Context

• Recently, the Supreme Court reprimanded both the central and state governments for failing to take substantial action against stubble burning practice, highlighting the citizens’ right to a pollution-free environment under Article 21 of the Constitution.
• Although efforts to reduce farm-fire incidents have been made, punitive measures have been insufficient in addressing the root causes that drive farmers to burn crop residue.
• Therefore, it is important to explore the environmental impact, economic barriers, and potential solutions, and a comprehensive approach to manage stubble burning.

The Historical and Legal Origins of Stubble Burning

• Legislative Efforts Aimed at Conservation of Water
  • The issue of stubble burning in India, especially in the northern states of Punjab and Haryana, has roots that trace back to legislative efforts aimed at water conservation in agriculture.
  • These states are major rice-producing regions, and paddy cultivation there is both water-intensive and energy-demanding.
  • To address escalating groundwater depletion, the governments of Punjab and Haryana implemented the Punjab Preservation of Sub-soil Water Act and the Haryana Preservation of Sub-soil Water Act in 2009.
  • This marked a significant policy intervention aimed at preserving the rapidly depleting groundwater levels.
• Unintended Consequences of Legislative Action: Disruption in Traditional Agricultural Cycle
  • Under these laws, farmers were prohibited from sowing paddy before mid-June, a measure designed to align the sowing season more closely with the arrival of the monsoon rains.
  • Previously, farmers would often sow paddy as early as April or May, relying heavily on groundwater to irrigate their fields in the absence of rain.
  • By delaying the sowing period, these acts sought to conserve water by reducing dependence on groundwater and encouraging reliance on natural rainfall during the monsoon season.
  • Although successful in conserving groundwater to some extent, this policy inadvertently disrupted the traditional agricultural cycle, creating a domino effect that ultimately contributed to the practice of stubble burning.
• The Move Away from Manual Harvesting
  • Traditionally, farmers in Punjab and Haryana harvested paddy manually, an eco-friendly method that left little to no stubble in the fields.
  • Manual harvesting is labour-intensive and requires many seasonal farmworkers, who would travel from one field to another during the harvest season.
  • However, the shortened post-harvest window imposed by the Sub-soil Water Conservation Acts led to increased demand for labour within a limited timeframe, driving up labour costs and creating a shortage of available workers.
  • Additionally, as labour migration patterns were disrupted, farmers found it challenging to secure affordable labour for manual harvesting.
• Economic Constraints and the Turn to Stubble Burning
  • With limited time and resources, stubble burning has emerged as a swift, cost-effective solution for farmers to clear their fields of residue.
  • Mechanised harvesting, while efficient, makes the residue management process more complex and financially challenging, costing around Rs 4,000 per acre for alternative, non-burning stubble management methods.
  • For small and marginal farmers, these additional expenses are often unfeasible, especially considering the narrow profit margins in agriculture.
  • Consequently, stubble burning has become the practical choice for many farmers, despite its detrimental impact on air quality, soil health, and biodiversity.

Proposed Solutions to Address the Issue of Stubble Burning

• Financial Support for Farmers
  • One primary reason farmers resort to stubble burning is the high cost of alternative stubble management methods.
  • Mechanical solutions to manage stubble, such as incorporating residue back into the soil or using specialised machines like the Happy Seeder, require an investment of approximately Rs 4,000 per acre—an expense that many small and marginal farmers cannot afford.
  • Providing targeted financial support to cover these additional costs would help reduce the economic burden on farmers, making sustainable methods more accessible.
  • One way to fund these initiatives is through the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).
  • By subsidising the costs associated with sustainable residue management, governments can make these methods viable for farmers and incentivize a shift away from burning.
• Crop Diversification and Revisiting Minimum Support Prices (MSP)
  • Another key solution lies in encouraging crop diversification, shifting farmers away from water-intensive crops like paddy and promoting the cultivation of alternatives like coarse grains, pulses, and oilseeds.
  • This strategy could reduce the amount of paddy stubble produced in the first place, alleviating the need for widespread stubble management.
  • In recent decades, government policies have incentivised paddy cultivation to meet the nation’s food security demands.
  • These policies have created a cycle where farmers in Punjab and Haryana grow primarily paddy and wheat due to the assured returns through MSP (Minimum Support Prices) for these crops.
• Providing Technical Support and Training Programs
  • In addition to MSP policies, providing technical support and training programs for farmers on diversified cropping systems would help bridge knowledge gaps and enable farmers to transition smoothly.
  • Agricultural extension services could play a crucial role in this shift, offering guidance on how to cultivate alternative crops and manage land sustainably.
  • Over time, a diversified crop landscape would reduce stubble production, alleviate water scarcity, and contribute to India’s food security with a broader range of crops.

Manual Harvesting and Additional Considerations to Address the Stubble Burning

• Incentivising Manual Harvesting
  • Manual harvesting is another environmentally friendly solution that reduces stubble burning by leaving minimal residue in fields.
  • While traditional manual harvesting methods have largely been replaced by mechanical alternatives due to labour shortages and high costs, reintroducing these methods, particularly in high-stubble areas, could make a meaningful difference.
  • Manual harvesting not only minimises stubble production but also preserves the soil structure and nutrients that would otherwise be destroyed by burning.
  • Incentivising manual harvesting, however, would require an initial investment to offset labour costs and address the challenges of labour availability.
  • A subsidy of Rs 4,000 per acre could cover the expenses associated with manual harvesting, making it feasible for farmers to employ seasonal labourers for the process.
• Additional Considerations for Implementation
  • To make these solutions effective, collaboration between state governments, the central government, and local authorities is essential.
  • Coordination could ensure that financial support reaches farmers promptly, that MSPs for alternative crops are enforced reliably, and that resources are allocated efficiently to regions facing the greatest challenges.
  • Developing a monitoring and evaluation system to track the effectiveness of these measures could help policymakers refine their approaches over time.

The Broader Impact of Supporting Sustainable Farming Practices

• Encouraging manual harvesting not only aids in reducing air pollution but also has broader environmental and economic benefits.
• It aligns with India’s commitments to address climate change and reduce carbon emissions.
• Each year, global forums pledge to spend billions on climate change mitigation; directing a fraction of such funds towards incentivising sustainable farming practices could create meaningful impact on both local and global scales.
• Moreover, supporting farmers in this transition can address social issues such as rural unemployment and ensure food security through sustainable, diversified crop production.

Conclusion

• The issue of stubble burning in India highlights the need for a comprehensive, long-term strategy that addresses not just environmental concerns but also economic realities faced by farmers.
• Instead of relying solely on punitive measures, policymakers must consider solutions that balance environmental sustainability with economic viability, such as supporting manual harvesting, promoting crop diversification, and providing financial assistance to farmers.
• Such measures could create lasting improvements in air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and create a resilient agricultural economy, benefiting both the people of Delhi-NCR and the broader Indian ecosystem.