We require private expertise
You have been entrusted by the Centre with the task of overhauling Indian agriculture. What approach will you adopt to your new projects?
I myself, or for that matter, the National Agriculture Innovation Project, cannot overhaul all of Indian agriculture. We can produce just 20 to 25 viable scientific and economically viable models for agriculture, which if successful, could be replicated.
If the project has no dearth of funding, why have a consortium? Is that on the World Bank's insistence?
Who told you that? Funding has always been a constraint for agriculture research and development in India. So, more financial support and partners are always welcome. However, the consortium idea is totally ours, the World Bank did not force us in any way.
Are NARS scientists and research establishments not capable enough to carry out such research? Why involve private players?
No, they are not private players. They are good at pure academic research, but naip involves factors such as marketability, which requires strategic research. So we require private expertise to supplement the expertise of government scientists.
Will NAIP focus more on natural resource management, dry-land agriculture, farming systems and production technologies, having long-term impact, or will you adopt the high-end cash approach?
naip focuses on all that you say. Every area will get equal importance. Marketability of agricultural products is as important as basic research.
The project proposes to make NARS transparent and faster. But is that limited to just the working of the project or the institution?
Yes, naip will inculcate transparency and accountability in the agriculture research establishment. And this will not stop at this project.
The project will research on post-harvest, specially marketing, which is wonderful. But can this be done without a consortium once the project ends?
I'm aware of this constraint. Hence we have decided to fix some permanent consortia for future implementation. Without this, the gains will not come.
What would be the focus of the 20 livelihood generating research and development (R&D) programmes in India's 150 most backward districts?
Our focus would be to explore r&d opportunities in agriculture in such districts, identify the agricultural commodities and their market. At the end of the six-year period, we are sure we will have successful business models that can be replicated.
Private players imply a threat of germplasm appropriation. How will the project guard against it?
We have a strict material transfer agreement with the private partners for dealing with this problem. No germplasm will be allowed to be distributed commercially by private parties.
Can you name a few private entrants whose entry has helped a component of the project to take off, which otherwise wouldn't have been possible?
I can disclose no names now.
Priya Ranjan Das Munsi, the parliamentary affairs minister, told parliament that NAIP would churn out 100 papers and 25 patents. Is that realistic, what's your take?
I think we will be able to produce some papers and patents finding a place in international publications and registries.
Related Content
- Scaling up finance for water
- Framework for promotion of decentralised renewable energy livelihood applications
- Proposed Framework for Empanelment of Organizations and Individual Experts for Conducting Social Impact Assessment in Land Acquisitions
- Renewables readiness assessment: United Republic of Tanzania
- Crores to gamble
- CDGK to use solar energy