|
Changing priorities in farm sector
ACCORDING to the State Bank’s Annual Report, agriculture
sector showed dismal performance in the last fiscal. The
share of this sector in the total GDP growth has been
further marginalised. This happened despite the provision of
subsidies and better credit supplies. Some quarters have
rightfully voiced their concerns regarding further
investment in this sector — they are against big water
reservoirs.
 The
crops yielded poorly. The decline in sugarcane, cotton and
wheat production is the main reason for the 3.6 per cent
decline in value addition by major crops, in sharp contrast
to 17.7 per cent growth in the preceding year.
Improvement in credit and water supplies last year
brightened the prospects but remained short of expectations.
Sugarcane and cotton could not do well. Wheat harvest
decreased by 1.4 per cent and growth remained 3.6 per cent
below the target.
Minor crops could not fare better, either. The 1.6 per cent
growth during FY06 was lower than the three per cent rise in
output seen during FY05, and consequently aggregate
production of the crop’s sub-sector fell by 2.3 per cent in
FY06, compared to its growth of 13.7 per cent in FY05.
Agriculture remains a neglected area as for as the
policy-formulation process is concerned. Most of the
agricultural lands are cultivated on commercial basis.
Intensive cultivation and careless use of chemicals have not
only deteriorated soil fertility but has also inflicted a
blow to environment, including the flight of crop-friendly
birds and insects and acidity in the subsoil water. This
proved another factor for crop failure.
The government has not undertaken any crop management plan.
More credit supplies but little availability of canal water
has raised the input cost of agriculturalists as they have
to sink tube wells and increase the use of fertilisers and
pesticides. The aquifers depleted without any chance of
getting refurnished as rapidly as their consumption.
Similarly, water management policy is nowhere in sight. In
some areas, this source is available in abundance causing
salinity and related problems. Others have reduced water
share due to more areas under cultivation. Bahawalpur
provides an interesting example in this regard. Farmer
receive 40 per cent per cent of the water which was made
available to them half-a-decade back.
The Indus Basin Treaty giving complete right to India over
the utilisation of water of its three rivers — Ravi, Beas
and Sutlej — is nothing but a blunder committed by the
people then at the helm of affairs. Contrary to
international law, the treaty gave upper riparian the right
to use the water of these rivers. No where in the world, a
party can divert water in a way that could affect the flow
of a river to the detriment of the lower riparian.
Major areas affected by the Indus Basin Treaty are
Bahawalpur and Sindh. Due to the perennial rivers gone to
India, major cost is borne by the aquifers for being used
extravagantly when water in seasonal rivers is reduced. It
was to discourage farming in these areas. Instead, lands
were allotted to civil and military bureaucracy.
A recent study of Water and Power Department of Punjab has
found that 75 per cent of water in southern districts is not
fit for crops. While the Indus Basin Treaty remains intact
and raging controversy surrounds the construction of water
reservoirs on the Indus River. The fate of lower regions —
cotton belt — is almost doomed.
According to the report, agriculture sector's failure has
been due to crop production. Livestock has gained
significantly by attaining eight per cent growth. The other
allied sector like fishing and forestry grew below the
target. Given their meagre share in agriculture, livestock
remains the only hope for agriculture.
There are few fundamental issues concerning the agriculture
sector. Welding livestock, fisheries and forestry with
farming reflects a not-so-wise approach. As more emphasis is
laid on farming, the more it proves a restraint for the
livestock, fisheries and the forestry. Promotion of
cultivation in semi-desert areas, like Cholistan and
Balochistan, has caused a decline in livestock population
due to the loss of space available to herding communities.
The ZTBL has increased the credit supply but the major
beneficiaries are big landlords who mostly get their loans
written off. The small farmer ends up by selling his land to
pay off the debt.
As for agriculture, landlords must turn to forestry and
livestock. This step is necessary to regain soil fertility.
Their income will witness downward slide for a few years but
will pay in long-term. There is no reason to keep fisheries
as an allied subject of agriculture. It should be dealt
separately; credit supply to this new sector will revive
hope in a large community associated with this sector.
Meanwhile, some quarters are pressurising the government to
defer water conservation plans on the plea that it was
useless to invest in this fast declining sector. The move is
intriguing, for having storage dams is must as the same can
be used as a guarantee to ensure water supplies in
dry-months. It is necessary because ours is an
agriculture-based economy and that the country now has
seasonal rivers for fresh water supplies.
The agricultural policy needs a revision. Pakistan must
evolve a strategy to replenish soil fertility through
shifting emphasise to forestry and livestock from
cultivation. Meanwhile, water resources should be managed to
ensure supplies during dry-months.
The government should stop subsidies available to
agriculture sector (to any sector whatsoever) and divert
credit supplies from crops to forestry and livestock.
Meanwhile, crop management policy should be brought forth
while taking into consideration the water availability in
different parts of Pakistan.
Courtesy: The DAWN
|
Pakissan.com;
|
