Madhya Pradesh Grapples with Fertiliser Crisis, Farmer Death Sparks Protests
A farmer's death amid a severe urea shortage in Madhya Pradesh has triggered protests and looting, highlighting a critical agricultural crisis.
Photo by Gowtham AGM
त्वरित संशोधन
Farmer's death by suicide in Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, reportedly due to urea unavailability.
Widespread protests and looting of fertiliser sacks from government godowns.
Crisis started in November, marked by scarcity and alleged black marketing of urea.
Government attributes the crisis to a supply-demand gap and promises action against black marketers.
महत्वपूर्ण तिथियां
महत्वपूर्ण संख्याएं
दृश्य सामग्री
Madhya Pradesh Fertiliser Crisis: Key Locations
This map highlights Madhya Pradesh, the state grappling with a severe fertiliser crisis, and specifically Sagar district, where a farmer's suicide due to urea unavailability sparked widespread protests. It provides a geographical context to the unfolding events.
Loading interactive map...
परीक्षा के दृष्टिकोण
Government policies and interventions in agriculture (fertiliser subsidies, NBS scheme)
Centre-State relations in agricultural input management
Economic implications of supply chain disruptions and black marketing
Farmer distress, suicides, and welfare measures
Role of Essential Commodities Act in market regulation
विस्तृत सारांश देखें
सारांश
Madhya Pradesh is currently facing a severe fertiliser crisis, particularly a shortage of urea, which has led to tragic consequences. Recently, a farmer in Sagar district died by suicide, reportedly due to the unavailability of urea for his crops. This incident has sparked widespread protests across the state, with farmers expressing their anger over the scarcity and alleged black marketing of fertilisers.
In some areas, the situation escalated to looting of fertiliser sacks from government godowns. The crisis, which began in November, has seen farmers struggling to procure essential fertilisers, often forced to pay exorbitant prices in the black market. This situation is not just about a lack of supply; it points to deeper issues in the distribution system and the vulnerability of farmers to market fluctuations and exploitation.
The state government has acknowledged the problem, attributing it to a supply-demand gap and promising action against black marketers, but the immediate impact on farmers remains severe, threatening their livelihoods and agricultural output.
पृष्ठभूमि
India's agricultural sector heavily relies on fertilisers, with urea being the most consumed and highly subsidised. Historically, fertiliser distribution has been a complex issue involving central allocation, state-level logistics, and market dynamics.
The Nutrient Based Subsidy (NBS) scheme was introduced for Phosphatic and Potassic (P&K) fertilisers to encourage balanced fertilisation, while urea remains under a separate price control mechanism. Recurring crises related to fertiliser availability and black marketing highlight systemic issues in supply chain management, policy implementation, and farmer vulnerability.
नवीनतम घटनाक्रम
बहुविकल्पीय प्रश्न (MCQ)
1. Consider the following statements regarding fertiliser policy in India: 1. Urea is the only fertiliser whose maximum retail price (MRP) is statutorily controlled by the government. 2. The Nutrient Based Subsidy (NBS) scheme covers all phosphatic and potassic (P&K) fertilisers, encouraging their balanced use. 3. Under the Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) system for fertilisers, the subsidy amount is directly transferred to the farmers' bank accounts upon purchase. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
उत्तर देखें
सही उत्तर: A
Statement 1 is correct. Urea's MRP is fixed by the government. Statement 2 is correct. The NBS scheme applies to P&K fertilisers, where a fixed amount of subsidy is provided on each nutrient. Statement 3 is incorrect. For fertilisers, the DBT system means that the subsidy is released to fertiliser companies based on actual sales to farmers, authenticated by PoS devices at retail outlets. While the benefit ultimately reaches farmers through reduced prices, the subsidy amount is not directly transferred to their bank accounts for every purchase, unlike some other DBT schemes.
2. In the context of fertiliser distribution and management in India, which of the following statements is NOT correct?
- A.The Central Government is primarily responsible for the allocation of fertilisers to states based on their requirements.
- B.State governments are responsible for the last-mile distribution of fertilisers within their respective states and for preventing black marketing.
- C.The Essential Commodities Act, 1955, can be invoked by the government to regulate the production, supply, and distribution of fertilisers.
- D.India is entirely self-sufficient in urea production and does not rely on imports to meet domestic demand.
उत्तर देखें
सही उत्तर: D
Statement D is NOT correct. India is not entirely self-sufficient in urea production and relies significantly on imports to meet its domestic demand, especially during peak agricultural seasons. Statements A, B, and C are correct. The Central Government allocates fertilisers, state governments manage last-mile distribution and check black marketing, and the Essential Commodities Act is a key tool for regulating essential goods like fertilisers.
3. Which of the following factors are often cited as contributing to farmer distress and vulnerability in India, as highlighted by recent events like the fertiliser crisis? 1. Volatility in global commodity prices affecting input costs and output prices. 2. Inadequate access to institutional credit and reliance on informal sources. 3. Fragmented landholdings and lack of modern agricultural practices. 4. Inefficient supply chain management and prevalence of black marketing. Select the correct answer using the code given below:
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2, 3 and 4 only
- C.1, 3 and 4 only
- D.1, 2, 3 and 4
उत्तर देखें
सही उत्तर: D
All four statements are correct and widely recognized factors contributing to farmer distress in India. Volatility in global prices (1) impacts both input costs (like fertilisers) and the prices farmers receive for their produce. Inadequate institutional credit (2) pushes farmers towards high-interest informal loans. Fragmented landholdings and slow adoption of modern practices (3) hinder productivity and economies of scale. Inefficient supply chains and black marketing (4), as seen in the MP crisis, directly impact input availability and cost, severely affecting farmers' profitability and livelihood.