Natural Farming in Andhra Pradesh: A Model State in the Making

Introduction

The Bhartiya Prakritik Krishi Paddhati (BPKP), a sub-scheme under the Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana (PKVY), since the year 2021 serves as a framework for the Natural Farming (NF) ecosystem in India. With an intention to upscale this ecosystem, the Government of India launched the National Mission on Natural Farming in 2023-24. Although Zero Budget Natural Farming (ZBNF) as a concept was popularised in India by Subhash Palekar, a Maharashtra based agriculturist, it has found relevance in the state of Andhra Pradesh (AP). The state government had resorted to this farming technique to avoid high input costs and escape the debt-trap laid by conventional farming methods. Although this mission has been conceived at the national level recently, at the state level, AP has been a model state for effectively implementing natural farming at an expanded scale with its Community Managed Natural Farming (CMNF) as recognised by the international Portuguese Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation’s 2024 Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity.  Before we begin expanding upon the State’s efforts, it is necessary to break down what the term natural farming implies.

Decoding Natural Farming

Natural farming is a regenerative agricultural technique that lays emphasis on soil restoration and depends upon agro-forestry and permaculture to achieve that. It is an approach to agriculture that aligns with indigenous agricultural practices. The ideal of natural farming is minimal exploitation of natural and economical resources. Often the term organic farming and natural farming is used inter-changeably. However, NF falls under the regenerative agriculture umbrella, not synonymous with organic farming. Unlike organic farming, natural farming does not employ nature friendly products that do not absolutely belong to its immediate surroundings. Subhash Palekar, a Maharashtrian agriculturist who popularised the practice, outlined four primary principles in natural farming, namely, Jeevamrutham, Beejamrutham, Acchadana, and Whapasa.

Farmers who engage in this form of agriculture utilise the following practices to generate their produce:

1. Biomass mulching
2. Using livestock dung and urine as fertiliser
3. Using livestock for nutrient cycling
4. Intercropping, crop diversification and botanical concoctions to prevent pest infestation
5. Avoiding or limiting tillage

Unlike other farming techniques, there are no standard practices subscribed to NF as it is a hyperlocal approach to agriculture. However, a farmer must under no circumstances resort to pesticides, herbicides or fertilisers to be classified as an NF practitioner.

The Andhra Pradesh Model of Zero Budget Natural Farming

The ZBNF programme was implemented in 2016 by Andhra Pradesh to transition from chemical-based and capital-intensive agriculture, through an implementing agency Rythu Sadhikara Samstha (RySS). This programme was conceived to streamline the state’s previous fragmented efforts such as the Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture (CMSA) initiated by the Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty (SERP), in 2004 and the Non-Pesticide Management (NPM) initiative of 2015. The RySS is a not-for-profit organisation established through Section 8 of the Companies Act 2013, providing services such as credit flow, financial support, farmer welfare, empowerment and capacity building. ZBNF was later renamed Andhra Pradesh Community Managed Natural Farming (APCNF) as the RySS has heavily relied on Community Resource Persons and Self-Help Groups to scale up its ZBNF programme. The RySS has also partnered with 34 N.G.O.s to facilitate this process.

Around 615 gram panchayats, which cover 715 villages out of 13,000 gram panchayats in Andhra Pradesh, were the pilot areas to transition to NF. Most of the villages used to pilot the APCNF initiative in 2016 were already engaged in non-chemical farming under the CMSA programme of 2004. As of 2024, APCNF is being practiced in 4,116 gram panchayats and 7,746 Village Organisations with the assistance of 2.31 lakh SHGs across 662 mandals. The ZBNF programme is receiving technical and financial support from national initiatives and international organisations. For the years 2015-16 to 2019-20, Rs 221.36 crore from the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) and Rs 160.39 crore from PKVY have been used. Azim Premji Philanthropic Initiatives released Rs 22.88 crore from 2017-2019 for technical support, German state-owned bank KfW has agreed to provide a loan amount of Rs 711 crore in 2020 and the AP government has entered into a formal partnership with Sustainable India Finance Facility. Additionally, the Centre provided around Rs 750 lakhs through BPKP in the year 2023. To convert 5.9 million farmers across 12,924 gram panchayats in a phased manner by the year 2027, the Government has estimated a requirement of Rs 16,452 crores funds for marketing support, capacity building, technical support, farmers’ institution building, and Participatory Guarantee System of Certification.

Barriers to ZBNF Adoption

Although it is believed that NF will aid in restoring soil health, preserving biodiversity and water conservation, its short-term drawbacks are leading to hesitation in farmers. The transition from conventional farming to natural farming is not smooth. Given that no additional chemical inputs are used, farmers cannot expect to get a commercially acceptable quantity of yield in a short duration. It has also been noted that compared to conventional farming, NF is time and labour intensive. Preparing the natural concoctions is a meticulous process and given that there is limited knowledge of bio-pesticides preparation, most farmers find it time intensive. If farmers were to involve experienced labour, labour costs would increase. In terms of resources, access to livestock is a constraint. Farmers in Andhra Pradesh note that there is a scarcity of cattle due to fodder shortage in districts where NF is practiced. This may pose a challenge as livestock are a crucial component for long-term soil restoration goals.

Regarding large landowners, they are risk averse to NF as the market environment for NF products is not conducive. Unpredictable yield and market premium in NF when compared to conventional farming prevents large landowners from adopting these practices.

In Conclusion

Although long-term benefits of NF have been acknowledged, the AP government is yet to develop a robust market framework for NF products. To truly be considered a model state for Natural Farming practices, the government must constitute a market structure wherein agriculturists practicing NF can engage in business equivalent to a system such as National Programme for Organic Production and Participatory Guarantee System. Unless such a mechanism is built, large landowners will not be encouraged to gradually adopt NF.

On the other hand, marginal and small landowners are open to transitioning to NF but given that livestock availability is limited, the state must devise a strategy to address fodder shortage. Forming a skeleton market structure will also benefit them in the long run.

Andhra Pradesh is heading in the right direction and given that it is still evolving, it has done a commendable job. To build a sustainable Natural Farming ecosystem, it must work upon building a robust market, increasing access to credit and address how to shield natural farming agriculturists from the unpredictable weather patterns affecting the fodder availability for their cattle.