28.02.2018 Views

Revitalization of Rivers in India Draft Policy - Isha Guru Jaggi Vasudev

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Revitalization</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Rivers</strong> In <strong>India</strong><br />

<strong>Draft</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> Recommendation<br />

FINANCING AND RISK MITIGATION: COMPENSATION OF NOTIONAL LOSS OF<br />

FARMER INCOME<br />

The challenge <strong>in</strong> the economic model proposed is that the earn<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

<strong>of</strong> the farmer for the first few years after transition to the new cropp<strong>in</strong>g<br />

system are below the threshold <strong>of</strong> their current earn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> Rs. 75,000 per<br />

annum. 24 The fact is that not many farmers will have the sav<strong>in</strong>gs to fund<br />

this cash outlay upfront. This would slow down the implementation <strong>of</strong> the<br />

program because only a small percentage <strong>of</strong> the farmers will be able to<br />

fund their livelihoods for the <strong>in</strong>itial 3-5 year gestation before <strong>in</strong>come rises<br />

above their current earn<strong>in</strong>g threshold.<br />

To tackle this, we are recommend<strong>in</strong>g that the government<br />

compensate the notional loss <strong>of</strong> livelihood. We have assumed that the<br />

farmer must have an annual surplus at least similar to their current<br />

average earn<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> Rs. 74,988. 25 With this assumption the additional<br />

government cost per farmer would be Rs. 75,000 <strong>in</strong> the first three years <strong>of</strong><br />

the program.<br />

The ecosystem services that rivers and the trees on river floodpla<strong>in</strong>s<br />

provide, strongly justifies the compensation for the nom<strong>in</strong>al loss <strong>in</strong> the<br />

farmers’ <strong>in</strong>come. Ways <strong>in</strong> which we could compensate for the loss <strong>of</strong><br />

farmers’ exist<strong>in</strong>g livelihood and m<strong>in</strong>imize the risks <strong>in</strong>volved dur<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

transition to tree-based agriculture are:<br />

••<br />

Conversion <strong>in</strong>to horticulture crop by the farmer <strong>in</strong>volves loss<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>come till the start <strong>of</strong> commercial yield <strong>of</strong> the fruit trees.<br />

Therefore, the notional loss <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>come for the farmer is to be suitably<br />

compensated.<br />

••<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ancial support/l<strong>in</strong>kages must be provided for farmers through<br />

exist<strong>in</strong>g government schemes/programs, f<strong>in</strong>ancial <strong>in</strong>stitutions, and<br />

banks, so that they can smoothly transition from staple crop to agr<strong>of</strong>orestry<br />

fruit-tree cultivation. Easy loan with zero <strong>in</strong>terest rates, and<br />

long-term repayment plans may be provided to the farmers to help<br />

stabilize their livelihood.<br />

132

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!