbonsequestration through these program interventions is befitting the NMSA.Rainfed areas (development program) can be seen as sinks for all the GHGsemanating from the agriculture in the country. The positive environmentalservices of the rainfed areas need to be highlighted.

Constitution of a Core Group: Considering the need for preparing,withinsights from these deliberations, micro-details of the new program a CoreGroup is proposed. After working out further micro-details of the programthe Core Group need to meet and discuss with the Ministry of Agricultureand the Planning Commission.

Dr. KV Rao thanked all who have contributed tothis workshop and observed that this workshopunlike others aims to bring already existing programsinto a common framework.

The organisers specially thanked Dr. Rashda Zafarof Chetna Organic for her excellent compering; G.R.Dharmendar, T. Rajendra and Rajkumar for

documenting the proceedings and Nemani Chandrasekhar for thephotographs and help in the final preparation of the proceedings.


The following document elaborates on the operational modalities of theproposed National Rainfed Farming Systems Program integrating inputsfrom the National Workshop on the subject held on 14-15 May, 2013 atCRIDA. The framework provided by the Working Group on NRM andRained Farming for the 12th FYP forms the basis.

Proposed Time period

4 years

Rationale of the Program:

Rainfed areas are facing severe resource degradation and are highlyvulnerable to climate change. At the same time they are having to sustainlarge numbers of poor. These signify the need for focused attention andenhanced investments for rainfed agriculture.

Rainfed areas at present also offer significant climate change mitigationand adaptation opportunities. The proposed pilot program on rainfedfarming systems aims to capture the climate change mitigation andadaptation potential of an array of integrated, location specificinterventions. Rainfed agriculture practices like improvement of soil organicmatter, water conservation, agro-forestry, promotion of millets andintercropping systems are proven climate resilient practices. Unlike irrigatedcrops and intensive livestock production systems which contribute tosignificant emission of GHGs, rainfed production systems including theextensive livestock grazing systems capture carbon in the form of vegetationand have negligible emissions.

NATIONAL RAINFED FARMING SYSTEMS

PILOT PROGRAMOPERATIONAL MODALITIES:

DRAFT BASED ON THE DELIBERATIONS ANDRECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE NATIONAL WORKSHOP

ANNEXURE – 1


Strengthening the rainfed systems through effective service delivery,supportive critical investments, positive incentives to climate resilientpractices, resource governance, and sustainable intensification throughappropriate and integrated technological options will go a long way inharnessing the climate change potential (of mitigation and adaptation) ofrainfed agriculture development. At the same time, such measures willenhance the sustainable productive capacity of the rainfed landscapescontributing to enhanced production and increased incomes of the farmers,particularly the poor.

The proposed Rainfed Farming Systems pilot program under NMSAessentially intends to capture the multiple and mutually reinforcingoutcomes of structured investments in achieving climate resilience,sustained productivity increase and enhanced farmers’ incomes in rainfedagriculture.

National Rainfed Farming Systems Program (NRFP): The Pilot Program

The principles underlying the proposed NRFP are well acknowledged tobe foundational for relevant public investments to revitalizing rainfedagriculture. The Working Group provided a programmatic framework fortheir operationalization.

The NRFP is meant to be a pilot program with the objective of evolvingtechnical, programatic, financial, institutional and administrative protocolsnecessary for moving towards such an integrated paradigm. Synthesizingaction-research, assessment and learning are crucial. The suggestion is toevolve a robust framework through synthesizing the experiences fromimplementation in about 50 blocks during the 12th Plan and prepare groundfor scaling up during the 13th Five Year Plan.

Approach

The program builds on an integrative and interactive process across sectorswith Sustainable Intensification as the key approach.


Integrative: Sustainable productivity enhancement in rainfed areasneeds to integrate natural resources development and managementwith yield increasing interventions.

Interactive: The program builds on the interactive flows of inputs/products across various systems – agriculture-livestock-commons-water bodies. The aim is to strengthen and harness productivepotential of the given natural resources as a whole; it follows landscapeas a unit of production and attempts to achieve improvements in itsproductivity and sustainability as a system. The term ‘SystemProductivity’ is used in this context.

Such approaches need to be location specific. The program takes Block/ Mandalas a program administration unit and develops strategic plans specific to variedagro-ecosystems within the Block.

Thrust Areas

The thrust areas identified by the Working Group were further improvisedin the National Workshop; they are:

1. Enhancing Soil Productivity : regular addition of organic matter inevery ha of rainfed areas

2. Expanding Protective Irrigation to secure rainfed crops (from groundand surface water sources: equity, productivity, efficiency and securityaspects of water management)

3. Seed systems: timeliness, quality, affordability, contingency,diversity - all in the control of community organisations

4. Agronomic innovations: enhancing farmers’ knowledge andmanagement skills as a core area; several possibilities – SSNM, IPM,NPM, LEISA, SRI, etc., including trees as an integral component offarming systems, as appropriate to local situations

5. Appropriate farm mechanization for enhancing labor productivity6. Developing and strengthening producers organisations (resources

management, credit access, securing inputs, value addition and marketlinkages, infrastructure)


7. Strengthening Rainfed Livestock Support Systems (health care,breed improvement, drinking water, fodder in commons, special carefor small ruminants, backyard poultry, etc.) with a focused effort ondeveloping common property resources

8. Promoting Fisheries in numerous rainfed water bodies havingseasonal to perennial water storage

9. Integrated value chain support systems to realise growth potentialin pulses, millets, meat and fish production systems and to createmultiplier effects in generating employment opportunities

10. Risk minimization and resilience building through harnessingecosystem services and diversification

11. Creating infrastructure and rural processing for agriculture productsand enhancing private investments

12. Strengthening institutional capacities and decentralized planning.

Impact Areas

After considerable deliberations, the following impact areas for the programwere identified in the National Workshop.

1. Rain water efficiency and system productivity at a landscape level

2. Improved health of natural resource base

3. Resilience of the production systems

4. Enhanced NR based livelihoods and extent of spin-offs or multipliereffects – particularly on off-farm incomes

5. Harnessing ecosystem services for cost reduction and increased farmviability

Developing appropriate metrics for each of the impact areas is challenging;developing the metrics and tools of measurements including baseline surveysneed to be taken up as a multi-disciplinary exercise before rolling out of theprogram.


Approach to Financing

This is envisaged as an integrative program that looks beyond meregeographical convergence of schemes. The program provides a locationspecific rainfed agriculture development framework for proactive integrationof various mainstream programs/ investments. The starting point for theprogram is to evolve a scientifically robust and strategic plan for integrateddevelopment of various resource-production systems within the given agro-geography. Such a strategic plan provides a basis for sourcing humanresources, technical expertise, institutional capital and investments fromdifferent mainstream programs.

An important aspect of the program is to converge scientific inputs fromICAR and SAU institutions, the extension research and support systemsaround MANAGE-ATMA and Department of Agriculture with theconvergent development investments of the mainstream programs of MoAand MoRD, among others. The location specific strategic plans at Blocklevel are the points of convergence.

The program envisages an investment of Rs.10 crore per block over a periodof 4 years. Total fund allocation of Rs. 500 crore is to be made for 50 Blocksunder NMSA @ Rs.125 crores per year. The NRFP is expected to leverageRs. 40 crore per block from different programs through convergence makingthe total projected program expenditure on ground at Rs. 2500 crore. Theprojected leverage of funds also includes the working capital and valuechain financing mobilized from banks and other sources.

The program does not envisage transfer of funds across any line departments.Investments will be assessed/ sanctioned as per the guidelines of therespective schemes and in accordance with the strategic plans; these willbe spent by the line departments through the appropriate primarystakeholders’ organisations supported by the facilitating agency, withinthe framework of the approved plans.


Budget Components

The total budget of Rs. 10 crore per block shall have two components viz.,

Part A : Rs. 3.50 crore towards facilitation costs. These will be releasedto the facilitating agency against approved plans targeting specificmile stones and intermediate evaluation reports.

Part B: Rs. 6.50 crore for program costs and innovations that have noprovision under the existing schemes. These will be released to theimplementing agencies (farmers’ organisations/ cooperatives/ SHGs)against approved action plans and performance reports.

Details of the breakup of these two types of budget lines are inAnnexure 9 of the Working Group Report.

Appropriate accounting systems tracking the leverage/ convergence offunds shall be evolved and built into the M&E systems to assess theeffectiveness of the facilitating agency.

Fund flows from the MoA will be through the state treasury. Budgets willbe released from the state to the ATMAs of the pilot districts annually. Anindicative budget release schedule along with the expected outputs ispresented in the following Table.


- Plans and proposals preparedand sanction for most of theclusters in the block

- Implementation extended to 1/3rd

of the Block- Mid-term evaluation at end of 2nd

year (coverage, quality,institutions promoted and impact)

- Institutional arrangements atcluster/ block and district levelfirmed up

- HR Deployment complete- Production systems – situation

analysis and strategic plans forthe blocks

- Farmers’ (agriculture, livestock,fisheries) institutionsstrengthened

- Implementation started in at leastone cluster

- Plans and proposals for the entireblock prepared and approved

- Scaling up with in the block andImplementation extended to almostall the clusters

- Consolidation of works at theblock level

- Institutional sustainabil ityassessment and plans

- Plans for the next phase- Final evaluation report

((coverage, quality, institutionspromoted and impact)

Budget Release Schedule per Block:S.No. Program Phase Expected outputs Budget Budget Release

Release (Rs.Cr) time

1 15% 1.5 1st Year

2 MainImplementation -phase

2a. Initial program 30% 3.0 2nd Yearimplementation

2b. Main program 30% 3.0 3rd Yearimplementation

3 Consolidation 25% 2.5 4th Yearand scaling up

TOTAL 100% 10.0

Additional allocations will be made for effective functioning of variousinstitutional mechanisms at different levels.

Preparatory phase(planning,institution buildingand minimalimplementation)


Proposed Budget allocation at Secondary levels :

(Rs. in lakhs)

S.No. Agency Budget Per Block For Per block/ For 50 Blocks /Allocation 50 Blocks year year

1 ATMA 3.00% 30 1500 7.5 375

2 State 1.00% 10 500 2.5 125

3 National 3.00% 30 1500 7.5 375

TOTAL 7.00% 70 3500 17.50 875

The total budget envisaged for the program is Rs.500 + Rs.35 = Rs.535crores for 50 Blocks for a period of 4 years.

Institutional Arrangements

Program Implementation: The primary stakeholders’ groups or theirorganisations as appropriate are envisaged to spearhead the actualimplementation of the program. The program shall work with theexisting community organisations- farmers’ producer organisations,cooperatives, federations of SHGs as per the prevailing situation inthe Block. Over time, efforts should be made in evolving appropriateproducer organisations with capacities to manage services and valuechains at Block level.

Cadre of para-professionals: The program is intense in its technicalcontent. The program relies on building (existing and new) cadres ofpara-professionals in the technical areas of agriculture services (likesoil testing, seed quality, pest/disease management, etc.), livestockhealth care and water resources with a focus on hydrogeology. Thiscadre will be supported by the respective technical support agencies/line departments.

Program Facilitation: At the Block level, a Facilitating Agency willbe chosen to be responsible for overall facilitation. Selection will bemade through an open bid –from agencies with proven record ofworking with communities in each location, and experience of multi-


institutional projects and multi-pronged approaches. Accountabilityfor outputs of the entire program lies with this program facilitationagency.

The Block Development Officer or any appropriate agency as decided bythe District Planning Committee or District Collector can be the convergingpoint at the Block level bringing all the line departments to integrate theirresources. The Facilitating Agency will work in close coordination with theBlock level designated officer.

Program budgets will be released to the appropriate primary producergroups/ community based organisation or through the Gram Panchayatagainst an approved action plan under the supervision/ facilitation of theFacilitating Agency. Only the facilitation budgets along with a smallprovision for innovation shall be released to the Facilitating Agency byATMA under a contract approved by District Planning Committee.

District Level Nodal Organisation: The overall governance of theprogram lies with the District Planning Committee; the DPC willconstitute a convergence committee under the chairpersonship of theDistrict Collector/ CEO, ZP as appropriate. ATMA (ATMA locatedwithin the Department of Agriculture is the only organisation at thedistrict level that has a mandate to work with all the sectors –Agriculture, livestock, fisheries, etc., and therefore, is a natural choice)will be the program anchor at the district level managing the programfunds, contracting the facilitation agency, release of funds as per theprocedure, supporting, providing an oversight on the facilitationagency and liaison with the other departments. ATMA reports to theDPC on the progress of the program. All the program funds shall bereleased to ATMA on an annual basis against the progress of work.

State Level: Department of Agriculture, represented by SAMETI orthe equivalent agency as decided at the state level will be the statenode for the program. A State Learning Cell shall be created withinthe chosen agency for administration, support and learning; it liaiseswith the NMSA cell at the Ministry of Agriculture. It helps the ATMAin seeking appropriate sanctions from various line Departments, as


necessary and source research and technical inputs through SAUs.It will also liaison with the national Program Learning Cell atMANAGE/ CRIDA in terms of assessing scaling up potential of theprogram. Such an assessment can be a basis for scaling up the programto other Blocks sourcing the required budgets from various programs.

National Level: The NMSA cell at the MoA is proposed as the nodaladministrative agency for the program. The NMSA cell may partnerwith CRIDA as the national Technical Support Agency and withMANAGE to host a Program Learning Cell. The structure, functionsand learning mechanisms within the Cell may be evolved through aninteractive process. Both CRIDA and MANAGE have activelycontributed in evolving the program concept and framework.

Technical support partnership: The technical support includes,appropriate characterisation of the agro-ecologies of the chosen Blocks,identifying longer term climate change trends, evolving appropriatescientific protocols for identifying strategic areas for action inpartnership with the facilitating organisations and communities. TheTechnical Support Agency has to evolve linkages/ partnership withthe nearest SAUs and KVKs. Other national and state level as well asprivate technical agencies may also be called upon to partner withthe location specific knowledge generation and use activities.

Program Learning Cell: The role of the state and technical supportorganizations in this NRFP pilots will no longer be supply driven basedon centralized decisions. Learning is particularly important to makethis transition from provisioning to enabling roles, in response todecentralized demand driven development and technical interventionsneeded and articulated at the Block level. MANAGE closely workswith ATMAs in several districts. It can build on this longer termrelation and understanding of ATMAs. The program may also beseen as a way to bring in extension reforms for supporting anintegrated rainfed farming systems program. The program learningcell along with the technical support agency develops the criteria andprocess of selection of Blocks for the Pilot program and also, takes an


active role in identification of Blocks along with the State Agency.This is important in view to ensure coverage of the diversity of agro-ecologies and institutional arrangements in each agro-ecosystem. Itis also necessary to ensure that the required capacities tooperationalize the program exists locally, and appropriate protocolsof decentralized responsive administration, extension and researchcapacities are institutionalized in the 13th Five Year Plan.

The Program Learning Cell may partner with the Revitalizing RainfedAgriculture Network (RRA Network) – a network of civil societyorganisations and researchers working on this agenda to synthesizelearning.

The costs of technical support and program learning need to be adequatelyprovisioned in the overall budget of the program at the national level.

The above institutional structure envisaged provides for strong facilitationand community rootedness at the bottom with a strong referral andsupportive systems and learning platform to harvest lessons.

Demand Driven Approach for Selection of Blocks

Ownership, proactive involvement of the state governments and theircommitment to scale up the program are important prerequisites for thesuccess of the program; this need to be built into the selection of the pilotBlocks. Selection of Blocks will follow a two tiered approach.

The agro-ecologies will be identified based on the diversity, potential andcapacities by the national support agency; this process will also duly takeinto account the Priority Index recently developed by NRAA. The ProgramLearning Cell and the RRA Network may canvass with the stategovernments explaining the nature, importance and modalities of theprogram. This will be similar to the national workshop hosted at CRIDA –but with a specific focus on the particular state level rainfed agriculturefeatures. Such an exercise is expected to result in submission of Expressionof Interest from the state governments to the NMSA cell with a copy markedto the Program Learning Cell. The expression of interest also indicatesagreement of the state governments on the following:


Willingness to decentralize planning to Block level and agreement onthe framework of the program.

Willingness to converge various programs of Department ofAgriculture and commitment from Department of Rural Developmentand others on convergence of the programs (RKVY, IWMP,MGNREGS, NFSM, BRGF, IAP, MIP and others).

Willingness to attempt institutional reforms in ATMA as may benecessary for the program.

Willingness to scale up the program, if successful.

The EOI with proof of the above, may be taken up as application from thestate governments.

The same process of demand generation and an in-principle agreementfrom the District Collector/ CEO, ZP as appropriate, to convergemainstream programs into the program action plans may be attempted. Aresolution from the DPC may be made a prerequisite for the program.

Final selection of the Blocks may be based on the criteria developed byCRIDA and MANAGE for the selection of pilot Districts and FacilitatingAgencies; a joint committee will execute the process in consultation withthe States.

MoA may consider further incentivizing the states by enabling scaling upfunds for better focus, convergence and achievements under this program.

Selection of Facilitating Agency will also follow the process of solicitingexpression of interest from the competent agencies. Capacity of theorganisation, local presence, quality human resources committed to theprogram and experience in working across sectors and working withmainstream programs could be important criteria for selection. The selectionof the Facilitating Agencies for the Pilot Program may best be processed bythe Program Learning Cell in collaboration with the state departments.


The following criteria may be looked at while selecting pilot Blocks (withinthe diverse agro-ecological zones identified for the program):

a. Climatic and edaphic: rainfall, soils, climate vulnerability, etc.

b. Agriculture: moisture index, length of growing period, diversityof production systems, risks

c. Need: Irrigation coverage (lack of it), poverty/ nutrition index,backwardness, level of degradation of resources, low productivity

d. Capacities: social capital and facilitation capacities available

e. Potential to make an impact

Suitable index will be evolved considering the above aspects.

Location Specific, Participatory, Strategic Planning

Strength of the program lies in identification of appropriate drivers forchange and strategic areas for public investment that can stimulate growth.The bed-rock of the strategic planning exercise is to identify criticalbottlenecks in service delivery, infrastructure, institutions, technologicalcapacities and investments within the given context of natural resourcesand production systems.

The program draws from C-DAP, SREP, contingency planning and otherplanning exercises done so far (mostly available at the district level). Thefoundation of the program need be on the characterization of varied agro-ecosystems within a Block, benchmarking the productivity levels andsustainability trends. Intense technical inputs converging climate science,agro-ecosystems analysis, production systems characterization and socialcapital analysis on a GIS platform provide an essential backdrop for adetailed participatory bottom-up plans evolved and owned by the primaryproducer groups and other stakeholders. Such plans encompass a blend ofstreamlining service delivery, establishing critical infrastructure, buildingpositive incentives for sustainable agriculture practices that improve thehealth of natural resources, evolving appropriate institutional mechanismsand on internalizing value chains within the Block to create multiplierimpacts.


Strategic investment options will be evolved through this process. Specialefforts will be made to systematically analyze to capture the climate changemitigation potential of the interventions. Rainfed agriculture practices likewater conservation, agroforestry, millets and intercropping systems areproven climate resilient practices. Unlike irrigated crops and intensivelivestock production systems which contribute to significant emission ofGHGs, rainfed production systems including the extensive livestock grazingsystems capture carbon in the form of vegetation and have negligibleemissions. Efforts will be made to quantify the adaptation potential oftechnological and institutional interventions being tried in the pilots bydisaggregating the contribution of individual components through aweighted scoring method.

Institutional SynergiesThe program brings in the agriculture sciences, mainstream extension anddevelopment initiatives onto a common platform to evolve location specificscientific characterization and development action. This moves away fromthe conventional prescriptive external input based and subsidy led programs.Farmers, be agriculture, livestock or fisheries or commons dependentcommunities and their organisations will be at the core of implementationwith due space for the Gram Panchayats. The facilitating agency can bethe potential peg to bring in synergies across various actors at multiplelevels and across programs.

At the Departments level, no transfer of funds is envisaged. Each departmentmay be facilitated to partner in diagnosing the problem and in searchingfor the solutions, to link the appropriate schemes and to support itsimplementation through the community organisations.

The District Planning Committee can be the overall decision making bodyresponsible for convergent decisions and investment allocation.

The program envisages bringing about necessary changes in the functioningof ATMA to be more effective and responsible to steer such convergentactions in the district, building on community level institutions. At the sametime, the program brings in much needed scientific and management inputsand intense capacity building through its partnerships at state and nationallevels.


Monitoring & Evaluation and Learning

The program will develop a web based monitoring tools with required ICTinnovations. Regular MIS based reviews, third party evaluation of keymilestones achieved and social audit are the three core approaches to M&E.The Program Learning Cell envisaged to be constituted at MANAGE mayprovide the necessary ground for learning.

Policy learning is a key area for the program. Active partnership with NRAAis envisaged in the process of harvesting lessons for the 13th Plan and inrolling out this program. The Program Learning Cell at MANAGE mayorganize policy learning/ exposure visit workshops for key senior officialsat each stage of the program, more targeted towards state governmentofficials.

Co-creation of KnowledgeCRIDA has a historical advantage of diverse multi-location studies fordiverse rainfed agri-ecosystems. In its envisaged capacity as TechnicalSupport Agency, CRIDA may play proactive role in evolving adecentralized, location specific approach to articulating location specificproblem statements, making the location-specific data and monitoringsystems available, identifying and analyzing potential problem solving andcapacity building opportunities to address production problems, resourcemanagement problems, and climate adaptation, mitigation issues. CRIDAwith KVKs and other national and state level labs (the Zonal AgriculturalResearch Stations of SAUs in particular) will work with communities andgram panchayats for location specific technical and institutional supportfor the NRFP. Such an initiative may lead to evolving a new paradigm ofintense participatory, decentralized and integrated research in partnershipwith communities; technology adoption concerns are overcome whentechnology choices and design involves the community that is to use thetechnology.

Ideally, the SAUs and ICAR may capitalize on the opportunity of NRFPand build a collaborative action-research platform for revitalizing rainfedagriculture.


10:00 Hrs Welcome Dr. B. VenkateswarluDirector, CRIDA,Hyderabad

10:15 Hrs

11.00 Hrs

11.20 Hrs

11.40 Hrs

11.50 Hrs

12:10 Hrs

12.30 Hrs

12.50 Hrs

13.15 Hrs

Introducing the workshop objectives andexpected outputs

Emerging opportunities and challenges forRevitalization of Rainfed Agriculture (RRA)during XII plan

Strategy and approach being considered by FAOfor rainfed farming systems

Tea break

On-going initiatives on rainfed farming and anoutlook for the 12th Five Year Plan

Initiatives on rainfed farming - Ministry ofAgriculture (With a focus on RADP programunder RKVY)

An overview of the recommendations of theworking group on NRM and Rainfed Farmingfor the 12th Plan

Discussion & Summing up with remarks of theChair

Lunch Break

Dr. Rajeswari S RainaScientist, NISTADS-CSIR

Chair

Dr. B. VenkateswarluDirector, CRIDA

Dr. Peter Kenmore,FAO, New Delhi

Dr. J.P. Mishra, Adviser(Agri.), Planning Commission

Dr. BVN Rao,Asst. Commissioner,Ministry of Agriculture

Dr. I.P. AbrolChairman,Working Group

SESSION – I : Emerging scenario of Rainfed Agriculture Programs

Chairperson: Dr. V.V. Sadamate, Additional Commissioner, MoA

SESSION – 2 : Sharing of Experiences

Chairperson: Dr. I.P. Abrol, Chair, Working Group on NRM & RF farming, 12th FYP

14.00 Hrs

14.20 Hrs

Emerging experiences from National Initiativeon Climate Resilience Agriculture (NICRA) andNAIP

Experiences from NABARD programs inrainfed farming system

Dr. Sreenath Dixit,CRIDA

Representative ofNABARD, Mumbai

ANNEXURE – 2

SCHEDULE AGENDA

May 14th (Tuesday)


14:40 Hrs Sharing of Experiences from States:

Shri. R. Subramanyam,Principal Secretary, RD,GoAP*

Representative ofDepartment ofFisheries

Representative ofDept of AnimalHusbandry.

Ravindra A,RRA Network, WASSAN

District Collector,Mahabubnagar,Andhra Pradesh

Dr. I.P. AbrolChairman,Working Group

State representatives ofthe departments ofAgriculture

17.00 Hrs

17.30 Hrs

Ovcerview of the proposed framework by theWorking Group & introducing themes for groupwork

Farming Groups

Close Day 1

Sri. Vijay Shankar,SPS

Jharkhand, Odisha, Andhra Pradesh

Convergence of MGNREGS and rainfedagriculture

A case study on convergent program on

rainfed fisheries

A convergent program on small ruminants’development in Andhra Pradesh

Tea break

Comprehensive Pilots with RRA Network –overview

Experiences in convergent rainfed agricultureprograms

A case study about comprehensive pilotsunder RRA in Mahabubnagar district ofAndhra Pradesh

A case study about comprehensive pilotsunder RRA in Malkangiri district of Odisha

Tea Break

15.10 Hrs

15.20 Hrs

15.45 Hrs

16.00 Hrs

16.15 Hrs

16.35 Hrs

16.50 Hrs

SESSION – 3 : Evolving Modalities: Group Work

Chairperson:Dr.KPR Vittal, Former Director, Nationalk Institute on Abiotic Stress Management

GROUP WORK


May 15th (Wednesday)

9:30 to Continuation of Group working respective Facilitated by the Group10.45 Hrs groups internal presentations, refinement & anchors

conclusion

10.45 Tea Break

11.00 Hrs

12.30 Hrs

12.50 Hrs

13.30 Hrs

14:15 Hrs

15.15Hrs

15.45Hrs

16.15 Hrs

16.30 Hrs

Presentations from the Group Work andclarifications:

Group 1, Group 2, Group 3, Group 4

Extension reforms and rainfed agriculture

State’s Perspective

Lunch break

Ministry of Agriculture

Planning Commission

From a scientists point of view

From the view point of institutions andmarkets

Open discussion

Next Steps: Consolidating therecommendations and evolving the draft

Constituting a drafting committee

Concluding remarks by Chair

Vote of Thanks and Close

Dr. Sadamate, VV, MoA

Dr. BVN. Rao, MoA

Dr. JP Mishra,Planning Commission

SESSION – 4 : Evolving operational Modalities: Plenary

Chairperson: Co-charperson: Dr. A.K. Sikka, DDG (NRM), ICAR Dr. JP Mishra, Planning Commission

Inputs from Lead Discussants

Inputs from Lead Discussants (contd.)

Dr. Om RupelaPrincipal Consultant,FAO

Dr. Amar Nayak,XIMB, Bhubaneswar

Dr. B. Venkateswarlu

Dr. JP Mishra

Chair

Dr. K. V. Rao, CRIDA


1. Aashima ChaudharyProgram Officer, RRA – Malkangiri,# CA – 13, Near ShishuMandir,Chitrakonda, Malkangiri – 764052, Odisha.Mobile: 8658442114Email: [email protected]

2. Abrol I.P.Secretary, Centre for Advancement ofSustainable Agriculture (CASA)National Agricultural ScienceCentre (NASC) Complex, DPS Marg,Pusa,New Delhi – 110012.Landline: (011) 25848188,25846880Mobile: 9810772161Email: [email protected], [email protected]

3. Amar KJF NayakAssociate Professor (Strategic Management)Xavier Institute of Management, Bhubaneswar.Landline:(0674) 3983706, Mobile: 9437120280,Email: [email protected]

4. Bhagyalaxmi SSr. Program Officer, Watershed SupportServices and Activities Network (WASSAN)H.No. 12-13-452, Street No. 1, Tarnaka,Secunderabad – 500 017.Landline: (040) 27015295 / 96Mobile: 9440621867Email: [email protected]

5. Bhaskar GoswamiPolicy Specialist, FAO India55 Lodi Estate, Max Muller Marg, New Delhi.Landline: (011) 24628877Mobile: 9811191335Email: [email protected]

6. Chandra PrakashJoint Director of Agriculture (NRM)O/o Commissioner of AgricultureOpp: L.B. Stadium, Basheerbagh,Hyderabad – 500 001.Landline: (040) 23383528Mobile: 9505517961Email: [email protected]

ANNEXURE – 3

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

7. Dharmendar G.R.Coordinator (RRA-Soils),Chetna Organic12-13-677/66, Plot # 187,Sree Sai Durga Nivas, Street # 1,Tarnaka, Secunderabad – 500017.Landline (040) 27009944Email: [email protected]

8. Diana SiddiquiProgram Associate, HIVOS India,402 Eden Park, No.20, Vittal Mallya Road,Bangalore.Landline: (080) 22210514 / 22244966Mobile: 8197598186Email: [email protected]

9. Girija Shankar M.District Collector, District Collectorate Office,Mahabubnagar - 509 001.Landline: (08542) 242210Mobile: 9849904179Email: [email protected]

10. Mashar V.Assistant General ManagerNational Bank for Agriculture and RuralDevelopment (NABARD)Head Office, BKC Bandra (E),Mumbai – 400 051.Landline: (022) 26539632Email: [email protected]

11. Mishra J.P.Adviser, Planning Commission Advisor(Agriculture), Yojana Bhavan,Sansad Marg, New Delhi -110001.Landline: (011) 23096796Mobile: 9953953852Email: [email protected],

[email protected]

12. Mohammed OsmanPrincipal Scientist, Central Research Institutefor Dryland Agriculture (CRIDA),Santoshnagar, Hyderabad - 500 059.Landline: (040) 24547821Mobile: 9440763100Email: [email protected]


13. Mukesh PatilResearch, Advanced Center for WaterResources Management (ACWADAM)Plot No. 4, Lenyadri Housing Society,Pashan, Pune. Mobile: 9096297651Email: [email protected]

14. Nageswara Rao B.V.Assistant Commissioner,Government of India, Ministry of AgricultureDepartment of Agriculture and CooperationOffice: Room No. 542, Krishi Bhawan,New Delhi - 110 001.Landline: (011) 23386244Mobile: 9868374233Email: [email protected], [email protected]

15. Peter KenmoreFAO Representative in India55 Lodi Estate, Max Muller Marg,New Delhi. Landline: (011) 24628877Mobile: 9810032078.Email: [email protected]

16. Prasad Y.G.Principal Scientist (Entomology)Central Research Institute for DrylandAgriculture (CRIDA)Santoshnagar, Hyderabad - 500 059.Landline: (040) 24531802 / 24534909Mobile: 9490192749, Email: [email protected]

17. Rajeswari RainaPrincipal Scientist, CSIR – NISTADSDr. K.S. Krishnan Marg, Pusa,New Delhi – 110 012.Landline: (011) 25843027.Mobile: 9810956469.Email: [email protected]

18. Rama Rao C.A.Principal Scientist (Economic)Central Research Institute for DrylandAgriculture (CRIDA),Santoshnagar, Hyderabad - 500 059.Landline: (040) 24530161Mobile: 9949142331, Email: [email protected]

19. Ramachandrudu M.V.Director, Watershed Support Services andActivities Network (WASSAN), 12-13-452,Street No. 1, Tarnaka, Secunderabad – 17.Landline: (040) 27015295Mobile: 9440621860,Email: [email protected]

20. Rangu RaoDirector (Watershed and SHG led livelihoods)Samaj Pragati Sahayog (SPS)Village Jafashankar,Tehsil Bagli District Dewas – 455 227.Landline: (07271) 275757Mobile: 9755256589Email: [email protected]

21. Rao KVPrincipal Scientist (Soil & WaterConservation Engineering)Santoshnagar, Hyderabad - 500 059.Landline: (040) 24532243, 24530161Mobile: 9441067855, 8019435545Email: [email protected], [email protected]

22. Rashda ZafarProgramme Officer (Research), RRA-SoilsChetna Organic, 12-13-677/66, Plot # 187,Sree Sai Durga Nivas, Street # 1, Tarnaka,Secunderabad- 500017.Landline: (040) 27009944, 64639944Mobile: 9849301744

23. Ravindra ADirector, Watershed Support Services andActivities Network (WASSAN)12-13-452, Street No. 1, Tarnaka,Secunderabad – 500 017.Landline: (040) 27015295Mobile: 9440621861Email: [email protected]

24. Renuka Rani, BAssistant Director (HRD)National Institute of Agricultural ExtensionManagement (MANAGE)Rajendranagar, Hyderabad – 500 030.Landline: (040) 24016709Mobile: 9848306593Email: [email protected]

25. Rupela OmFreelance ScientistSaket Colony, 120-I, Kapra, ECIL Post,Hyderabad – 500 062.Landline: (040) 27143022Mobile: 9490621798Email: [email protected]


26. Sadamate V.V.Additional Commissioner (Extension)Ministry of Agriculture (Agriculture &Cooperation), Ministry of AgricultureKrishi Bhawan, New Delhi -110 001.Landline: (011) 23386053Email: [email protected]

27. Sarat Kumar G.V.Director, Access Livelihoods Consulting(ALC) India Pvt. Ltd.Plot no. - 4, Matrunilayam,Telephone office lane, Sainagar colony,Picket, Secunderabad - 500009.Landline: (040) 40177321Mobile: 9440901793Email: [email protected]

28. Saumya Ranjan NathPrime Minister’s Rural DevelopmentFellow l Kandhamal, OdishaMinistry of Rural Development,Government of India, Collectorate,Kandhamal, Odisha.Mobile: 8895788320Email: [email protected]

29. Sharma V.P.Director (Information Technology,Documentation and Publications)National Institute of Agricultural ExtensionManagement (MANAGE)Rajendranagar, Hyderabad – 500 030.Landline: (040) 24014525Mobile: 9848019048Email: [email protected]

30. Sikka A.K.Deputy Director GeneralDivision of Natural Resource Management,Indian Council of Agricultural Research(ICAR) Krishi Anusandhan Bhawan-II,New Delhi - 110 012.Landline: (011) 25848364Email: [email protected]

31. Sreenath DixitPrincipal Scientist (Agril. Extension) &Team Leader, Socio-economic and PolicyResearch Cell, Central Research Institutefor Dryland Agriculture (CRIDA)Santoshnagar, Hyderabad - 500 059.Landline: (040) 24535336Mobile: 9949006328Email: [email protected]

32. Venkateswarlu B.Director, Central Research Institute forDryland Agriculture (CRIDA)Santoshnagar, Hyderabad - 500 059.Landline: (040) 24530177Mobile: 9652988265Email: [email protected]

33. Venkateswarlu J.Consultant and Ex-Director, CAZRI26, SBI Colony, Gandhinagar,Hyderabad – 500 080.Landline: (040) 27532928Mobile: 9849040635Email: [email protected]

34. Vijay Shankar P.S.Director (Research)Samaj Pragati Sahayog (SPS)Village Jafashankar, Tehsil Bagli,District Dewas – 455 227.Landline: (07271) 275757Mobile: 9981137834Email: [email protected]

35. Virmani S.M.Former Principal Scientist,Agro-meteorology, ICRISAT,House No. 811A, Road No - 41,Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad - 500 033.

36. Vittal K.P..R.Former Director, National Institute on AbioticStress Management (NIAM)202, Nipun’sGunturi Residency,Plot No. 61-62, Door No. 19-64/7,Ayodhyanagar (Near Sharada Theater),Hyderabad – 500 062.Landline: (040) 40058480Mobile:7893579845Email: [email protected]

37. Yakub BashaDeputy Director,Fisheries DepartmentGovernment of Andhra PradeshMobile: 9440814705

Documents

Binder1 - India Water Portal · M. Girija Shankar, District Collector, Mahabubnagar district, Andhra Pradesh 31 Revitalizing Rainfed Agriculture Network – Malkangiri district, Odisha