Agrarian distress remains a critical issue in India, with farmers demanding a legal guarantee for MSPs for 23 crops. This demand stems from declining incomes, climate change risks, and rising input costs. However, implementing a legally mandated MSP system has significant fiscal, inflationary, and trade implications, necessitating viable alternatives like deficiency price payments (DPPs) or direct income support. The challenge lies in balancing farmer welfare, fiscal prudence, and food security.
Understanding the Minimum Support Price (MSP)
The MSP system was introduced in 1965 with the Agricultural Prices Commission (APC), now the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP), to ensure food security and protect farmers from price drops.
1. Calculation of MSP:
A2: Covers direct costs like seeds, fertilizers, and irrigation.
A2+FL: Includes unpaid family labor.
C2: Adds costs of owned land, rentals, and fixed capital.
2. MSP is set at 1.5 times the A2+FL cost for 23 mandated crops, ensuring minimum returns to farmers.
3. Coverage: The following 23 crops are covered under MSP
Arguments in Favor of Legalizing MSP
Protection Against Market Volatility: Legalizing MSP ensures income stability, protecting farmers from market crashes. For instance, tomato farmers in Andhra Pradesh suffered losses in 2024 due to a price crash.
Addressing Regional and Crop Disparities: Legal MSP can reduce regional inequalities in procurement and encourage cultivation of pulses and oilseeds over water-intensive crops. Currently, Punjab and Haryana dominate procurement, sidelining states like Bihar and Odisha.
Reducing Rural Distress: A predictable income can mitigate farmer suicides, with 6,083 agricultural laborer suicides reported in 2022.
Encouraging Investments: Assured returns enable farmers to adopt better technologies and inputs, improving productivity. For example, the Fair and Remunerative Price (FRP) for sugarcane increased by 8% in 2024-25.
Countering Exploitation: Only 6% of farmers benefit from MSP due to limited access to mandis. Legalizing MSP could reduce middlemen exploitation.
Climate Risk Mitigation: Legal MSP protects farmers from unpredictable weather, such as the 5.23 lakh hectares of wheat crops damaged by unseasonal rains in 2023.
Boosting Exports: Predictable pricing can enhance agricultural exports, as seen in the $11 billion rice exports in 2022-23.
Arguments Against Legalizing MSP
Fiscal Burden: Estimates suggest that legalizing MSP for all crops could cost ₹21,000 crore annually, straining the government’s budget.
Implementation Challenges: In informal markets, enforcing MSP is impractical. Maharashtra’s 2018 attempt led to trader boycotts.
International Trade Conflicts: Legalizing MSP could violate WTO subsidy norms, jeopardizing India’s agricultural exports.
Resource Misallocation: A focus on MSP-backed crops risks groundwater depletion and soil degradation. For instance, Punjab and Haryana lost 64.6 billion cubic meters of groundwater between 2003 and 2020.
Environmental Impact: Monocultures encouraged by MSP, such as sugarcane, exacerbate biodiversity loss and greenhouse gas emissions.
Overburdening Procurement Systems: India’s food grain production exceeds 311 MMT, while storage capacity is only 145 MMT, creating a storage shortfall.
Alternatives to Strengthen MSP System
Deficiency Price Payments (DPPs): DPPs compensate farmers for the gap between MSP and market prices, reducing the need for large-scale procurement. Madhya Pradesh’s Bhavantar Bhugtan Yojana is a successful model.
Decentralized Procurement: States like Chhattisgarh have implemented decentralized paddy procurement, ensuring better regional equity and reduced logistical burdens.
Modernizing APMCs: Integrating APMCs with the e-NAM platform and expanding their reach can ensure competitive pricing and transparency.
Crop Diversification: Incentivizing pulses, oilseeds, and millets through higher MSPs can reduce environmental degradation. The International Year of Millets (2023) highlighted millet cultivation’s potential.
Climate-Resilient Policies: Linking MSP with insurance schemes like PMFBY can create a safety net for farmers affected by climate-related risks.
Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs): Strengthening FPOs ensures collective bargaining and reduces dependency on middlemen.
Sustainability-Linked MSPs: Introducing “green MSP” tied to sustainable practices can promote eco-friendly farming.
Infrastructure Development: Enhancing storage and warehousing capacity minimizes post-harvest losses. Public-private partnerships can address storage deficits.
Export-Oriented Strategies: Aligning MSP policies with global demand can enhance exports of premium crops like basmati rice.
Technological Interventions: AI and blockchain-based platforms can provide real-time price discovery and monitor MSP implementation.
Graded MSP for Quality: Higher MSPs for superior-grade crops can encourage better farming practices and align with export standards.
Direct Benefit Transfers (DBTs): Replacing input subsidies with DBTs, as seen in Telangana’s Rythu Bandhu scheme, offers farmers greater financial flexibility.
Conclusion
Legalizing MSP presents a multifaceted challenge, balancing farmer welfare with fiscal and environmental sustainability. While MSP offers income security, its implementation must be complemented by market reforms, crop diversification, and climate-resilient practices. A combination of DPPs, decentralized procurement, and modernized market mechanisms can create a robust, equitable, and sustainable agricultural framework that benefits all stakeholders.
.png)
