Crop protection products [CPP] or pesticides as these are commonly known – are meant to protect plants from pests and disease so that they are healthy and in turn, help farmers in garnering higher yield and better crop quality. But, imagine what would happen if pesticides themselves start posing risk to humans, animals, birds, water, air, land etc? This is precisely what has happened during the last more than a decade ago or so.
In 2003, a joint parliamentary committee [JPC] had taken a serious view of presence of pesticides in drinking water, beverages and soft drinks much in excess of global standards. The JPC had then made far reaching recommendations that included inter alia formulation of standards for individual food items, making fixation of maximum residue limits [MRLs] mandatory prior to granting market access for any new pesticide [besides fixing MRL for all pesticides already in use within a set time frame] and regular monitoring of pesticide residue in food.
The government had then given a commitment in the Supreme Court to implement the above recommendations. Accordingly, in 2006, Food Safety and Standards Authority of India [FSSAI] was set up under Food Safety and Standards Act passed by the parliament. A project on “Monitoring of Pesticides Residue at National Level” in commonly consumed food was also initiated. It is being implemented by Indian Agriculture Research Institute [IARI] – a research centre under the aegis of Indian Council of Agriculture Research [ICAR].
Yet, improper and indiscriminate use of pesticides continues to haunt us. A study under the above project covering 20,618 samples of food [vegetables, fruits, milk, pulses, meat, spices] collected during 2014-15 shows that nearly 18.7% of the samples tested contained pesticide residues in varying degree. In over 2.6% of the samples, the residue level was higher than the prescribed limits set by FSSAI. The incidence has doubled when compared to similar studies done in the past.
The problem is not confined to big cities such as Mumbai and Delhi [although they are the worst hit]; samples from small urban centres too have failed to pass the safety test. Worst of all, traces of banned/prohibited and unapproved pesticides have also been found in 12.5% of the samples tested.
Banned pesticides are those which have lost their efficacy and are found to have damaging effect on health and environment [or government may not allow their use because these are banned in other similarly placed countries]. Unapproved pesticides [commonly known as “spurious”] are ones which have not even been tested in India for their ‘safety’ and ‘efficacy’ and could be far more dangerous than banned products.
These scary results are manifestation of a much deeper malaise afflicting the entire pesticides supply chain covering registration, manufacture, sales and use. Any person wanting to deal in a pesticide in any manner whatsoever must take prior registration/approval from the national regulator Central Insecticides Board & Registration Committee [CIB&RC] – a statutory authority created under the Insecticides Act [1968]. The relevant sections of the Act pertaining to registration suffer from a serious flaw.
An applicant wanting to register a new product ‘first time’ in India is required generate voluminous data to demonstrate its ‘safety’ and ‘efficacy’ in Indian conditions [costing millions of rupees] in addition to hundreds of million dollars spent globally on toxicity and chemistry studies. Once this registration is granted under Section 9(3) of Insecticides Act [1968], subsequent applicants can get registration Section 9(4) for the same product on payment of nominal fee ‘without having to submit any data’.
This inevitably leads to a scenario whereby for every registration under section 9(3), there are multiple registrations under 9(4). If, a new pesticide turns out to be a blockbuster molecule [with brisk sales], subsequent registrations run in to hundreds. The ease of getting such registrations virtually on a platter makes way for non-serious players who have little regard for quality and compliance with standards. What makes matters worse is that once granted, regulator/CIB&RC cannot cancel the registration.
If, getting registration from national regulator is easy, obtaining a manufacturing license from the state [concerned authority under relevant provisions of Insecticides Act] is no difficult either. True, the state authorities are expected to do the inspection – before giving a license as also at the time renewal – to check whether basic facilities including quality control exist or not. But, that is rarely done. This has led to indiscriminate proliferation of pesticide manufacturing units, currently a whopping over 1250 [of these, serious/genuine players are just about 50].
The requirements for pesticide distributors and retailers are equally lax. A retailer is the key point of interface with the farmer. The former is expected to have full knowledge about the pesticides he is stocking/selling and should be in a position to tell latter on ‘what’, ‘how’, ‘when’, ‘dosage’ etc. In other words, he should be acting in a manner like a doctor is to a patient. Yet, our regulations do not prescribe any minimum qualification for a dealer.
The pesticide quality control infrastructure is in a dilapidated state. The problem is not only with regard to paucity of sampling testing capacity of state pesticide testing laboratories [SPTL] and regional pesticide testing laboratories [RPTLs] versus requirements but also lack of equipment and trained analysts. Even these heavily stressed facilities are used for analysing samples of genuine companies [who any way are fully committed to maintaining quality] leaving out dubious operators who should be getting maximum attention.
Lastly, neither the I Act nor the Rules made there under put any obligation on farmers in regard to proper use. Although, the labels and leaflets accompanying the pack containing pesticides carry instructions regarding their use, these are rarely followed. Improper and indiscriminate use of pesticides is rampant. So much so, even the basic requirement of complying with “waiting period” – the time gap between spraying pesticide and harvesting the crop [this is needed to allow pesticide molecule to degenerate] – is not followed.
Many farmers especially vegetable growers, dip their produce in chemical solutions just before going to the wholesale market – which they believe will improve their appearance and assure them better prices. The use of chemicals like calcium carbide to artificially ripen fruits like banana, papayas and mangoes also contaminates them.
In short, the entire pesticide supply chain is crowded with non-serious players [many of them dubious operators] which inevitably results in compromise on quality, lack of farmer’s education and improper use of pesticides. Though, there are genuine/serious players too [these include a handful of subsidiaries of MNCs besides some leading Indian companies who have zero tolerance for sub-standard material and are totally committed to ‘stewardship’] but they are outnumbered by non-serious players.
A lax administrative machinery at state level and poor enforcement of the provisions of Insecticide Act exacerbates the situation. According to a report, of the total pesticide market in India worth about Rs 25,000 crores, nearly 25% is ‘spurious’ sales. In such a scenario, one should not be surprised that there is so much toxicity in the food supply chain and farmers suffer crop losses.
The ‘systemic’ maladies afflicting the pesticides sector are known to the ruling establishment for long. In late 90s, government of the day initiated an exercise to make necessary amendments in the Insecticides Act [1968] to remove the anomalies and it took close to a decade to bring a Pesticide Management Bill [PMB] to replace the old Act. The PMB was introduced in Rajya Sabha [RS] in 2008 and has been languishing there till date.
The bill was referred to the Standing Committee on Agriculture [SCA] which promptly submitted its report in early 2009. The then UPA government sat on it for more than an year and only in 2010, approved a set of amendments taking in to account SCA recommendations. Since then, PMB along with amendments used to get listed in agenda of RS but never discussed. This speaks volumes about the callous attitude of the law makers towards this crucial sector.
Meanwhile, the massive damage to cotton crops in Punjab [estimated to be over Rs 4000 crores] – caused due to use of spurious pesticides – should serve as a wake-up call to clean up this sector. It is in dire need of Modi’s ‘MIDAS’ touch of good governance.
All institutions/agencies connected with enforcement of pesticide rules and regulations must be freed from inefficiency, nepotism and corruption. The entire administrative machinery – both at the central and state level – should be galvanized to ensure supply of quality products along with farmer’s education for proper use to get optimum results.
But, first the government should get the PMB [2008] passed on fast track as without it, vested interests will exploit loopholes in the Insecticides Act [1968] to frustrate efforts to stem the rot. Unlike the land bill, on this one, Modi will find it easy to take the opposition parties on board.