Consumer Voice On Farm Products Need To Be Unmuted

The consumer concerns of price volatility in farm products like fruits, vegetables, cereals, and pulses have lost their voice in the ongoing slugfest between the farmer and government.

Ironically, the consumer's voice remains muted in the whole discussion. Consumer activists and economists opine that price fluctuations will hurt the end consumer in the absence of a strong regulator.

No doubt, the farmer and corporate will continue to cooperate, collaborate, and co-exist when the current conundrum is eventually resolved or settled-either by the government.

At least one hopes it will conclude amicably without loss of lives or property.

"I am confident the price of commodities will come down. Look around the fierce competition and surplus production. There will be seasonal fluctuations in price. But there is no need to be paranoid of hoarding, resulting in artificial price rise," says Prof Bejon Kumar Misra, International Consumer Policy expert.

However, a former chairman of The Commission for Agricultural Costs & Prices (CACP) points out that in the absence of a strong regulator for consumers and farmers, the window under the new Act is open for mischief. CACP was set up in 1965, and as per the website, recommends Minimum Support Price (MSPs) of 23 commodities, which comprise seven cereals (paddy, wheat, maize, sorghum, pearl millet, barley, and ragi), five pulses (gram, tur, moong, urad, lentil), seven oilseeds (groundnut, rapeseed-mustard, soybean, sesamum, sunflower, safflower, niger seed), and four commercial crops (copra, sugarcane, cotton, and raw jute).

"The challenge could be the availability of farm products and controlled price. The consumer at the lowest spectrum of society, may not be able to afford it all through the year. Earlier, seasonality ensured lower prices during surplus production. This aspect needs to be addressed," said Prof Amir Ullah Khan specialist on Economics and Development policy at the MCR HRDI of the Government of Telangana.

The concern has to go beyond minimum support price, to encompass the risks of diluting essential commodities and maintenance act and many other issues cited by the stakeholders.

One does not need to look for any convincing evidence to vindicate the hypothesis that electoral considerations guide policy decisions on support prices and procurement. A purely political motive and devoid of economics can never provide a long term solution to the farming community and the end consumer.

"Every stakeholder should be made part of the reform, and that would require closing the gaps in the three bills," says Dr Raja Ram Tripathi, national convener of the All India Farmers Alliance (AIFA).

The agricultural produce landscape in India is undergoing significant and rapid change. This is primarily led by changing consumer demand preferences, as rising incomes rearrange the contents of the household food basket in both urban and rural India.

"To address the new consumption pattern and provide directional subsidy to these segments of agricultural production in the next decade. A greater emphasis will have to be placed on developing institutional infrastructure," states Swaha Shome, a leading agriculture analyst in one of his essays.

Agriculture economists are of the view that economic considerations are critical and will determine the future of the current stalemate between the farmers and the government. It will also shape the future of agriculture reforms in India.

"Reforms have to be for a better future of Indian farmers, corporate, government, consumer, and economy. But, unfortunately, even today, farmer leaders are not seeking holistic reforms, and the government is trying to dilute reform by offering amendments," points Vijay Sardana, Agriculture Economist.

The author is a Blogger and Personal Finance Expert