The MSP regime has distorted cropping patterns in favour of cereals. Critically examine this in the light of recent Rabi MSP announcements that favour oilseeds and pulses.

The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA) sets the Minimum Support Price (MSP) by executive decision. MSP is notified for many crops, but assured purchase exists mainly for wheat and paddy. That gap, more than the price level itself, has tilted farmers towards cereals. The recent Rabi hikes for oilseeds only partly correct this bias.

How MSP has favoured cereals

• Better relative returns: in RMS 2026-27, wheat had a 109% margin over cost, against 59% for gram and 50% for safflower [1].
• Assured procurement: FCI buys wheat and paddy in large volumes, so these crops carry little price risk. Even so, only 6% of farmers sell wheat or paddy directly to a procurement agency, and most of them are in a few states [2].
• Ecological cost: the wheat–paddy cycle has become locked in across the water-stressed north-west.
• Import dependence: India still imports 56.25% of its edible oil (2023-24) [3].

Counter-view: the distortion is overstated and being corrected

• Price signals are shifting: for RMS 2027-28, safflower got the largest hike, up ₹675 to ₹7,215/qtl (+10.3%). All crops now carry a margin of 50–106% over cost [4].
• Pulses and oilseeds are rewarded: in 2026-27, rapeseed-mustard had a 93% margin and lentil 89% [1]. Import dependence has fallen from 63.2% (2015-16) under the National Mission on Edible Oils [3].
• Many causes: irrigation, power and fertiliser subsidies, and yield gaps also shape what farmers grow. MSP is not the only driver.
• Food security: the cereal focus built the buffer stocks behind the PDS.

Why the correction remains partial

• Safflower is a minor crop, so a big percentage hike adds little to national oil supply.
• Wheat still pairs the highest margin with assured purchase, so it remains the lower-risk choice.
• Without purchase under PM-AASHA, an oilseed MSP is only a reference price. Cheap edible-oil imports can also push market prices below MSP.

In short, the distortion comes mainly from the gap in procurement, not from MSP levels alone. Recent announcements point the right way. Making them work needs three things: crop-neutral purchase or price-deficiency payments for pulses and oilseeds, import duties aligned with MSP, and procurement extended to eastern states, as the Shanta Kumar Committee urged [2]. This would advance SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) and sustainable, diversified farming.