NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION PROJECT NEW PHASE OF NATP

1. NATIONALAGRICULTURALINNOVATION PROJECTNEW PHASE OF NATP

2. BACK DROP Economic growth with social justice in our national goal. Focus on job-led, pro-poor, eco-friendly growth combined with enhanced food 7 nutritional security, profitability, income and competitiveness. Agriculture will continue to be significant for overall growth of economy. GDP growth rate of agriculture, since 1996- 97 is 1.75% p.a. against the targeted growth rate of 4% p.a. Farmers are in great distress.

3. BACK DROP Calls for new strategy and re-orientation in planning and working in every source of growth including agricultural research, which is the key driver of growth. After NARP & NATP, NAIP is the strategy to take the “next leap forward” towards bringing excellence in science, science for commerce and science for society through integration of technology orientation with agricultural economy and market orientation. NAIP responds to Gols objectives as well as Bank’s objectives as expressed in Country Agricultural Strategy 2004.

4. NATP: GAINS NATP has contributed to considerable improvement in the system efficiency. Substantial production system research & impact (IRR of 30%). Establishment of the new district-based ATMA model for technology dissemination.

5. NAIP: The Charter The NAIP is to facilitate the accelerated and sustainable transformation of Indian agriculture for poverty alleviation and income generation by collaborative development. Application of agriculture technologies by the public research organizations in partnership with farmer’s groups, PRIs, private sector, and other stakeholders.

6. Why ‘NAIP’ Holism (farm to plate). Integrating multiple approaches of scientific pursuit: basic, strategic, applied, action & value chain research. Social engineering – consortia formation & relationship management.

7. NAIP : Key components Strengthening the ability of the ICAR to act as a catalyzing agent for rapid transformation of Indian agricultural Innovation system (about 20% resources). Establishment of value chain (production to consumption system) promoting consortia for raising productivity, profitability and competitiveness (about 30% resources). System and action research consortia for livelihood improvement in disadvantaged regions and vulnerable groups (about 35% resources). Basic & Strategic research of national and long- term importance to break yield and quality barrier and make India a global leader in research for development (About 15% resources).

8. ICAR : Catalyzing Agent of NAIS Strengthening communication ability and information capacity – Communication Mission. Enhanced dialogue and interaction with public at large, farming community, private sector and within ICAR system between all key functionaries. System-wise institutionalization of O&M reforms like decentralization, IPM management, visioning and policy analysis.

9. Value – Chain Consortia Novel aspect of NAIP for the Indian NARS. Value-chains in rural areas are market driven, income generating and employment intensive options. A limited number of 10-15 research consortia on value chains based on competition. Consortia of need-based public sector organizations, private sector, farmer organizations, NGOs, CGIAR institutions.

10. PRODUCTION TO CONSUMPTION CHAINS UNDER NAIP Different domains (irrigated, rainfed, hills and mountains). Tribal areas, islands, border areas etc. Emphasis on research even into the backward linkages to input supplies (consumed inputs such as fertilizers, durable/capital inputs, such as irrigation and tillage equipments). Horizontal linkages (crop-livestock integration, crop substitution, package of best production practices etc.). Forward linkages involving research on post- harvest management, marketing, processing and consumption (quality, safety of final goods like food, fodder, fibre, fuel commodities).

11. CRITERIA FOR VALUE CHAIN CONSORTIUM Changing preferences of consumers. Government priorities for enhancing food security, increasing income and generating employment. Environmental issues to prevent degradation on natural resources, controlling pollution and managing waste. Potential frontier technologies. Benefit-cost (economic significance) of value chain.

12. Criteria : Income augmentation & employment generation Milk & milk products in rainfed areas. Peri-urban dairy. Vegetables. Criteria: Food Security and income augmentation (Rainfed and disadvantaged areas).

13. Criteria : Export promotion Organic rice Flowers High value fish Criteria : Import substitution Soybean Mustard Groundnut Pigeonpea chickpea

14. Criteria : Agro-processing Potato. Tomato. Dairy products. Citrus fruits (oranges). Frozen pea. Criteria : Natural resources conservation Soil health Ground water Surface water Agro-forestry Organic farming Conservation agriculture

15. VALUE CHAIN – Horizontal & Vertical (QPM) Consumer awareness, volatility in price, shelf-life Consumption (Local, Foreign) 6 Standards, grades, sorting, Packaging, produced development Processing 5 Middlemen layers, storage, Packaging, market regulation & market access, consumer awareness Marketing 4 Multiple picking, manual de-husking Harvest, Post-harvest 3 Biotic and abiotic constraints Production 2 • Seed production (niche areas) • Seed Recovery, Synchromy • HRD • MNCs not interested • Reduced cost of seeds • Improve yields Input Delivery System 1 Baby corn

16. SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOOD CONSORTIA Research also should consider the needs of the poor regions and vulnerable groups. Selection of target regions and vulnerable groups essential. 10-15 contiguous districts in a cluster within a similar agro-ecological zone and production system. Both competitive and sponsored mode. Examples include dryland areas, hill and mountain areas etc.

17. Consortium on Livelihood Security Features Development and validation of sustainable farming systems based on on-farm action research relating to agriculture and allied activities. Natural Resource Management. Food and nutritional security. Rural income and employment. Extension activities – information and expert systems for farmers – forward and backward flow.

18. Selection of Disadvantaged Areas Detailed statistical analysis and consultations. The analysis will include development status of following parameters: -Infrastructure -Agricultural -Nutrition -Economic -Health and Sanitation -food Availability Integrated Livelihood Index will be arrived at.

19. Consortia Formation Prescriptive and ‘Prescriptive & Open’ calls for proposals. Wide publicity. Expression of interest : Concept Note. Project preparation on the selected proposals. Seed money for project proposal preparation and bench-marking. Help desk and training for project proposal preparation.

20. Basic and Strategic Research Challenge problems of national and long-term importance cutting across regions & production systems requiring innovative research at the frontiers of science.

21. INSTITUTIONAL AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENT Partnership arrangements Partnership will include public research organizations, other related research departments and organizations, private sector, NGOs, farmer organizations etc. with well defined TOR, M&E framework, clear rules for sharing resources and cost etc.

22. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND MONITORING NAIP would develop a result-oriented M&E system to monitor processes and evaluate the final outcome using the well defined strategy, tools and approaches.

23. ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS • Studying the impact in a production-consumption • system and livelihood improvement system using • standard tools and techniques at the consortium as • well as at the project Level by in-home and external • evaluations. • SAFEGUARD POLICY ANALYSIS • The projectconsiders potential environmental and • social impacts. • The project follows a broad environmental • management framework.

24. INSTITUTIONAL LEARNING AND CAPACITY BUILDING For self-renewal of NAIS, IL & CB is critical. Training and need assessment for all personnel. Preparing the participants to plan, execute and deliver outcomes under NAIP. Capacity building in NARS to deal with globalized agricultural market and economy.

25. SUMMARY OF REPEATED FEEDBACK FROM EARLIER STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS Project has to develop validated models for solving the problems of Indian Agriculture. The project symbolizes shift towards fragmentary development of agriculture to wholesome development. Reaching to the stakeholders while designing the project is innovative and a welcome departure. Continuous interaction with and empowerment of farmer (the main end user) and synergetic use of facilities, services and supplies of the development departments are key to success of the project. The main problems of farmers are market, water and input supply. Contd...

26. Contd... Give special focus to women, youth, organic farming, ITK, PRIs, dryland areas, in-situ water harvesting, knowledge sharing in local languages, market intelligence, small scale agro-industrialization and risk mitigation. NAIP provides glue money for synergy. Make use of it well. Trader is the manager of the value chain now. Make producer/consumer as managers of value chain. Do not leave the details to be decided later. Enterpreneurship development in farmers holds the key for next revolution in agriculture. Do not have a rigid framework. Training for understanding and monitoring E&S framework is important. Socio-economic aspects of farming should guide designing interventions.

27. Emphasis during NAIP Increasing water availability (quantity & quality), improving organic matter in the soil, crop holidays, conservation of forest, fertility of land. Increasing useful flora & fauna. Reducing input cost. Promoting natural resource conservation. Broaden genetic base (gene pool). Adding value to the farm produce.

28. SOIL HEALTH Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) – tonic for soil health Poor SOC content attributed to: extensive mining of soil fertility. low and imbalanced fertilizer use. removal of crop residue for fodder or household fuel/burning. severe soil degradation.

29. Contd….. Integrated Crop Management. Addressing precision farming (input use efficiency). Resource Conservation tillage. Use of stress tolerant plant material (heat, drought, salinity, pests and diseases). Use of ITKs. Diversifying agriculture. Promoting organic farming. Application of bio-pesticides and bio-agents (IPM), IPNM. Accelerating TFP growth rate. Decreasing rural migration towards urban.

30. ENVIRONMENTAL BENCH MARKS Physical bench marks in terms of water quality, micronutrients, pH, EC, water holding capacity including geological, hydrological, topographical, meteorological informations. Environmental profile in respect of existing farm practices, cropping pattern, pollution load (lead, chromium, mercury, arsenic, cadmium, nickel), residue effect, water resource availability, IPM, IPNM etc. Other land use related programmes such as drainage facilities, storm water drainage a arrangements, watershed development activities, roads and other basic infrastructure. Ecological profile in terms of climate, flora & fauna, forest cover including ecologically sensitive locations (if any).

31. SOCIAL BENCH MARKS Literacy Rate (Education, mechanism of knowledge sharing, skill upliftment and Information Delivery). Access to Technologies and other Resources (quality seed and planting material/testing of soil, water, seed, agro-chemicals etc.). Productivity Level (crop/livestock/others). Post Harvest Losses (crop/livestock/others). Contd…..

32. Contd….. SOCIAL BENCH MARKS Food and Nutritional Status (food availability/nutritional value of food). Farm Household Income (income from farm/income from other sources) including households below poverty line. Storage, Packaging, Transport, Communication and Marketing Facilities.

33. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS Degradation of critical habitats like land, water, grassland, forest cover etc. Changes in landscape and topography. Land slide due to extensive cultivation on hilly areas. Loss of grazing land. Rise in green house gas emission. Decline in biomass and agro-biodiversity. Increase in pest and disease incidence.

34. MONITORABLE INDICATORS Environmental Soil erosion from the present level of around 46 t/ha (decrease). Conservation of runoff water and water from catchment areas in the water harvesting structure (increase). Diversifications/multiple cropping in the project areas (increase). Cluster approach to food production (increase). Complementarities of crop-animal system of farming (increase). Shifting cultivation (decrease). Partnership mode of resource conservation (increase). Fallow land areas (decrease).

35. IPM Monitorable Indicators Increase in the use of bio-pesticides. Reduction in irrational use of chemical pesticides. Decrease in pesticide residues in the target crops. Increase in plantation of neem trees. Enhancement in yield and income of IPM farmers. Increase in biodiversity of natural enemies like predators, insect pathogens, honeybees, birds etc.

36. AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY Risks Contamination of the genetic stock in the biosphere. Chemical contamination of ecosystems threats to the integrity of living species. Modified crop might persist in the environment longer than usual or invade new habitats. Likelihood of a gene being transferred from the modified crop to other species. Radiation hazards. Contd……

37. Contd…… • Mitigation-Regulatory Systems in India • Research Institutes/Universities (Institute Biosafety • Committee). • Department of Biotechnology (Review Committee • on Genetic Manipulation). • Department of Environment (Genetic Engineering • Approval Committee).

38. THANKS