According to a 10 year study “The Indian Nitrogen Assessment” carried out by the Indian Nitrogen Group [ING] for Down To Earth [DTE] – a New Delhi-based environment and health magazine – Nitrogen-based fertilizers like urea, which have been instrumental in increasing crop yields in India, are now turning into potent destroyers by polluting land and water, affecting people’s health and leading to climate change. The study says that “agriculture is the main source of nitrogen pollution in India; further cereals like rice and wheat accounting for maximum cropped area pollute the most”.
In the past five decades, every Indian farmer has, on an average, used up over 6,000 kg of urea or 120 kg annually. Only 33 per cent of this is consumed by rice and wheat crops – the remaining 67 per cent remains in the soil, water and environment, harming all irreparably. In the last 60 years, the use of urea in agriculture has increased by leaps and bounds. In 1960-61, it accounted for only 10 per cent of total nitrogen fertilizer base; currently, it is 82 per cent. This has had a serious adverse effect on soil health leading to lower yields.
Too much nitrogen in the soil leads to reduction in carbon content of the soil. The Soil Organic Carbon [SOC] plays a key role in maintaining soil fertility by holding a host of nutrients for plant growth; improving soil properties such as water holding capacity; providing gaseous exchange and root growth; suppressing crop diseases and acting as a buffer against toxic and harmful substances. Currently, SOC content is 0.3-0.4 per cent when it should ideally be at 1-1.5 per cent.
It also pollutes water even as Nitrate [NO3] concentration in dug-well and shallow bore-well water in Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh has been found to be much above the limits set by World Health Organization [WHO]. For instance, in Haryana it is 99.5 mg per litre against the WHO norm of 50 mg per litre. Too much of NO3 in water causes the ‘blue baby syndrome’ in children who see a dip in the oxygen levels in their blood, leading to incidences of continuous diarrhea, respiratory problems and high blood pressure.
The implications of excessive urea use go much beyond impacting land and water. Nitrogen in the form of nitrous oxide [N2O] is a greenhouse gas and a contributor to climate change. Fertilizers are the major emitters of nitrous oxide in India.
The grave situation and urgent need for corrective action resonate at the highest level in the echelons of the government. In his 38th edition of ‘Mann Ki Baat’, the prime minister exhorted “Can our farmers take a pledge to bring down urea use by half by 2022? If, they promise to use less urea in agriculture, the fertility of the land will increase. The lives of farmers will start improving.”
In 2015, the government had launched National Soil-Health-Card [NSHC] scheme with the objective of promoting a more judicious mix of fertilizers by testing soil samples of each farm household and prescribing recommendations on use. It also ordered mandatory neem coating of all urea supplies to enhance efficiency besides stopping diversion to chemical factories. From March 1, 2018, it has notified use of urea in 45 kg bag instead of existing 50 kg purportedly to bring about saving in use.
The above mentioned measures may be helpful. But, these stand nowhere when it comes to the paramount need for reversing the current trend of deterioration in soil health and damage to the land, water and air. A 5-10% reduction in urea use which these measures could yield – at best – is far from making any dent on the problem.
The biggest obstacle is the policy of giving disproportionately high subsidy on urea [main source of nitrogen] vis-à-vis subsidy on other fertilizers such as DAP, MOP and complexes [carrying phosphate and potash] to keep the maximum retail price [MRP] of the former low when compared to MRP of the latter. This gives an inherent incentive to farmers use more of urea and less of non-urea fertilizers.
The policy has been followed by successive governments and continued by the present dispensation. In fact, the latter excelled previous regimes when under a Comprehensive New Urea Policy [2015], had frozen urea MRP at existing level and retain the New Pricing Scheme [under it, it fixes retention price and subsidy on unit-specific basis for manufacturers] for 4 years till 2019.
These policy instruments were put in place several decades back with the sole objective of increasing urea use to help achieve higher crop yield. Now, with the country facing excessive urea use when, there was an urgent need to cut it, continuation of those very policies is bound to aggravate current declining trend in soil health. In this backdrop, to expect measures like SHCs, neem coating etc to work sounds like asking a person to win the race with his hands and legs tied.
The way forward is to give less subsidy on urea and more subsidy on non-urea fertilizers to correct the price imbalance. But, small changes in price even while keeping existing systems in tact won’t yield the desired results. The way forward is decontrol of urea and giving subsidy directly to farmers. This will bring about steep decline in urea use, reduce imbalance in nutrient use, improve soil health and reduce adverse impact on the environment.
So, what is holding back? It could be sheer vote bank politics which gets intertwined with low urea price per se wherein no ruling establishment dare increase it by even small amount. It could also be the fear of some vested interest losing clout as in such a scenario, urea import will decline sharply [to even zero]; or even the fear of some indigenous capacity rendered redundant. Or, things are going by default.
Modi should implement the much awaited pricing and subsidy reforms in the long-term interest of rejuvenating Indian soils and bring about sustainable increase in crop yield.