Solutions to stubble burning exist, changing mindset is key: A K Padhee

Substituting Kharif paddy with other remunerative crops (like cotton, maize, soybean, fruits and vegetables, etc suiting the market) is one solution, says Padhee

Come winter, North India is engulfed in a thick concoction of smoke, pollutants and heavy air that makes lives miserable for people in most cities here. Arabinda Kumar Padhee, country director-India of International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) talks to Sanjeeb Mukherjee about the various aspects of the problem and also how it can be tackled without harassing the farming community. Edited excerpts:

Stubble burning has become a big cause for pollution in North India during winter. A lot of theories are floating around. What, according to you, is the root cause?

There could be a multitude of reasons. Environmentalists cite increasing number of vehicles; industrial pollution; construction activities from infrastructure and homes and deforestation commensurate with rapid urbanisation. Studies done by SAFAR (System of Air Quality and Weather Forecasting and Research) have established that smoke from crop-residue/stubble burning in neighbouring states of Delhi is carried by (north-westerly) winds and contributes to air pollution of the capital city in a range from 0 per cent to 53 per cent.

After analysing the field scenarios, talking to policy makers and scientist friends, shifts in sowing time of paddy seems like one of the main reasons. We all know that not very long ago farmers used to start with a summer, ‘Sathi’ (short-duration up to 60 days) paddy in May itself, before going for another paddy crop in the Kharif (rainy) season. This was only because of the abundant ground water available in this belt. Both Punjab and Haryana governments through their Preservation of Sub-Soil Water Acts regulated the planting time of paddy to mid-June, because of the unsustainable cropping practices and a fast depleting ground water table. 

However, farmers continued with their long-duration high yielding paddy varieties and obviously, the window between paddy harvest and land preparation for the next crop of wheat got shortened. Drastic decline of agricultural workforce over the years and increased mechanised harvesting operations forced the farmers to take the easiest option to clear the fields — burning the stubbles or residue. All this has led to the present impasse. However, solutions do exist. 

Why is stubble burning not a big factor in the east, where paddy is grown in bigger amount than North. Has it something to do with the varieties grown or the harvest practices are less mechanised?

The agro-ecologies and cropping practices in eastern states are not exactly the same as in north-west India, particularly Punjab, Haryana and parts of Uttar Pradesh. In the east, labour is still not scarce (though machine harvesting is increasing over the years).

In the Rabi season, farmers go for a variety of crops like paddy, wheat, pulses, etc. Moreover, they also use the straw as cattle feed; thatching of houses in rural areas; compost making; mulching and few other uses like fuels for parboiling paddy, etc.

In few parts of eastern India, there is also a practice of growing short duration pulses to utilise the available soil moisture in the rice-fallows. This unique method raises soil productivity and contributes to the eco-system services. Scientific rice fallow management should be a top policy priority at this stage. 

If effective strategies are not adopted from now, stubble burning may even turn to these unaffected parts.

A lot of farmers’ groups say expensive machines are being thrust on them in the garb of reducing stubble burning. Do machines provide a viable solution to stubble burning?

The present unsustainable practices are leading to such a situation. Short-duration paddy varieties suited for direct-seeded-rice (DSR) method are available. DSR paddy takes less time for establishment; and there is no transplanting shock.

This method will not only save irrigation water, but also enhance the window between paddy harvest and wheat sowing, potentially reducing the stubble burning problem. Then, it needs a behavioural change from the farming community. 

Machines such as Happy seeders, rotavators, etc are subsidised by the government. I’ve personally seen how a few farmer collectives around Ludhiana are successfully operating the custom-hiring centers. But, the scale has to go up. 

From a scientist’s point of view, what can be the scientific answer to this problem, which does not involve use of costly machines or ineffective decomposers?

Scientists both from the National Agricultural Research System like ICAR; State Agricultural Universities and CGIAR organisations like CIMMYT have offered technological solutions to the vexed problem.

Substituting Kharif paddy with other remunerative crops (like cotton, maize, soybean, fruits and vegetables, etc suiting the market) has often been suggested. Similarly, alternative uses of straw through briquettes/pellets for power generation; straw baling for use as fodder, etc could be done with appropriate policy support and infrastructure.

Some farmers complain that in-situ management machines supplied to them lead to drop in wheat yields. Does this argument have any scientific basis?

I’ve not come across any scientific study to this effect. But, I must add that in-situ residue management could not only improve the nutrient profile, but also positively impact the micro-biome activities, which improve the soil health.

One suggestion that some experts are propagating is using MGNREGA funds for straw management. How feasible is this option, given that it will involve change in the mother act and also expanding the time frame of paddy harvesting?

Let’s admit that increased use of farm machines has displaced manual labour. If Panchayati Raj institutions in this belt take the lead of collection of paddy straws for production of manure or for any other purposes, agricultural labourers could productively be used for these operations. Amendments, if required, under MGNREGA should not be a problem when we see the positive changes.

Won't this delay wheat yield?

Required infrastructure has to be geared up. Agricultural Science offers solutions with right kind of varieties and other technological solutions. Mind-set is the key.

Farmers seem open to shift to other crops from paddy, but want assured returns as remunerative as paddy, what should be the the government response to hasten this shift?

It follows a cardinal principle that as long as the alternative option is not made more remunerative than the existing practice, farmers may not fully switch over. If we recommend any other crop, policy support is required. 

The existing assured procurement of Kharif paddy under the minimum support price (MSP) mechanism has often been cited as being the reason to move to other crops. If a similar mechanism is assured, it might slowly change.   

For example, if we prescribe to them to grow Sorghum and millets, which are climate resilient and nutritious (as compared to rice or wheat), necessary market demand will also need to be created. 

Crop diversity should come with dietary diversity of citizens. At the macro-policy level, we need to create awareness and conducive policy space for this. 

In many places, state governments have started rounding up farmers for burning stubble, don't you think, criminalising the farmer is wrong?

The social and environmental benefits are yet to be appreciated by large sections of farming communities as it is perceived that only farmers have to pay the price for the problem. Enforcement of existing legislations or guidelines can only be effectively done when we convince the farmers of the situation and by giving them remunerative alternatives.  

The SC recently announced a Rs 100 per quintal incentive for farmers who haven't burnt paddy stubble. Do you think this is viable solution?

This is timely. Incentives to those confirming to rules and guidelines are always advisable. However, its proper implementation would decide the impact on fellow farmers.

Biomass-based power generation plants is also being talked about as an answer to stubble burning and many states are already working on this. Do you think this could be long-term solution? What should be the policy response?

Yes, this could be a good long-term solution. However, catchment of the bio- refineries has to be suitably decided to ensure sustainable supply chain of feed stock.

Studies show that more than stubble burning, it is our local pollution that gets heightened during winters causing all the smog and farmers get unnecessarily blamed for this. Is this the case?

Stubble burning is one of the prime reasons for smog and air pollution in winter. There are other reasons too. Burning of crackers during Diwali and construction activities aggravate the pollution. Burning of agricultural residues not only creates health risks for citizens of Delhi, it increases the risk of respiratory illnesses of the people around the stubble burning areas. Unfortunately, while discussing stubble burning problem, we often overlook the immediately-affected people. 

Do you think more than environment, it has become more a political issue?

I only wish all the governments systematically address this problem.