--classstrugggle-flipmag classstruggle-oct-2019-flippbook | Seite 20

Secondly, ZBNF has not
stressed on the increase of
production. The production of,
particularly of foodgrains will not
increase by ZBNF unless a high
yielding varity of seeds compatible
with natural farming methods are
developed. The Council for
Energy, Environment and Water
(CEEW) study, done between 2016
and 2017, is based on crop cutting
experiments in 13 districts of AP
where ZBNF was being practiced,
found a decline in the input costs,
an improvement in yields of
horticultural crops and a decline in
yields of foodgrains. As the ZBNF
practice began in 2015 with GoAP
support through Rythu Sadhikara
Samstha (RySS), it was too short
a period to assess, over the years
as the soil fertility revives due to
ZBNF yield may improve. But to
grow foodgrains to meet the needs
of growing population, ZBNF has
to adopt the available scientific
knowledge to improve the
productivity of seeds and suitability
to climatic conditions. This is in no
way validates chemical dependent
HYV seeds and GM seeds.
The problems of adoptability
of alternative farming methods can
be surmounted through experi-
mentation if there is will and
tenacity. But what about the
stratification among so-called
farmers? Nearly 86% of ‘farmers’
have less than one hectare of land,
who are poor peasants often
working as agricultural labour.
These are the ones who bears the
brunt of the crisis, in debt trap and
committing suicides. Are these
alternative methods within the
reach of these small peasants?
A case study conducted by La
Via Campesina, a coalition of 182
farmers organizations across 81
countries, has shown that most of
the farmers collaborating with
Palekar’s ZBNF in Karnataka came
from “middle peasantry” - having
20
2 to 4 hectares of land. The same
report cited the ‘marketability’ of
ZBNF produce as a major
limitation. There are many media
reports about several instances
where farmers using ZBNF method
have returned to old input-intensive
farming on the round of profitability.
A look into GoAP’s programme
of ZBNF, being implemented
through Rythu Sadhikara Samstha
(RySS), translated as farmers
empowerment
organization,
reveals the same. Most of the
success stories shown in the
website are of the middle and
above middle peasants who had
non-farm income to fall back. One
farmer used his 5 acres of land to
rise 64 varieties of fruit trees for
consumption by his family and
relatives and leased in 2 more
acres to raise paddy crop. Unless
these alternative methods adopted
to be availed by the small
peasants, they will remain at the
fringes of the present agricultural
system.
Niti Aayog in its agricultural
policy statement has stated, without
evidence or data in support, that
GMOs are required in Indian
agriculture for food security.
Curiously, it is supporting ZBNF.
According to a report by “The
Wire”, it was in February that Niti
Aayog approached ICAR and
National Academy for Agricultural
Research Management (NAARM)
to study the effect of natural
farming. When the scientists
wanted two years time to submit a
report, it insisted that the study
should be completed in six months,
which duration id not enough time
to be able to scientifically assess
the effectiveness of natural
farming. The study covered 295
farmers practicing ZBNF and
another 170 who are not, has been
conducted in Karnataka, Maha-
rashtra and AP for a single crop
season. The ‘quick observations’
Keep aside this wasteful
exercise; studies are being
conducted in various universities,
including ICAR, to understand the
methods, value and viability for
farmers in various agro-climatic
regions. None has reached any
definite conclusion so far.
The GoAP ZBNF programme
began in 2015 and in two years got
1,38,000 farmers and 1,50,000
acres into ZBNF. In the next two
years the numbers swelled to
5,23,000 farmers and 5,04,000
acres in 3015 villages of 13
districts.
The
programme
depended on SHGs to enroll and
used Rythu Mitra groups, which are
formed in the place of defuncted
agricultural extension services.
There is no information available
from the official sources as to how
many farmers opted out of the
programme.
It is being financed by Centre’s
Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana and
Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana.
By the end of November 2018, the
RySS spent Rs.290 crore. The
target set by the RySS is
universalisation of ZBNF in AP by
bringing all 60,00,000 farmers into
ZBNF, in10 years, that is by 2024.
It is estimated to cost Rs. 17,000
crore.
How to raise these finances?
The RySS says it is in negotiations
with national and international
institutions and it had collaboration
with UN Environment Programme,
FAO, World Agroforestry Centre
(ICRAF), Sustainable India Finance
Facility (SIFF), French Agrire-
serach Centre for International
Development (CIRAD) and BNP
Paribas Bank. It had not clarified
on what form of collabaration it had
with these organizations. It only said
that all MoUs are put in its website,
But none of it is there.
When 24 eminent environ-
mentalists wrote letter of RySS
Class Struggle