Agriculture new development

Target for Foodgrain Production during 2014-15

Government has set targets for agricultural production including foodgrains for the year 2014-15, which are as follows: Crop Production Target (in million tonnes) Total foodgrains 261.00 Rice 106.00 Wheat  94.00 Pulses  19.50 Coarse Cereals  41.50 Oilseeds  33.00 Sugarcane 345.00 Cotton*  35.00 Jute & Mesta**                             11.20   *(in million bales of 170 kg each for Cotton)  **(in million bales of 180 kg each for Jute & Mesta) Government is implementing various crop development programmes/ schemes through State Governments such as National Food Security Mission (NFSM), Bringing Green Revolution to Eastern India (BGREI), Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY), National Mission on Oilseeds and Oil Palm (NMOOP) and Mission for Integrated Development of Horticulture (MIDH) etc. to meet the targets for agricultural production, including foodgrains.  Under these programmes, assistance is provided for activities like demonstrations of improved technologies, distribution of improved seed / planting material, need based plant protection and soil amendments, resource conservation techniques/ energy management, efficient water application tools, protected cultivation, farmers’ trainings, etc. for enhancing production and productivity of agricultural production in the country. Promoting Modern Method of Paddy Cultivation In order to enhance the production & productivity of rice in the country, Government has been promoting modified methods of paddy cultivation such as System of Rice Intensification (SRI), Direct Seeded Rice (DSR) and Line Transplanting under various crop development programmes such as “National Food Security Mission (NFSM)”, “Bringing Green Revolution to Eastern India (BGREI)” and “Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY)”. The Government have drawn up long term strategy to increase the production and productivity through promoting newer technology like hybrid rice cultivation, multiple stress tolerant varieties, soil health improvement through use of lime, Gypsum, micro-nutrient, green manuring, balanced use of fertilizers, mechanization etc., besides any new technologies developed by Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) & State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) with help of various programmes like NFSM, RKVY, BGREI, National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA) etc. across the country. Promoting Conversion of Crop Residues into Biochar Conversion of crop residues into biochar and its application in soil as soil amendment is a novel approach for sequestering atmospheric carbon into the soils, besides improving soil quality and productivity. Apart from this, the production of biochar and its application to soil may deliver immediate benefits through increase in soil water retention properties, saturated hydraulic conductivity and nutrients availability. It has led to renewed interest of agricultural scientists in this field. Research on biochar at Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture (CRIDA), Hyderabad has indicated that biochar can be produced from stocks of cotton, redgram, maize, pigeon pea and castor. A low cost portable charring kiln has also been developed at CRIDA. Research also carried out under National Initiatives on Climate Resilient Agriculture (NICRA) revealed the usefulness of application of biochar in red soils of Andhra Pradesh. Indian Institute of Soil Science, Bhopal has initiated research to standardize optimum condition for preparation of Biochar from bio-mass of different origin and to study their effect on soil properties and crop growth. Government is accordingly taking various steps to create adequate awareness among farmers and to educate them under its Sub-Mission on Agricultural Extension (SMAE) under National Mission on Agricultural Extension and Technology (NMAET) through initiatives such as Support to States Extension Programmes for Extension Reforms (ATMA Scheme); Mass Media Support to Agricultural Extension; Setting up of Agri-Clinics and Agri-Business Centres and Kisan Call Centre Scheme. Information is also provided to farmers through SMS Portal in the form of topical and seasonal advisories in their local language and as per their crop preferences.

June 2014 hottest month since 1880

The average temperature for land and ocean surfaces around the world was 16.2 degrees Celsius.

The US government’s climate agency on Monday reported that this June’s global temperatures were the hottest since record keeping began in 1880.

It was also the 352nd consecutive month with a global temperature above the 20th-century average.

Record warmth was registered in Greenland, parts of northern South America, areas in eastern and central Africa and parts of southern and south-eastern Asia, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said.

The average temperature for land and ocean surfaces around the world was 16.2 degrees Celsius, compared with the average of 15.5 degrees over the past century.

The report supported warnings by climate scientists that the world faces temperature increases of 4 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century, if no preventative action is taken.

The only way to avoid drastic rises in sea levels and lethal drought is to keep that increase to 2 degrees or less, they say.

Global average temperatures have already risen by 0.85 degrees since 1880.

To keep below the 2-degree-Celsius increase, the world would have to lower global greenhouse gas emissions like carbon dioxide by 40 to 70 per cent compared with 2010 - and do it by 2050.

CSE report comes down hard on junk food in schools

The research and advocacy organisation Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) has called for a ban on junk food in schools and the regulation of advertisements promoting its consumption.

Children are not the best judges of their food and they are aggressively targeted by advertisements and seduced by celebrity endorsements, says a new CSE report titled “Junk Food Targeted at Children, Regulatory Action Required to Limit Exposure and Availability”.

The CSE has put together this report to fill the gaps in the suggestions made by a committee appointed by the Delhi High Court in a case filed by an NGO, which demanded a ban on junk food.

The committee, which submitted its report earlier this year, decided to only “restrict” junk food advertising instead of banning it; did not propose advertising regulation and felt junk food should be banned only within 50 metres of schools instead of the 500 yards (457 metres) put forth by the petitioner, says Amit Khurana of CSE. The case will be heard on August 6.

The CSE report suggests stringent steps to curb junk food. It demands that online advertisements, sponsorship, direct marketing and other emerging sales and promotional ventures should be regulated.

Countries have imposed “fat” taxes or soda taxes on junk food but CSE demands that junk food be banned in schools and areas within 500 yards. It says there must be a canteen policy to provide nutritious food; regulation of promotion of junk food targeted at children, establishing of stringent norms for unhealthy ingredients like trans fatty acids, and encouraging of physical activity among children.

It also suggests a scoring-based nutrient profiling model practised in the United Kingdom where points are allocated on the basis of nutrient content in 100 grams of food or drink.

While a 10 to 12-year-old moderately active child needs up to 30 grams of sugar and salt up to five grams, processed foods rich in fats, salt, sugar and preservatives pose a health risk. A cross sectional study among 400 school children in Chennai in 2013 found that the total prevalence of hypertension was 21.5 per cent.Unless strong regulation is in place to control the availability and exposure of junk food to children, consumption will increase, warns CSE.

The World Health Organisation says that the number of overweight or obese infants and young children (zero to 5 years) increased from 31 million globally in 1990 to 44 million in 2012. The worrying aspect is that a vast majority of overweight children live in developing countries, where the rate of increase has been over 30 per cent higher than that of developed countries.

The WHO predicts that if current trends continue, the number of overweight or obese infants and young children globally will increase to 70 million by 2025.

Globally, countries have put in place certain norms like banning junk food in schools, like in the U.S.A, U.A.E, England, Canada; regulating advertisement and promotion (Canada, England, South Korea, Peru, France) and imposing taxes (Finland, France, Mexico, Peru).

Mars orbiter completes about 80% of journey

The spacecraft has covered a distance of more than 540 million kilometres on its helio centric journey to the red planet

Inching closer to the red planet, India’s ambitious Mars orbiter spacecraft has covered more than 540 million kilometres, about 80 per cent of its journey for its rendezvous with the planet scheduled for September 24.

The spacecraft has covered a distance of more than 540 million kilometres on its helio centric journey to the red planet, ISRO said on Tuesday. “Yes, that is very close to a whopping 80 per cent”. Mars Orbit Mission and its payloads are in good health”, ISRO said on its social networking site.

In the last crucial milestone, ISRO performed the second Trajectory Correction Manoeuvre on the spacecraft on June 11 by firing the spacecraft’s 22 Newton thrusters for 16 seconds. Mid-course corrections are done to keep the spacecraft on course. Another trajectory correction manoeuvre is planned for August before ISRO performs the Mars Orbit Insertion in September.

The ambitious Mars mission under a Rs. 450-crore project was launched from Sriharikota in Andhra Pradesh onboard the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle on November 5 last year with an aim to reach the red planet’s atmosphere by September 24. The project is expected to provide the scientific community better opportunities in planetary research.

Faith and fatwa,UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

Nothing prepared us for the pleasant constitutional surprise, an incredibly brief order by a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court that “the decisions of Dar-ul-Qaza or the fatwa” are neither “created nor sanctioned by any law made by the competent legislature”. The fatwa issued by Dar-ul-Qazas (a sharia court) or “for that matter anybody, is not adjudication of dispute by an authority under a judicial system sanctioned by law”. In our constitutional legal system, a “qazi or mufti has no authority” nor any legal powers to impose “his opinion and enforce his fatwa on anyone by any coercive method”.

However, any decision affecting 65 million Indian Muslim women must be read closely. First, the decision is not a judgment at all; it is merely an advisory. The court does not overtly declare the law; it merely dismisses the petition with an observation “that no Dar-ul-Qazas or for that matter, anybody or institution by any name, shall give verdict or issue fatwa touching upon the rights, status and obligation of an individual unless such an individual has asked for it”. Fatwas that do not do so are constitutionally valid. And a non-citizen may still fall under the sway of a fatwa.

The court’s observations deserve to be given great weight, but in so far as the sharia is a matter of faith and that faith is interpreted by its custodians, only rebelling women may take recourse to civil courts. And even they must bear the intolerable ambiguities of constitutional as well as pious Islamic interpretation of the Quran. For example, the 2005 “model nikahnama” issued by the Muslim Personal Law Board (MPLB) says, in its last clause, that the “Ulema would take the decision and whatever judgement he gives would be binding on us”. As sociologist Sabiha Hussain points out, this “clause apparently closes the option for women to approach the secular courts”.

Second, the court does not make prior fatwas invalid. Victims may file for proceedings with the police or approach the courts. But whether a crime has been committed by the issuance of a fatwa remains a matter for the police and courts to decide, eventually.

Third, only the fatwas “touching upon the rights of an individual at the instance of rank strangers”, which “may cause irreparable damage” and so are “absolutely uncalled for”, would “be in violation of basic human rights” and “cannot be used to punish innocent”, as no “religion, including Islam, punishes the innocent”. Religion, moreover, cannot be “allowed to be merciless to the victim. Faith cannot be used as dehumanising force”. These great words do not, for example, help Muslim women forced tomarry their fathers-in-law under some strained interpretation of the Quran. Women are dragged to so-called sharia courts not by “strangers” but by near relations. Is it any relief if the fatwa were asked for “by the person interested”?

Fourth, although a fatwa can be asked for on behalf of a person in “case of incapacity”, what constitutes that incapacity and who is best suited to represent physical or mental disability or impairment is a vexed question. Would the judicial injunction on the “stranger” seeking a fatwa deter pious Muslims from taking genuine care of the incapacitated? The question is not fully answered by the clarification that “any person interested in the welfare of such [a] person may be permitted to represent the cause of [the] concerned individual”.

Fifth, what does the very last judicial observation signify? It says that, in “any event, the decision or the fatwa issued by whatever body being not emanating from any judicial system recognised by law is not binding on anyone including the person who had asked for it”. Does the word “binding” refer to law or religion or both?

The MPLB had already argued for the “necessity of establishment of a network of judicial system throughout the country” through which “Muslims should be made aware that they should get their disputes decided by the qazis”. True, “this establishment may not have the police powers but [it] shall have the book of Allah in hand and sunnat of the Rasool and all decisions should be according to the Book and the Sunnat”. But according to the MPLB, “this will bring the Muslims to the Muslim Courts. They will get justice”. The judicial position that while fatwas may be enforced as religion, they cannot be coercively implemented by the religious community, does not address the problem of pious Muslims being asked to believe, often to the point of harm and even death, that the decisions of the Islamic tribunals are always “just”.

According to Dar-ul-Uloom, Deoband, which admitted issuing the fatwa in the Imrana case “as per Fiqah-e-Hanafi, which is based on Quran and Hadith” it is “not running [a] parallel judiciary”. It contended that it “has no agency or powers to enforce its fatwas” and it is up to “the discretion of the persons or the parties who obtain fatwas to abide by it or not”. It can, however, do nothing if “God fearing Muslims being answerable to the Almighty, obey the fatwas”. But such coercive implementation of community decisions on deeply religious matters is not new. Hindus succeeded in maintaining untouchability for nearly 5,000 years and some are doing so even today, despite it being constitutionally and legally outlawed. Even now, caste biradari panchayats deliver patently unconstitutional decisions violating the equal rights of women as persons and as citizens. This does not, however, justify the hurtful, and even wounding, Muslim apartheid against Islamic women, if only because several wrongs never make a right.

Overall, the court is discharging its duty under Article 44 of the Constitution to “endeavour” towardsa uniform civil code. But nowhere does it say so, and wisely. Wisely because the code raises complex issues of the politics of cruelty, survival and identity, which the representative institutions find unfeasible to answer. The court rightly asserts that, in the meantime, the Constitution normatively forbids barbaric treatment of Islamic women citizens of India. Although the Hindu law lacks the institutional piety of fatwas, its viciousness towards women seems impliedly addressed.

When Modi goes to Kathmandu

India and Nepal have a new opportunity to collaborate on development and energy security.

Indian External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj’s visit to Kathmandu, scheduled this week, is being viewed with some hope and fear. Hope, because there may be clues offered about what India’s political change means for Nepal. Also, her visit will lay the ground for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit — the first bilateral visit to Nepal by an Indian PM in 17 years. Some ministers in Nepal are being told by Indian officials to prepare a wishlist, as Modi is keen on making a “generous offer”.

Fear, because Nepalese officials are concerned about the “unequal” draft of the power trading agreement that India has sent. They assert that India is more keen on an unfair control over Nepal’s rich water resources rather than exploring opportunities for equal benefit, with due recognition to Nepal’s status as an upper riparian country. Apart from the hydro-power projects, an agreement on the revised extradition treaty, mutual legal assistance and the settlement of border disputes top the agenda during Modi’s visit, expected soon although the date isn’t finalised. In sum, there is hope about Modi and his government, and fear of the bureaucratic machinery that deals with Nepal on a day-to-day basis.

Modi is largely seen as a welcome change by the people of Nepal. Someone as strong as Nehru in that he is a strong personality, with control over his government and a sound party organisation, and different from Indira Gandhi in that she became stronger at the cost of her party organisation. I.K. Gujral is seen more as an ideal PM in the neighbourhood for advocating non-reciprocity in dealing with India’s smaller neighbours. But his short tenure and poor hold on the bureaucracy reduced his wish to a mere slogan. How Modi blends all those factors and his own approach will establish his image in the neighbourhood and in Nepal — a country with enormous geostrategic significance. India, especially post-2005, has lost its traditional respect and clout in Nepal because its bureaucracy and intelligence agencies are dabbling more in Nepal’s internal politics, in a prolonged period of transition and uncertainty.

Hawks in the previous UPA regime, who still influence the course of Nepali politics through their allies here, believe a constitution delivered on time alone will ensure political stability. That sounds too simplistic. Nepali actors, meanwhile, did not maintain even minimal contact with the BJP, which they believed was against the “radical changes” in Nepal — republicanism and secularism — being institutionalised.

A couple of weeks ago, S.D. Muni, who played a crucial role in bringing Nepal’s Maoists to the Indian PM’s office, warned on Twitter that Modi should restrain forces withinthe BJP favouring the restoration of the monarchy and Nepal’s return to its former status of a Hindu nation. He also asked Swaraj to ignore such forces when she visits Nepal.

But the real challenge lies in exploring the prospects of prosperity together. Past collaboration on hydel power failed to generate the needed trust between the two neighbours. In 1996, Nepal and India signed the Pancheshwar Multipurpose Project (PMP) deal as part of the Mahakali Treaty. Almost two decades later, not even the detailed project report has been finalised, bringing into question the sincerity of the two governments about working together. The costs of non-execution, of agreed projects, has taken a toll on the credibility of Nepal-India cooperation.

More problems lie in Nepal. India’s power trading draft, sent to the ministry of energy in Kathmandu, has not yet been circulated to other departments, including the PM’s office. “It is time, Nepal transformed itself into a dignified trading partner instead of continuing as a dependent,” says Bhekh Bahadur Thapa, a senior diplomat. Some say Nepal should solicit the partnership of other countries as well for smaller projects, but should sign the power purchase agreement with India on mutually beneficial terms. An official assessment shows that around 15,000 MW of power purchase by India at current rates will neutralise Nepal’s ever-increasing trade deficit with India.

“From a developmental perspective, Modi’s emergence in India is the best thing to happen for Nepal. India should give up its usual coercive tactic, both independent and sovereign countries should hold a straightforward discussion to explore their bright future together,”says former PM Kirtinidhi Bista, adding, “Let us involve India and China for the generation of hydro power that both India and Nepal need so badly.”

A shot in time,HEALTH EXPENDITURE

India’s expenditure on vaccines should count as sound investment in a healthy future.

Plans by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to introduce four new vaccines to India’s Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP) have been welcomed across the globe as one of the most significant leaps in India’s public health policy in 30 years, and rightly so. These vaccines are currently available in India only on the private market, beyond the reach of poor children living in unsanitary conditions. But some sceptics have labelled the move as both unnecessary and costly. This is a view that is not only wrong but also shortsighted.

The addition of these new vaccines to India’s existing immunisation programme is not just an example of great leadership but also makes good economic sense. Introducing new vaccines does not just prevent death and disease, it also maximises the lifetime potential of children and the economic health of families, and the communities and countries in which they live.

This is particularly the case in India, home to the largest number of unimmunised children in the world: 6.8 million, or roughly a third of the world’s total. Granted this is partly due to the fact that India has the largest birth cohort in the world of 27 million children each year, but also because it has a particularly large gap in the health status between its rich and poor. Immunisation can help bridge that gap. By introducing the rotavirus vaccine as one of the new vaccines, for example, the Centre hopes to radically reduce the 80,000 child deaths and one million hospitalisations it estimates are caused by diarrhoea each year. These are children who could be going to school to improve their chances of a productive life. Disease doesn’t just claim lives, it impoverishes them, too.

Currently, organisations like Gavi, Unicef, WHO, the World Bank and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are working with governments, industry and civil society organisations in preparation for the largest scale-up of immunisation coverage. The goal of immunising an additional 300 million children across the globe between 2016 and 2020 will take an additional $9.5 billion. But donors, including the government of India, are willing to invest in this venture because they know that it won’t just save lives but is also expected to generate between $80-100 billion in economic benefits. They recognise that saving a life today reaps long-term benefits for families, communities and countries.

Back of the envelope calculations by naysayers on the cost of vaccines fail to take this into account. Some have argued that the money spent on vaccinations could go towards primary healthcare services and mobilising health workers. But India has already done that, with enormous success, achieving what many believed was simply not possible — eliminating polio. What’s more, in doing so, India created a vast infrastructure that has been used fora range of health services, from neonatal and maternal care to improving nutrition. There is an opportunity to build on this success and use the existing infrastructure and outreach that helped wipe out polio to increase India’s immunisation coverage for other vaccines.

To a large extent, this process has already begun, with India’s national scale-up of its pentavalent vaccine. With Gavi support, eight states have already rolled out this 5-in-1 vaccine with the remaining states set to introduce it by April 2015. Adding rotavirus, rubella and injectable polio to India’s routine childhood immunisation programmes, and adult Japanese encephalitis (JE) vaccine for adults in disease hotspots, will take this further. It is worth noting, with the exception of JE, all these vaccines are produced indigenously.

Modern vaccines can indeed be more expensive than the old and there will always be other areas that also need funding. But immunisation continues to be one of the most cost-effective interventions. Not just because an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, but because immunisation makes economic sense. It is a case of an investment versus an expenditure.