"Subsidised fertilisers have distorted the NPK ratio and harmed soil health in India." Examine, and suggest measures, including recent campaigns and PM-PRANAM.

The government fixes the price of urea, but phosphatic (P) and potassic (K) fertilisers are sold at market prices under the Nutrient Based Subsidy (NBS). This price gap pushes farmers towards nitrogen, so the statement largely holds. Price is the main cause, and weak soil-testing advice makes it worse [3].

How subsidy distorted the NPK ratio

• Price signal: a bag of urea costs a farmer ₹266, against ₹1,350 for DAP [1]. CACP has noted that the higher urea subsidy, compared with P&K, drives overuse of nitrogen [3].
• Skewed ratio: actual use has been reported at 6.7:2.4:1, against the recommended 4:2:1 [2]. Nitrogen makes up about two-thirds of total nutrient use [3].
• Fiscal waste: the Centre spends over ₹1.5 lakh crore on fertiliser subsidy [1], yet the imbalance persists.

Impact on soil health

• Low efficiency: crops take up only 30–45% of applied nitrogen [4]. The rest is lost to groundwater or the air.
• Falling returns: ICAR links this decline to nutrient imbalance and falling soil organic matter [4].
• Long-term risk: NITI Aayog has observed that soil health cannot be maintained unless this imbalance is corrected [3].

Measures

• Price reform: phase urea into a nutrient-based framework, and protect small farmers through direct benefit transfer (DBT).
• Soil Health Card: in an NPC study, using fertiliser as the card advised cut fertiliser use by 8–10% and raised yields by 5–6% [5]. Card advice should reach farmers at the point of sale.
• Khet Bachao Abhiyan: this Ministry of Agriculture campaign works through KVKs. It promotes balanced use based on the Soil Health Card and rotating paddy–wheat with pulses, with a village-level drive until 30 Nov 2026 [1]. Haryana's ₹8,000 per acre incentive for shifting from paddy to pulses shows that advice needs money behind it [6].
• PM-PRANAM: States/UTs receive 50% of the subsidy saved when they cut fertiliser use below their previous 3-year average [7]. Part of this reward should reach farmers and FPOs.
• Alternatives: nano-urea, organic and natural farming, and crop diversification.

Cheap urea, low nitrogen-use efficiency and weak soil-testing advice together explain the damage to India's soils. The way forward combines gradual price rationalisation with incentives to the States (PM-PRANAM), Soil Health Card-based advice to farmers, and sustained campaigns. This moves India towards SDG 2.4 (sustainable food production) and protects the soil, which is the base of food security.