The numbers game: Rush to certify India’s natural farmers raises concerns

India's agricultural sector, a cornerstone of its economy and a livelihood for a significant portion of its population, has long grappled with the dual challenges of ensuring food security and promoting sustainable practices. The Green Revolution, while boosting food production in the mid-20th century, led to an over-reliance on chemical fertilizers and pesticides, raising concerns about soil health, environmental degradation, and farmer indebtedness. This historical context paved the way for a renewed focus on sustainable alternatives like organic and natural farming.

Natural farming, in particular, has gained traction as an agroecological approach that promotes chemical-free agriculture, relying on on-farm biomass recycling, mulching, and local biodiversity. The Indian government has actively championed this shift through schemes like the Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana (PKVY), launched in 2015 as a sub-scheme under the National Mission of Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA). Further solidifying this commitment, the Bhartiya Prakritik Krishi Paddhati (BPKP) was introduced in 2020-21 as a sub-scheme under PKVY, specifically to promote natural farming.

The current concern, as highlighted, revolves around the implementation of certification for these natural farming efforts. There is a palpable rush to certify a large number of natural farmers, driven by ambitious targets set by various authorities. However, this push is reportedly occurring without adequate funding for the certification bodies responsible for validating these practices. Certification bodies and grassroots organizations involved in the Participatory Guarantee System (PGS) are under immense pressure to meet these targets, often compromising the rigor and integrity of the certification process. The PGS-India system, a decentralized, peer-based certification model, is particularly crucial for small and marginal farmers and domestic markets, as it offers a less expensive and more accessible alternative to third-party certification.

Key stakeholders in this scenario include the farmers themselves, who are at the heart of the natural farming movement, seeking better incomes and healthier produce. The certification bodies and PGS groups are critical implementers, tasked with verifying adherence to natural farming standards. Consumers form another vital group, relying on these certifications to make informed choices about food safety and authenticity. The Union Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, along with state agriculture departments, are the primary policy formulators and funding agencies, responsible for setting targets and allocating resources. Lastly, the broader market and industry players, including retailers and food processors, depend on credible certification for their supply chains and brand reputation.

This issue holds immense significance for India. Economically, a robust and credible natural farming sector can unlock new market opportunities, both domestically and internationally, potentially fetching premium prices for farmers and boosting rural economies. Conversely, a flawed certification system could lead to a loss of consumer trust, market collapse for 'natural' products, and undermine farmer morale, negating the very purpose of these schemes. Socially, compromised standards could mean consumers are misled about the quality and safety of their food. Environmentally, if 'natural' labels become meaningless, the push for sustainable agriculture could falter, exacerbating issues like soil degradation and biodiversity loss. This challenge also highlights broader themes of governance and policy implementation – the difficulty in translating ambitious targets into effective, well-resourced programs on the ground.

From a constitutional perspective, the promotion of sustainable agriculture aligns with the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP). Article 48 mandates the state to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and to take steps for preserving and improving the breeds. More directly, Article 48A directs the state to endeavor to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country, which encompasses sustainable agricultural practices. Furthermore, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) plays a crucial role in regulating food standards, including those for organic and natural products under the Food Safety and Standards (Organic Foods) Regulations, 2017, and similar guidelines for natural produce. The Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) also oversees the National Programme for Organic Production (NPOP), which sets standards for organic exports.

Looking ahead, the future implications are significant. If the government and stakeholders fail to address the funding and implementation gaps, the credibility of India's natural farming movement could be severely damaged. This could lead to consumer skepticism, reduced market demand for genuinely natural products, and a disincentive for farmers to adopt these practices. Conversely, if adequate resources are provided, and a rigorous, transparent certification system is established, India could emerge as a global leader in sustainable agriculture, ensuring food security, improving farmer livelihoods, and contributing significantly to environmental conservation. The success of schemes like PKVY and BPKP hinges on striking a balance between ambitious targets and robust, well-funded implementation mechanisms.