AIR POLLUTION

There is a predictability to the narrative around North India’s air pollution. Air
that is unhealthy all year-round becomes unbreathable during winter, largely due
to particulate matter in emissions from farm fires in Punjab, Haryana, and
Western Uttar Pradesh. This contributes to the portrayal of farmers as the
primary architects of Delhi’s air pollution crisis, and short-term solutions sustain
only till the skies clear up.
There is no denying that the effects of seasonal paddy stubble burning are severe
—it causes an estimated loss of 150,000 years of healthy life annually. Underlying
stubble burning, however, is a paddy-wheat cropping system with wide-ranging
effects on the region. The dominant practice of growing paddy in
the kharif (monsoon) season and wheat in the rabi (winter) season, doesn’t only
cause stubble burning. It has also caused Northwest India’s farm incomes
to stagnate and indebtedness to increase, polluted its environment, drained its
groundwater, degraded its soil, and made it vulnerable to climate change.
Thus far, solutions supported by philanthropy have treated stubble burning as an
isolated issue, focusing primarily on mechanised stubble
management interventions. Instead, donors and implementing nonprofits should
address it as a part of Northwest India’s agricultural system, which is in need of
repair.
Five key impacts of the paddy-wheat monoculture
While paddy and wheat blanket agricultural land across Punjab and Haryana,
they were not always so widespread. India’s persistent food shortages in the early
post-independence period were addressed by the Green Revolution—a package of
interventions focussed on increasing yields of rice and wheat. This involved
introducing investments in irrigation, research into high-yielding crop varieties,
subsidised chemical inputs such as fertilisers, and machinery, particularly in
Punjab, Haryana, and Western Uttar Pradesh. All of which led to a dramatic
increase in the yield of, and area under, wheat and paddy, and
quickly replaced the traditionally diverse mix of local crops.
Underlying stubble burning is a paddy-wheat cropping system with wide-ranging
effects on the region.| Picture courtesy: ©2011CIAT/NeilPalmer on Flickr

However, despite significant changes to the environment and the economy since
the 1960s, the policy environment continues to favour the paddy-wheat
monoculture system. A range of negative externalities have emerged and grown
over time, most importantly including groundwater depletion, stubble burning,
soil and water degradation, economic stagnation, and climate change
vulnerability.
 Groundwater depletion: A key Green Revolution intervention was the
introduction of new varieties of paddy which gave high yields under
intensive flood irrigation—a technique that uses huge amounts of water. In
semi-arid Northwest India, groundwater reserves supply the bulk of this
water. Free electricity to pump wells provided to farmers in Punjab and
Haryana, has exacerbated the usage of groundwater, leading to its
depletion. It is estimated that there will be severe shortage of groundwater
not only for irrigation, but also for drinking in 15-20 years. Alternative
cereal crops such as millets can reduce water use without affecting total
land use or calorie production.
 Stubble burning: Before the sowing of wheat—which typically happens
in November—farmers have to clear the large quantities of residue
produced at the time of harvesting paddy. Furthermore, because
groundwater levels have depleted considerably over time, farmers in
Punjab and Haryana delay paddy planting and harvesting until the
monsoons; which increases the pressure to quickly clear their fields by
burning stubble.
 Soil and water degradation: Each cycle of paddy and wheat
cultivation removes nutrients from the soil, as key elements like carbon,
nitrates, phosphates, and potassium, are taken up into the plant during
growth and removed from the ecosystem when the plant is harvested. This
causes a continuous degradation of soil health and a decline in land
productivity. In response, farmers must continually apply increasing
amounts of fertiliser, in order to maintain constant yields. The high yields
of the paddy-wheat monoculture cycle are maintained with vast amounts of
synthetic fertilisers and pesticides, which seep into groundwater and run
 off into canals. The resulting accumulation of toxins in the drinking water
supply has been linked to high cancer rates in the region.
 Economic stagnation: Across Northwest India, and particularly in
Punjab, agricultural GDP is growing far more slowly than in other states in
India. The rewards of growing paddy and wheat have hit a point of
diminishing returns, in terms of both agricultural and economic
productivity. Meanwhile, the rising cost of cultivation, including prices of
fertilisers, pesticides, and other inputs, has led to high levels of debt and
lower profitability for farmers. Diversifying into high-value crops can be a
key strategy in increasing farmer incomes.
 Climate change vulnerability: Greenhouse gas emissions are projected
to raise global temperatures in the coming years, with significant
consequences for agriculture. India’s monsoon is likely to be disrupted, and
yields of rice and wheat in Punjab are likely to fall substantially with
temperature and rainfall changes. Monocultured cropping patterns such as
paddy-wheat are especially vulnerable to climate change, and a diversified
farm is a key part of climate-resilient agricultural practice. As a bonus,
modifying the paddy-wheat cycle can significantly increase the carbon
sequestration ability of soils, mitigating climate change while reducing
water usage.
Five ways philanthropy can chip in
A comprehensive and holistic approach to agricultural transformation is the only
sustainable way to avoid unintended consequences. Further, any intervention
should take the route of offering farmers tools and incentives, and providing
information, rather than coercing them to follow instructions.
Due to the large role of the government in all aspects of agriculture—from
subsidies, infrastructure investment, Public Distribution System (PDS)
management, and environmental regulation—any action at scale must come from
the state. The role of philanthropy and the development sector, then, should be to
demonstrate working scalable models of alternative agricultural practice, and
generate the evidence for changes in agricultural policy.
1. Subsidy reform pilots
The central government has thus far been funding the procurement of nearly all
the wheat and rice produced in Punjab and Haryana, at a relatively high
Minimum Support Price (MSP). In addition, the two state governments provide
free electricity to all farmers for pumping groundwater, leading to huge fiscal
outlays as well as incentivising cultivation of water-intensive paddy. These
policies, as well as other subsidies (such as on fertilisers), provide indirect income
support to farmers, but incentivise paddy-wheat monoculture. By piloting and
evaluating alternate models of farmer income support (such as direct subsidy
transfers to farmer bank accounts), philanthropy may make it possible to reduce
this misaligned incentive, without hurting farmers economically.
For example, the ‘Pani Bachao Paisa Kamao’ project demonstrates the potential
of replacing free electricity with a direct benefit transfer for the value of electricity
saved. This offers farmers the same monetary value as the subsidy, while also
giving them the flexibility to make money by reducing their pumping electricity
consumption. This directly incentivises farmers to reduce their water
consumption, and can make less water-intensive crops more attractive.