·The Hindu·15 marks·250–350 wordsEconomyEnvironmentS&T

Examine the institutional and economic barriers to large-scale adoption of climate-resilient agricultural technologies in India.

In this answer
  1. Institutional barriers
  2. Economic barriers

India's climate-resilient agriculture architecture is research-rich — NICRA, run by ICAR, has assessed 651 agricultural districts and flagged 310 as vulnerable [1] — yet field-level adoption remains thin, revealing barriers that are institutional and economic rather than scientific.

Institutional barriers

  • Fragmented mandates: research rests with ICAR (NICRA), while delivery runs through DA&FW's NMSA schemes — Per Drop More Crop, Rainfed Area Development, Soil Health Management — and state agriculture departments, weakening the lab-to-land chain [2].
  • Demonstration islands: NICRA technologies are showcased in Climate Resilient Villages — 448 villages across 151 districts [1] — but replication beyond them depends on thinly spread extension staff and KVKs.
  • Information gaps: District Agriculture Contingency Plans exist for all 651 districts [1], yet timely, location-specific agro-advisories seldom reach the individual cultivator.
  • Exclusionary records: tenants and oral lessees rarely appear in land registers, so scheme subsidies and institutional credit bypass those most exposed.

Economic barriers

  • High upfront cost: micro-irrigation assistance is 55% for small and marginal farmers and 45% for others [3]; the residual capital cost remains prohibitive on sub-hectare holdings.
  • Slow diffusion: cumulative PDMC coverage of about 95.58 lakh hectares with ₹21,968.75 crore released since 2015-16 [3] is modest against India's total cropped area.
  • Thin risk buffers: a 1°C rise in long-term temperature pushes poor rural households deeper into weather-dependent farming while cutting their off-farm incomes by about 33% [4], leaving no surplus to absorb adoption risk.
  • Market disincentives: assured procurement of paddy and wheat weakens the price signal for shifting to less water-intensive, resilient crops.

The constraint, therefore, is delivery and affordability, not availability of technology. Convergence of NICRA research with NMSA implementation, single-window subsidy plus insurance linkage, and tenant-inclusive registries can carry proven practices to scale — the systemic agrifood transformation that FAO and the IPCC urge [5], advancing SDG-2 and SDG-13 together.

Sources

  1. 1Initiatives to Promote Sustainable Farming Practices and Resilience Against Climate Change — PIBNICRA vulnerability assessment of 651 districts, 310 vulnerable; Climate Resilient Villages; District Agriculture Contingency Plans
  2. 2Climate-Resilient Agriculture Technologies — PIBdivision of roles between ICAR (NICRA) and DA&FW (NMSA components)
  3. 3Per Drop More Crop: funds released and area covered — PIBmicro-irrigation coverage, outlay, and 55%/45% assistance pattern
  4. 4FAO report: Insights Highlight Rising Vulnerabilities of Rural Poor Amid Climate Shocks in India — FAOimpact of a 1°C temperature rise on farm dependence and off-farm incomes
  5. 5Latest IPCC report highlights the critical need to transform agrifood systems — FAOneed for systemic agrifood transformation for adaptation and mitigation
Practice
12 questions on this article
Check the answer for each question, or reveal all at once.
Practice MCQs →

More from this note

More on Economy