REPORT
OF
EXPERT GROUP ON PULSES
Department of Agriculture & Co-operation
Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture
New Delhi -110 001
Published by :
Director
National Centre for Integrated Pest Management
(Indian Council of Agricultural Research)
LBS Building, IARI Campus, New Delhi 110012 (India)
Tel: 011-25740952; Fax : 011-25841472
E-mail: impnet@ncipm.org.in
Website: www.ncipm.org.in
This publication has been made under Accelerated Pulse Production Programme (A3P)
of National Food Security Mission Programme.
Printed at
M/s Royal Offset Printers
A-89/1, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi 110028
F. No. 2-7/2009-NFSM (Pt.)
Department of Agri. & Cooperation
(Crops Division)
Dated the 30th December, 2009-12-30
ORDER
Pursuant to the decision of the meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Prices held on 19th
October, 2009 regarding setting up of an Expert Group on Pulses by the Department of
Agriculture & Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, I am directed to
convey that, it has been decided to consititute an expert group to suggest measures to be taken
in the medium term to eliminate, or at least sharply reduce, the demand-supply mismatch in
respect of pulses. The composition of the Expert Group shall be as follows:1.
Dr. Y.K. Alagh, Chairman,
IRMA, Anand-388001
2. Shri R. Gopalakrishnan,
Vice-Chairman, Tata Chemicals (TCL)
3. Dr. S. Mahendra Dev
Chairman, CACP
4. Dr. Ashok Gulati, Director
IFPRI, New Delhi
5. DDG (CS), ICAR
6. Agriculture Commissioner, DAC
7. Pulses Scientist (ICRISAT)
8. Director, IIPR (ICAR), Kanpur
9. Dr. R.B. Deshmukh, Vice Chancellor,
MPKV, Rahuri (Maharashtra)
10. Joint Secretary (Crops)
MOA, DAC
Chairman
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Convenor
Further addition, as Members/Experts, if any and if needed may be made accordingly in
due course. The terms of Reference (TOR) of the Group shall be communicated subsequently
in due course.
(A. Neeraja)
Director (Crops)
iii
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Preface
In the wake of wide spread drought in the country in 2009 causing production
losses of pulses that eventually led to sharp rise in prices of pulses in 2010,
Government of India constituted a Pulses Expert Group to examine the supply side
of pulses for suggesting short, medium and long term measures to increase production
of pulses for meeting the growing demand.
After a series of meetings with the experts from research, development and
policy domains, both from public and the private sectors, very useful contributions
have come by way of diagnosis, analysis and suggested measures which resulted in
formulation of recommendations. These wide ranging recommendations have been
compiled and put together as a report with the secretariat assistance extended by
the Crops Division of Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of
Agriculture, Government of India.
It has taken quite some time for the report to get finalized because the issues
were examined afresh to identify the critical gaps and to determine specific measures
on marketing, pricing and trade which could be supported through development
programs and a focused research agenda. The Group has concentrated on details.
Hence short and medium term targets have been specified in detail in terms of
quantitative input and output standards and more important in specified geographies
in terms of Districts. With the specific phasing of the targets in terms of road maps
for implementing the recommendations, it is felt that a lot of gains could be secured
for future development of pulses especially for time consuming research work.
Many of the ideas discussed in the meetings of the Group got implemented like
setting up of farmer producer organizations, promotion of farm mechanization for
planting and plant protection operations and taking up technology promotional work
on a large scale with increased budgetary allocation for pulses. Result is quite evident
with the country recording successive years of very high production in 2010-11 and
in 2011-12. The momentum has to be maintained. Private sector interest will have to
be mobilized for the purpose by creating feasible business models that help in building
efficient pulses supply chain, satisfying both the producers and the consumers.
There are basically three constraining factors contributing to low yield of pulses.
One the pulses being rain-fed and protein rich crops are more susceptible to abiotic
and biotic stresses. Risk-averse resource poor farmers are unwilling to upgrade their
farming with investment in modern technological tools. Second, research has not
been able to increase currently very low harvest index of pulses, develop plant types
easy to manage and amendable to mechanization and breeding varieties for tolerance
to pests and diseases. India being the largest producer and consumer of pulses onus
iv
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
is on Indian Agriculture Research System to come up with a time bound program
backed by adequate scientific and financial resources. Thirdly, inadequate marketing
infrastructure and unpredictable trade policies is not drawing private sector to
capitalize on huge unmet domestic market demand for pulses. It is felt that time has
come to implement a pricing policy that is linked to trade policy and worked on the
principles of ‘efficiency shifters’ for making cultivation of pulses competitive
compared to other crops. Recommendations of Alagh Committee (2003) need to be
seriously considered for implementation without any further delay.
Expert group places on record its gratitude for the contributions that were received
in the form of reports, papers, presentations and concept notes from different
stakeholders. These contributions were studied and have been appropriately placed
in corresponding sections of the reports. Expert group is thankful to Union Minister
of Agriculture for allowing the key points of the report to be shared with the
participants from policy, development, research and private sector in the brain
storming session on Pulses held on 12th September at New Delhi. It is gratifying to
note that most recommendations of the report were resonating in the presentations of
the speakers in the brain storming session.
Time is ripe now to act on the recommendations and act real fast, lest it becomes
too late. It is hoped that the recommendations backed by keen desire of the
Government to increase production and productivity of pulses inform the program
designers and policy makers to up the ante for sustained increase in pulses production.
Even at the cost of repetition, let it be clear that action is needed on all the fronts
- Price incentives, marketing reforms, innovative programs and time bound research
agenda. There is no reason not to be optimist that the demand supply gap in pulses
could vanish by 2026, if concerted efforts are mobilized immediately.
Y.K.Alagh
v
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Contents
Title
Preface
iii
1.
Introduction
1.1 Present status of pulses in India
1
1
2.
Production Trends
2.1 Possibilities
3
6
3.
Major Constraints and Opportunities in Pulses Production
3.1. Constraints
3.1.1 Climatic factors
3.1.2 Soil related constraints
3.1.3 Input quality and availability related constraints
3.1.4 Pests and diseases
3.1.5 Blue Bull Menace
3.1.6 Technological constraints
3.1.7 Infrastructural Constraints
3.1.8 Credit and marketing related constraints
3.1.9 Policy related issues
6
6
6
6
7
10
10
10
11
11
11
3.2 Opportunities
11
Strategy for Increasing Production
4.1 Identification of additional area having potential for pulse crops
4.1.1 Utilization of potential area of rice fallow lands
4.1.2 Replacement of low productivity crops with pulses
4.1.3 Cultivation of summer mungbean
4.1.4 Promotion of intercropping and utera cultivation of pulses
4.1.5 Cultivation of pigeonpea on rice-bunds
4.1.6 Promotion of utera cultivation of lentil and field pea in rice fields
4.1.7 Rainfed areas developed as watersheds
12
12
12
13
13
13
14
14
14
4.2 Increasing Crop Productivity
4.2.1 Promotion of quality seeds
4.2.2 Identification of best agronomic practices
15
15
18
4.
vi
Page No.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
5.
Prices, Tariff and Trade Policies
5.1 Pricing policy
5.2 License requirement in pulses:
5.2.1 APMC License
5.2.2 Pulses Control Order
22
23
23
24
24
6.
Manufactured Dal
27
7.
National Pulses Development Board
29
8.
Communication Strategy for Reaching out to Farmers
29
9.
Long Term Research Plan for Raising Productivity to Global levels
9.1 GM crops: Current status
9.2 ICAR Initiatives
9.3 Technological priorities for medium and long term planning for a
Dynamic Pulses Economy
9.3.1 Research Component 1: Hybrids in pigeonpea
9.3.2 Research Component 2: Transgenics for pod borer resistance
in pigeonpea and chickpea
9.3.3 Research component 3: Efficient plant architecture in major
pulse crops
9.3.4 PPP in research and development
31
31
37
39
43
50
10. Role of Farmers’ Institutions in Anchoring Technology, Mitigating Risk
and Increasing Productivity
52
11. Development of Comprehensive Business Model based on the Study of
Successful Agro-business Models and Consultation with CII
54
12. Recommendations and Action Points
55
13. Annexures
Annexure I
Annexure II
68
68
Issues and TOR assigned to subgroups
Names of the States and Districts recording >=8q/ha yield
of kharif pulses.
Annexure III Recommendations of Brain Storming Session on Pulses
Annexure IV Net irrigated area in pulse crops growing districts
Annexure V Progress of National Watershed Development Project
for Rainfed Area Programme (NWDPRA)
Annexure VI Districts covered under NWDPRA during XI Plan
Annexure VII Statewise summary of projects appraised & cleared by
the steering committee during 2010-11
Annexure VIII Seed-Sufficiency in legumes at the village level - Development
and Popularization of ‘Model’ Seed System(s) for Quality Seed
Production proposed by ICRISAT.
vii
40
42
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
95
117
119
121
123
1. Introduction
Pulses are the staple source of protein to the majority of Indian population and contribute
significantly to the nutritional security of the country. Production of these crops has been
stagnant over the years. There is widening gap between demand and supply with about 20 %
of the total demand met by imports. In the context of the price rise witnessed in pulses,
Government constituted an Expert Group on Pulses to look at pulses holistically for suggesting
a medium term strategy to ensure adequate availability of pulses in the country by sharply
reducing the demand supply gap. The group headed by economist Y.K. Alagh held wide ranging
consultations before recommending a number of short-term and medium-term measures to
augment the availability of pulses in the country.
The group approached the issues as per the terms of reference and formed seven
sub-groups for going into the required details on the issues relating to production and availability
of better seed varieties, crop management practices, area expansion, price support, business
model for private sector engagement, research and communication strategy for technology
dissemination. The group took note of the brain storming session on pulses that was conducted
in June 2009 in which specific issues and opportunities were culled out for each of the major
pulse crops.
A long-term strategy is worked out for meeting the requirement of pulses up to 2025.
A mix of short-term and medium-term measures covering policy, development, research and
trade related issues are recommended.
1.1 Present Status of Pulses in India
Pulses are grown in 22.37 million hectares area in India. Major areas under pulses are in
the States of Madhya Pradesh (20.3%), Maharashtra (13.8%), Rajasthan (16.4), Uttar Pradesh
(9.5%), Karnataka (9.3%), Andhra Pradesh (7.9%), Chhattisgarh (3.8%), Bihar (2.6%) and
Tamil Nadu (2.9%).
Production of pulses in 2008-09 was 14.66 million tons with an average yield of 655 kg/ha.
Share of chickpea, pigeonpea, mungbean and urdbean to total production has been worked out
about 39, 21, 11 and 10%, respectively. Lentil and field pea accounted for 7- and 5% share of
total production. The yield levels of pulses have remained low and stagnant, also area and total
production. Number of districts harvesting more than 0.8 or 1 t/ha yield of kharif pulses
is very small (Annexure-II). Situation of rabi pulses is better in this regard. The gap between
demand and supply has been widening and has necessitated import of pulses of 2.8 million tons
in 2007-08.
IIPR, has estimated that by 2024-25, for the projected population of 1.55 billion, the total
requirement would be 25.39 million tons. Behaviourial estimates of demand in relation to
elasticities of demand and per capita income growth in real terms may give higher estimates,
but even the lower figures require that production would have to be nearly doubled from the
2007-08 levels. Even though the option for importing pulses remains, considering very small
global marketable surplus, it would be in strategic interests of the country to develop additional
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
1
sources of pulses supply from within the country or through contracts in abroad. It would be
worthwhile to diversify the sources of production for imports. If it is found feasible, some
policy would need to be evolved for supporting committed pulses production in Latin America
and Africa.
Basically to meet the requirement of pulses in next ten years, there is urgent need to look
at the policies, technologies and alternate products to ensure that the domestic availability of
pulses meeting the consumer preference is maintained through domestic production. IIPR has
drawn up a plan on the technologies that are available now and that on which some work is
actively being pursued through strategic research and development by which in 2024-25 country
would be able to produce 25.06 million tons of the pulses crops leaving a gap of 0.33 million
tons to meet the estimated demand. A revised version of this plan in presented in this report.
A brain storming session was organized in June 2009 to discuss the issues that constraint
the productivity of pulses and the opportunities that could improve the overall availability of
pulses in the country. A gist of the recommendations of the brain storming session is attached
as Annexure-III.
Acting on the major recommendations of the brain storming session, Government launched
programmes aimed at augmenting pulse production during 11th Five Year Plan. These include
merger of pulses component of ISOPOM with the National Food Security Mission so as to
increase the reach of NFSM-Pulses to all the districts of the pulses growing States, launching
Accelerated Pulse Production Programme under National Food Security Mission for intensive
technology promotion in compact blocks of five pulse crops and Watershed Centric Integrated
Development of Sixty Thousand Pulses and Oilseeds Villages in the rainfed areas program
under Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana. Large scale full package technology demonstrations
were also organized by Indian Council of Agriculture Research through its Krishi Vigyan
Kendras for the major pulses crops. These programmes have met with varied success depending
on the extent and quality of implementation.
Minimum Support Price of pulses have been significantly increased in 2010-11 with an
increase of about 50% over that of the previous year. Along with the increase in MSP, additional
agencies for procurement of pulses have been notified. National Consumers’ Cooperative
Federation and Central Warehousing Corporation have been made pulses procurement agencies
along with NAFED. However as we find later the effectiveness of these efforts needs attention.
As a result of these measures and generally favourable climatic conditions record production
of pulses crops was achieved in 2010-11, with an annual increase of over 20%. Such increases
sustained in production would increase the availability of pulses in the market, reduce
dependence on imports and keep market prices in check. There is need to consolidate these
gains through institution building, technology support, economic incentives and building the
value chains of pulses.
2
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
2. Production Trends
Over the years pulses cultivation in India has been pushed to marginal lands and rainfed
areas. Still pulses are cultivated in the country on more than 12 per cent of total cultivated area
and they constitute more than 4 per cent of the output of crop sector in value terms.
Pulses production got a big setback in the country after the onset of green revolution.
Production of pulses increased by 18.13 per cent during 40 years from the onset of green
revolution as against 130 per cent increase in population in India for the same period.
Consequently, per capita availability of pulses fell from about 61grams per day in the early
sixties to about 32 grams in the initial years of the new century. In the same period India was
able to raise cereal production substantially. The increase in cereal production was 40 per cent
higher than the increase in population.
An analysis of the declining status of pulses production was done by NCAP covering the
issues relating to causes for slow growth in production of pulses, regional patterns of shifts in
pulses production, possible strategies to meet the future demand of pulses, incentives needed
to make pulses crops attractive to farmers. In order to understand the decline in status of pulses
production and resulting distortion in dietary balance, several issues need to be addressed.
Some of the findings of this study are:
Area stagnation: Gross cultivated area in India expanded by more than 30 million hectares
during last 40 years since the onset of green revolution. However, pulses did not gain anything
from this expansion in area. The main reason for stagnation in area under pulses has been
differential impact of technology and relative profitability of pulses and other crops. Initially
it started with high yielding varieties of wheat which raised productivity and profitability
relative to Gram and pushed the latter out of cultivation in almost all the regions where wheat
could spread. In some states like Rajasthan Technology Mission on Oilseeds turned the
environment in favour of oilseeds which resulted in shift in area from pulses to oilseeds.
Expansion of irrigation is another factor for reduction in area under pulses to more
remunerative crops. Uncontrolled water flows (flooding) generally common in canal system
in India are incompatible with large scale area under pulses, which need protective irrigation
in times of rainfall failures.
In order to understand the constraints in raising production of pulses in the country the
relative profitability and risk involved in pulses cultivation and competing crops in various
states/region needs assessment. The main competition for pulses in India is from cereals both
where they gained area and lost area. Gram lost area to wheat in north western plains whereas
it gained area from rabi sorghum in Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, from barley in Madhya
Pradesh and from linseed and wheat in Maharashtra. Gram lost area in Haryana, Uttar Pradesh
and Punjab to wheat and in Rajasthan to rapeseed and mustard. Lentil has been completely out
in West Bengal, Haryana and Punjab by wheat but it gained area from khesari in Uttar Pradesh,
from barley in Madhya Pradesh and from gram in Bihar.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
3
Because of long duration of earlier varieties of arhar this crop faced competition from
shorter duration crops. In Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh paddy is found to have replaced
arhar while in West Bengal groundnut gained area from this crop. Arhar gained area from
coarse cereals and millets in Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat. In Karnataka cotton
has been driven out by arhar. Large scale replacement of mash took place in favour of sesamum
in West Bengal, and in favour of maize in Bihar and Himachal Pradesh. In Andhra Pradesh,
Maharashtra and Karnataka mash got area from ragi, sorghum and kulthi. Moong lost major
area to soyabean in Madhya Pradesh but gained area from kulthi in Karnataka, bajra in Andhra
Pradesh, jowar in Rajasthan and ragi in Bihar.
Relative return from competing crops show that return from gram was just half of that of
wheat in early 1970s and the margin decreased further to 0.4 during triennium ending 2005.
Almost same situation holds for the state of Punjab. In Uttar Pradesh, gross income from gram
was 9 per cent lower than the return from wheat in early 1970s. The margin increased to 30 per
cent in the recent years. For the state of Rajasthan as a whole ratio of gross return from gram
as compared to rapeseed-mustard declined from 82 per cent to 39 per cent during
last 3 decades. In these two states, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh though gross return
from arhar at state level remained higher than state average for paddy but the margin has been
squeezed over time. Risk in yield might have played important role in decline in area under
arhar in these two states.
Competing crops of mash are identified as sesame in West Bengal maize in Himachal
Pradesh and paddy in Madhya Pradesh. Mash in West Bengal paid two third of return from
sesame during early 1970s and less than half during recent period. Similar trend is result for
maize versus mash in Himachal Pradesh. Moong and mash lost major area to soyabean in
Madhya Pradesh where gross return from moong and mash was below 30 per cent of the gross
returns from soyabean. These results indicate deterioration in income from pulses cultivation
relative to cereal and rapeseed-mustard. Among the states which gained in area under pulses,
relative return from gram in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh showed very
high increase. In Andhra Pradesh average income from gram at state level was 12 per cent
higher than rabi sorghum in early 1970’s. At present gram is found to provide more than
3 times of income from sorghum. In Karnataka gross return from Gram was just half of the
gross return from rabi sorghum three decades back. During the recent years income from gram
was found to be 58 per cent higher than sorghum. In Madhya Pradesh income from gram
increased by 65 per cent over barley and by 7 per cent over wheat.
Relative economics of lentil shows almost doubling over linseed in Maharashtra. In
Madhya Pradesh, return from lentil was 13 per cent lower than barley in early 1970’s Recent
data shows economics superiority of lentil over barley by 5 per cent. In Bihar, competition
seems to be taking place within pulses. Three decades back gross return from lentil was
12 per cent lower than gram, whereas now it is 5 per cent higher than gram. Gross return from
arhar remained higher than bajra and ragi in Maharashtra and the margin increased further by
more than 30 percent. In Andhra Pradesh arhar turned from a position of 29 per cent lower
return to 43 percent higher return as compared to sorghum. Arhar gained lot of area in Karnataka
4
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
from cotton but due to non-availability of prices of comparable grade over time its return
could not be compared with arhar over time. Recent data shows that arhar yields 67 percent
higher gross returns as compared to cotton. Mash remained more profitable than sorghum in
Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh. During last 30 years the margin further tilted in favour of former.
In Andhra Pradesh ragi gave a little higher income than mash in early 1970’s whereas now it is
18 percent more attractive in terms of gross revenue. Moong showed improvement in its
margin of gross return over bajra in Andhra Pradesh, sorghum in Rajasthan and ragi in Bihar.
The second major factor influencing area allocation is risk in productivity and farm income.
At all India level, there is a significant decline in instability of yield of paddy and wheat
over time. A comparison of instability since the onset of Green Revolution shows that standard
deviation of yield from trend declined from 11.05 percent to 7.24 percent for paddy and from
6.58 percent to 5.0 percent for wheat between 1968-1988 and 1989-2007, respectively. In the
same period fluctuations in productivity of gram declined from about 17 percent to 11 percent.
Instability in productivity of sorghum in respective periods increased from 11.3 to 17.0 percent.
In bajra the instability remained higher than 30 percent. While in arhar, it increased from
14.3 to 16 per cent. These estimates show that instability in productivity of gram remained
much higher than wheat but much lower than sorghum. Similarly, instability in arhar, though
increased, it remained lower than instability in sorghum and bajra but much higher than paddy.
Pulses largely grown under unirrigated and rainfed conditions and in many cases in marginal
lands suffered instability.
Though India is the largest producer of most of the pulses, its productivity levels are
generally low and it does not figure among top five countries in terms of productivity of
major pulses. Productivity of lentil, arhar and field pea is lower than the world average. India
did not figure in major technological break throughs in the world with countries
like Canada and others achieving averages of around two tonnes per hectare in pulses
productivity. This relative stagnation in pulses productivity in the country is a matter
of concern.
The Twelfth Plan Approach Paper says “In the case of fruit & vegetables, milk eggs,
meat & fish and also of pulses, there is a need to ensure that output grows at a rate
significantly faster than that of cereals so as to service the expanded demand in these
areas.” In fact some econometric estimates of the demand eleasticities of pulses range from
1.5 to 2.0. This would mean that with an increase of around 6.5% annual in per capita income
demand for pulses would increase around 10% annually.
To some extent the deficiency in pulses production to meet domestic demand has been
filled through imports. But import possibilities are limited and with rising demand, real prices
of pulses have been increasing and protein rich pulses are being substituted by vegetables like
potato. The concern on further decline in pulses intake in the country and in meeting future
demand is genuine.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
5
2.1 Possibilities
Possibilities to augment domestic supply of pulses in the country given the profitability
and risk involved in pulses cultivation need study and delineation. Shifts in cropping pattern
across states show that pulses are preferred over coarse cereals which are more risky and also
less profitable than pulses. It seems quite likely that pulses would get some of the areas from
millets, bajra, ragi and sorghum in several states. Pulses are also having potential to replace
cotton in some parts where cotton yield is low. These trends will accentuate if demand step up
is substantial which may be expected.
The best possibility to increase production of pulses through area expansion would be by
(a) fitting pulses in cropping sequence where it helps in increasing cropping intensity (as has
been the case with soyabean in some regions) and (b) by cultivation of short duration varieties
of pulses particularly, in between the main season crops.
Another big potential area will be areas where limited irrigation facilities become available
as for example in watershed development projects in rainfed areas.
3. Major constraints and Opportunities in Pulses Production
3.1 Constraints
3.1.1 Climatic factors
Pulses are mainly grown under rainfed conditions except in few districts of Karnataka,
Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Bihar (Annexure.IV). As a consequence area
under pulses and their productivity are dependent on amount and distribution of rainfall. Rainfall
intensity and distribution leads to vulnerability of kharif pulses to water stagnation (oxygen
stress) and that of rabi pulses to water stress. Occurrence of mid-season cold waves and terminal
heat during winter season has also been causing losses to crop productivity of rabi pulses in
many regions.
3.1.2 Soil related constraints
Pulses crops are generally very sensitive to acidic, saline and alkaline soil conditions.
North-western states have extensive areas with high soil pH whereas eastern and north eastern
states have chronically acidic soils. The problem has been compounded by rising deficiency of
micronutrients such as zinc, iron, boron and molybdenum and that of secondary nutrients like
sulphur particularly in traditional pulse growing areas.This emerges to an extent from the
fertilizer subsidy policies. Recent incentives to speciality fertilisers ameliorate this stress.
Deep black cotton soils in the states of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Andhra
Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu get inundated during kharif season thereby causing serious damage
to pigeonpea, urdbeans and mungbeans. On the other hand, shallow and coarse textured soils
in north and western states have low water rententivity and require irrigation for supporting a
good rabi pulse crop.
6
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
3.1.3 Input quality and availability related constraints
Nutrient requirement of pulses is much lower than cereals mainly because of biological
nitrogen fixation and relatively low productivity levels although pulse crops respond favorably
to higher doses of fertilizer nutrients than generally applied or even recommended. But, since
pulses are invariably subjected to abiotic stresses leading to sub-optimal nutrient uptake, farmers
tend to use low doses of fertilizer nutrients. Further, nutrient use is unbalanced and seldom
based on soil-test values. Timely availability of quality chemical fertilizers continues to be a
problem in many pulses growing area. Inadequate availability of gypsum or pyrites as a cheap
source of sulphur remains a serious impediment in many states/regions.
Availability of pesticides (including herbicides) in most of the states has been comfortable
but their quality in terms of effectiveness and eco-friendliness has been an issue in spite of a
well designed regulatory mechanism put in place.
3.1.4 Pests and diseases
Although pulse crops are prone to many insect pests and seed borne diseases, pod-borer
in chickpea and pigeonpea has been a major cause of concern as its incidence, if not controlled,
devastates the crop. Podfly and Maruca also cause serious damage to pigeonpea. Fusarium
wilt is wide spread in chickpea, pigeonpea and lentil growing regions. Urd and mungbean
crops are often damaged by yellow mosaic virus and powdery mildew. In addition, heavy
damage to pulses grain is caused by pests during storage.
3.1.5 Blue Bull Menace
Pulses are vulnerable to attack by Blue Bulls in the Indo-Gangetic Plains. Because of the
widespread menace particularly in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and
Chhattisgarh the potential area suitable for taking pulses crops is left uncultivated by the farmers.
There is no viable strategy available in the country to effectively the menace.
3.1.6 Technological constraints
Pulses are grown under varied agro-climatic conditions (soil types, rainfall and thermal
regime) in the country. This calls for region specific production technology including crop
varieties with traits relevant to prevailing biotic and abiotic stresses. Even biological fertilizers
and pesticides used should be based on strains isolated from regions with similar agro-climatic
conditions for them to be effective. Our research and development programme in pulses has
yet to appreciate and address this issue adequately.
Production technology for a pulse crop has to be soil type/region specific. So is true for
tillage and seeding device/gadgets. Non- availability of a dependable ridge planter for kharif
pulses in black soil region (for which ridge planting is most relevant and recommended) has left
farmers with no option but to grow kharif pulses on flat beds following conventional practices.
The country has lagged in state of the art biotechnology research in pulses, now common
in some of the countries exporting pulses to India.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
7
3.1.7 Infrastructural Constraints
Rainfall received during maturity of kharif pulses, causes losses in yields and grain quality
when farmers usually do not have pakka and covered threshing floor. Farmers also lack
awareness and means for safe storage of grain/seed of pulses. Many areas are approachable
only during fair weather. Warehousing facilities are either inadequate or inaccessible.
3.1.8 Credit and marketing related constraints
Farmers engaged in cultivation of pulses are mostly small and marginal. A majority are in
areas with poor banking infrastructure. They have poor resource base and lack risk-bearing
capacity. They therefore either lack access to credit or turn defaulters. Delivery of credit to
such farmers is also not hastle-free.
There is lack of marketing network in remote areas. Procurement of produce by a dedicated
agency is virtually non-existent or in-effective.
3.1.9 Policy related issues
System of regulating quality of inputs though in place in all the states, needs to be made
more effective. Delivery of improved technology, inputs, credits need to be stream lined through
appropriate policy interventions. Benefit of crop insurance need to be extended to pulses farmers.
3.2 Opportunities
A wide spectrum of agro-climatic conditions, favourable thermal regime for almost year
round cropping and availability of generally adequate rainfall point to the fact that there is a
vast untapped potential for improving productivity of pulses and bringing additional area under
pulses. There is overwhelming scientific evidence suggesting a vast gap between farmer’s
yield of pulses and front line demonstration plot yield. Further, a large chunk of rice fallow
lands can be brought under pulses provided available land and water resources (soil moisture)
are scientifically and innovatively managed.
Exploitation of promising intercropping systems in rainfed/partial irrigated areas offers a
vast opportunity for improving pulse production. Scientific management of “utera” cultivation
of pulses in rice based cropping systems and utilization of the period between harvesting
of timely planted wheat and planting of kharif crop for growing short duration pulses such
as mungbean/urdbean in north-western states are other avenues for augmenting production
of pulses.
Pulses are environment friendly crops that have the unique ability to fix nitrogen and
thereby help improve soil health. Even though, they have low genetic potential in terms of
realizing productivity as compared to cereals, they contribute to the environment protection.
Opportunity exists in cultivation of pulses not only to increase production of other crops in the
cropping system but also entitles pulses growers to claim Payment for Environment Services
(PES) through carbon trading or other similar mechanisms.
8
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
4. Strategy for increasing production
The issues assigned to each sub-group were dealt in detail during presentations
and subsequent discussion. The strategy and approach suggested to address each issue is
narrated below:
4.1 Identification of additional area having potential for pulse crops
Following avenues for area expansion have been suggested.
4.1.1 Utilization of potential area of rice fallow lands
The area left un-cropped after kharif rice is estimated to be around 11.65 million ha.
The area is primarily rainfed and exists in the states of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh,
Orissa, Eastern Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Jharkhand. About 25% of this area has potential
for supporting a rabi pulses after rice depending on soil type and depth. Distribution of rainfed
rice fallow lands and potential area for rabi pulse cultivation is depicted in Table 1.
Table 1: Distribution of rainfed rice fallow (RRF) lands and area with potential for rice
cultivation in India.
State
RRFL
Potential 30-40%
area
RRFL (area mha)
mha available for immediate
IPPT interventions
30%
40%
Potential RRFL districts for
IPPT interventions *
Chhattisgarh
2.94
0.88
1.18
Bilaspur, Dhamtari, Kanker, Jashpur, Raipur,
Durg, Raigarh, Raj-Nandgaon, Kabirdham,
Korba, and Mahasamund
Jharkhand
1.75
0.53
0.70
Chhatra, Dumka, Jamtara, Palamau, Ranchi,
Lohardega, Gumla, Girdhi, Deoghar, Sahibhanj,
Dhanbad, Godda, Purbi Singhbum and
Pashcimi Singhbum
Madhya
Pradesh
1.75
0.53
0.70
Anupuur, Chhatarpur, Damoh, Dindori, Raisen,
Jabalpur, Katni, Jhabua, Rewa, Satna, Shadol,
Seoni, Mandla, Narsingpur and Umeria
Orissa
1.22
0.37
0.49
Baleshwar, Dhenkanal, Sundergarh,
Mayurbhanj, Kalahandi, Bolangir, Kheonjar, Puri
and Cuttack
West Bengal
1.72
0.52
0.69
Bankura, Purulia, Mednapur, West Dinajpur,
Malda, Jalpaiguri, Medinipur, Barddhaman, and
Birbhum
Assam
0.54
0.16
0.22
Marigaon, Naogaon, Lakhimpur, Kokrajhar,
Bongaigaon, Nalbari, Kamrup, Barpeta, Darrang,
Cachar, Goalaghat, Jorhat, Dibrugarh, Tirsukia,
Sonitpur
Total
9.92
2.99
3.98
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
9
Thus, the 3 to 4 million ha additional area can be brought under rabi pulses. Assuming an
average productivity of 600 kg/ha, the area can produce 1.8 to 2.4 million tons of pulses.
Farmers need to be encouraged through various incentives and region specific extension strategy
for cultivation of pulses in the identified districts. Necessary technological back up in terms of
suitable short-duration varieties, nutrient application rates and other agronomic practices should
come from local research stations. SAUs/KVKs may be mandated to conduct field
demonstrations on pulses in rice fallow lands and train field staff and farmers participating
in demonstrations.
4.1.2 Replacement of low productivity crops with pulses
About 5 lakh ha area of upland rice, 4.5 lakh ha area of millets and 3 lakh ha area under
barley, mustard and wheat can be brought under kharif/rabi pulses. Kharif pulses such as
pigeonpea, mungbean and urdbeans should replace rice and planted on ridges where as rabi
pulses such as lentil and chickpea should replace mustard, barley and wheat. If possible,
harvested rain-water should be used for rabi crop establishment.
4.1.3 Cultivation of summer mungbean
About 16.5 lakh ha area vacated by wheat, peas, potato, sugarcane and lentil can be used
for raising short-duration (60-65 day) summer mungbean crop in the States of Uttar Pradesh,
Punjab, Haryana, Bihar, Gujarat and West Bengal where adequate irrigation facilities exist and
the menace of blue bull is contained. These states need to identify such areas, set a modest
targets for area coverage, and draw up a plan for producing seed and providing other inputs
(fertilizer, plant protection, chemicals, gypsum, and power) and disseminate package of practices
to farmers through mass media, state extension network and KVKs. Arrangement for
procurement of the produce should also be put in place and widely publicized.
4.1.4 Promotion of intercropping and utera cultivation of pulses
There are a good number of promising intercropping systems for pulses developed by
Zonal Agricultural Research Stations. Farmers in rainfed states (Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh,
Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Andhra Pradesh) are familiar with some of them as
they have been practicing them in traditional ways.
Promising intercropping systems for different states are as follows:
Intercropping systems
10
States
Soybean + pigeonpea
Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra
Pearl millet/sorghum + pigeonpea
Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra
Groundnut + pigeonpea
Gujarat
Groundnut/sorghum/pearlmillet + urdbean/
mungbean/ cowpea
Bihar, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka,
Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan
Sugarcane + cowpea/mungbean/urdbean
Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka Andhra
Pradesh, Tamil Nadu
Cotton + urdbean/mungbean/cowpea
Punjab, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat,
Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
The approach to be followed by the rainfed states should include:
i)
Identification of districts and promising intercropping systems for each agro-climatic
zone and setting of area coverage targets.
ii) Conduction of field demonstrations on intercropping with farmer’s active participation
and comparing returns with sole cropping system.
iii) Ensuring availability of seed of pulse varieties recommended for intercropping.
iv) Demonstration of suitable seeding devices (animal drawn and tractor drawn) for
simultaneously planting of main and intercrop components.
v) Seed-minikits of pulses may be given to farmers opting for intercropping only.
vi) KVKs at districts level should be involved in training of farmers and field
demonstration of production technology.
4.1.5 Cultivation of pigeonpea on rice-bunds
An area of 20-30 thousand ha can be brought under pigeonpea in Chhattisgarh, Madhya
Pradesh, Orissa, West Bengal and Jharkhand by utilizing rice-bunds. Farmers of Chhattisgarh
traditionally use rice bunds for pigeonpea cultivation.
4.1.6 Promotion of utera cultivation of lentil and field pea in rice fields
Utera cultivation is a practice commonly and traditionally followed in tribal regions of
Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand and can contribute to pulse production
ensuring additional income to tribal rice growers.
4.1.7 Rainfed areas developed as watersheds
Multiple ministries/departments and agencies have been involved in the growth and
development of watersheds with an array of watershed schemes. Three schemes of Drought
Prone Area programme (DPAP), Desert Development Programme (DDP) and Integrated
Wasteland Development Programme (IWDP) of Ministry of Rural Development have now
been merged into Integrated Watershed Management Programme (IWMP). National Watershed
Development Programme for Rainfed Areas (NWDPRA), River Valley Projects (RVPs),
Catchment Area Programme in Flood Prone Rivers, Shifting cultivation scheme of Ministry of
Agriculture, Hill Area Development Programme (HADP) and Western Ghats Development
Programme (WGDP) of Planning Commission; various afforestation programmes and other
national and externally aided projects (EAPs) are other programmes being implemented for
developing land and water resources in rainfed areas.
Annexures-V & VI contain the extent of area treated and the districts covered under
NWDPRA. More than 1.2 million ha area has already been treated and developed in 28 States
during the period 2007-08 to September, 2010. Further, 1736 projects (Annexure-VII) aimed
to cover 8.42 million ha land have also been cleared for implementation during 2010-11.
States can be asked to include pulses as a major crop component for watershed areas. While
kharif pulses can be purely rainfed, rabi pulses can be provided supplementary irrigation for
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
11
sustaining remunerative productivity levels. It should be possible to cover 30-40% of cultivated
watershed area under pulses.
4.2 Increasing Crop Productivity
Opportunities for increase in crop productivity exist in the form of new varieties of seeds
developed for recording higher yields and through better crop management practices that make
the pulses cultivates of more efficient. Strategies and approaches relating to the two aspects:
promotion of quality seed varieties and promotion of efficient package of practices are discussed
as under.
4.2.1 Promotion of quality seeds
Main issue relating to promotion of quality seeds is the availability of seed of promising
varieties to the farmers in adequate quantities and in time. To increase supply of quality seeds,
following measures are recommended.
a) Seed replacement/multiplication strategy
Use of good quality/certified seed in pulses has generally been low. Seed replacement
Rate (SRR) estimated for the year 2006-07 was only 10.41% (Table 2). Efforts made through
various Government Sponsored Programmes such as Integrated Scheme of Oilseeds, Pulses,
Oilpalm and Maize (ISOPOM), National Food Security Mission, (NFSM), Seed Village
Programme etc have been successful in raising SRR of pulses to 22.5% by the year 2010-11.
Table 2 : SRR of pulses in India
Crop
1
Gram
Lentil
Peas
Urd
Moong
Arhar
Total
Ave. area
Seed
(2003-08)
(Lakh ha)
Requirement
(Lakh Qtls.)
2
71.45
14.30
7.37
31.46
33.86
35.80
230.87
3
53.59
3.57
1.47
6.29
6.77
7.16
92.53
2006-2007
Distribution of
Certified / Quality
Seeds (lakh qtls.)
4
5.08
0.54
0.93
0.80
0.23
0.85
9.63
2010-11
SRR
(%)
5
9.48
15.10
15.78
12.71
3.40
11.87
10.41
Distribution of
Certified / Quality
Seeds (lakh qtls.)
6
12.50
0.74
1.47
1.96
1.76
1.52
20.83
SRR
(%)
7
23.33
20.70
24.94
31.15
26.01
21.23
22.51
Relatively slow progress in the SRR has been attained because of inadequate availability
of certified seed and its timely delivery to farmers. There is an urgent need to address the
major impediments to seed production and its delivery. These are
i) Lack of practicable seed plan in most of the pulse growing states.
ii) Generally low seed multiplication ratio (Smo).
12
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
iii) Varietal mismatch between demand and supply.
iv) Lack of storage facilities often leading to high storage losses in quality and quantity.
v) Virtually non-participation of private sector in production and distribution of seed of pulses.
b) Development of seed plan and production of breeder, foundation & certified
seed
Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) has come out with a breeder seed plan
for 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. The plan is based 25-30% seed replacement rate to be
achieved by 2011-12. The quantity of breeder seed to be produced and corresponding quantity
of foundation and certified seed required in 2011-12 is depicted in Table 3.
Table 3 : Quantity of breeder, foundation and certified seed of major pulses crops to
be produced in 2011-12 for achieving SRR of 25-30%.
Crop
Mungbean
Urdbean
Lentil
Fieldpea
Chickpea
Pigeonpea
Total
Quantity of
breeder seed
(quintals)
473.85
426.51
1839.89
1474.15
17157.49
303.57
21675.46
Quantity of
foundation seed
(quintals)
12922.81
11631.74
25089.36
20102.12
233965.60
11039.47
314751.10
Quantity of
certified seed
(quintals)
352440.00
317229.00
3421275.00
274120.00
3190440.00
401434.00
7956938.00
It is quite likely that ICAR and its cooperating centres will be able to produce required
quantity of breeder seed but the quantity of foundation seed and certified seed produced may
fall short of the targeted quantity unless concerted efforts are made.
The following suggestions are made with a view to stream-line the production of breeder
seed and its multiplication to foundation seed and certified seed.
i)
SAUs located in each state should come out with crop and variety-wise requirement
of certified seed in consultation with State Seed Corporation and State Director of
Agriculture.
ii) Based on achievable seed multiplication rates the requirement of breeder seed of
each variety should be worked out.
iii) Provision for phasing out old varieties and inclusion of new but promising varieties
should find place in the breeder seed production plan.
iv) SAU and State Department of Agriculture/State Seed Cooperation should enter into
a written agreement which holds SAU accountable for production of breeder seed
and State Department of Agriculture/State Seed Corporation for lifting the seed.
v) Multiplication of expensive breeder seed to foundation (F1, F2 categories) should be
planned following prescribed guidelines so as to maximize SMR and cut down on
cost of production.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
13
vi) ICAR should coordinate production of nucleus seed and breeder seed by SAUs.
vii) Agriculture farms available with SAUs, KVKs, State Seed Corporation, National
Seed Corporation, State Farm Corporation of India and with private sector equipped
with basic facilities (approach road, irrigation, storage, farm machines etc.) should
be used for seed multiplication of pulses.
viii) Private sector companies should be involved in production and marketing of certified
seed of improved pulses varieties by extending advantage of production and
distribution subsidy.
ix) Some promising hybrids of pigeonpea have been developed and released by ICRISAT
and SAUs. Multi -location testing of these hybrids for their suitability and yield
advantage has also been carried out. ICAR in consultation with ICRISAT and SAUs
should endeavor to generate data on performance of such hybrids through their
network of cooperating centres and initiate action for production of seed of promising
hybrids of pigeonpea for large scale demonstrations and subsequent distribution in
potential areas.
x) Public and private seed companies should be encouraged through appropriate MOUs
to take up production of pigeonpea hybrids whose performance has been consistently
and significantly better than ruling varieties.
xi) Quality of hybrid seed of pigeonpea produced needs rigorous monitoring by Seed
Certification agency of the State concerned need to be equipped in terms of well
trained technical personnel and DNA finger printing facilities.
xii) Provision for training of hybrid seed producers should be taken up by ICRISAT and
SAUs/ICAR institutes located in the state concerned.
xiii) There is an urgent need to develop and implement a seed system model at village
level for improving production and ensuring sustained availability of certified
seed to farmers. ICRISAT has come out with a seed system model that involves
promotion of Farmers’ seed cooperatives, farmers’ participatory varietal selection,
provision of seed procurement, processing and storage at village cluster level by the
societies and making the same available to the farmers in the next season. Such
societies are functional in Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa
(Annexure-VIII)
c) Strategy for improving Seed multiplication rates (SMR) of pulses
Seed multiplication rates in pulses are low and unstable. Seasonal and regional variations
both in quality and productivity of seed are not uncommon. There is a considerable scope for
raising SMR on a sustainable basis. The following measures are as under suggested.
Identification of regions climatically suitable for seed production of various pulses crops
is necessary not only for improving yield but also off-season production of seed.
14
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Crop-wise regions for seed production with enhanced SMR and quality are indicated below.
Crop
Region / State
Mungbean
Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, and Rajasthan
Urdbean
Uttar Pradesh (Kharif), Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh (Rabi)
Lentil
Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, (Bundel- khand region)
Chickpea
Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan
Pigeonpea
Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka,
Maharashtra
Field pea
Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand
Guidelines prescribed by seed technologists for seed production need to be followed.
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
vii)
viii)
They include criteria for site selection, inter row spacing, seed rate, plant protection
measures, roguing operation, isolation distance, harvesting method, seed processing,
packing and storage etc.
Kharif seed production plots should be well drained and conveniently accessible so
that inspection and monitoring of the crop is possible on regular intervals.
Rabi pulse seed production should be planned on irrigated farms only.
Conjunctive use of organic manures and fertilizers based on soil test values is essential
for optimum yield levels and ensuring seed quality.
IPM practices prescribed for pulse crops should be followed. This calls for intensive
training of seed producers in IPM practices.
Seed lots should be processed at a well equipped plant such that it meets prescribed
seed-quality standards.
Processed seed should be stored in scientifically designed bins so as to protect it
from high humidity and stored grain pests.
Involvement of progressive farmers and private companies in seed production will
significantly improve SMR.
4.2.2 Identification of best agronomic practices
Agronomic practices that have major impact on productivity of pulses include tillage,
crop geometry, plant population, planting method and time, nutrient and water (rainwater and
irrigation) management, seed treatment (with fungicides) and crop-specific bacterial cultures,
weed management and plant protection.
Crop-specific recommendations based on applied and adaptive research findings generated
in different agro-climatic regions are developed by Zonal Agricultural Research Stations. The
same are usually presented and finalized during Research-Extension Interface held between
SAUs/ICAR Institutes and State Department of Agriculture and allied departments/agencies
twice in a year. The recommendations that emerge are passed on to farmers for adoption. Thus
availability of sound region, and crop-specific agronomic practices is adequate however, low
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
15
rate of adoption of improved agronomic practices has been a major constraint. Promising
agronomic practices applicable across pulse growing regions are suggested as below:
a) Agronomic Practices
Wide spread deficiency of zinc and sulphur in major pulse growing states and boron
deficiency in acid soils of eastern and north eastern states has necessitated use of sulphur
containing fertilizers and zinc sulphate as a source of zinc. Sulphur application @ 20-40 kg/ha
(through gypsum, SSP) at sowing and zinc sulphate @25-50 kg/ha once in two years effectively
address the problem and tend to maximize crop productivity.
Correction of Soil pH has a major role in nutrient and water use efficiency and consequently
on crop yield. Use of gypsum in western states and liming in eastern and parts of southern
states at the rates prescribed by SAUs/ICAR research centres located in the region is strongly
recommended.
Ridge-planting of kharif pulses in black soil region (Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh,
Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu) improves crop productivity and sustainability of
production as it ensure drainage of the root zone during intense rains and facilitates in-situ
conservation of rain-water to be used by rabi crops.
Nitrogen requirement of pulses is much higher than that of cereals. However, most of the
requirement is met through biological N-fixation. It is, therefore important that farmers are
encouraged to adopt agronomic practices that facilitate N-fixation. These include seed treatment
with crop specific rhizobium strain, integrated nutrient management, ridge-planting of kharif
(rainy season) pulses, balanced use of plant nutrients (including micro-nutrients) and
minimization of magnitude and duration of moisture stress.
Weed infestation of pulses has been observed to cause heavy yield losses in kharif and
rabi pluses. Use of chemical herbicides particularly during kharif season needs to be promoted
through incentives and appropriate extension strategy as frequent rains and too wet soil
conditions do not allow mechanical/manual weeding. A number of cost-effective herbicides
are available in the market. L ocal research stations can provide accurate recommendation in
this regard. Technologically advanced private sector companies with a wide distribution network
must be involved in pesticide and herbicide propagation for yield expansion.
b) Pest Surveillance mechanism and pest management practices
It is important that region specific advisories are issued for guiding pulse growers on pest
control. This calls for an effective pest surveillance mechanism to be put in place at district
level. National Centre for Integrated Pest Management (NCIPM) has come out with a model
for pest surveillance in cotton, pigeon pea, chickpea and other crops and tested the same in
Maharashtra state. The model is being demonstrated in some selected (7) NFSM-pulses states.
The model has met with notable success. As a consequence, other states such as Orissa, Gujarat
are keen to adopt. The key features of the mechanism followed are as below:
16
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
i) Demonstration of IPM module in farmers’ participatory mode.
ii) Capacity building of farmers, Subject Matter Specialists and Extension functionaries.
iii) Conduction of roving as well as fixed plot surveys on weekly basis so as to provide
real time data base for use by National Pest Reporting and Alert System established
at NCIPM.
iv) Periodic release of pest advisories using electronic media.
v) Ensuring that the advices are complied with through provisioning of the needed
biological or chemical pesticides.
It is therefore suggested to adopt the model with defined priorities.
c) Innovative method of better dissemination and adoption of agronomic
practices
Agronomic practices to be disseminated have to be not only region/agro-climatic
zone-specific but should also match the resource-base of the farming community. Similarly,
extension strategy to be followed should take into account the prevailing socio-economic status
of farmers. It is however widely observed that training of farmers and field demonstrations of
improved production practices are effective extension methods. Timely availability of credit
and critical inputs facilitates adoption of a practice which has been popularized. Innovative
ways of institution building that aggregates the produce of scattered pulse farmers and links
them up with the businesses for better quality of inputs and for efficient marketing of the
produce need to be found. Building farmer-producer organization discussed separately is an
example of this approach. More such approaches using Non-Government Organizations and
private sector should be tried. Producer Companies and other strategic PPP models need to be
followed with priority.
d) Mechanization in pulses
Pulses are grown in different agro climatic regimes and soil conditions can vary. In many
soils mechanisation is essential to raise productivity. Adoption of many scientifically sound
and economically viable agronomic practices requires use of certain farm machines/implements.
Very good examples are deep ploughing, ridge planting, line sowing, inter-culture operations
etc. Besides, mechanization contributes to timeliness of operations, reduces cost of production
and improves resource (water, energy and inputs) use efficiency.
Another important aspect on farm mechanization is that it needs to be promoted on ‘service’
approach. Considering small holding of the farmers, custom hiring of the machines is the only
viable option for increasing the reach. In this context, example of ‘Haldhar’ program of Madhya
Pradesh Government is a good practice that subsidizes the farmers to the extent of Rs. 2000/per hectare for deep ploughing of their lands. Government can facilitate farmers’ access to the
recommended machines by empanelment of the vendors for the services against a fixed fee/
charges. This way instead of subsidizing capital of individual farmers, the subsidy amount on
service charges would generate demand for capital creation that could be served from
institutional finance and ensure more optimal utilization of assets.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
17
The following suggestions are worth consideration for promotion of farm mechanization.
i)
Make an assessment of operations that if mechanized will contribute to crop
productivity, resource use efficiency and reduction in cost of cultivation in each
agro-climatic region.
ii) Make an assessment of availability of farm power.
iii) Identify farm implements/machines based on the above.
iv) Organize demonstrations of identified farm implements/machines to pulse growers.
v) Involve prominent manufacturers of farm implements/machines for manufacturing,
establishing supply outlets of identified machines/implements and providing after
sales service.
vi) Provide financial assistance for purchase of implements/machines.
e) Post harvest handling of grains for reducing losses
i)
Mechanical threshing needs to be promoted by providing incentives for purchase of
threshers.
ii) Procurement of pulses grains by Govt. authorized organizations will considerably
reduce the need for storage at farmers level.
iii) Small Dal-mills should be popularized and promoted through various incentives.
iv) Private sector should be encouraged to establish’ Dal Mill’s in rural areas/districts
with large acreage under pulses on the pattern of sugar mills. Private companies
need to be involved in processing, packing and marketing of pulses. The public sector
procurement agencies are severely handicapped for funds and expertise in this area.
f) Expansion of irrigation using resource conservation technologies
Pulses crops are invariably grown under moisture stress which leads to sub-optimal
productivity levels. Scientific scheduling of irrigation, an estimate of quantity of water to be
applied and deployment of water saving irrigation methods can lead to enhanced yield, higher
water and nutrient use efficiency and larger area coverage under irrigation. Use of sprinkler
irrigation has enormous potential for saving irrigation water and expanding area under irrigation.
The method has gained popularity in many districts with limited water resources. Drip irrigation
and fertigation hold promise for widely spaced crops like pigeonpea. These devices can expand
irrigation area by 30-50%.
g) Control of damage by blue bull
The damage caused to pulses crops by blue bull has been on the rise in the extent and
magnitude. The problem has become so acute that area of pulses in general and summer
mungbean in particular has witnessed drastic reduction in the states of Punjab, Haryana,
Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat. Although, the problem has been in existence for decades,
no socio-economically viable control measures have been evolved and implemented. Pulse
growers continue to suffer heavy economic losses. The issue is very serious and warrants
18
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
attention of the policy makers, administrators, social workers, as it has assumed social, economic
and ecological dimensions. The problem was discussed at length in a Brain Storming Session
chaired by Agriculture Commissioner and some useful recommendations emerged. It is
suggested that a committee consisting of senior officers from Department of Agriculture,
Department of Forestry and wild Life, and Department of Animal Husbandry may be constituted
with a mandate to come out with practicable recommendations including policy interventions
in a time bound manner as the issue is too serious to be ignored or left unattended for long.
5. Prices, tariff and trade policies
Assurance of remunerative and stable price environment is essential for ensuring farmers
interest in pulse crops cultivation. This will also encourage and facilitate adoption of improved
production technology through higher investments and consequently contribute to overall pulse
production. Remunerative price, of course, depends largely on cost of cultivation which off
late has registered a phenomenal increase. Rise in cost of inputs (seed, fertilizer, power, labour),
risk involved in pulse production due to climate change and change in pest complex etc should
also reflect in remunerative prices. The existing mechanism for addressing price issue involves
fixing annually Minimum Support Price (MSP) for pulses after taking into account
recommendations of the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices. While MSP of pulses
has registered more than 100% increase in 2010-11 over 2004-05 but increasing cost of
production and marketing related problems have significantly offset the profitability.
Procurement of pulses has remained a deficit area thereby depriving pulse growers of
getting full advantage of MSP. Post harvest losses and high marketing cost further erode
profitability. Import and export policy of Government of India has been based on prevailing
demand and supply situation with a view to control domestic prices and possibly insulate
domestic prices from international prices. But the policy has done little to minimize vast gap
between farm-gate and prevailing market price. This calls for review of the policy. The following
suggestions are made to address these and associated issues.
i)
Criteria for fixing MSP of pulses should be sensitive to prevailing market prices and
the risk associated with pulse production.
ii) Each state should designate appropriate agencies for procurement operations.
iii) Procurement centre with adequate storage facilities need to be established at district
and block level in major pulse growing zones.
iv) There is an urgent need to blend domestic price policy with tariff policy such that
domestic price of pulses stabilize and attractive returns to pulse producers are ensured.
v) Import duties on pulses need to be calibrated in response to the demand and supply
situation.
vi) Detailed analysis of cost of cultivation and marketing for each pulse crop in pulse
growing states is required so as to explore scope of reducing losses and production
cost through innovative interventions such as farm mechanization, deployment of
water and power saving gadgets/devices etc.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
19
vii) Post harvest losses in various pulse crops need to be quantified and affordable ways
to minimize such losses should be popularized through financial incentives.
viii) Policy interventions are required to minimize gap between farm-gate and market
price of pulses.
5.1 Pricing policy
There is need to radically change in the methodology followed by Commisison on
Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP) for fixing minimum support price so as to make pulses
crops more competitive. Alagh Committee on WTO Impacts on Price Policies (2003) had
proposed integration of price policy with tariff policy. It introduced the concept to efficiency
shifter with the price computed on the opportunity costs at the margin rather than on historical
costs. Such a computation could incentivize infusion of capital for adoption of new technological
inputs at the farm level resulting in lower per unit of current output cost and thus making the
pulse crops competitive.
On the basis of the recommendation of the Alagh Committee, the terms of reference of
CACP have been revised with the addition of the words ‘competitiveness of agriculture and
agro-based commodities’ in ToR n.2 (iii). A new ToR entry ‘ To effectively integrate the
recommended non-price measures with price recommendations and to ensure competitive
agriculture’. It is necessary for the CACP to draw up a road map for each crop to assess initial
capital requirements of progressive farming, which could lead to additional costs around a sixth
higher as compared to the `average` procurement prices. Integrated policy to give incentives for
a competitive agriculture could be followed in tandem with the Tariff, Tax and Monetary Policies.
Alagh Committee report has illustrated the new price policy with several simulated exercises
for different crops. By using Venugopal Reddy simulation, it demonstrated that within tariff
bounds with some monetary policy built in, it was possible to hold the farmer’s hand for the
transitional period in which he moves over to a lower cost per unit of output.
With low productivity level of pulse crops and reluctance of the farmers to invest adequate
resources to modernize farming of pulses, it is strongly recommended that revised pricing
policy as worked out by Alagh Committee should be introduced immediately.
5.2 License requirement in pulses
These are again bottlenecks to an economic regime favoring pulse economy revival. To
begin business operations to market pulses, any purchaser/dealer/trader needs to take two
licenses –
1. License under the respective state APMC Act to deal in agricultural produce.
2. License to stock pulses under the Essential Commodity Act - Pulses Control Order.
5.2.1 APMC License
The Agricultural Marketing is state subject and Agricultural Produce Market Commettee
(APMCs) are operated under different State Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Acts.
20
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Traders, commission agents, purchasers and other market functionaries are required to
take license under the respective state APMR Act for business operations. Further, in some
States, the traders / commission agents seeking license are required to have physical
establishment for such business in the APMC market area. There is no one clear guideline and
the interpretation of the act is different in different states.
For direct procurement as per present APMC Act, purchaser has to take license from each
APMC for trading / procurement operations in the notified area of such market committee.
In some states where amendment for direct marketing / contract farming has been made,
the concerned Director (Marketing) / MD Marketing Board can issue unified license. In many
states like Karnataka there is lack of clarity on the license and the right guidance by the
government officials.(Table 4)
Table 4: The status of license requirements under APMC across the country
S.No.
State
APMC
District Supply Office
EC Act
Stock
Limits
1
Maharashtra
2
Karnataka
3
4
Andhra pradesh Individual Mandi
(controlled by Civil
Supplies) Rationing
Officer
Gujrat
Unified License
5
Tamilnadu
No license required
Individual Mandi/
Unified License
Pulses Dealer
License given in
every district
Yes
Yes
Individual Mandi/
Unified License (but
process for this is
unclear)
The APMC only
controls this and it is
unclear whether a
separate license is
required
Pulses Dealer License
given in every district
100 tons Yes for
Individual
N.A for
unified
200 tons Yes
Yes
No
200 tons N.A
Yes
No
N.A (but still to confirm) N.A
100 tons N.A
Yes
No
6
Delhi
Individual Mandi
Pulses Dealer License
100 tons N.A
N.A
No
7
Kerala
No License required
Holding License for
the trader
N.A
N.A
Yes
No
8
Madhya Pradesh N.A (but still to confirm) N.A (but still to confirm) No
(Gazette Notification to (Gazette Notification to No
be got out)
be got out)
N.A
N.A
N.A
N.A
No
No
9
Uttar Pradesh
Individual Mandi
Pulses Dealer License
Yes
N.A
Yes
No
10
Punjab
Individual Mandi/Unified Pulses Dealer License
License (but process for
Yes
N.A
Yes
No
11
Haryana
Individual Mandi/Unified Pulses Dealer License
License (but process for
Yes
N.A
Yes
No
12
Rajasthan
Individual Mandi/Unified Pulses Dealer License
License (but process for
Yes
N.A
Yes
No
Not Required
Others - APMC Practices
Physical Licenses Cess for
Shop
for
multiple
Channel transactions
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
21
S.No.
State
APMC
District Supply Office
EC Act
Stock
Limits
Others - APMC Practices
Physical Licenses
Cess for
Shop
for
multiple
Channel transactions
13
West Bengal
Individual Mandi
Pulses Dealer License
Yes
N.A
Yes
No
14
Orissa
Individual Mandi/Unified Pulses Dealer License
License (but process for
Yes
N.A
Yes
No
15
Himachal
Pradesh
Individual Mandi/Unified Pulses Dealer License
License (but process for
Yes
N.A
Yes
No
16
Chattisgarh
N.A (but still to confirm) N.A (but still to confirm) No
(Gazett Notification to (Gazett Notification to
be got out)
be got out)
N.A
N.A
No
5.2.2 Pulses Control Order
Regarding stock limits, the concerned Food and Supply Department of State Government
who is implementing pulses control order need to be approached. Different states have different
license requirements and stock limits imposed on pulses. Only Madhya Pradesh does not have
a stock limit imposed on domestic pulses. Gujarat has done away with control order license
but has a stock limit. Due to these reasons, none of the big trading companies deal in domestic
pulses.
Applying through the right department in every state for EC license as well as obtaining
the EC license is a complex and time consuming exercise. States like Delhi are not issuing
Pulses Dealer license for over one year. All channel partners have to also apply for licenses.
Generally, the official time limits vary from 1-2 months, while the actual time taken is much
longer (Table 5).
Table 5: State-wise Stock Limits/ restrictions imposed by State Governments/Union
Territories on movement of food and agricultural produce
22
State
Status
Andhra Pradesh
A.P Storage Control Order: Stock limits on pulse
Assam
Stocking of food and agricultural produce is regulated through: Assam Trade
Articles (Licensing and Control) Order, 1982.
Bihar
Stock limits on food and agricultural produce have been imposed with prior
concurrence of the Central Government.
Chandigarh
Chandigarh Food Articles (Licensing and Control) Order: Stock limits
imposed for wheat, rice and pulses.
Delhi
Delhi Pulses (Licensing of Dealers) Order, 1974: Stock limits imposed on
pulses. But these do not provide for any restriction on movement.
Gujarat
Gujarat Pulses Order 2007: effective till September 2011 – wholesaler does
not a license but needs to maintain a stock limit of 100 tons.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
State
Status
Jammu & Kashmir
Ban on movement outside the state of food grains (except Basmati rice),
pulses, singharas, oil seeds, cheese & butter and vegetables of all kinds.
Himachal Pradesh
H.P Trade Articles (Licensing and Control) Order, 1981: Traders possessing
food grains and other food articles more than the specified limits are required
to obtain a license.
Karnataka
Karnataka Essential Commodities (Licensing) Order, 1999: Stock limits
imposed on wholesalers, dealers, commission agents and retailers.
Madhya Pradesh
Pulses, Edible Oilseeds and Edible Oils (Storage Control) Order, 1977:
Under which stock limits imposed on pulses. (We are looking for the latest
notification where MP does not have stock limits)
Maharashtra
Maharashtra Scheduled Commodities Wholesale Dealers Licensing Order,
1998: Stock limits have been fixed.
Punjab
Stock limits imposed on pulses.
Rajasthan
Central Pulses, Edible Oilseeds and Edible Oils (Storage and Control Order,
1977: Stock limits imposed on pulses.
Tamil Nadu
Tamil Nadu Essential Trade Articles (Regulation of Trade) Order, 1984:
Stock limits fixed paddy/rice, sugar and pulses.
Uttar Pradesh
Stock limits fixed on edible oilseeds, pulses and edible oils (including
hydrogenated Vanaspati).
West Bengal
West Bengal Rationing Order, 1964: It delineates ‘Rationed areas’, which is
an area where a rationed article is sold. The movement of food grains in
these areas is restricted to those appointed by the State authorities.
New methods for marketing should be Devised to supplement some of the shortfalls in
specific pulses crops. For example, Yellow Dal is being aggressively promoted by Ministry of
Consumer Affairs through publicity campaign that not only succeeded in introducing the split
field pea for consumption as dal but also promoted its nutritive and culinary benefits in
preference to the gram dal or toor dal.
New avenues need to be explored to manufacture dal from other vegetative nutritive base
that meets the culinary and nutritive requirement of vast majority of Indians. A brief description
of such an initiative is given below
6. Manufactured Dal
With a view to augment the availability of low cost protein in the country, the National
Dairy Development Board (NDDB) developed technology to produce analogue to natural dal
from defatted Soya flour and wheat flour to utilize the protein in the Soya meal. The Soya
protein which otherwise would have been mostly exported for feeding cattle is thus converted
into nutritious and easily digestible value added food as Dal Analogue. Technology Mission
on Oilseeds and Pulses (TMOP) had approved the project with an initial outlay of ` 11.50
crores. Of which ` 2.56 crores was grant from TMOP and ` 8.94 crores funded by NDDB
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
23
under Oil Project. Actual expenditure on the Dal Analogue plant was ` 9.10 crores (` 2.56
crores grant from TMOP and ` 6.54 crores from NDDB Oil Project).
The state of art automated plant with an installed capacity of 1200 kg/hr dal analogue
(6000MT/annum) was commissioned in 1999 and is located at Anand. The plant equipment
include raw material batching system, pre-conditioner, twin screw extruder, drying and cooling
system and packing section. Dal analogue is prepared from edible grade defatted Soya flour
and wheat flour along with turmeric using extrusion technology. The product is a high protein
proprietary product specially developed in the form of pellets which resembles TUR/ARHAR
DAL in appearance. It has mininum of 30% protein when compared to 22-24% in natural dal
and calorific value similar to natural dal i.e. around 350 Kcal. The dal analogue takes less time
to cook than natural dal and have all functional cooking properties and palatable taste.
While the plant supplied this product to CARE for their nutritional programme and
Integrated Child Development Scheme in the state of Madhya Pradesh, the product could not
be commercialized as the extruded food was a new concept replacing a natural food.
Based on the current price of raw materials, the ex-factory basic cost of dal analogue is
approx ` 42500/- per MT.
Details of Costing are as under:
Raw Material
` / MT
Soya floor
16200
Wheat floor
9275
Turmeric
750
Pacakaging material
716
Manufacturing expenses
11550
Other Misc. Expenses
1000
Fixed over heads
1000
Margin assumed
2000
Basic Price ex- Plant
42491
Approximate
42500
Transportation
Delhi
2000
Hyderabad
3000
Gujrat
1000
Whole sale price of Tur Dal is assumed around
65000
Over and above 12.50% VAT and 2% CST would be applicable.
The dal analogue has high protein content, which could be an ideal food for various
nutrition programme run by the state governments, discussions have also been held with
American Soybean Association, International Marketing (ASA-IM), who are promoting Soya
based products in the country. In order to position the product on health platform, ASA –IM
24
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
with the assistance of M/s Wenger, USA have taken pilot trial run to improve the product
colour and texture so as to enhance the product appeal and consumer acceptability. The plant
has also approached M/s Andhra Pradesh Foods, Hyderabad (A Govt. of A.P. Enterprise)
to introduce dal analogue for their various nutrition programme. During 2009-10, 50 Metric
tons of dal analogue was supplied to M/s AP Foods, a government undertaking for mid-day
meal scheme. Currently AP Foods has placed an order for supply of 330 Metric tons dal analogue
under mid-day scheme.
In the similar manner, Mother Dairy has attempted to supply sale of dal analogue through
mother Dairy booth in NCR in 1 kg packing and around 14 Metric tons dal analogue was
supplied during 2010-11 under the brand name I-Dal.
If dal analogue product has to be competitive in the market, GOI may consider issuing
directives to respective state government & central authority for exempting the product from
state sale tax in case of local sales and central sale tax (in case of inter-state sales).
7. National Pulses Development Board
Sustainable availability of the pulses in general and kharif pulses like Red Gram, Black
Gram and Green Gram in particular in the context of limited global marketable surplus and
increasing demand makes it important to ensure that these crops get special attention.
It is necessary to view various functions under the pulses supply chain from the farmers’
field to the consumers’ plate under a single integrating umbrella to bring in more efficiency
and develop a holistic approach to pulses development. For production, marketing, processing,
retailing and consumption, information relating to the specialized functions performed by
different departments, agencies and private sector could be collected, collated and analysed by
a central institution for knowledge exchange to bring about efficiency gains in the supply
chain and for timely policy and programmatic responses so as to improve the availability of
pulses in the market.
It is proposed that on the lines of Coconut Development Board, National Pulses
Development Board may be constituted as a Central knowledge bank on pulses. This one stop
administrative structure on pulses would encompass knowledge exchange on production,
markets, trade, processing, manufacturing and consumption. It could be an autonomous body
of expertise covering all aspects of pulses. Mandate and the functions of the Board could be
worked out separately. Board can be given an initial corpus for performing the mandated
functions. A revenue model would need to be evolved for sustaining its efforts.
8. Communication strategy for reaching out to farmers
One of the major constraints in improving production and productivity of pulses continues
to be low rate of adoption of improved practices generated and refined by National Agricultural
Research System (NARS) unlike rice and wheat crops as demonstration by a vast gap in yield
between farmers practice and field demonstrations of improved practices. Low rate of adoption
of improved practices may be attributed to:
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
25
i)
Higher risk associated with rainfed production systems in general and pulses in
particular.
ii) High cost and inadequate availability of inputs recommended under improved package
of practices i.e. seed.
iii) Technologies generated and recommended lack regional specificity and are beyond
the reach of resource poor farmers.
iv) Farmers are ignorant about the practice and its economics/advantages or not convinced
about merits of its adoption.
In majority of the cases, however, lack of effective communication has been a major
impediment in adoption of improved practices. Enhancement of productivity of pulses on
sustainable basis is not possible without narrowing existing communication gap between
research centres and farmers. The responsibility of bridging the gap primarily rests with State
Department of Agriculture which has a vast network of extension functionaries at district,
block, panchayat and even village cluster level in most of the states. The extension network
has a technical back up from SAUs/ICAR institutes/ Zonal Research Stations and KVKs located
in the region. In addition ATMA and many NGOs are engaged in agricultural extension activities.
Following strategy is suggested to fully harness the potential of the available infrastructure
and vast human resource.
i)
Existing research and extension interface at State, Zone and District level needs to
be made more effective so as to take policy and administrative decisions for facilitating
transfer and adoption of improved practices by pulse growers.
ii) Extension functionaries are engaged in many other activities not related to technology
transfer. As a consequence the very purpose of being technical is either defeated or
partially achieved. This takes a big task on technology dissemination. It is therefore
necessary to accord priority to agricultural extension programmes by ensuring
deployment of a dedicated team of extension personnel for each district.
iii) There is a need to revisit extension strategy adopted by states as it lacks relevance to
socio-economic and existing knowledge base of small, marginal and sub-marginal
farmers.
iv) The strategy and approach for effective and faster dissemination of improved practices
to farmers should include:
Capacity building for extension workers with emphasis on major regional
constraints holding productivity of pulses in the district. This task should be
entrusted to the KVK located in the district. Training modules developed by
KVKs should be regularly updated so as to accommodate emerging field
problems/innovations and most recent technological developments in pulses.
Scientists manning Agricultural Technology Information centres (ATIC) located
at SAU/ICAR Institute head quarters and those attending Kisan Call centres
should be well conversant and up-to-date with pulse production technology
26
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
and sources of quality inputs and ongoing schemes for the benefit of pulse
growers.
Sensitization of private input supplying agencies, cooperative bodies and dealers
located in each district about likely demand of various inputs, quality standards
of inputs fixed by regulatory departments and on-going Government sponsored
programme/provisions by ATMA/District Agriculture prior to onset of a cropping
season should be arranged in each district.
District/Block level programmes for Gram Panchayats, SHGs and NGO for
seeking their active participation in popularizing pulses technology should be
organized by ATMA/KVKs.
Capacity building of pulse growers will go a long way in promoting pulse
production. Extension staff trained by KVKs/ATMA should be used as resource
persons for farmers training to be organized at Gram Panchayat Level.
Progressive farmers from each Gram Panchayat can also be identified and trained
to act as resource persons.
Famers should be made aware of on-going credit and crop insurance schemes,
agencies to be approached and procedures to be followed through Panchayats,
AIR, Doordarshan, Grain Mandis etc.
Forewarning against imminent pest attack, occurrence of frost, rains, hail storm
etc should be an integral part of district level extension programme.
9. Long Term Research Plan for Raising Productivity to Global levels
It is important to identify emerging challenges in pulse production along with existing
technological gaps for each agro-climatic region for setting up short, medium and long-term
research goals. ICAR at National and SAUs and their Zonal Research Stations at regional
level have been vested with this responsibility. IIPR and their cooperating centres (SAUs)
spread across the country has come out with a document “Vision 2020” containing long term
research goals and activity milestones. It is hoped that the strategy developed is amenable to
mid-course corrections being necessitated by climatic change and associated changes in disease
and pest complex, income-induced increase in demand of pulses and global production and
market scenario.
9.1 GM crops: Current Status
Efforts are being made in Indian Public Research Institutions since early eighties to develop
transgenic crops. The Government of India has been very supportive of the efforts to develop
transgenic crops and invested liberally through the Department of Biotechnology, Department
of Science, Department of Technology and Indian Council of Agricultural Research. As a
result many transgenic crops have been developed and are being tested by various public and
private institutions. A list of such efforts is given in the Tables 6 and 7. There are however
some recent developments on approval process for conducting trials which have made the
system more complex. A gist of the revised process is given below.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
27
Table 6: A list of Field Trials of GM Food Crops being conducted by Public Research
Institutions
Sl. No. Crops
28
Year
Institute
Traits
1
Brinjal
2006
IARI, New Delhi
Insect resistance
2
Castor
2006
Directorate of Oilseeds Research, Hyd
Insect resistance
3
Groundnut
2006
ICRISAT, Hyderabad
Virus resistance
4
Potato
2006
Central Potato Research Institute, Shimla
Fungal resistance
5
Rice
2006
IARI, New Delhi
Insect resistance
6
Rice
2006
TNAU, Coimbatore
Disease resistance
7
Tomato
2006
IARI, New Delhi
Virus resistance
8
Brinjal
2007
UAS, Bangalore
Insect resistance
9
Brinjal
2007
TNAU, Coimbatore
Insect resistance
10
Potato
2009
Central Potato Research Institute, Shimla
Tuber sweetening
11
Chickpea
2009
ICRISAT, Hyderabad
Abiotic stress tolerance
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl. No. Crops
12
Sorghum
Year
Institute
Traits
2009
National Research Centre for Sorghum,
Hyderabad
Insect resistance
13
Watermelon
2010
Indian Institute of Horticultural Research
Virus resistance
14
Tomato
2010
Indian Institute of Horticultural Research
Virus resistance
15
Tomato
2010
IIVR, Varanasi
Insect resistance
16
Tomato
2010
NRCPB, New Delhi
Fruit ripening
17
Papaya
2010
Indian Institute of Horticulture Research
Virus resistance
18
Sugarcane
2010
Sugarcane Breeding Institute
Insect resistance
19
Sorghum
2010
Central Research Institute for Dryland
Agriculture
Abiotic stress tolerance
20
Groundnut
2010
University of Agricultural Sciences,
Bangalore
Abiotic stress tolerance
21
Mustard
2010
NRCPB, New Delhi
Abiotic stress tolerance
22
Mustard
2010
University of Delhi South Campus, Delhi
Heterosis
23
Brinjal
2006
IARI, New Delhi
Insect resistance
24
Castor
2006
Directorate of Oilseeds Research, Hyd
Insect resistance
25
Groundnut
2006
ICRISAT, Hyderabad
Virus resistance
26
Potato
2006
Central Potato Research Institute, Shimla
Fungal resistance
27
Rice
2006
IARI, New Delhi
Insect resistance
28
Rice
2006
TNAU, Coimbatore
Disease resistance
29
Tomato
2006
IARI, New Delhi
Virus resistance
30
Brinjal
2007
UAS, Bangalore
Insect resistance
31
Brinjal
2007
TNAU, Coimbatore
Insect resistance
32
Potato
2009
Central Potato Research Institute, Shimla
Tuber sweetening
33
Chickpea
2009
ICRISAT, Hyderabad
Abiotic stress tolerance
34
Sorghum
2009
National Research Centre for Sorghum,
Hyderabad
Insect resistance
35
Watermelon
2010
Indian Institute of Horticultural Research
Virus resistance
36
Tomato
2010
Indian Institute of Horticultural Research
Virus resistance
37
Tomato
2010
IIVR, Varanasi
Insect resistance
38
Tomato
2010
NRCPB, New Delhi
Fruit ripening
39
Papaya
2010
Indian Institute of Horticulture Research
Virus resistance
40
Sugarcane
2010
Sugarcane Breeding Institute
Insect resistance
41
Sorghum
2010
Central Research Institute for Dryland
Agriculture
Abiotic stress tolerance
42
Groundnut
2010
University of Agricultural Sciences,
Bangalore
Abiotic stress tolerance
43
Mustard
2010
NRCPB, New Delhi
Abiotic stress tolerance
44
Mustard
2010
University of Delhi South Campus, Delhi
Heterosis
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
29
Table 7: A list of Field Trials of GM Food Crops being conducted by Private companies.
30
S.No
Crops
Year
Institute
Traits
1
Brinjal
2006
Sungro Seeds, New Delhi
Insect resistance
2
Brinjal
2006
Mahyco, Mumbai
Insect resistance
3
Cabbage
2006
M/s Nunhems, Gurgaon
Insect resistance
4
Cauliflower
2006
Sungro Seeds, New Delhi
Insect resistance
5
Cauliflower
2006
M/s Nunhems, Gurgaon
Insect resistance
6
Corn
2006
Monsanto, Mumbai
Insect resistance
7
Okra
2006
Mahyco, Mumbai
Insect resistance
8
Rice
2006
Mahyco, Mumbai
Insect resistance
9
Tomato
2006
Mahyco, Mumbai
Insect resistance
10
Okra
2007
Mahyco, Mumbai
Insect resistance
11
Rice
2008
Bayer Bioscience Pvt. Ltd.
Insect resistance
12
Tomato
2008
Avesthagen Ltd.
Nutritional quality
13
Corn
2008
Monsanto India Ltd.
Insect resistance,
Herbicide tolerance
14
Brinjal
2009
Bejo Sheetal Seeds, Jalna
Insect resistance
15
Corn
2009
Pioneer Overseas Corporation
Insect resistance,
Herbicide tolerance
16
Corn
2009
Dow Agro.
Insect resistance
17
Rice
2009
Bayer Bioscience.
Insect resistance
18
Rice
2009
Mahyco, Jalna
Insect resistance,
Herbicide tolerance
19
Rice
2010
E.I. DuPont
Heterosis
20
Rice
2010
Bayer Bioscience
Insect resistance
21
Rice
2010
Metahelix Life Sciences
Insect resistance
22
Rice
2010
BASF India Ltd.
Insect resistance
23
Maize
2010
Pioneer Overseas Corporation
Insect resistance and
Herbicide tolerance
24
Corn
2010
Dow AgroSciences
Insect resistance
25
Corn
2010
Syngenta Biosciences
Insect resistance
26
Brinjal
2006
Sungro Seeds, New Delhi
Insect resistance
27
Brinjal
2006
Mahyco, Mumbai
Insect resistance
28
Cabbage
2006
M/s Nunhems, Gurgaon
Insect resistance
29
Cauliflower
2006
Sungro Seeds, New Delhi
Insect resistance
30
Cauliflower
2006
M/s Nunhems, Gurgaon
Insect resistance
31
Corn
2006
Monsanto, Mumbai
Insect resistance
32
Okra
2006
Mahyco, Mumbai
Insect resistance
33
Rice
2006
Mahyco, Mumbai
Insect resistance
34
Tomato
2006
Mahyco, Mumbai
Insect resistance
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
S.No
Crops
Year
Institute
Traits
35
Okra
2007
Mahyco, Mumbai
Insect resistance
36
Rice
2008
Bayer Bioscience Pvt. Ltd.
Insect resistance
37
Tomato
2008
Avesthagen Ltd.
Nutritional quality
38
Corn
2008
Monsanto India Ltd.
Insect resistance,
Herbicide tolerance
39
Brinjal
2009
Bejo Sheetal Seeds, Jalna
Insect resistance
40
Corn
2009
Pioneer Overseas Corporation
Insect resistance,
Herbicide tolerance
41
Corn
2009
Dow Agro.
Insect resistance
42
Rice
2009
Bayer Bioscience.
Insect resistance
43
Rice
2009
Mahyco, Jalna
Insect resistance,
Herbicide tolerance
44
Rice
2010
E.I. DuPont
Heterosis
45
Rice
2010
Bayer Bioscience
Insect resistance
Insect resistance
46
Rice
2010
Metahelix Life Sciences
47
Rice
2010
BASF India Ltd.
Insect resistance
48
Maize
2010
Pioneer Overseas Corporation
Insect resistance and
Herbicide tolerance
49
Corn
2010
Dow AgroSciences
Insect resistance
50
Corn
2010
Syngenta Biosciences
Insect resistance
9.2 ICAR Initiatives
ICAR initiated a network programme aimed at the development of transgenics in major
crops for introduction of traits such as pest resistance, disease tolerance and abiotic stress
tolerance. Some of the transgenics such as cotton, potato, castor and tomato are being fieldtested. A list of the crops and traits being handled in ICAR Network programme is given in
Table 8.
Table 8: Crops, traits and institutes identified for Network Project on Transgenic
development
S.No.
1
Crops
Traits
Institutions
Rice
Resistance to yellow stemborer
NRCPB; DRR;CRRI;
Sheath blight resistance
ICAR-NEH; VPKAS
NRC Sorghum; NRCPB
2
Sorghum
Resistance to stem borer
3
Maize
Resistance to stem borers
VPKAS; IARI; DMR;NRCPB
4
Chickpea
Resistance to pod borer
NRCPB; IIPR
5
Pigeonpea
Resistance to pod borer
NRCPB; IIPR
6
Soybean
Resistance to viruses
IARI; NRCSoy
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
31
S.No.
7
Crops
Traits
Institutions
Cotton
Resistance to boll worm
CICR; NRCPB; IARI
Resistance to leaf curl virus
8
Brassica
Resistance to aphids
NRCPB; NRCRM
Tolerance to drought
9
Banana
Bunchy top virus resistance
Banana streak virus resistance
Fusarium wilt resistance
NRCB; IARI; IIHR
10
Papaya
Ring spot virus resistance
Leaf curl virus resistance
CISH; IARI
11
Tomato
Leaf curl virus resistance
IIVR; IIHR; IARI; NRCPB
Extended shelf life
Resistance to fruit borer
12
Brinjal
Resistance to fruit Borer
IIVR; NRCPB
13
Potato
Resistance to viruses
CPRI; IARI
14
Cassava
Mosaic virus resistance
CTCRI; IARI
15
Groundnut
Resistance to Insect/pests
NRCG;NRCPB
16
Castor
(PVY; PALCV)
Tolerance to drought and salinity
Resistance to Insect/pests
DOR, NRCPB
Transgenic events in cotton, sorghum, brassica, tomato, potato and papaya that emanated out of the
Network Project are undergoing field/glasshouse tests.
There are, however, a few technological issues of general importance which need to be
addressed on priority.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
32
Development of early maturing pigeonpea varieties so that productivity per unit
time could be enhanced and they may fit well in pigeonpea-wheat cropping sequence
in the north and could be grown as sole crop in peninsular India during winter season.
Development of chickpea varieties tolerant to terminal heat for north India and also
breeding of chickpea, fieldpea and lentil for tolerance to cold/frost.
Development of bold seeded desi and kabuli chickpea varieties tolerant to biotic and
abiotic stresses.
Pigeonpea suffers a heavy loss due to water inundation in the states of Bihar,
Jharkhand, West Bengal, Eastern Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat. Therefore, development
of pigeonpea varieties suitable for post-rainy season (Pre-rabi season) planting is
required.
Zero-till seed drill suitable to different soil types need to be designed. This device
will ensure timely planting of rabi pulses and facilitate conservation of residual soil
moisture after kharif crops harvest.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
m.
n.
Kharif pulses suffer heavy loss due to stagnation of water in the root zone, particularly
at seedling stage. Therefore, designing of ridge-cum-planter for kharif pulses suitable
for major soil types is required.
There are heavy post-harvest losses in pulses, more so during storage. Therefore,
development of eco-friendly and affordable grain storage technology for different
regions is urgently required.
Systematic studies for validation of benefits of dibbling/transplanting/nipping/ drip
irrigation practices in pigeonpea innovated in Maharashtra and Karnataka are required
Pigeonpea hybrids based on genetic male sterility were developed in the country.
These hybrids could not be popularized due to problems in seed production. Recently
cytoplasmic genetic male sterile lines have been isolated and some promising hybrids
using this trait have been developed by ICRISAT in collaboration with state
Agricultural Universities of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Karnataka. Practical
feasible production technology for seed of these hybrids should be developed so that
they can be popularised.
Helicoverpa (gram pod borer) is a major pest of chickpea and pigeonpea. Sources of
resistance against this pest in the germplasm though being studied, are yet to be
established. Therefore, development of transgenic varieties of these two pulses
possessing resistance to pod borer is need of the day. The work in this direction is in
progress in CCSHAU, Hisar, IARI and IIPR. This work needs to be strengthened.
Vigna group of pulses (mungbean, urdbean, mothbean, cowpea and horse gram) are
vulnerable to yellow mosaic virus disease and powdery mildew. Suitable sources of
resistance against these diseases are not available in the germplasm. Therefore, the
biotechnological approach should be exploited to develop varieties of these pulses
resistant to these two diseases.
Fusarium wilt in chickpea, lentil and pigeonpea is a devastating disease that drastically
reduces plant population. Both conventional and biotechnological tools should be
applied for breeding wilt resistant varieties of these crops.(Some Plans for j,k and l
are outlined below)
Development of pulse crop varieties suitable for mechanical harvesting and
intercropping need to should be a part of pulse breeding strategy.
Development of mechanical harvester for kharif and rabi pulses is urgently required.
9.3 Technological Priorities for Medium and long Term Planning for a
Dynamic Pulses Economy
Technological issues have been listed above. But the Expert Group believe that while
with the available technologies given policy support as outlined pulse productivity can rise by
around a quarter, if a long term plan is not there, there can be no question of achieving pulse
demands, towards the end of the decade. If these plans are not set in place now, their outcomes
will not be achieved. To develop the next generation germplasm, we need at least five to seven
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
33
years and so long-term planning and action is needed. It therefore repeats the available plans
in a tabular form at the risk of some duplication. It also notes with considerable regret that
inspite of repeated requests the Research Establishment has not given a detailed road map and
the bare outlines below will need to be flushed out detailed, costed, milestones laid down and
implemented in the next six months. It still feels a preliminary listing is useful, if not for any
other reason just to outline the seriousness of the task.
9.3.1 Research Component 1 : Hybrids in pigeonpea
Activity
Milestone
201213
2013- 2014- 2015- 2016- Estima14
15
16
17
ted
Budget
(` Lakh)
Development
of heterotic
pool
Identification of heterotic
combinations in early and
medium maturity group
100
Diversification
and molecular
characterization of CGMS
lines
Diversification of CGMS lines in
diverse backgrounds with
resistance to diseases and
pests.
Identification and differentiation
of available cytoplasm
(mitochondrial DNA) from
stable A lines possessing
different cytoplasm
200
Identification
and
diversification
of restorers
Crossing between diverse lines
and CGMS lines
Identification of fertile F1’s and
restorers
100
Molecular
mapping and
tagging of
restorer genes
Marker assay for parental
polymorphism.
Generation of mapping
population·
Tagging of gene(s) for fertility
restoration
200
Crossing between CGMS lines
and fertility restorers·
Identification and development
of heterotic F1s
150
Training will be given to farmers,
personnels of private and public
seed companies, extension
workers of different state deptt.
of Agriculture, scientists of
KVKs etc.
200
Development
and multi
locational
evaluation of
CGMS based
hybrids
Organisation
of trainings for
seed
production of
parental lines
Total Budget
34
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
950
9.3.2 Research Component 2: Transgenics for pod borer resistance in pigeonpea
and chickpea
Activity and
milestone
2012- 2013- 2014- 2015- 2016- Collaborators
13
14
15
16
17
Expected
Output
Budget
(` In
lakh)
10.0
Procurement of
appropriate gene
constructs for
Helicoverpa
resistance and their
efficacy studies
NRCPB,
ICGEB,
University of
Ottawa,
Canada
MAHYCOMONSANTO
Gene with
proven efficacy
identified
Genetic
transformation of
chickpea and
pigeonpea with
genes of proven
efficacy (including
capacity building
and infrastructure
development)
CSIRO Plant
Industry,
Australia, AAU,
ICRISAT
Generation of
at least 100
putative
chickpea and
pigeonpea
events
Selection of putative
transformants on
stringent selection
conditions and
generation
advancement
NRCPB,
ICRISAT
Proven, stable 200.0
transgenic lines
Event
characterization for
single copy
insertions with
stable inheritance
in advanced
generations
NRCPB,
ICRISAT
Characterization 500.0
of transgenic
lines
Insect Bioassay and
other assays
IARI, ICRISAT Lines with >
90% mortality
50.0
Generation of
biosafety data
including limited field
trials
IARI, ICRISAT,
SRIRAM
Institute
40.0
Total Budget
800.00
1600.00
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
35
9.3.3 Research component 3: Efficient plant architecture in major pulse crops
a) Chickpea
Activity &
Milestone
Time Frame
2012-13 2013-14
Development and
evaluation of tall
and erect plant
types for
mechanical
harvesting and
short duration
varieties for rainfed
and late sown
conditions
Pre-breeding to
broaden genetic
base and creation
of new variability
Tailoring of plant
types for various
cropping systems
using identified
donors
Generation of
breeding material
and utilization of offseason nursery for
generation
advancement
Phenotypic
selection, utilization
of MAS and
progeny testing
Evaluation of
promising material
in preliminary yield
trials.
Multi-location
evaluation for
identification of
varieties
36
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Collaboration
Budget
(` In lakh)
2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
ICRISAT,
ICARDA, IARI,
SAUs
300
b) Pigeonpea
Activity &
Milestone
Time Frame
2012-13 2013-14
Development of
plant types with
semi-spreading
growth habit,
medium height (11.5 m) with long
fruiting branches in
early and late
pigeonpea
Collaboration
Budget
(` In lakh)
2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
ICRISAT, IARI,
SAUs
350
Pre-breeding to
broaden genetic
base and creation
of new variability
Tailoring of plant
types using
identified donors
Generation of
breeding material
through
hybridization
Phenotypic
selection, utilization
of MAS and
progeny testing
Evaluation of
promising material
in station trials
Multilocation
evaluation of
promising lines for
their possible
release
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
37
c) Urdbean and Mungbean
Activity &
Milestone
Time Frame
2012-13 2013-14
Development of
short duration photo
thermo-insensitive
plant types for
coastal area and
rice fallow in
urdbean and
mungbean
Pre-breeding to
broaden genetic
base and creation
of new variability
Tailoring of plant
types for various
cropping systems
using identified
donors
Generation of
breeding material
and utilization of offseason nursery for
generation
advancement
Phenotypic
selection, utilization
of MAS and
progeny testing
Evaluation of
promising material
and identification of
suitable varieties
Multilocation
evaluation of
promising
genotypes possible
release
38
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Collaboration
Budget
(` In lakh)
2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
AVDRC, IARI,
SAUs
350
d) Lentil
Activity &
Milestone
Time Frame
2012-13 2013-14
Development of
high biomass and
early maturing plant
types for rice fellow
and, semi-erect and
tall for mechanical
harvesting
Collaboration
Budget
(` In lakh)
2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
ICARDA, IARI,
VIPKAS, and
SAUs
250
Pre-breeding to
broaden genetic
base and creation
of new variability
Tailoring of plant
types using
identified donors
Generation of
breeding material
and utilization of offseason nursery for
generation
advancement
Phenotypic
selection, utilization
of MAS and
progeny testing
Evaluation of
promising material
in station trials
Multi-location
evaluation for
identification of
varieties
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
39
e) Field pea
Activity &
Milestone
Time Frame
2012-13 2013-14
Development of
dwarf plant types
for high input and
tall types for rainfed
conditions
Collaboration
Budget
(` In lakh)
2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
IIVR and
175
SAUs
Tailoring of plant
types using
identified donors
Generation of
breeding material
and utilization of
off-season nursery
for generation
advancement
Phenotypic
selection, utilization
of MAS and
progeny testing
Evaluation of
promising material
in station trials
Multi-location
evaluation for
identification of
varieties
Expert Group notes that a detailed plan for achieving experimental yields of two and a
half tonnes per hectare as in some countries like Canada is not available in India and it could
not be prepared even though it was requested by it. The existing somewhat rudimentary stage
of the art is given in some recent discussions reported. The research establishment is not only
to blame since highly negative signals have been given to the scientists working in the field.
f) An Example Chickpea: Insect resistance technologies
Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is the premier pulse crop of Indian subcontinent. India is
the largest chickpea producer as well as consumer in the world. India grows chickpea on about
6.67 million ha area producing 5.3 million tonnes which represents 30% and 38% of the national
pulse acreage and production, respectively. Productivity stands at 844 kg/ha. Madhya Pradesh,
Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh together contribute
91% of the production and 90% of the chickpea area of the country.
40
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
The pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera, is the major economic insect pest of chickpea.
Yield losses from Helicoverpa damage were found to vary from 10 to 33% depending on the
chickpea type and the growing environment. Spreading types are more susceptible to
Helicoverpa damage than erect types, as are kabuli types compared to desi types. Yield losses
due to Helicoverpa infestation are found to be greater in the irrigated than in the rainfed crop.
Sap-sucking pests such as aphids are also a constraint on chickpea productivity, to a lesser
extent than pod borer.
f.1 Pod-borer tolerant chickpea
Assam Agricultural University (AAU) Jorhat, has developed transgenic chickpea lines
expressing cry2Aa, a gene obtained from Bacillus thuringiensis, the same soil bacterium from
which Bt genes used in Bt cotton are derived. cry2Aa is effective against Helicoverpa armigera.
Under the Indo-Swiss Collaboration in Biotechnology (ISCB) program, Sungro Seeds Research
Ltd, New Delhi, received three chickpea cry2Aa-expressing lines which were planted in the
greenhouse in mid-2010 and then harvested on maturity.
The objective of the initiative at Sungro is to evaluate the efficacy of the transgenic lines
against the pest, and once this is established, to introgress the cry2Aa event into widely grown
chickpea varieties, in order to make available Helicoverpa resistant varieties.
As of now progress has been achieved as outlined below:
The three cry2Aa-expressing lines were advanced by selfing to bulk up seed numbers
and plants were selected on the basis of on protein expression
Eight leading chickpea varieties chosen for conducting outcrossing using the 3 donor
lines, and introgression of the trait has commenced
F1 and BC1 seeds were successfully obtained from the above crosses and have been
harvested
Expression of Cry2Aa was confirmed in F1 plants derived from the 3 events
Insect bioassays will be carried out on F1 and BC1 material
Final line selection will be carried out based on greenhouse experiments, and
molecular characterization of the events.
f.2 Sucking pest tolerant chickpea
Transgenic chickpea material containing the ASAL gene which showed improved tolerance
to the sucking pest damage was received from Bose Institute, Kolkata. The seeds received
have been sown for bulking and further analysis.
g) Pigeonpea
Pigeonpea also sustains a high level of economic loss due to Helicoverpa, which at times
can cause complete crop loss. A number of labs including ICRISAT have worked on developing
Bt pigeonpea. Several years ago, Mahyco developed pigeonpea lines expressing cry1Ac, which
showed high levels of resistance to the pest. However, it was found that these lines were not
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
41
suitable for breeding due to a number of reasons including poor fertility. Recently AAU has
been awarded funding by DBT for pigeonpea transformation with Mahyco as a collaborator,
and work to establish a reliable transformation system has been initiated.
h) Recent Discussion
The Committee was also informed that Shri Nitish Kumar, Chief Minister, Bihar has
indicated that he is opposed to Bt. Maize field trials in the State and permission given for this
activity should be withdrawn immediately.
To accelerate work on research on transgenics varieties in Pulses, following steps as way
forward have been recently taken by ICAR.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
9.3.4
On a general agreement that reliable transformation protocols for chickpea and
pigeonpea appear now to be achievable there is consensus that need now was for an
increase in the volume of the transformation work so that a reasonable number of
successful transgenic events are available in about an year.
For this purpose a large number of skilled man power is required to do the tissue
culture work in an assembly mode. Two possible ways to get this man power were
planned. One was to engage Ph.D. students for doing work on pigeonpea/chickpea
transformations as a part of their thesis work. Another way was to hire on a strictly
contractual basis, a number of graduates through walk in interviews.
IIPR should attempt to develop and maintain a line of Helicoverpa armigera which
is susceptible to most of the pesticides and one which is resistant to as many pesticides
as possible.
All transgenics of chickpea available with the Assam Agricultural University (AAU)
and those of pigeonpea available with the University of Agricultural Sciences Dharwad
(UAS, Dharwad) should immediately be transferred to IIPR Kanpur. The Director,
IIPR should take up the matter of any MTA or MOU required for these transfers
immediately. The required testing of these lines and further breeding work may be
initiated by IIPR at the earliest. Both UAS, Dharwad and AAU, Assam should take
up event characterisation of their respective transgenics at the earliest. Dr. Ananda
Kumar of NRCPB will help them in this work. They should also attempt to register/
patent their material with appropriate authorities at the earliest.
Each core group will try to meet regularly at the different partner institutions. The
National Coordinator should attempt to attend these meetings. In general there should
be attempts to have inter partner mobility in the project.
PPP in Research and Development
This is a more general issue needing discussion. It is obvious that the needs are so high
that both for resources and management of details a PPP mode will be necessary. The Public
sector ICAR system will need to take the strategic initiatives. India is too big for the world to
feed its growth and we can only use trade to adjust at the margin.
42
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
The Department of Agriculture has on its website and pulses portal given some details of
an excellent pulses development program, to raise yield to, say, 12 to 15 quintals per hectare is
strongly endorsed by the Expert Group we chair on pulses. William Dar, the director-general
of the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), has recently
announced that in different agro-climatic regions where pulses are grown, seeds with the highest
yields in the world have been developed, which are above two tonnes per hectare.
If we get on the drawing board now, it would take four to five years. We need such
strategies for many crops, in the PPP mode (GOI, 2010). To meet such needs, both money and
mobilization of scarce technical talent are required. We also need great management and
organizational abilities to cover the last mile in a long-haul problem. Sometimes we despair
but we have to constantly remind ourselves that when we set clear goals, commit resources
and persevere, our systems perform. Since entry costs are high, this is probably not a highly
competitive industry. Since product obsolescence too is high, the public-private partnership
(PPP) mould is probably very effective.
The hybrid paddy project was being developed two decades ago, but it failed because of
lack of perseverance once the technology was jointly developed by public-sector groups like
the seed corporations and companies like Indo American Hybrid Seeds, Lever and so on.
Recently, the Sadguru Foundation has reported that tribal farmers are taking to hybrid maize
that gives yields up to two and a half tones per hectare. Under Project Sunshine in Gujarat,
seeds developed by an MNC were distributed at subsidized rates to tribal farmers. This plan is
also under difficulty.
Given the long-term nature of the problem and the fact that large investment is needed to
develop new molecules, a degree of regulation will be needed. Investors need a reasonable
assurance of returns or they will not commit financial and, more importantly, experienced
managerial and technical resources. For pulses itself for example the research plan will cost
hundreds of crores of rupees, if the experience of hybrid paddy is any indication. Such PPP
projects will need public resource commitments in terms of meeting the so-called viability
gaps.
Also, public-sector involvement is essential for sustainability and environmental-safety
aspects. A Central organization working on what are called long-range, marginal cost principles,
which have been advocated for power projects, for example, could work out fair pricing
solutions. Anybody doing better than the average efficiency cost estimates, giving a fair rate of
return, would keep the profits.
It has been demonstrated time and again that the nation gains in such strategies. For
example, pricing strategies which rely on group efficiency cost norms have given very powerful
returns in terms of energy savings in the nitrogenous fertilizer industry and after eight years of
discussion, it is reported that a committee under a planning commission member is suggesting
this approach, which was the basis of pricing which Alagh committee had recommended many
years ago. It is important that the approach of a national regulator suggested in the proposed
Seeds Bill is properly designed and implemented by law. Instead, we are going through an
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
43
extremely destructive regulation of states like Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat and Maharashtra, through
State Price Control Acts is short-sighted. By cutting down normal profits in the industry after
R&D has been done, this will discourage investment in the sector. In April 2011 the Gujarat.
High Court has struck down the right of the State Government to regulate seed prices.
10. Role of Farmers’ Institutions in anchoring technology, mitigating risk
and increasing productivity
Given the highly fragmented state of landholdings, it is a continuing challenge to use the
latest technology to improve the productivity of smallholder agriculture, especially in rainfed
regions. According to a recent NCAP study, 83% of all holdings in 2005-06 were either small
or marginal, having increased from 70% in 1970-71. However, the silver lining to this
development is a higher cropping intensity of small farms compared to large ones and higher
use of irrigation and application of fertilizers. This suggests that farmers with small holdings
are highly efficient and are most likely to respond to targeted interventions to improve
productivity, which in turn raises incomes.
At the same time, it must be recognized that smallholder agriculture suffers from serious
constraints, which restrict the penetration of modern technology and prevent these farmers
from accessing the real benefits of their labour and inputs. In particular, they are unable to
benefit from subsidized crop credit from institutional sources, suffer from uncertain input
supplies, depend on unreliable technical advice, mostly from private agents, and are finally
force to surrender their produce in opaque marketing arrangements. In their individual
fragmented state, these millions of small and marginal farmers are unable to leverage their
members to enter into equitable relationship with market players.
However, experience shows that wherever farm producers, especially smallholders, have
leveraged collective bargaining power they are not only able to gain better conditions with
private agents but also able to reduce the risk of farming to a large extent. The success of dairy
cooperatives in India is widely acknowledged to be the result of collective integration of the
value chain by producers. Similar examples exist for several other farm commodities.
There is a strong case for taking steps for setting up farmer institutions that help them to
get better quality and assured supply of inputs and also links them up with the pulse processors
and marketers for value addition and timely marketing support. There are a number of advantages
for setting up farmer institutions, some of which are given below.
i)
It will target the intervention in the most efficient manner among the farming
community i.e. small and marginal farmers.
ii) It will allow for collective dissemination of technology which is more likely to impact
the larger producer base. It also helps to tap the inherent knowledge of farmers and
provides a platform for sharing that knowledge.
iii) Farmer’s institutions are able to bargain for bulk credit with financial institutions
and significantly reduce input cost, leading to lowering of the overall risk associated
with pulses production.
44
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
iv) Finally, farmers’ institutions will be able to market the produce of their members on
better terms than individual producers.
One of the important institutions to facilitate a dynamic rural urban continuum transition of
large populations is Producer Companies. These are sponsored by NGOs, cooperatives and now
corporate.The Expert Group noted the problems rising out of the treatment of Producers’
Companies in the proposed Companies Bill legislation. Apparently the present position is that
the second amendment to the Companies Act in 2002 which emerged from a Committee the
Chiarman of this Group had chaired which introduced Producers’ Companies is relegated to a
position that the existing legislation will continue until a fresh one is brought into the position.
A few years ago based on recommendations of the Irani Committee, the Chambers of
Commerce had suggested that the provision for Producers’ Companies be dropped. A number
of industrial and non-governmental organizations which had set up were disturbed at those
and had approached me. The chairman of this Group had written to the Prime Minister and he
was kind enough to send a letter saying that the legislation would not be dropped and that he
was writing to the then Minister of Corporate Affairs to that effect. Subsequently, that Ministry
had also confirmed this position.
Pradan and other NGOs organized a meeting to discuss this issue. The letter from the
Prime Minister was tabled to give them the assurance that it contained. That meeting set up a
Civil Society Committee under Shri Nitin Desai, Former Under-Secretary General of the UN
to monitor this aspect and submit a report on the legislation. The Committee did submit a
report which made a number of useful suggestions on the different groups which are supporters
of this legislation had called a meeting which strengthening the Producers’ Companies,
particularly streamlining the process of registration by the Registrar of Companies at the
State level.
A number of corporate entities have now used this model. These include the Haryali
Project of DCM which is a Harvard Business School case and the strategic business plans of
Companies in agro-based industries, like Rallis and Tata Chemicals. It is also the preferred
mode of the National Dairy Development Plan. If Companies Act legislation gives a secondary
role to producer companies that would be unfortunate.
The initial sunk cost of institution building is major investment in building the capacity of
the farming community, especially small and marginal farmers, to adopt new technology and
raise productivity in a time bound manner.
11. Development of comprehensive business model based on the study
of successful agro-business models and consultation with CII
Pulse growers across the country are faced with many issues related to seed availability at
reasonable price, credit delivery for purchasing inputs and its lonely repayment, coverage of
production related risk and means for its aversion, procurement and marketing of produce at
remunerative price. Dependence on public institution may not always yield results for various
reasons. It is therefore imperative that a business model that contributes to the confidence of
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
45
farmers in cultivation of pulses, by facilitating availability of high quality inputs at reasonable
cost, technical support as and when necessary credit at affordable cost, ensures procurement of
his produce, minimizes marketing cost while serving legitimate business interest of the agencies
involved is put in place. The Expert Group thought it appropriate to study a few operational
models and their strength and weaknesses and recommend a model that employs best features
of the models studied.
The models studied involve private-public partnership (PPP) and are listed below:
i)
Rallis India – Tamil Nadu Govt. and partnership for enhancing black gram cultivation
in 3 blocks of Pudukkottai district of Tamil Nadu.
ii) Tata Chemicals Ltd.- Punjab state Govt. partnership for promotion of summer moong
in Punjab.
iii) Agriculture Consultancy Management Foundation (ACMF)- Rallis India Ltd.
partnership at Somangalam (Chennai) in Tamil Nadu for promotion of black gram
cultivation.
A public private partnership model involving the agencies and activities listed above is
recommended.
It may be noted that the expert group has suggested these models, both for integration of
groups of farmers with backward linkages on technology and input support and forward linkages
with markets and proper prices. These models are essential for achieving targets.
a) Public Partners:
i)
Public research organizations for development of varieties production of nucleus
and breeder seed.
ii) SAUs/ KVKs for improved package of practices.
iii) Departments of Agriculture for proving policy and administrative support.
b)
Private partners: One or more
i) Organizations/ Companies can participate in the following activities.
ii) Seed production with active involvement for farmers/ farmer groups.
iii) Extension of improved package of production practices to farmers.
iv) Skill upgradation of farmers.
v) Delivery of inputs and services to farmers.
vi) Technological interventions based on recommendations of SAUs/ICAR institutes.
vii) Crop-insurance and credit delivery.
viii) Procurement of produce from farmer at market rate + incentive.
ix) Promotion of resource relevant farm mechanization
x) Development of natural resources (land, water and vegetation) for augmenting
pulse production on sustainable basis.
46
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
12. Recommendations and Action Points
Recommendations made by the group call for short term, medium term and long term
action plans. They have been categorized accordingly.
Short-term plan
1.
Medium-term plan
Long-term plan
Areas bestowed with irrigation
facility in the states of Uttar
Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana,
Bihar, Gujarat and West
Bengal should be used for
growing summer moong after
the harvest of a timely planted
wheat/potato/ sugar cane crop.
Depending on availability of
irrigation and inputs an area
upto 16.5 lakh ha can be put
under moong crop. States like
Uttar Pradesh, Haryana have
large area with poor quality
underground water. There is a
strong case for correcting soil
PH and water quality with use
of gypsum. The states must
ensure easy availability of the
material at subsidized cost.
States need to be encouraged
to initiate action in this regard
by providing support for seed
and other inputs.
Rainfed rice fallow lands to the
extent of 3-4 m ha spread in the
states
of
Chhattisgarh,
Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh,
Orissa, West Bengal and Assam
should be brought under pulses
cultivation in phased but targetted
manner. These states need to
develop action plans for
delineation of potential areas and
cultivation of pulses crops.
Replacement of low productivity
crops such as upland rice,
rainfed wheat, barley and
mustard with more remunerative
pulses should be planned in
Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa,
Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, and
Jharkhand. States should identify
districts, estimate area and
develop
action
plan
in
consultation
with
Gram
Panchayats. About 9.5 lakh ha
area can be brought under pulses
in this manner.
Inter-cropping of pulses with
soybean, sorghum, sugar cane,
groundnut, cotton should be
promoted in the states with
major area under these crops.
Promising intercropping system
and associated cultivation
practices have been developed
by zonal research centres.
States concerned should
identify potential districts,
provide incentive for seed and
multi-crop planters to farmers
for expanding area under
intercropping. Even a modest
target of bringing 10% of the
area covered by the crops listed
above under pulses as
intercrops can contribute 2-3 m
ha of additional area.
Indo gangetic plain spread across
the States of Punjab, Haryana
and western Uttar Pradesh has
become an ecologically fragile
region due to continued depletion
of under-ground water resources
for cultivation of rice-wheat
cropping sequence. The situation
warrants urgent technological and
policy interventions aimed at
promoting less water and energy
intensive cropping systems.
Replacement of rice with kharif
pulses particularly in upland (well
drained) areas can drastically
reduce, if not eliminate, depletion
of underground water and
contribute to restoration of soil
health and fertility. Pulse-based
cropping systems would also cut-
Feasibility study should be
commissioned to look at the
possibility of outsourcing pulses
production in land surplus
countries of Africa and South
America, particularly for the kharif
pulses like Pigeon pea, Black
Gram and Greengram.
Identification of additional area
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
47
Short-term plan
Medium-term plan
Long-term plan
down on nitrogen fertilizer use
which tends to pollute groundwater as indicated by rising nitrate
content in ground waters in some
intensive by cropped areas.
2.
Seed replacement/multiplication strategy
Progressive farmer should be
encouraged and involved in
production of certified seed of
improved pulses varieties.
States should come out with a
time bound strategy for upscaling
seed multiplication ratio of pulses
in consultation with SAUs, IIPR.
Well equipped farms available
with SAUs/KVKs/State Seed
Corporations should be used
for multiplication of breeder
seed to foundation seed.
‘Seed Village’ concept linking
Kharif-rabi-kharif seasons seed
production and promoting local
seed enterprises through seed
growers associations with
supportive role of public sector
seed agencies.
Major pulse growing states should
develop a 5 year rolling plan for
seed production of each pulse
crop in consultation with SAU and
IIPR. The plan should include
popular varieties with provision of
replacing old varieties with new
but promising ones.
Multi-location testing of promising
hybrids of pigeonpea to be
released/proposed
to
be
released.
Short duration varieties of black
gram and green gram need to be
developed for promoting pulses
as catch crops
3.
Identification of best agronomic practices
Nutrient use recommendation
should include secondary
nutrient such as sulphur and
micronutrients such as zinc,
boron, iron, manganese as
well. States should ensure
timely availability of gypsum
and micronutrients.
Planting of kharif pulses on ridges,
particularly in black soil region has
been observed to improve yield
of pulses. The practice has seen
only limited adoption because of
non-availability of a ridger-cumplanter for pulses. Central
Agricultural Engineering research
Institute at Bhopal and SAUs
concerned should develop ridge
planters (animal drawn and tractor
driven) and carry out field
demonstrations.
Pest surveillance and management model developed by ICAR
48
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Appropriate
and
socially
acceptable policy interventions for
controlling population of blue bull
for minimising damage caused to
pulses crops are required.
Short-term plan
4.
Medium-term plan
Manual weeding in pulses is not
only expensive but also often
not feasible during rainy
season.
SAUs
should
recommend effective postemergence weedicides for
different pulse crops. The state
should extend subsidy to
farmers to make their use
popular.
(NCIPM) and successfully tested
as a pilot project in Maharashtra,
Karnataka should be adopted by
pulse growing states. ICAR/SAUs
should provide technical support
and training to the staff engaged
in surveillance and processing of
data.
Special
Programs
for
development of Pulses in the
Rainfed areas should be
initiated to promote technologies
in a focused manner. The
program should include
development of infrastructure
such as farm ponds, borewells,
etc. for providing life saving
irrigation to pulses crops as also
farm mechanization and use of
disease resistant seed varieties.
Sates should endeavour to
popularize farm implements for
ridge planting, interculture, zerotill-planting, and threshing
operations in addition to watersaving micro-irrigation systems,
water pumps and insecticides
sprayers. Mechanical harvesters
of dependable quality are also
required as they will save time and
minimize losses.
Long-term plan
Researchable issues
Kharif pulses suffer heavy loss
due to stagnation of water in the
root zone, particularly at
seedling stage. Therefore,
designing of ridge-cumplanter for kharif pulses
suitable for major soil types is
required.
Zero-till seed drill suitable to
different soil types need to be
designed. This device will ensure
timely planting of rabi pulses and
facilitate conservation of soil
moisture.
Development of mechanical
harvesters for major pulse crops
i.e. urid/mungbeans, pigeonpea
and chickpea should be a part of
research agenda of Central
Agricultural
Engineering
Research Institute, Bhopal.
There are heavy post harvest
losses in pulses, more so
during storage. Therefore,
development of eco-friendly
and affordable grain storage
technology for different regions
is urgently required.
Systematic studies for validation
of benefits of dibbling/
transplanting/nipping/ drip
irrigation practices in pigeonpea
innovated in Maharashtra and
Karnataka are required
Development of cold/heat
tolerant varieties of lentil and
chickpea has become necessary
in view of climate change.
Development of mechanical Pigeonpea hybrids based on
harvesters for kharif and rabi genetic male sterility were
developed in the country. These
pulses is urgently required.
hybrids could not be popularized
due to problems in seed
production. Recently cytoplasmic
genetic male sterile lines have
been isolated and some
promising hybrids using this trait
Development of short duration
pigeonpea varieties which fit into
a cropping sequence such as
pigeonpea-wheat/gram
will
substantially contribute to area
expansion under pulses.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
49
Short-term plan
Medium-term plan
Long-term plan
have been developed by
ICRISAT in collaboration with
state Agricultural Universities of
Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra
and Karnataka. Practically
feasible production technology for
seed of these hybrids should be
developed so that they can be
popularised.
Development of pulse crop
varieties suitable for mechanical
harvesting and intercropping
should be a part of pulse breeding
strategy.
Development of pigeonpea
varieties for cultivation during rabi
season in peninsular region will
enable the region to expand area
under the crop.
As per the felt needs pest resistant
varieties need to be developed
Development of bold seeded
desi and kabuli chickpea varieties
tolerant to biotic and abiotic
stresses.
Pigeonpea suffers a heavy loss
due to water inundation in the
states of Bihar, Jharkhand, West
Bengal, eastern Uttar Pradesh
and
Gujarat.
Therefore,
development of pigeonpea
varieties suitable for post-rainy
season (Pre-rabi season) planting
is required.
Helicoverpa (gram pod borer) is
a major pest of chickpea and
pigeonpea. Sources of resistance
against this pest in the germplasm
have not yet been identified.
Therefore, development of
transgenic varieties of these two
pulses possessing resistance to
pod borer is need of the day. The
work in this direction is in progress
in CCSHAU, Hisar, IARI and IIPR.
This work needs to be
strengthened.
Vigna
group
of
pulses
(mungbean, urdbean, mothbean,
cowpea and horse gram) are
vulnerable to yellow mosaic
virus disease and powdery
mildew. Suitable sources of
50
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Short-term plan
Medium-term plan
Long-term plan
resistance against these diseases
are not available in the
germplasm. Therefore, the
biotechnological approach should
be exploited to develop varieties
of these pulses resistant to yellow
masaic virus and powdery mildew.
Fusarium wilt in chickpea, lentil
and pigeonpea is a devastating
disease that drastically reduces
plant population. Both conventional
and biotechnological tools should
be applied for breeding wilt resistant
varieties of these crops
5.
Communication strategy for effective technology dissemination
Capacity building of farmers by
involving Private Sector, NGOs
and progressive famers should be
organized at the beginning of
each cropping season. The subject
matter should cover newer
production technologies, on-going
credit and insurance schemes,
sources of inputs, names of
agencies and centres responsible
for procurement of produce.
6.
District
level
extension
programme should be up- scaled
so as to be able to issue
advisories on imminent pest
attack, occurrence of frost, heavy
rains, long dry-spells and hail
storms etc.
Development of comprehensive business model and policy interventions
Criteria for fixing MSP of pulses
should be revisited in
accordance with Alagh
Committee report (2003) so as
to include efficiency shifters in
the cost computations to
incentivize technology infusion
for achieving higher production
at lower cost per unit.
Public-private partnership models
employed by some states (Tamil
Nadu, Punjab) have met with
overwhelming success. States
should be encouraged to adopt
such model for effective
dissemination of newer practices,
timely supply of quality inputs,
processing/marketing of produce,
arranging credit for needy farmers
and facilitating risk mitigation
through crop insurance.
A multipronged approach
including policy interventions,
administrative steps, involvement
of NGOs, Gram Panchayats,
social workers etc. is required for
management and control of blue
bulls. Initiative taken by DAC,
MOA should be taken forward to
a logical conclusion.
Dal Manufacturing units need to
be encouraged to ensure that
nutrient equivalent of the
preferred pulse crop is made
available
through
other
alternatives like Soybean
Appropriate policy intervention is
needed for minimizing a vast gap
between farm gate and whole
sale/market prices of pulses.
Establishment of small ‘dal’ mills
in districts with major area under
pulses can significantly contribute
to this end.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
51
Short term plan
Medium term plan
Long term plan
National Pulse Development
Board may be constituted as a
one stop administrative structure
which should be a repository of
information and knowledge on
pulses and deal with policy
issuesrelated to production,
markets, trade, processing,
manufacturing andconsumption /
demand. Promotion of Farmers’
organisations for improving
market chain.
Establishment of a Pulses
Development Board on lines of
Tea, Coffee, and Spices boards
for overseeing and coordinating
all developmental issues related
to pulses is likely to provide
momentum to on-going pulse
promotion
programmes,
contribute to better utilization of
available fiscal, infrastructural and
natural resources leading to
sustainable growth in production
of pulses in the country.
The actions suggested above are aimed at eliminating the gap between projected demand
and availability of pulses by 2025 or earlier through (a) productivity enhancement, (b) area
expansion and (c) reduction of post harvest losses. As projected by Indian Institute of Pulses
Research, Kanpur, the demand for pulses in India will be about 25 mt by 2025. In order to
meet the demand, a time frame for productivity enhancement, area expansion and reduction in
post harvest losses in targetted manner has been suggested (Table 9)
Table 9 : Time frames for targetted productivity enhancement, area expansion and
reduction in post harvest losses.
Approach
Time
Frame
Productivity
2011Enhancement 2015
Horizontal
Expansion
52
Target
Drivers
Targeted
Production
Increase in productivity from Existing technologies
and institutional
637 kg/ha to 737 kg/ha.
support
17.69 m t (2015)
20152020
Increase in productivity from Policy Support
637 kg/ha to 737 kg/ha.
19.78 m t (2020)
20202025
Increase in productivity from New Technology*
637 kg/ha to 737 kg/ha.
21.06 m t (2025)
2011-15
Increase in area from 23
mha to 24mha (Additional
area 1.0 mha)
Cropping system
manipulation, crop
diversification and
multiple cropping
system.
Additional
production 0.8 m t
(2015)
2015-20
Increase in area from 24
mha to 25.5 m ha
(Additional area 1.5 mha)
New Niches (Rice
fallows, Kharif fallows
of bundelkhand, foot
hills of tarai etc.)
Additional
production 0.9 m t
(2020)
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Approach
Minimizing
Post harvest
losses
Time
Frame
Target
Drivers
Targeted
Production
2020-25 Increase in area from 25.5
mha to 26m ha (Additional
area 0.5 mha)
Promotion of pulses in
high productivity zone.
Additional
production 0.8 m t
(2025)
Total additional
production 2.5
mt
2011-15 6% reduction in existing
level of post harvest losses.
Custom hiring of
machines for
harvesting and
threshing
0.2 m t reduction
in existing level of
post-harvest
losses.
2015-20 16% reduction in existing
level of post harvest losses.
Ensuring availability of
machines at
Panchayat level
0.6 m t reduction
in existing level of
post-harvest
losses.
2020-25 30% reduction in existing
level of post harvest losses.
Infrastructure support
for processing and
storage.
1.5 m t reduction
in existing level of
post-harvest
losses.
IIPR has also come out with a list of drivers (interventions), plan of action and agencies to
be involved in various programmes/activities (Table 10, Table 11 and Table 12)
Table 10 : Action plan for productivity enhancement
Drivers
Action plan
Agencies
Adoption of existing
technology for
bridging the yield
gap
Demonstration on farmer’s fields
Institutional Support
Improving Seed
Replacement Rate
(SRR)
Advance seed planning for each state rolling DAC
seed plan with appropriate emphasis to the
newly released varieties.
Extension agencies of
ICAR, SAUs, KVKs
Conversion of breeder seed to foundation seed DAC, NSC, SFCI, SSCI
and certified seed.
Maintenance of seed buffer of improved varieties SSCI
at State Seed Corporation level.Public-Private
partnership inSeed business.
Farmer’s Participatory Seed Production for Appropriate Mechanism
SAUs
farmer to farmer seed spread (Bihar Model)*
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
53
Drivers
Action plan
Agencies
Provision for life
saving irrigation in
pulse growing
districts
Micro-irrigation through sprinklers for drip Rainwater harvesting in farm ponds and community
reservoirs
Appropriate mechanism by
DAC
Ensuring availability
of critical inputs
Availability of critical inputs like bio-fertilizers,
sulphur, zinc, bio-pesticides etc, at state level
Appropriate mechanism by
DAC
Mechanization for
pulse production
Machines for essential agricultural operations
like planting, harvesting, inter-cultivation,
threshing, processing etc. through cooperatives
or custom hiring.
Appropriate mechanism by
DAC
Policy support for
value chain
Credit, insurance, attractive MSP with
procurement, incentives (subsidies) Processing
and value additionInnovative institutional models
of marketing like Amul, Parag, Dhara etc.
Appropriate arrangements
by Government PublicPrivate Institutions
NAFED, Cooperatives
New Technologies
(through research
components)
Improved varieties/Hybrids/Transgencies
Resource conservation and utilizationGood
Agronomic PracticesIntegrated Disease and
Pest ManagementImproved machines for
harvesting, threshing, processing and
transportation. Value addition
ICAR, SAUs NRA, ICAR,
National Wasteland
Develpoment Board ICAR,
SAUs ICAR, SAUs ICAR,
SAUs & Private
Entrepreneurs NIN, Pvt.
Entrepreneurs
Table 11 : Action plan for Horizontal Expansion
Action 1
Popularization
of pulses in
different
cropping
systems
Crop
Intercropping
With
Mungbean Sugarcane
(irrigated)
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Potential Target Agencies
Area
area
(mha) (201125)
mha
Western U.P.,
Central U.P.,
Eastern U.P., Bihar
0.20
0.10
Cotton and millets
(rainfed uplands)
Maharashtra, A.P.
and Tamil Nadu
0.50
0.30
Spring/summer as
catch crop
(irrigated)
Western U.P.,
Central U.P., Bihar,
Punjab, Haryana,
West Bengal
0.30
0.20
Andhra Pradesh,
Malwa Plateau of
M.P., Vidarbha of
Maharashtra,
North Karnataka,
Tamil nadu
0.50
0.30
Pigeonpea Soybean, Sorghum,
Cotton, millets and
groundnuts (rainfed
upland)
54
Specific area
Developmental
Agencies
KVKs
Action 1
Crop
Chickpea
Intercropping
With
Barley, Mustard
and safflower
(rainfed upland)
Specific area
Potential Target Agencies
Area
area
(mha) (201125)
mha
South East
Rajasthan,
Punjab Haryana,
Bihar, Uttar
Pradesh,
Vidharbha of
Maharashtra
0.50
Total
Action 2
Promotion
of Pulses in
New Niches
Potential
areas
2.00
Crop
States
0.20
1.00
Additional Target Agencies
Area
area
(mha) (201125)
mha
Chickpea
Eastern U.P., Bihar,
Orissa, Jharkhand,
Chhattisgarh,
West Bengal
0.4
0.3
Urdbean/
mungbean
Andhra PradeshTamil
Nadu, Karnataka,
Orissa
0.5
0.3
Lentil
Eastern U.P., Bihar,
West Bengal
0.1
0.1
Lentil/field
pea
North-East
0.1
0.1
Kharif
Major Kharif
fallow of
Pulses
Bundelkhand area
Uttar Pradesh,
Madhya Pradesh
1.2
0.6
Diara land
Lentil
Uttar Pradesh, Bihar
0.05
0.03
Foot hills
of Tarai
Pigeonpea
Uttarakhand,
North Bihar
0.05
0.03
2.4
1.46
Rice
fallows
Total
Developmental
Agencies,
KVKs
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
55
Action 3
Promotion of
Pulses in high
productivity
zones through
Pilot Projects
Crop
Chickpea
State
District
Yield
(Kg/ha)
Madhya
Pradesh
Tikamgarh, Gwalior,
Chhindwara, Kalan Sheopur,
1405
Maharashtra
Jalgaon, Kolhapur,
Nandurbar, Amravati
803
Rajashtan
Udaipur, Baran, Kota,
Banswara
1215
Andhra
Pradesh
Prakasam, Mahbubnagar,
Kaddapa, Guntur
1858
Uttar Pradesh
Jalaun, Kanpur (Dehat),
Etawah, Firozabad
1285
Jabalpur, Narsingpur,
Chhindwara, Burhanpur
1582
Maharashtra
Wardha, Washim, Amravati,
Hingoli
1009
Gujarat
Kheda, Dahod,
Panchamahal, Vadodara
1083
Uttar Pradesh
Fatehpur, Banda, Chitrakut,
Kanpur (Nagar)
2021
Madhya
Pradesh
Ashoknagar, Sehore, Guna,
Vidisha, Bhind
616
Bihar
Bhabhua, Nalanda, Patna,
Champaran,Aurangabad
1256
Rajashtan
Dholpur, Bharatpur,Baran,
Bhilwara
1232
West Bengal
Howrah, Malda, Bankura, 24
Pargana (s)
823
Uttar Pradesh
Balia, Lalitpur,
Jalaun,Chitrakut, Barabanki
1150
Pigeonpea Madhya
Pradesh
Lentil
Agencies
Developmental
Agencies
KVKs
Table 12 : Action plan for Minimizing Post Harvest losses
Action
Safe storage
56
Programme
Mass awareness Programme
to educatefarmers on scientific
storage along with distribution
of seed storage bins
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Reduction in
extent of losses
0.21 million tons
Agencies
Development
Agencies
Action
Programme
Reduction in
extent of losses
Agencies
Efficient harvesting
and threshing
Fabrication and popularization
of efficient harvesters and
threshers
0.24 million tons
ICAR and Private
entrepreneurs
Easy transportation
Good mechanism
oftransportation
0.15 million tons
Developmental
agencies
Processing and
milling
Installation of efficient and
modern Dal mills in the
production hubs for increasing
Dal recovery by 11%.
0.90 million tons
ICAR and Private
entrepreneurs
Total
1.5 million tons
The data generated through large scale demonstrations conducted by ICAR and through
Accelerated Pulse Production Programme implemented by NFSM, Ministry of Agriculture
indicate that the productivity targets are achievable provided interventions as suggested in the
action plan are implemented in true spirit. There are reasons to believe that available improved
pulse production technology, if disseminated on large scale to cover majority of the pulse
growers, is capable of raising productivity of pulses to the targetted level. Generation of new
technologies to meet immerging challenges is however required for sustaining productivity of
pulses at high level.
Short term programs are under way and medium term programs are being experimented
with. The Expert Group was coordinating its thinking with the Action Plans and there is a
definite momentum to the efforts underway. These efforts need systemic support, like the
Pulses Development Board to plan and monitor them and the PPP models discussed below. In
the area of long term planning even the beginnings are weak. Some suggestions are made to
remedy these shortcomings.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
57
ANNEXURES
Annexure I: Issues and TOR assigned to subgroups
Sub Group
1. Group I
Sub-Group Leader
CEO, NRAR,
New Delhi
Issues
Identification of
additional area
having potential
for pulse crops
Terms of Reference
1. Identification of new areas for pulses
cultivation-hills,
tea
gardens,
sugarcane, etc.
2. Utilization of rice fallows in IndoGangetic Plain (Punjab, U.P., Bihar,
W.B.), NE states, Orissa, Chhattisgarh
and Jharkhand.
3. Replacement of crops having low yield
by kharif pulses in rainfed uplands of
M.P., Chhattisgarh Jharkhand and part
of Bihar.
4. Areas vacated by winter crops having
potent irrigation sources for cultivation
in Gujarat, Punjab, Haryana, U.P., Bihar,
W.B., Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh.
2. Group II
Dr R.B. Deshmukh,
Ex. V.C., MPKV,
Rahuri and
Dr. K.B. Saxena,
ICRI SAT
Seed
replacement/
multiplication
strategy/
programmes
1. Technical, administrative and other
impediments
to
seed
plan
implementation in the states.
2. Ensuring adequate quantity of quality
seeds through efficient seed production
programmes and distribution and
suggesting contingent Plans for
addressing scarcity caused by aberrant
weather conditions.
3. Strategy for increasing the seed
quantity of recently released varieties.
Strategy for ensuring adequate seed
multiplication from nucleus seed to B.S.,
F.S. and C.S.
4. Identification of areas/zones having
production potential and free from
diseases and insect pests for ensuring
high SMR
5. Potential role of private seed companies
in certified seed production.
6. Assessment of storageinfrastructure
requirement for storage of seeds.
58
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sub Group
Sub-Group Leader
3. Group III Dr. Gurbachan Singh,
Agri. Commissioner,
GOI
Issues
Identification of
best agronomic
practices
Terms of Reference
1. Identification of best agronomic
practices followed in different states for
exploiting full genetic yield potential of
pulses.
2. Identifying critical nutrients and ensuring
their timely availability to the farmers.
3. Indentifying
pest
surveillance
mechanism and pest management
practices for easy understanding and
adoption by farmers.
4. Innovative methods for better
dissemination and faster adoption of
appropriate agronomic practices.
5. Ways and means of promoting
mechanization in pulses, specially for
ridge and raised bed planting, weeding
and threshing operations.
6. Measures required for improving post
harvest handling of pulses by grading,
bagging, transportation and storage for
reducing losses and improving quality
of the produce.
7. Expansion of irrigation using resource
conservation technologies.
8. Control of damage by blue bulls.
4. Group IV Dr. S. Mahendradev,
Chairman, CACP and
Dr. Ashok Gulati
Review of Prices,
tariff and trade
policies.
1. Linking MSP to market price for bridging
the gap between demand and supply.
2. Reviewing the MSP for pulses to make
it attractive for the farmers to take up
intensive cultivation or give pulses
comparative advantage over other
competing crops.
3. Reviewing the present procurement
policy for assured and smooth
procurement operations on the lines of
cereals.
4. Suggesting mechanism for facilitating
integration of the farmers to the markets
through creation of producers
companies or through transparent ,fair
and enforceable contract farming with
the private retailers or processors.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
59
Sub Group
Sub-Group Leader
Issues
Terms of Reference
5. Feasibility of setting up of a National
Pulses Development Board in the lines
of Tur Development Board set up by
Karnataka, Government.
5. Group V
DDG (Extn) ICAR/
IIPR
Communication
strategy to reach
out to more
farmers.
1. Development of training/capacity
building strategies for extension
workers and farmers.
2. Role of KVKs, Kisan Call Centers,
Private Agro-agencies, etc. in
popularizing pulses production
strategies among farmers.
3. Harnessing the avenues of All India
Radio, Door Darshan, Print Media,
DAVP for reaching the pulses farmers.
4. Role of Panchayataj institutions, SHG
in propagating the pulses production
technology.
5. Mechanism for organizing the Pulses
farmers groups for availing credit and
insurance facilities for sustained risk
free investments in pulses cultivation.
Involvement of NBARD/ other
cooperative agencies should be studied
6.Group VI
Dr. J. S. Sandhu,
ADG (seeds), ICAR
Researchable
issues with
medium and long
term planning.
1. Under medium term Planning
Development of suitable new HYVs/
hybrids for location specific sole as well
as for intercropping patterns.
2. Latest package of technology for post
harvest management including storage
3. Under long term planning.
(i) Pre-breeding of pulse against
abiotic stresses.
(ii) Resistance breeding against biotic
stresses like major diseases and
pests.
(iii) Development of transgenic pulses.
7.Group VII Dr. Gopalkrishana,
Dialogues/
V.C., Tata Chemicals, Consultations
Mumbai.
with Chamber of
Commerce
business model.
60
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
1. Study of successful business models in
the past.
2. Development of comprehensive
business model (PPP model) from
production of seeds of new varieties to
procurement and marketing of pulses.
Annexure II : Names of the States and Districts recording >=8q/ha yield of
kharif pulses.
Sl.No.
Name of the State
Sl.No.
Name of the District
1
ANDHRA PRADESH
1
KRISHNA
2
BIHAR
1
GOPALGANJ
2
KATIHAR
3
ROHTAS
4
SIWAN
1
AMRELI
2
BHAVNAGAR
3
JAMNAGAR
4
KHEDA
5
VADODARA
1
BANGALORE (RURAL)
2
BANGALORE (URBAN)
3
BIDAR
4
CHIKMAGALUR
5
CHITRADURGA
6
DAVANGERE
7
KOLAR
1
BAREN
2
BARMER
3
BUNDI
4
JAISALMER
5
KARAULI
6
KOTA
7
SIROHI
1
BIJNOR
2
J.B.PHULE NGR.
3
LALITPUR
4
MORADABAD
5
RAMPUR
3
4
5
6
GUJARAT
KARNATAKA
RAJASTHAN
UTTAR PRADESH
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
61
Names of the States and Districts recording >=8q/ha yield of rabi pulses.
Sl.No.
1
2
3
4
62
Name of the State
ANDHRA PRADESH
BIHAR
CHHATTISGARH
GUJARAT
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
1
CHITTOOR
2
KARIMNAGAR
3
MEDAK
4
NIZAMABAD
5
VISAKHAPATNAM
1
AURANGABAD
2
BAGHALPUR
3
DARBHANGA
4
GOPALGANJ
5
MADHUBANI
6
SAMASTIPUR
7
SARAN
8
SIWAN
9
VAISHALI
1
DHAMTARI
2
KANKER
3
RAIPUR
4
RAJ NANDGAON
1
AMRELI
2
ANAND
3
BROACH
4
DANGS
5
JAMNAGAR
6
JUNAGARH
7
KHEDA
8
KUTCH
9
MEHSANA
10
NARMADA
11
NAVSARI
12
PANCH MAHALS
13
PATAN
Sl.No.
5
6
7
8
Name of the State
MAHARASHTRA
ORISSA
RAJASTHAN
UTTAR PRADESH
Sl.No.
Name of the District
14
RAJKOT
15
SURAT
16
VADODARA
17
VALSAD
1
SATARA
2
YAVATMAL
1
BALASORE
2
KEDRAPARA
3
KEONJHAR
1
BHARATPUR
2
BUNDI
3
CHITTOR GARH
4
DAUSA
5
DUNGARPUR
6
GANGANAGAR
7
JAIPUR
8
JALORE
9
JHALAWAR
10
KARAULI
11
SIROHI
12
TONK
13
UDAIPUR
1
AGRA
2
ALIGARH
3
ALLAHABAD
4
AMBEDKAR NGR.
5
AURAIYA
6
AZAMGARH
7
BADAUN
8
BAGPAT
9
BAHRAICH
10
BALLIA
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
63
Sl.No.
64
Name of the State
Sl.No.
UTTAR PRADESH
11
BALRAMPUR
12
BARABANKI
13
BAREILLY
14
BASTI
15
BIJNOR
16
BULLANDSHAHR
17
CHANDAULI
18
DEORIA
19
ETAH
20
ETAWAH
21
FAIZABAD
22
FARRUKHABAD
23
FATEHPUR
24
FIROZABAD
25
G.BUDDHA NGR.
26
GHAZIABAD
27
GHAZIPUR
28
GONDA
29
GORAKHPUR
30
HARDOI
31
HATHARAS
32
J.B.PHULE NGR.
33
JALAUN
34
JAUNPUR
35
JHANSI
36
KANNAUJ
37
KANPUR CITY
38
KANPUR DEHAT
39
KAUSHAMBI
40
KHERI
41
KUSHI NGR.
42
LALITPUR
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Name of the District
Sl.No.
Name of the State
Sl.No.
Name of the District
43
LUCKNOW
44
MAHARAHGANJ
45
MAINPURI
46
MATHURA
47
MAU
48
MEERUT
49
MIRZAPUR
50
MORADABAD
51
MUZAFFARNAGAR
52
PILIBHIT
53
PRATAPGARH
54
RAEBARELI
55
RAMPUR
56
S.RAVI DAS NGR.
57
SAHARANPUR
58
SANT KABIR NGR.
59
SHAHJAHANPUR
60
SHIVASTI
61
SIDDHARTH NGR.
62
SITAPUR
63
SULTANPUR
64
UNNAO
65
VARANASI
Names of the States and Districts recording >=8q/ha yield of gram.
Sl.No.
1
Name of the State
ANDHRA PRADESH
Sl.No.
Name of the District
1
ADILABAD
2
ANANTPUR
3
CHITTOOR
4
CUDDAPAH
5
EAST GODAVARI
6
GUNTUR
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
65
Sl.No.
2
66
Name of the State
BIHAR
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
7
KARIMNAGAR
8
KHAMMAM
9
KRISHNA
10
KURNOOL
11
MAHABOOBNAGAR
12
MEDAK
13
NALGONDA
14
NELLORE
15
NIZAMABAD
16
PRAKASAM
17
RANGAREDDY
18
SRIKAKULAM
19
VISAKHAPATNAM
20
VIZIANAGARM
21
WARANGAL
1
ARARIA
2
ARHASIA
3
ARVAL
4
AURANGABAD
5
BAGHALPUR
6
BANKA
7
BEGUSARAI
8
BHABHA
9
BHOJPUR
10
BUXAR
11
CHAMPARAN(EAST)
12
CHAMPARAN(WEST)
13
DARBHANGA
14
GAYA
15
GOPALGANJ
16
JAHANABAD
17
KATIHAR
Sl.No.
3
Name of the State
CHHATTISGARH
Sl.No.
Name of the District
18
KHAGARIA
19
KISHANGANJ
20
LAKHISARIA
21
MADHUBANI
22
MADHUPURA
23
MONGHYR
24
MUZAFFARPUR
25
NALANDA
26
NAWADA
27
PATNA
28
PURNIA
29
ROHTAS
30
SAHARSA
31
SAMASTIPUR
32
SARAN
33
SHKHPURA
34
SITAMARHI
35
SIWAN
36
SUMAL
37
SUPAUL
38
VAISHALI
39
ZAMUI
1
BASTAR
2
BILASPUR
3
DHAMTARI
4
DURG
5
JANJGIR-CHAMPA
6
JASHPUR
7
KANKER
8
KAWARDHA (KABIRDHAM)
9
KORBA
10
MAHASMUND
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
67
Sl.No.
4
5
6
68
Name of the State
GUJARAT
KARNATAKA
MADHYA PRADESH
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
11
RAIGARH
12
RAIPUR
13
RAJ NANDGAON
14
SARGUJA
1
AMRELI
2
BANAS KANTHA
3
BHAVNAGAR
4
BROACH
5
DANGS
6
DOHAD
7
GANDHINAGAR
8
JAMNAGAR
9
JUNAGARH
10
KHEDA
11
KUTCH
12
MEHSANA
13
NARMADA
14
NAVSARI
15
PANCH MAHALS
16
PATAN
17
PORBANDAR
18
RAJKOT
19
SABARKANTHA
20
SURAT
21
SURENDRANAGAR
22
VADODARA
23
VALSAD
1
CHAMARAJANNAGAR
2
KODAGU(COORG)
3
KOPPAL
4
TUMKUR
1
ASHOK NAGAR
2
BALAGHAT
Sl.No.
7
Name of the State
MAHARASHTRA
Sl.No.
Name of the District
3
BHIND
4
BHOPAL
5
BURHANPUR
6
CHHATARPUR
7
CHINDWARA
8
DAMOH
9
DATIA
10
DEWAS
11
DHAR
12
GUNA
13
GWALIOR
14
HARDA
15
HOSHANGABAD
16
INDORE
17
JABALPUR
18
KATNI
19
KHANDWA
20
MORENA
21
NARSIMPUR
22
NEEMACH
23
RAISEN
24
RAJGARH
25
REWA
26
SAGAR
27
SEHORE
28
SHAJAPUR
29
SHEOPUR KALAN
30
SHIVPURI
31
TIKAMGARH
32
UJJAIN
33
VIDISHA
1
AKOLA
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
69
Sl.No.
8
9
70
Name of the State
ORISSA
RAJASTHAN
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
2
AMRAVATI
3
AURANGABAD
4
BULDHANA
5
DHULE
6
HINGOLI
7
JALANA
8
JALGAON
9
KOLHAPUR
10
MANDURBAR
11
NANDED
12
SANGLI
13
SATARA
14
THANE
15
YAVATMAL
1
ANGUL
2
JAGATSINGPUR
3
KALAHANDI
4
KEDRAPARA
5
KEONJHAR
1
ALWAR
2
BANSWARA
3
BAREN
4
BARMER
5
BHARATPUR
6
BHILWARA
7
BIKANER
8
BUNDI
9
CHITTOR GARH
10
DAUSA
11
DHOLPUR
12
DUNGARPUR
13
GANGANAGAR
Sl.No.
10
Name of the State
UTTAR PRADESH
Sl.No.
Name of the District
14
JAIPUR
15
JAISALMER
16
JALORE
17
JHALAWAR
18
JHUNJHUNU
19
JODHPUR
20
KARAULI
21
KOTA
22
NAGAUR
23
PALI
24
RAJSAMAND
25
SAWAI MADHOPUR
26
SIKAR
27
SIROHI
28
UDAIPUR
1
AGRA
2
ALIGARH
3
ALLAHABAD
4
AMBEDKAR NGR.
5
AURAIYA
6
AZAMGARH
7
BADAUN
8
BAGPAT
9
BAHRAICH
10
BALLIA
11
BALRAMPUR
12
BANDA
13
BARABANKI
14
BAREILLY
15
BASTI
16
BIJNOR
17
BULLANDSHAHR
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
71
Sl.No.
72
Name of the State
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
18
CHANDAULI
19
CHITRAKUT
20
DEORIA
21
ETAH
22
ETAWAH
23
FAIZABAD
24
FARRUKHABAD
25
FATEHPUR
26
FIROZABAD
27
G.BUDDHA NGR.
28
GHAZIABAD
29
GHAZIPUR
30
GONDA
31
GORAKHPUR
32
HAMIRPUR
33
HARDOI
34
HATHARAS
35
J.B.PHULE NGR.
36
JALAUN
37
JAUNPUR
38
JHANSI
39
KANNAUJ
40
KANPUR CITY
41
KANPUR DEHAT
42
KAUSHAMBI
43
KHERI
44
KUSHI NGR.
45
LALITPUR
46
LUCKNOW
47
MAHARAHGANJ
48
MAHOBA
49
MAINPURI
Sl.No.
Name of the State
Sl.No.
Name of the District
50
MATHURA
51
MAU
52
MEERUT
53
MIRZAPUR
54
MORADABAD
55
MUZAFFARNAGAR
56
PILIBHIT
57
PRATAPGARH
58
RAEBARELI
59
RAMPUR
60
S.RAVI DAS NGR.
61
SAHARANPUR
62
SANT KABIR NGR.
63
SHAHJAHANPUR
64
SHIVASTI
65
SIDDHARTH NGR.
66
SITAPUR
67
SONBHADRA
68
SULTANPUR
69
UNNAO
70
VARANASI
Names of the States and Districts recording >=8q/ha yield of pigeonpea
Sl.No.
1
2
Name of the State
ANDHRA PRADESH
BIHAR
Sl.No.
Name of the District
1
EAST GODAVARI
2
GUNTUR
3
NIZAMABAD
4
RANGAREDDY
1
ARARIA
2
ARHASIA
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
73
Sl.No.
74
Name of the State
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
3
ARVAL
4
AURANGABAD
5
BAGHALPUR
6
BANKA
7
BEGUSARAI
8
BHABHA
9
BHANKA
10
BHOJPUR
11
BUXAR
12
CHAMPARAN(EAST)
13
CHAMPARAN(WEST)
14
DARBHANGA
15
GAYA
16
GOPALGANJ
17
JAHANABAD
18
KATIHAR
19
KHAGARIA
20
KISHANGANJ
21
LAKHISARIA
22
MADHUBANI
23
MADHUPURA
24
MONGHYR
25
MUZAFFARPUR
26
NALANDA
27
NAWADA
28
PATNA
29
PURNIA
30
ROHTAS
31
SAHARSA
32
SAMASTIPUR
33
SARAN
34
SHIVHAR
Sl.No.
3
4
Name of the State
GUJARAT
KARNATAKA
Sl.No.
Name of the District
35
SHKHPURA
36
SITAMARHI
37
SIWAN
38
SUMAL
39
SUPAUL
40
VAISHALI
41
ZAMUI
1
AHMEDABAD
2
AMRELI
3
ANAND
4
BANAS KANTHA
5
BHAVNAGAR
6
DANGS
7
DOHAD
8
GANDHINAGAR
9
JAMNAGAR
10
JUNAGARH
11
KHEDA
12
MEHSANA
13
NARMADA
14
NAVSARI
15
PANCH MAHALS
16
PATAN
17
PORBANDAR
18
RAJKOT
19
SABARKANTHA
20
SURAT
21
SURENDRANAGAR
22
VADODARA
23
VALSAD
1
BANGALORE (RURAL)
2
DAVANGERE
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
75
Sl.No.
5
6
76
Name of the State
MADHYA PRADESH
MAHARASHTRA
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
3
HAVERI
4
KOLAR
5
MYSORE
1
BALAGHAT
2
BURHANPUR
3
CHINDWARA
4
DINDORI
5
GWALIOR
6
HARDA
7
HOSHANGABAD
8
JABALPUR
9
KATNI
10
KHANDWA
11
MANDLA
12
NARSIMPUR
13
RATLAM
14
SEHORE
15
SEONI
1
AURANGABAD
2
AKOLA
3
AMRAVATI
4
BEED
5
BHANDARA
6
BULDHANA
7
GADCHIROLI
8
GONDIA
9
HINGOLI
10
JALANA
11
LATUR
12
NANDED
13
OSMANABAD
14
PUNE
15
RATNAGIRI
Sl.No.
7
8
Name of the State
ORISSA
RAJASTHAN
Sl.No.
Name of the District
16
WARDHA
17
WASHIM
18
YAVATMAL
1
ANGUL
2
BHADRAK
3
BURAGARH
4
CUTTACK
5
DEOGARH
6
DHENKANAL
7
GAJAPATTI
8
JAGATSINGPUR
9
JHARSUGDA
10
KEDRAPARA
11
KEONJHAR
12
MAYURBHANJ
13
NAWAPARA
14
NAWORANGPUR
15
PHULBANI
16
RAYAGADA
17
SAMBALPUR
1
AJMER
2
ALWAR
3
BHARATPUR
4
BIKANER
5
BUNDI
6
CHITTOR GARH
7
DHOLPUR
8
DUNGARPUR
9
GANGANAGAR
10
HANUMANGARH
11
JAIPUR
12
JHALAWAR
13
KARAULI
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
77
Sl.No.
9
78
Name of the State
UTTAR PRADESH
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
14
PALI
15
RAJSAMAND
16
SAWAI MADHOPUR
17
SIKAR
18
SIROHI
19
UDAIPUR
1
AGRA
2
ALIGARH
3
ALLAHABAD
4
AMBEDKAR NGR.
5
AURAIYA
6
AZAMGARH
7
BADAUN
8
BAGPAT
9
BANDA
10
BARABANKI
11
BAREILLY
12
BIJNOR
13
BULLANDSHAHR
14
CHANDAULI
15
CHITRAKUT
16
ETAH
17
ETAWAH
18
FAIZABAD
19
FARRUKHABAD
20
FATEHPUR
21
FIROZABAD
22
G.BUDDHA NGR.
23
GHAZIABAD
24
GHAZIPUR
25
HAMIRPUR
26
HARDOI
Sl.No.
Name of the State
Sl.No.
Name of the District
27
HATHARAS
28
J.B.PHULE NGR.
29
JALAUN
30
JAUNPUR
31
JHANSI
32
KANNAUJ
33
KANPUR CITY
34
KANPUR DEHAT
35
KAUSHAMBI
36
KHERI
37
LALITPUR
38
LUCKNOW
39
MAHOBA
40
MAINPURI
41
MATHURA
42
MAU
43
MEERUT
44
MIRZAPUR
45
MORADABAD
46
MUZAFFARNAGAR
47
PILIBHIT
48
PRATAPGARH
49
RAEBARELI
50
RAMPUR
51
S.RAVI DAS NGR.
53
SHAHJAHANPUR
54
SITAPUR
55
SONBHADRA
56
SULTANPUR
57
UNNAO
58
VARANASI
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
79
Names of the States and Districts showing yield >=10 q/ha of other rabi pulses.
Sl.No.
1
2
3
4
80
Name of the State
ANDHRA PRADESH
BIHAR
CHHATTISGARH
GUJARAT
Sl.No.
Name of the District
1
CHITTOOR
2
NIZAMABAD
3
VISAKHAPATNAM
1
AURANGABAD
2
DARBHANGA
3
MADHUBANI
4
SAMASTIPUR
5
SIWAN
6
VAISHALI
1
DHAMTARI
2
KANKER
3
RAIPUR
4
RAJ NANDGAON
1
AMRELI
2
ANAND
3
DANGS
4
JAMNAGAR
5
JUNAGARH
6
KHEDA
7
KUTCH
8
MEHSANA
9
NARMADA
10
NAVSARI
11
PANCH MAHALS
12
PATAN
13
RAJKOT
14
SURAT
15
VADODARA
16
VALSAD
5
MAHARASHTRA
1
YAVATMAL
6
ORISSA
1
KEDRAPARA
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
7
8
Name of the State
RAJASTHAN
UTTAR PRADESH
Sl.No.
Name of the District
1
BHARATPUR
2
DAUSA
3
DUNGARPUR
4
GANGANAGAR
5
JAIPUR
6
JALORE
7
JHALAWAR
8
KARAULI
9
SIROHI
10
TONK
11
UDAIPUR
1
ALLAHABAD
2
AURAIYA
3
AZAMGARH
4
BALLIA
5
CHANDAULI
6
ETAWAH
7
FARRUKHABAD
8
FATEHPUR
9
GHAZIPUR
10
JALAUN
11
JAUNPUR
12
JHANSI
13
KANNAUJ
14
KANPUR CITY
15
KANPUR DEHAT
16
KAUSHAMBI
17
LALITPUR
18
MAU
19
MIRZAPUR
20
PRATAPGARH
21
S.RAVI DAS NGR.
22
VARANASI
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
81
Names of the States and Districts showing yield >=10 q/ha of other Kharif pulses.
Sl.No.
Name of the State
Sl.No.
Name of the District
1
ANDHRA PRADESH
1
KRISHNA
2
BIHAR
1
KATIHAR
2
ROHTAS
3
SIWAN
1
AMRELI
2
BHAVNAGAR
3
JAMNAGAR
4
KHEDA
5
VADODARA
1
BANGALORE (RURAL)
2
BANGALORE (URBAN)
3
BIDAR
4
CHITRADURGA
5
DAVANGERE
6
KOLAR
1
BAREN
2
BARMER
3
BUNDI
4
JAISALMER
5
KARAULI
6
KOTA
3
4
5
GUJARAT
KARNATAKA
RAJASTHAN
Names of the States and Districts showing yield>=10 q/ha of Tur
Sl.No.
1
2
82
Name of the State
ANDHRA PRADESH
BIHAR
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
1
EAST GODAVARI
2
GUNTUR
3
NIZAMABAD
1
ARARIA
2
ARHASIA
3
ARVAL
Sl.No.
Name of the State
Sl.No.
Name of the District
4
AURANGABAD
5
BAGHALPUR
6
BANKA
7
BEGUSARAI
8
BHABHA
9
BHANKA
10
BHOJPUR
11
BUXAR
12
CHAMPARAN(EAST)
13
CHAMPARAN(WEST)
14
DARBHANGA
15
GAYA
16
GOPALGANJ
17
JAHANABAD
18
KATIHAR
19
KHAGARIA
20
KISHANGANJ
21
LAKHISARIA
22
MADHUBANI
23
MADHUPURA
24
MONGHYR
25
MUZAFFARPUR
26
NALANDA
27
NAWADA
28
PATNA
29
PURNIA
30
ROHTAS
31
SAHARSA
32
SAMASTIPUR
33
SARAN
34
SHIVHAR
35
SHKHPURA
36
SITAMARHI
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
83
Sl.No.
3
84
Name of the State
GUJARAT
Sl.No.
Name of the District
37
SIWAN
38
SUMAL
39
SUPAUL
40
ZAMUI
1
AHMEDABAD
2
AMRELI
3
ANAND
4
BANAS KANTHA
5
BHAVNAGAR
6
DANGS
7
DOHAD
8
GANDHINAGAR
9
JAMNAGAR
10
JUNAGARH
11
KHEDA
12
MEHSANA
13
PANCH MAHALS
14
PATAN
15
PORBANDAR
16
RAJKOT
17
SABARKANTHA
18
SURAT
19
SURENDRANAGAR
20
VADODARA
21
VALSAD
4
KARNATAKA
1
DAVANGERE
5
MADHYA PRADESH
1
BALAGHAT
2
BURHANPUR
3
CHINDWARA
4
HARDA
5
HOSHANGABAD
6
JABALPUR
7
KATNI
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
6
7
8
9
Name of the State
MAHARASHTRA
ORISSA
RAJASTHAN
UTTAR PRADESH
Sl.No.
Name of the District
8
NARSIMPUR
9
SEONI
1
AKOLA
2
AMRAVATI
3
HINGOLI
4
LATUR
5
OSMANABAD
6
WARDHA
7
WASHIM
8
YAVATMAL
1
BHADRAK
2
BURAGARH
3
GAJAPATTI
4
KEDRAPARA
1
AJMER
2
ALWAR
3
BIKANER
4
BUNDI
5
CHITTOR GARH
6
DHOLPUR
7
GANGANAGAR
8
JAIPUR
9
KARAULI
10
RAJSAMAND
11
SAWAI MADHOPUR
12
SIKAR
13
SIROHI
14
UDAIPUR
1
AGRA
2
ALLAHABAD
3
AMBEDKAR NGR.
4
AURAIYA
5
BADAUN
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
85
Sl.No.
86
Name of the State
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
6
BANDA
7
BARABANKI
8
BAREILLY
9
CHITRAKUT
10
ETAH
11
ETAWAH
12
FAIZABAD
13
FARRUKHABAD
14
FATEHPUR
15
G.BUDDHA NGR.
16
GHAZIPUR
17
HAMIRPUR
18
HARDOI
19
HATHARAS
20
JALAUN
21
KANNAUJ
22
KANPUR CITY
23
KANPUR DEHAT
24
KAUSHAMBI
25
KHERI
26
LALITPUR
27
LUCKNOW
28
MAHOBA
29
MAU
30
MIRZAPUR
31
PILIBHIT
32
PRATAPGARH
33
S.RAVI DAS NGR.
34
SAHARANPUR
35
SHAHJAHANPUR
36
SITAPUR
37
SULTANPUR
38
UNNAO
Names of the States and Districts showing yield >=10q/ha of Gram
Sl.No.
1
2
Name of the State
ANDHRA PRADESH
BIHAR
Sl.No.
Name of the District
1
ADILABAD
2
ANANTPUR
3
CHITTOOR
4
CUDDAPAH
5
EAST GODAVARI
6
GUNTUR
7
KARIMNAGAR
8
KHAMMAM
9
KRISHNA
10
KURNOOL
11
MAHABOOBNAGAR
12
MEDAK
13
NALGONDA
14
NELLORE
15
NIZAMABAD
16
PRAKASAM
17
RANGAREDDY
18
SRIKAKULAM
19
VISAKHAPATNAM
20
VIZIANAGARM
21
WARANGAL
1
ARVAL
2
AURANGABAD
3
BHABHA
4
BHOJPUR
5
BUXAR
6
CHAMPARAN(WEST)
7
GAYA
8
JAHANABAD
9
LAKHISARIA
10
PATNA
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
87
Sl.No.
3
4
5
88
Name of the State
CHHATTISGARH
GUJARAT
MADHYA PRADESH
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
11
ROHTAS
12
SAHARSA
13
SHKHPURA
1
BASTAR
2
DHAMTARI
3
DURG
4
JASHPUR
1
AMRELI
2
BANAS KANTHA
3
BHAVNAGAR
4
DANGS
5
GANDHINAGAR
6
JAMNAGAR
7
JUNAGARH
8
KHEDA
9
KUTCH
10
MEHSANA
11
NARMADA
12
NAVSARI
13
PATAN
14
PORBANDAR
15
RAJKOT
16
SURAT
17
SURENDRANAGAR
18
VADODARA
19
VALSAD
1
BHIND
2
BHOPAL
3
BURHANPUR
4
CHHATARPUR
5
CHINDWARA
6
DATIA
7
DEWAS
Sl.No.
6
Name of the State
MAHARASHTRA
Sl.No.
Name of the District
8
GWALIOR
9
HARDA
10
HOSHANGABAD
11
JABALPUR
12
MORENA
13
NARSIMPUR
14
NEEMACH
15
RAISEN
16
RAJGARH
17
REWA
18
SEHORE
19
SHEOPUR KALAN
20
SHIVPURI
21
TIKAMGARH
22
VIDISHA
1
AMRAVATI
2
DHULE
3
JALGAON
4
MANDURBAR
7
ORISSA
1
ANGUL
8
RAJASTHAN
1
ALWAR
2
BANSWARA
3
BAREN
4
BHARATPUR
5
BHILWARA
6
BIKANER
7
BUNDI
8
CHITTOR GARH
9
DAUSA
10
DHOLPUR
11
DUNGARPUR
12
JAIPUR
13
JALORE
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
89
Sl.No.
9
90
Name of the State
UTTAR PRADESH
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Sl.No.
Name of the District
14
JHALAWAR
15
JHUNJHUNU
16
KARAULI
17
KOTA
18
NAGAUR
19
SAWAI MADHOPUR
20
SIKAR
21
UDAIPUR
1
AGRA
2
ALIGARH
3
ALLAHABAD
4
AMBEDKAR NGR.
5
AURAIYA
6
AZAMGARH
7
BADAUN
8
BAGPAT
9
BALLIA
10
BARABANKI
11
BAREILLY
12
BIJNOR
13
BULLANDSHAHR
14
CHANDAULI
15
ETAH
16
ETAWAH
17
FAIZABAD
18
FARRUKHABAD
19
FATEHPUR
20
FIROZABAD
21
G.BUDDHA NGR.
22
GHAZIABAD
23
GHAZIPUR
24
HARDOI
25
HATHARAS
Sl.No.
Name of the State
Sl.No.
Name of the District
26
J.B.PHULE NGR.
27
JALAUN
28
JAUNPUR
29
JHANSI
30
KANNAUJ
31
KANPUR CITY
32
KANPUR DEHAT
33
KAUSHAMBI
34
KHERI
35
KUSHI NGR.
36
LALITPUR
37
LUCKNOW
38
MAHOBA
39
MAINPURI
40
MATHURA
41
MAU
42
MEERUT
43
MIRZAPUR
44
MORADABAD
45
MUZAFFARNAGAR
46
PILIBHIT
47
RAEBARELI
48
RAMPUR
49
S.RAVI DAS NGR.
50
SAHARANPUR
51
SHAHJAHANPUR
52
SHIVASTI
53
SITAPUR
54
SONBHADRA
55
SULTANPUR
56
UNNAO
57
VARANASI
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
91
Annexure III : Recommendations of Brain Storming Session on Pulses
S.No
Issues
1
Inadequate
availability of
quality seeds
of improved
varieties
Strategy recommended
•
•
•
•
•
•
2
Inadequate and
imbalanced use
of nutrients
•
•
•
•
3
4
Pulses suffer
heavily from soil
moisture stress/
drought
•
Heavy yield losses
due to insect-pests
and diseases
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
5
Lack of
mechanization
•
•
6
Trade policy and
MSP do not fully
support pulse
growers
•
•
7
Area Expansion:
Unutilized potential
of rice fallows
•
8
New Initiatives
Proposed
•
•
•
•
92
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Advanced seed planning at state level with rolling seed plan
Improving conversion of breeder to foundation to
certified seeds
The Seed Multiplication Ratio should be improved through
proper crop management
States need to be sensitized for giving enhanced and
realistic indents for breeder seed of new varieties
Seed treatment with fungicide should be made mandatory
for all classes of seeds
Seed buffer of improved varieties may be maintained at
State Seed Corporation level
Ensuring timely availability of S and Zn along with phosphatic
fertilizers in the districts deficient to these nutrients
Promoting use of bio-fertilizers (Rhizobium, PSB etc.)
Popularization of 2% foliar spray of urea/ DAP in rainfed
areas
Introducing the system of soil health card to ensure
balance use of nutrients
Rain water harvesting through farm ponds and community
reservoirs
Promoting short duration varieties in drought prone areas
Promoting micro-irrigation system
Adoption of moisture conservation practices
Advanced forewarning and forecasting
Promotion of IPM technologies against Helicoverpa
Ensuring timely availability of biopesticides like HaNPV,
Trichoderma and herbicides such as Pendimethalin
Seed dressing of fungicides for controlling diseases
Providing safe storage structures like Pusa Bin and
warehouse facility
Promoting designing and development of efficient farm
machineries like ridge planter, raised bed planter, weeder,
pulse harvester, threshers, and zero-till drill
Promoting custom hiring of farm machineries
Lifting ban on export
Supply and demand should be taken into account for fixing
of MSP
Provision of procurement of Pulses
Promoting cultivation of lentil and peas in rice fallows with
incentive packages
Appropriate measures to contain blue bull menace
Pilot project on chickpea and pigeonpea covering 10% area
in major pulse producing states such as Maharashtra, M.P.,
Karnataka, A.P., Rajasthan, Bihar
Creation of National Pulse Development Board
Annexure IV : Net irrigated area in pulse crops growing districts
(a) Pigeonpea (Tur)
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
ANDHRAPRADESH
ADILABAD
0.73
0.96
0.8
2.94
1.16
ANANTAPUR
0.09
0.13
0.72
0.39
0.39
CHITTOOR
0.64
0.26
1.28
0.49
0.55
CUDDAPAH
0.05
0
0.12
0
0.26
EAST GODAVARI
0
0.46
0.4
0
0
GUNTUR
2.8
5.03
0.66
4.45
0.28
KARIMNAGAR
5.86
4.92
0.93
0
0
KHAMMAM
1.01
0.16
0.23
0.51
0.08
KRISHNA
0
0
0
0
0
KURNOOL
0.64
1.52
0.84
1.24
0.91
MAHABUBNAGAR
0
0
0
0
0
MEDAK
0
0
0
0
0
NALGONDA
1.81
1.18
1.07
1.45
0.74
NELLORE
9.83
0.2
0
0
0
NIZAMABAD
0
0
0
0.09
0
PRAKASAM
0.49
0.44
0
0
0
RANGAREDDY
0
0
0
0
0
SRIKAKULAM
0
0
0
0
0
VISAKHAPATNAM
0
0
0
0
0
VIZIANAGRAM
0
0
0
0
0
WARANGAL
1.43
0.16
0.32
0.64
0.7
WEST GODAVARI
7.04
6.01
0.49
0
0
0
0
0
0
BIHAR
ARARIA
87.69
ARVAL
0
0
0
0
0
AURANGABAD
0
0
0
0
0
BANKA
0
2.47
2.14
7.38
0.31
BEGUSARAI
0
2.64
0
0.29
21.57
BHABHUA
0
0
0
0
0
BHAGALPUR
0.5
0
0
0
0
BHOJPUR
0
0
0
0
0
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
93
Name of the State
CHATTISGARH
Name of the district
2003
2004
BUXAR
0
0
CHAMPARAN(EAST)
0
CHAMPARAN(WEST)
2006
2007
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
DARBHANGA
1.19
0
0
0
0
GAYA
1.01
1.32
0
0.91
4.75
GOPALGANJ
0.2
0
0
0
0.15
JAHANABAD
0.73
0
0
0
0
JAMUI
0
0
0
0
0
KATIHAR
0
0
0
0
0
KHAGARIA
0
0
0
0
0
KISHANGANJ
0
0
0
0
0
LAKHISARAI
0
0
0
0
0
MADHUBANI
2.07
4.08
3.7
0
0
MADHUPURA
0
0
0
0
0
MONGHYR
0
0
0
0
0
MUZAFARPUR
0
2.22
11.3
0
0
NALANDA
0
0
17.91
0
0
NAWADHA
0
6.51
6.43
0
4.53
PATNA
0
0
0
0
0
PURNEA
0
0
0
0
0
ROHTAS
0
0
8.62
0
0
SAHARSA
0
0
.
0
0
SAMASTIPUR
0
0
0
0
0
SARAN
0
0.81
0
0
SHEIKHPURA
0
0
0
0
0
SITAMARHI
5.11
2.81
0
1.62
0
SIVHAR
0
0
0
0
0
SIWAN
0
0
0
0
0
SUPAUL
0
0
0
0
VAISHALI
1.71
0
7.26
4.6
BASTAR
0
0
0
0
.
0
.
BIJAPUR
94
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
12.59
.
.
2005
.
.
1.81
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
BILASPUR
0
0
0
0
.
DANTEWARA
0
0
0
0
.
DHAMTARI
0.21
0
0
0
.
DURG
0.07
0
0.04
0.29
.
JANJGIR-CHAMP
0
0
0
0
.
JASHPUR
0
0
0
0
.
KANKER
0
0
0
0
.
KAWARDHA (KAB
0
0
0
0
.
KORBA
0
0
0
0
.
KORIYA
0
0
0
0
.
MAHASMUND
0
0
0
0.12
.
0
.
NARAYANPUR
GUJARAT
.
2005
.
.
2006
2007
RAIGARH
0
0
0
0
.
RAIPUR
0
0
0.16
0.03
.
RAJNANDGAON
0
0
0
0
.
SURGUJA
0
0
0
0
.
AHMEDABAD
0
0
0
0
.
61.54
20
0
.
29.41
18.18
40
.
0
.
AMRELI
ANAND
BANAS KANTHA
BARODA
BHARUCH
BHAVNAGAR
100
23.08
0
3.7
0
17.18
.
.
.
.
9.26
2.91
2.93
1.84
.
0
0
0
.
0
0
.
57.14
DAHOD
0
DANGS
0
0
0
0
.
GANDHINAGAR
0
0
0
7.69
.
0
0
72.73
.
JAMNAGAR
52.38
JUNAGARH
91.67
10.81
85.71
68.18
58.82
.
42.17
7.23
.
KHEDA
0
1.1
MAHESANA
0
0
0
0
.
NARMADA
0
0.45
9.17
1.59
.
NAVSARI
5.13
9.52
0
34.62
.
PANCH MAHALS
0
0
0
0
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
95
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
PATAN
8.7
6.67
PORBANDER
0
RAJKOT
KARNATAKA
0
.
2006
2007
0
.
.
.
.
66.67
50
20
SABARKANTHA
0.28
0
0
0.39
.
SURAT
7.12
0
0
0
.
SURENDRANAGAR
.
0
0
.
VADORA
.
20
.
18.03
11
.
21.38
.
VALSAD
0
0
1.35
1.49
.
BAGALKOT
6.66
2.96
3.72
3.5
2.42
BANGALORE (RURAL)
5.82
4.56
16.72
10.07
32.79
BANGALORE (URBAN)
0
1.69
1.77
32.08
43.49
BELGAUM
2.73
2.76
3.56
3.66
3.91
BELLARY
31.05
29.26
30.19
35.07
32.39
BIDAR
BIJAPUR
0
0
0
0
0
18.39
13.28
18.95
CHAMRAJNAGAR
2.88
2.16
2.92
2.35
9.62
CHICKABALLAPU
.
.
.
.
1.41
CHIKMAGALUR
0
0
0
0
0
CHITRADURGA
0
0.04
0
0.22
0.35
DEVANAGRRE
1.27
0.91
2.55
4.54
3.7
DHARWAD
0
0.31
0
0
0.37
GAGAD
1.35
2.16
1.02
1.33
0
GULBARGA
1.03
1.28
1.51
1.68
2.13
HASSAN
0
3.79
0
0
0
HAVERI
0
0
0.05
0
0
0
0
KODAGU(COORG)
24.4
18.63
.
.
KOLAR
1.99
4.06
3.14
2.68
2.03
KOPAL
0.48
3.57
7.77
4.57
1.78
MANDYA
0
4.26
1.58
16.67
2.88
MYSORE
0
0
0
0
0
RAICHUR
0.01
0.48
0.84
0.46
0.95
.
.
.
.
0
138.57
1.89
6.42
6.6
0
RAMANGARA
SHIMOGA
96
2005
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
.
Name of the State
MADHYA PRADESH
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
TUMKUR
0
2.76
3.99
3.55
1.94
UTTARAKANNADA
0
0
0
0
0
ANUPPUR
0
0
0
0
.
ASHOK NAGAR
0
0
0
0
.
BADWANI
7.18
8.35
6.03
6.04
.
BALAGHAT
0
0
0
0
.
BETUL
0
0
0
0
.
BHIND
0
0.01
0
0
.
BHOPAL
0
0
0
0
.
BURHANPUR
9.57
CHHATARPUR
0
0
0
0
.
CHINDWARA
0.56
0.5
1.19
0.74
.
DAMOH
0
0
0
0
.
DATIA
0.03
0.14
0
0
.
DEWAS
0.57
0.92
0.91
1.25
.
DHAR
0.07
0.37
0.36
0.12
.
DINDORI
0
0
0
0
.
EAST NIMAR (K
14.59
11.4
10.02
18.97
17.96
11.75
20.92
.
.
GUNA
0
0
0
0
.
GWALIOR
0
0
0
0
.
HARDA
0.14
0.07
2.01
1.08
.
HOSHANGABAD
0
0
0
0.57
.
INDORE
0
0
0
0
.
JABALPUR
0
0
0
0
.
JHABUA
0.21
0.08
0.04
0.36
.
KATANI
0
0
0
0
.
MANDLA
0
0
0
0
.
MANDSAUR
0
0
0
0
.
MORENA
0
0
0
0.22
.
NARSIMPUR
0
0
0.39
0.04
.
NIMACH
0
0
0
0
.
PANNA
0
0.17
0
0
.
RAISEN
0
0
0
0
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
97
Name of the State
MAHARASHTRA
98
Name of the district
2003
2004
RAJGARH
0
0
0
0
.
RATLAM
0.08
0.1
0
0
.
REWA
0
0
0
0
.
SAGAR
0
0
0
0
.
SATNA
0
0
0
0
.
SEHORE
0
0
0
0
.
SEONI
0
0
0
0
.
SHAHDOL
0
0
0
0
.
SHAJAPUR
0
0
0
0
.
SHEOPUR
0
0
0
0
.
SHIVPURI
0
0
0
0
.
SIDHI
0
0
0
0
.
TIKAMGARH
0
0
0
0
.
UJJAIN
0
0
0
0
.
UMARIYA
0
0
0
0
.
VIDISHA
0
0
0
0
.
WEST NIMAR (KHA)
6.49
6.71
5.82
7.41
.
AHMEDNAGAR
0
0
0
.
.
AKOLA
0
0
0
.
.
AMRAVATI
0
0
0
.
.
AURAGABAD
0
0
0
.
.
BEED
0
0
0
.
.
BHANDARA
0
0
0
.
.
BULDHANA
0
0
0
.
.
CHANDRAPUR
0
0
0
.
.
DHULE
0
0
0
.
.
GADCHIROLI
0
0
0
.
.
GONDIYA
0
0
0
.
.
HINGOLI
0
0
0
.
.
JALGAON
0
0
0
.
.
JALNA
0
0
0
.
.
KOLHAPUR
0
0
0
.
.
LATUR
0
0
0
.
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
2005
2006
2007
Name of the State
ORISSA
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
NAGPUR
0
0
0
.
.
NANDED
0
0
0
.
.
NANDURBAR
0
0
0
.
.
NASIK
0
0
0
.
.
OSMANABAD
0
0
0
.
.
PARBHANI
0
0
0
.
.
PUNE
0
0
0
.
.
RAIGAD
0
0
0
.
.
RATNAGIRI
0
0
0
.
.
SANGLI
0
0
0
.
.
SATARA
0
0
0
.
.
SOLAPUR
0
0
0
.
.
THANE
0
0
0
.
.
WARDHA
0
0
0
.
.
WASHIM
0
0
0
.
.
YEVATMAL
0
0
0
.
.
ANGUL
0
0
0
0
0
BALASORE
0
0
0
0
0
BHADRAK
0
0
0
0
0
BOLANGIR
0
0
0
0
0
BOUDH
0
0
0
0
0
BURAGARH
0
0
0
0
0
CUTTACK
0
0
0
0
0
DEOGARH
0
0
0
0
0
DHENKANAL
0
0
0
0
0
GAJAPATTI
0
0
0
0
0
GANJAM
0
0
0
0
0
JAGATSINGPUR
0
0
0
0
0
JAJPUR
0
0
0
0
0
JHARSUGDA
0
0
0
0
0
KALAHANDI
3.07
0
0
0
0
KEDRAPARA
0
0
0
0
0
KEONJHAR
0
0
0
0
0
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
99
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
KHURDA
0
0
KORAPUT
4.48
MALKANGIRI
2006
2007
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MAYURBHANJ
0
0
0
0
0
NAWAPARA
0
0
0
0
0
NAWORANGPUR
0
0
0
0
0
NAYAGARH
0
0
0
0
0
PHULBANI
0
0
0
0
0
RAYAGADA
0
0
0
0
0
SAMBALPUR
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SONEPUR
RAJASTHAN
13.46
SUNDARGARH
0
0
AJMER
0
0
ALWAR
7.97
BANSWARA
0
0
0.22
0
.
BARAN
0
0
0.93
1.75
.
BHARATPUR
2.21
9.29
3.76
5.95
.
BHILWARA
0.3
.
0
0
.
BIKANER
50.16
.
.
.
37.36
36.87
.
100
.
.
100
.
BUNDI
0
0
0
0
.
CHITTORGARH
0
0
0
0
.
DAUSA
0
1.79
5.48
0
.
DHOLPUR
0
0
0.35
0
.
DUNGARPUR
0.13
0
0
0
.
71.43
100
100
.
37.5
100
100
.
GANGANAGAR
HANUMANGARH
JAIPUR
100
67.86
0
60.27
58.88
61.61
.
.
.
.
JAISALMER
100
100
JHALAWAR
0
0
.
100
KARULI
0
0
0
KOTA
0
0
0
NAGAUR
0
0
100
JHUNJHUNU
100
2005
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
0
0
.
.
.
0
.
.
10.81
.
.
.
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
PALI
0
0
0
0
.
0
0
0
.
0
0
0
.
RAJSAMAND
UTTAR PRADESH
.
2005
2006
2007
SAWAI MADHOPU
0
SIKAR
0
SIROHI
0
0
0
0
.
TONK
0
0
0
0
.
UDAIPUR
0
0
0
0
.
.
16.67
.
.
AGRA
20.82
16.1
.
24.77
.
ALIGARH
96.46
97.38
.
97.31
.
ALLAHABAD
0.04
0.03
.
0
.
AMBEDKAR NAGA
0.05
0
.
0
.
.
3.47
.
5.68
.
AZAMGARH
1.67
0.11
.
0.11
.
BADAUN
1.08
2.06
.
1.77
.
AURAIYA
BAGPAT
100
100
.
100
.
BAHRAICH
0
0.04
.
0
.
BALLIA
0.23
0.02
.
0.02
.
BALRAMPUR
0
0
.
0.09
.
BANDA
0
0
.
0
.
BARABANKI
0
0.02
.
0
.
BAREILLY
0
0
.
1.28
.
BASTI
0.63
0
.
0
.
BIJNOR
6.77
18.8
.
BULLANDSHAHR
22.86
.
100
100
.
100
.
CHANDAULI
0
0
.
0
.
CHITRAKUT
0
0
.
0
.
DEORIA
0
0
.
0.03
.
ETAH
63.49
74.59
.
83.97
.
ETAWAH
2.95
1.38
.
1.02
.
FAIZABAD
0
0
.
0.04
.
FARRUKHABAD
2.3
4.44
.
5.04
.
FATEHPUR
0.27
0.13
.
0.08
.
27.11
24.81
.
26.14
.
FEROZABAD
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
101
Name of the State
Name of the district
2004
2005
2006
2007
GAUTAM BUDDHA
100
100
.
100
.
GHAZIABAD
100
100
.
100
.
GHAZIPUR
0.34
0.51
.
0
.
GONDA
0
0
.
0
.
GORAKHPUR
0
0
.
0
.
HAMIRPUR
0
0.02
.
0
.
HARDOI
0.03
0.04
.
0.41
.
96.95
95.65
.
99.94
.
HATHARAS
JALAUN
0
0
.
0
.
JAUNPUR
0
0.03
.
0
.
18.77
.
JBFLUE NAGAR
12.78
16.63
.
JHANSI
0
0
.
0
.
KANNAUJ
2.26
6.28
.
6.4
.
KANPUR (D)
2.62
1.37
.
0.89
.
KANPUR (S)
1.19
3.28
.
5.2
.
KHERI
0
0.07
.
0.08
.
KOSHAMBHI
0
0
.
0.07
.
KUSHINAGAR
1.03
0.82
.
0.1
.
LALITPUR
0
0
.
0
.
LUCKNOW
0
0.1
.
0
.
MAHARAJ GANJ
0
0.24
.
0
.
MAHOBA
0
0
.
0
.
MAINPURI
47.07
44.53
.
64.29
.
MATHURA
71.72
72.28
.
83.81
.
.
0.37
.
MAU
MEERUT
MIRZAPUR
102
2003
0
100
0.04
MORADABAD
11.51
MUZAFFARNAGAR
98.39
0
99.89
.
100
.
0
.
0
.
9.24
.
2.59
.
100
.
100
.
PILIBHIT
0
0
.
0
.
PRATAPGARH
0
0.01
.
0
.
RAEBARELI
0
0
.
0
.
RAMPUR
0
2.33
.
3.7
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
S.RAVI DAS NG
0
0
.
0
.
50
.
100
.
SAHARANPUR
28.57
2005
2006
2007
SANT KABIR NG
0
0.03
.
0.03
.
SHAHJAHANPUR
0.6
0
.
0.35
.
SHRAVASTI
0.47
0.43
.
0
.
SIDHARTHA NAG
0
0
.
0
.
SITAPUR
0
0.02
.
0.15
.
SONBHADRA
0
0
.
0
.
SULTANPUR
0
0
.
0
.
UNNAO
0.12
0.02
.
0
.
VARANASI
0
0
.
0
.
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
ANDHRAPRADESH
ADILABAD
3.14
1.37
2.22
0
ANANTAPUR
3.99
4.5
5.66
2.28
1.46
CHITTOOR
.
18.18
.
.
57.14
CUDDAPAH
0.96
0.68
0.05
0.04
0.04
EAST GODAVARI
0
0
0
0
0
GUNTUR
0
0
0
0
0
0
8.83
6.38
(b) Gram
KARIMNAGAR
10.31
2006
2007
35.06
19.86
KHAMMAM
0
3
1.77
1.36
0
KRISHNA
0
0
0
0
0
KURNOOL
0.53
0.28
0.3
0.2
0.28
MAHABUBNAGAR
0
3.43
0.62
1.47
1.49
MEDAK
0.02
0.12
0.74
0.08
0
NALGONDA
1.36
4.53
0
5.73
0
NELLORE
0
0
0
0
0
NIZAMABAD
1.72
5.81
0
0.39
2.19
PRAKASAM
0
0
0
0.04
0
RANGAREDDY
0
0
0
0
0
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
103
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
SRIKAKULAM
BIHAR
.
2005
.
.
2006
2007
0
0
VISAKHAPATNAM
0
0
0
0
0
VIZIANAGRAM
0
0
0
0
5.61
WARANGAL
14.13
24.94
31.85
ARARIA
88.26
28.58
19.59
ARVAL
0
AURANGABAD
4.71
BANKA
0
BEGUSARAI
11.63
0
1.97
0
2.61
2.88
1.25
2
0.97
10.4
5.17
3.44
4.13
14.93
7.14
0
0
21.52
15.71
15.33
0.02
BHABHUA
0
1.92
0
0
0
BHAGALPUR
9.54
8.91
4.28
3.96
8.43
BHOJPUR
1.55
0.03
0.6
2.18
0
BUXAR
0
0.32
0.05
0
0
CHAMPARAN(EAST)
CHAMPARAN(WEST)
97.41
84.29
0
.
0
0
83.46
0
83.85
0
DARBHANGA
80.87
26.43
28.78
32.26
35.46
GAYA
21.73
2.22
1.84
11.91
0.36
GOPALGANJ
98.03
59.46
.
4.65
JAHANABAD
13.41
2.68
6.48
0
0
3.01
2.49
0.67
0
JAMUI
0
10.46
KATIHAR
0.33
94.6
55.4
5.6
0.65
58.54
0
24.11
7.6
0
41.14
12.84
0
KHAGARIA
KISHANGANJ
0
0
LAKHISARAI
3.57
0
MADHUBANI
57.17
0
MADHUPURA
.
MONGHYR
MUZAFARPUR
104
2004
0
98.89
0
12.82
0
0
0
0
55.38
.
.
4.77
1.01
95.24
92.31
84.22
.
3.58
8.04
27.53
0
5
0
NALANDA
0
0
NAWADHA
2.09
0.39
10.79
1.36
0.64
PATNA
4.14
7.65
31.66
21.13
1.06
PURNEA
7.17
51.87
77.95
64.34
70.13
ROHTAS
0.12
37.33
6.16
1.08
1.02
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
SAHARSA
0
0
0
2007
.
.
90.3
90.48
90.16
89.08
59.17
SARAN
44.62
92.72
45.77
87.88
88.84
0
0
0
0
SITAMARHI
83.99
100
SIWAN
35.65
20
SUPAUL
0
0
23.81
0
0
0
.
.
35.59
69.01
0
65.63
VAISHALI
55.25
92.51
78.44
81.97
BASTAR
4.35
4.43
3.29
2.52
BIJAPUR
.
.
.
1.55
3.23
2.69
BILASPUR
GUJARAT
2006
SAMASTIPUR
SHEIKHPURA
CHATTISGARH
2005
50
4.92
0
.
.
.
DANTEWARA
12.5
9.09
12.5
20
.
DHAMTARI
28.37
11.61
19.43
30.64
.
DURG
13.45
18.74
23.23
27.55
.
JANJGIR-CHAMP
63.32
66.86
61.54
68.06
.
JASHPUR
0.3
0.47
0.4
1.33
.
KANKER
4.72
4.28
3.26
2.14
.
KAWARDHA (KAB
7.08
13.5
20.82
.
KORBA
3.15
3.1
4.68
4.82
.
KORIYA
1
2.16
2.83
2.56
.
25.34
.
15.4
MAHASMUND
22.11
28.57
41.82
NARAYANPUR
.
.
.
RAIGARH
35.25
23.87
23.6
22.38
.
RAIPUR
27.86
28.96
27.77
29.71
.
RAJNANDGAON
2.02
3.86
4.66
8.84
.
SURGUJA
0.44
0.37
0.8
0.4
.
AHMEDABAD
0
4.76
27.08
10.62
.
0
.
AMRELI
100
92
100
ANAND
10
24
12
15.38
.
BANAS KANTHA
33.33
75
85.71
33.33
.
BARODA
20
.
.
.
.
5
8.11
4
14.71
.
90
85.71
.
BHARUCH
BHAVNAGAR
92.31
100
100
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
105
Name of the State
Name of the district
DAHOD
DANGS
GANDHINAGAR
2005
2006
29.44
33.79
7.01
.
0
.
0
0
0
100
100
100
2007
.
.
73.89
69.03
95.63
96.2
.
JUNAGARH
72.34
88.64
66.67
70.87
.
KHEDA
100
100
8.33
100
MAHESANA
33.33
100
NARMADA
57.14
100
100
100
.
83.33
.
84.62
62.5
.
0
54.55
16.67
.
54.05
50
49.02
49.02
.
PATAN
4.35
0
PORBANDER
5.71
1.67
RAJKOT
78.75
70.69
SABARKANTHA
16
39.13
PANCH MAHALS
0
100
0
31.5
100
3.85
SURENDRANAGAR
6.9
20
VADORA
.
5
10
VALSAD
0
0
0
BANGALORE (RURAL)
27.37
35.73
0
0
BANGALORE (URBAN) 100
0
0
.
6.25
.
100
22.58
SURAT
BAGALKOT
3.45
88.24
.
58.33
NAVSARI
0
.
25.64
.
0
36.27
27.75
1
.
17.91
.
4.76
.
0
.
29.58
100
18.73
10.64
.
.
.
BELGAUM
31.81
45.78
44.66
32.98
37.94
BELLARY
36.44
27.12
37.2
31.59
40.59
BIDAR
2.79
3.13
4.12
5.25
8.23
BIJAPUR
8.93
30.83
23.95
20.75
23.72
CHAMRAJNAGAR
0
3.57
0
0
0
CHIKMAGALUR
0
0
0
0
0
CHITRADURGA
2.63
0.73
0.5
0.43
0.35
DEVANAGRRE
0
0.29
2.48
2.25
2.54
DHARWAD
15.85
22.57
21.54
21.22
20.02
GAGAD
15.51
24.72
23.9
15.75
23.76
2.6
2.67
3.17
4.75
GULBARGA
106
13.26
2004
JAMNAGAR
KACHCHH
KARNATAKA
2003
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
2.92
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
HASSAN
14.66
HAVERI
7.92
KODAGU (COORG)
43.75
2006
2007
1.53
0
0
4.69
9.99
8.96
7.04
0
0
100
100
.
KOPAL
6.84
4.94
MANDYA
0.84
97.96
MYSORE
0
0
100
3.91
0
.
.
2.42
1.87
66.67 100
100
0
0.21
3.23
8.7
14.22
10.24
6.44
7.25
.
.
.
.
14.66
19.44
RAMANGARA
SHIMOGA
0
0
TUMKUR
0
0
UDIPPI
2005
0
KOLAR
RAICHUR
MADHYA PRADESH
2004
0
0
100
0
0
.
.
0
0
UTTARA KANNADA
0
0
0
8.33
ANUPPUR
1.48
1.92
1.96
1.51
.
ASHOK NAGAR
31.97
36.19
39.15
41.26
.
BADWANI
62.64
60.52
62.81
63.32
.
1.15
3.06
1.14
1.25
.
BETUL
33.64
32.65
52.51
36.52
.
BHIND
6.09
6.48
5.78
5.65
.
BHOPAL
56.08
53.93
55.98
57
.
BURHANPUR
84.54
82.69
86.37
85.52
.
CHHATARPUR
46.18
49.28
49.61
45.97
.
CHINDWARA
49.19
43.06
40.26
40.92
.
DAMOH
31.26
33.99
35.94
37.17
.
DATIA
26.98
29.07
36.2
45.74
.
DEWAS
50.94
53.55
55.55
55.24
.
DHAR
25.2
23.56
25.45
38.89
.
0.51
0.11
0.18
0.2
.
EAST NIMAR (K
87.59
88.17
89.67
88.61
.
GUNA
38.43
41.62
43.72
44.5
.
GWALIOR
23.15
27.09
26.21
28.63
.
HARDA
97.31
97.41
97.29
97.67
.
HOSHANGABAD
80.4
78.08
77.71
79.19
.
BALAGHAT
DINDORI
.
0
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
107
Name of the State
Name of the district
108
2004
2005
2006
2007
INDORE
43.88
52.25
45.98
66.86
.
JABALPUR
47.86
49.04
51.9
54.62
.
JHABUA
44.45
46.53
55.79
48.48
.
KATANI
22.66
23.53
24.4
21.5
.
MANDLA
1.76
1.19
1.33
1.29
.
MANDSAUR
15.41
21.48
25.35
27.95
.
MORENA
59.66
58.11
58.99
62.45
.
NARSIMPUR
57.26
57
56.67
56.04
.
NIMACH
13.59
20.83
13.45
18.49
.
PANNA
35.74
35.02
36.41
38.36
.
RAISEN
49.41
50.15
52.78
55.5
.
RAJGARH
90.44
88.94
90.91
94.8
.
RATLAM
23.3
25.02
33.94
41.7
.
REWA
5.8
6.02
6.55
6.33
.
SAGAR
41.5
43.04
45.61
47.57
.
SATNA
35.5
37.89
40.02
37.28
.
SEHORE
70.21
70
71.93
74.9
.
SEONI
30.92
33.27
34.97
35
.
SHAHDOL
8.87
6.82
20.47
25.06
.
SHAJAPUR
71.81
75.39
81.55
83.25
.
SHEOPUR
49.41
48.59
48.73
58.23
.
SHIVPURI
60.73
57.48
53.35
56.53
.
1.64
1.81
2.01
2.09
.
SIDHI
MAHARASHTRA
2003
TIKAMGARH
82.93
81.7
82.21
85.19
.
UJJAIN
44.27
51.75
57.45
58.74
.
UMARIYA
6.09
7.23
7.21
8.45
.
VIDISHA
46.75
49.19
51.83
53.72
.
WEST NIMAR (KHA)
83.09
84.51
88.59
93.09
.
AHMEDNAGAR
0
0
0
.
.
AKOLA
0
0
0
.
.
AMRAVATI
0
0
0
.
.
AURAGABAD
0
0
0
.
.
BEED
0
0
0
.
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Name of the State
ORISSA
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
BHANDARA
0
0
0
.
.
BULDHANA
0
0
0
.
.
CHANDRAPUR
0
0
0
.
.
DHULE
0
0
0
.
.
GADCHIROLI
0
0
0
.
.
GONDIYA
0
0
0
.
.
HINGOLI
0
0
0
.
.
JALGAON
0
0
0
.
.
JALNA
0
0
0
.
.
KOLHAPUR
0
0
0
.
.
LATUR
0
0
0
.
.
NAGPUR
0
0
0
.
.
NANDED
0
0
0
.
.
NANDURBAR
0
0
0
.
.
NASIK
0
0
0
.
.
OSMANABAD
0
0
0
.
.
PARBHANI
0
0
0
.
.
PUNE
0
0
0
.
.
RAIGAD
0
0
0
.
.
SANGLI
0
0
0
.
.
SATARA
0
0
0
.
.
SOLAPUR
0
0
0
.
.
THANE
0
0
0
.
.
WARDHA
0
0
0
.
.
WASHIM
0
0
0
.
.
YEVATMAL
0
0
0
.
.
ANGUL
0
0
0
0
0
BALASORE
0
0
0
0
0
BHADRAK
0
0
0
0
0
BOLANGIR
0
0
0
0
0
BOUDH
0
0
0
0
0
BURAGARH
0
0
0
0
0
CUTTACK
0
0
0
0
0
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
109
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
DEOGARH
0
0
DHENKANAL
0
GAJAPATTI
2006
2007
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
GANJAM
0
0
0
0
0
JAGATSINGPUR
0
0
0
0
0
JAJPUR
0
0
0
0
0
JHARSUGDA
0
0
0
0
0
KALAHANDI
0
0
0
0
0
KEDRAPARA
0
0
0
0
0
KEONJHAR
0
0
0
0
0
KHURDA
0
0
0
0
0
KORAPUT
0
0
0
0
0
MALKANGIRI
0
0
0
0
0
MAYURBHANJ
0
0
0
0
0
NAWAPARA
0
0
0
0
0
NAWORANGPUR
0
0
0
0
0
NAYAGARH
0
0
0
0
0
PHULBANI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PURI
RAJASTHAN
0
.
RAYAGADA
0
0
0
0
0
SAMBALPUR
0
0
0
0
0
SONEPUR
0
0
0
0
0
SUNDARGARH
0
0
0
0
0
9.7
3.7
11.98
.
AJMER
14.9
ALWAR
49.08
46.53
48.38
61.92
.
BANSWARA
44.51
41.09
42
40.2
.
BARAN
51.85
57.9
73.57
81.88
.
2.09
.
BARMER
110
.
2005
5.36
6.25
BHARATPUR
19.43
13.65
14.49
19.96
.
BHILWARA
34.13
27.88
10.43
35.03
.
BIKANER
73.96
72.11
68.9
80.48
.
BUNDI
47.99
39.99
51.04
27.67
.
CHITTORGARH
18.7
26.74
34.37
33.79
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
100
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
CHURU
7
2006
2007
4.2
6.41
6.23
.
DAUSA
51.71
41.43
39.54
67.42
.
DHOLPUR
31.65
30.15
37.23
42.39
.
4.79
5.84
6.11
4.13
.
33.12
37.39
46.02
51.41
.
4.7
11.27
6.85
14.47
.
JAIPUR
45.49
30.16
45.29
80.45
.
JAISALMER
91.42
93.95
98.27
90.7
.
JALORE
20.62
82.18
8.2
.
JHALAWAR
31.64
40.39
53.49
60.72
.
JHUNJHUNU
81.43
48.43
59.7
73.7
.
5.65
3.88
22.66
56.67
.
KARULI
17.38
11.14
14.86
11.31
.
KOTA
45.63
37.07
35.64
39.65
.
NAGAUR
72.57
82.25
76.09
97.53
.
PALI
37.42
9.68
15.21
20.1
.
RAJSAMAND
10.14
11.66
17.68
39.09
.
SAWAI MADHOPU
32.16
23.99
29.12
28.66
.
SIKAR
90.63
71.45
78.05
94.29
.
SIROHI
51.81
25.69
63.32
35.63
.
TONK
20.7
20.84
18.23
28.83
.
UDAIPUR
38.53
33.25
32.13
27.43
.
AGRA
37.84
28.45
.
51.96
.
ALIGARH
91.25
86.26
.
96.6
.
1.33
0.46
.
0.58
.
15.2
17.14
.
12.69
.
.
10.29
.
12.67
.
AZAMGARH
72.08
79.29
.
80.47
.
BADAUN
39.8
55.31
.
61.64
.
DUNGARPUR
GANGANAGAR
HANUMANGARH
JODHPUR
UTTAR PRADESH
2005
ALLAHABAD
AMBEDKAR NAGA
AURAIYA
BAGPAT
BAHRAICH
100
100
100
.
100
.
2.5
12.31
.
28.43
.
BALLIA
15.6
15.41
.
23.38
.
BALRAMPUR
29.77
15.87
.
25.91
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
111
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
BANDA
1.76
1.21
.
1.31
.
BARABANKI
1.31
1.66
.
1.68
.
BAREILLY
7.5
18.75
.
50
.
BASTI
71.76
72.56
.
74.52
.
BIJNOR
46.72
60.32
.
50.96
.
BULLANDSHAHR
100
.
100
.
CHANDAULI
3.49
5.11
.
2.79
.
CHITRAKUT
1.11
0.7
.
1.81
.
DEORIA
89.56
90
.
98.33
.
ETAH
85.02
86.11
.
94.84
.
ETAWAH
12.42
20.45
.
19.76
.
FAIZABAD
22.82
9.19
.
41.27
.
FARRUKHABAD
29.81
35.59
.
46.5
.
0.3
0.26
.
0.47
.
88.06
92.37
.
93.64
.
FATEHPUR
FEROZABAD
GAUTAM BUDDHA
100
100
.
100
.
GHAZIABAD
100
100
.
100
.
GHAZIPUR
42.54
39.4
.
40.5
.
GONDA
32.15
30.92
.
91.28
.
GORAKHPUR
87.92
88.4
.
94.95
.
HAMIRPUR
12.09
9.19
.
11.15
.
HARDOI
16.17
8.09
.
17.76
.
HATHARAS
90.69
87.76
.
96.92
.
JALAUN
3.48
3.47
.
5.52
.
JAUNPUR
1.55
3.67
.
3.41
.
JBFLUE NAGAR
100
100
.
100
.
JHANSI
36.34
28.83
.
31.71
.
KANNAUJ
50.08
59.42
.
69.92
.
KANPUR (D)
4.81
4.42
.
5.6
.
KANPUR (S)
3.69
3.75
.
5.18
.
KHERI
3.18
0.83
.
4.88
.
KOSHAMBHI
0.91
2.09
.
1.61
.
.
77.78
.
KUSHINAGAR
112
100
2007
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
75
80
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
LALITPUR
86.85
89.24
.
92.94
.
LUCKNOW
3.32
3.57
.
1.9
.
MAHARAJ GANJ
77.11
71.88
.
30.77
.
MAHOBA
34.84
31.83
.
28.55
.
MAINPURI
90.37
90.34
.
92.83
.
MATHURA
66.42
69.05
.
96
.
MAU
83.11
85.73
.
90.57
.
MEERUT
MIRZAPUR
MORADABAD
MUZAFFARNAGAR
100
100
1.25
55.56
.
1.16
72.5
.
100
.
0.95
.
.
100
.
100
100
.
100
.
PILIBHIT
0
0
.
0
.
PRATAPGARH
8.46
5.42
.
8.41
.
RAEBARELI
5.19
4.88
.
6.34
.
4
.
0
.
RAMPUR
16
S.RAVI DAS NG
5.58
4.65
.
4.21
.
SAHARANPUR
51.28
61.54
.
68.18
.
SANT KABIR NG
70.57
79.08
.
89.34
.
SHAHJAHANPUR
13.97
21.3
.
30.56
.
SHRAVASTI
0.68
1.36
.
1.55
.
83.23
97.52
.
97.73
.
SITAPUR
1.21
35.34
.
0.92
.
SONBHADRA
1.44
0.46
.
0.49
.
SULTANPUR
1.38
2.31
.
2.3
.
11.65
10.28
.
17.02
.
VARANASI
7.45
5.88
.
4.99
.
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
ANDHRAPRADESH
ADILABAD
.
0.62
0.54
1.65
0
ANANTAPUR
.
1.4
0.68
2.76
3.01
CHITTOOR
.
4.23
1.36
4.74
6.45
CUDDAPAH
.
14.34
19.71
15.76
9.25
SIDHARTHA NAG
UNNAO
(c) Other Pulses
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
113
Name of the State
BIHAR
114
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
EAST GODAVARI
.
0.24
0.07
0.08
0
GUNTUR
.
0.08
0.02
0.05
0.03
KARIMNAGAR
.
26.34
22.88
31.63
36.91
KHAMMAM
.
0.89
0.62
0.95
1.46
KRISHNA
.
0
0
0
0
KURNOOL
.
7.27
13.51
27.11
14.88
MAHABUBNAGAR
.
0.03
0.08
0.53
0.49
MEDAK
.
1.36
0.67
1.14
0.8
NALGONDA
.
0.98
1.67
5.14
3.04
NELLORE
.
2.34
0.71
0
0.04
NIZAMABAD
.
1.19
1.56
1.92
3.55
PRAKASAM
.
4.04
3.77
3.03
1.25
RANGAREDDY
.
0
0
0.01
0
SRIKAKULAM
.
0
0
0
0
VISAKHAPATNAM
.
0
0
0
0
VIZIANAGRAM
.
0
0
0
0
WARANGAL
.
7.09
4.83
7.11
9.21
WEST GODAVARI
.
17.53
2.5
0.14
0.24
ARARIA
0.18
.
0.05
1.09
1.48
ARVAL
0
.
1.96
1.25
1.29
AURANGABAD
0
.
0
0.05
0.05
BANKA
0
.
17.37
15.93
16.72
BEGUSARAI
0
.
10.73
10.65
9.62
BHABHUA
0
.
1.14
0.1
0.02
BHAGALPUR
0.45
.
1.69
7.18
1.89
BHOJPUR
0
.
0.28
0.24
0.34
BUXAR
0
.
0.62
0
0
CHAMPARAN(EAST)
0
.
1.05
0.94
0.93
CHAMPARAN(WEST)
0
.
0
0.1
2.65
DARBHANGA
0
.
3.17
0.31
0.1
GAYA
0
.
12.73
12.07
11.26
GOPALGANJ
0
.
26.09
29.03
18.43
JAHANABAD
0
.
0.63
0.24
0.75
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
JAMUI
0
KATIHAR
2005
2006
.
6.28
6.01
10.45
0
.
1.01
0.98
2.06
KHAGARIA
0
.
0.77
0.4
0.38
KISHANGANJ
0
.
0
0.13
0.01
LAKHISARAI
4.74
.
0.01
0
0
MADHUBANI
0
.
2.1
0.72
1.21
MADHUPURA
0
.
0
0.19
0.26
MONGHYR
0
.
1.42
3.16
2.43
MUZAFARPUR
0
.
1.21
0.59
2.44
NALANDA
6.09
.
1.52
1.21
1.95
NAWADHA
0
.
24.85
25.88
17.92
.
0.53
1.49
2.26
PATNA
30.71
2007
PURNEA
0
.
0.31
4.92
0.15
ROHTAS
0
.
2.83
0.33
0.32
SAHARSA
0
.
0.05
0
0
SAMASTIPUR
0
.
1.5
1.49
1.51
SARAN
0
.
2.72
4
7.35
.
0
0
0
.
2.03
1.05
2.47
.
0
0
0
SHEIKHPURA
SITAMARHI
.
0
SIVHAR
CHATTISGARH
2004
.
SIWAN
0
.
23.69
16.71
15.65
SUPAUL
0
.
0.04
1.66
0.37
VAISHALI
0
.
3.13
2.63
1.78
BASTAR
0.73
0.81
0.84
1
.
BIJAPUR
.
.
.
0.04
.
BILASPUR
0.24
0.4
0.33
0.33
.
DANTEWARA
0.08
0.12
0.1
0.12
.
DHAMTARI
2.45
0.54
0.86
1.78
.
DURG
0.21
0.16
0.17
0.16
.
JANJGIR-CHAMP
1.44
1.18
1.12
1.48
.
JASHPUR
0.5
0.58
0.69
0.63
.
KANKER
0.53
0.42
0.38
0.39
.
KAWARDHA (KAB)
0.25
0.34
0.31
1.01
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
115
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
KORBA
0.46
0.29
0.28
0.41
.
KORIYA
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.04
.
MAHASMUND
2.03
1.62
1.67
1.48
.
NARAYANPUR
.
.
.
0
.
12.15
8.66
9.24
8.83
.
RAIPUR
0.61
0.57
0.53
0.6
.
RAJNANDGAON
0.31
0.34
0.37
0.34
.
SURGUJA
1
2.58
1.6
3.12
.
AHMEDABAD
8.62
6.67
1.98
0
.
AMRELI
0
1.3
1.05
1.43
.
ANAND
37.5
35.29
53.85
42.86
.
RAIGARH
GUJARAT
BANAS KANTHA
0.95
0.33
0.53
1.4
.
BARODA
7.33
.
.
.
.
BHARUCH
4.46
16.96
17.28
12.2
.
BHAVNAGAR
2.38
0
5.71
13.04
.
DAHOD
2.17
3.05
2.2
3.05
.
DANGS
0
0
0
0
.
GANDHINAGAR
1.64
1.89
3.85
2.17
.
JAMNAGAR
3.31
1.96
1.19
7.81
.
JUNAGARH
1.25
5.33
38.89
.
KACHCHH
0.5
0.35
0.42
0.29
.
KHEDA
3.33
5.77
10.53
14.29
.
MAHESANA
0.41
1.38
0.94
0.81
.
29.63
23.33
21.05
19.05
.
3.17
5.48
43.86
5.8
.
16.85
15.73
13.1
12.94
.
NARMADA
NAVSARI
PANCH MAHALS
14.1
PATAN
0
0.39
0.38
PORBANDER
0
0
0
RAJKOT
0
0.86
SABARKANTHA
3.44
SURAT
7.61
SURENDRANAGAR
0
VADORA
116
2007
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
.
0
.
27.78
.
3.28
1.41
.
5.74
6.8
7.39
.
11.11
14.68
29.59
.
0
0
0
.
8.4
9.73
8.73
.
Name of the State
KARNATAKA
MADHYAPRADESH
Name of the district
2003
2004
VALSAD
0
0
2005
2006
2007
2.04
3.37
.
BAGALKOT
.
.
.
1.95
2.26
BANGALORE (RURAL)
.
.
.
1.51
2.89
BANGALORE (URBAN)
.
.
.
5.63
8.64
BELGAUM
.
.
.
19.62
6.04
BELLARY
.
.
.
19.82
19.28
BIDAR
.
.
.
0.04
0.04
BIJAPUR
.
.
.
0.55
0.4
CHAMRAJNAGAR
.
.
.
0.17
0.95
CHICKABALLAPU
.
.
.
.
2.32
CHIKMAGALUR
.
.
.
0.18
0.43
CHITRADURGA
.
.
.
0.89
1.23
DAKSHINAKANNA
.
.
.
0
0
DEVANAGRRE
.
.
.
8.31
18.12
DHARWAD
.
.
.
0.88
0.47
GAGAD
.
.
.
1.99
0.66
GULBARGA
.
.
.
0.18
0.53
HASSAN
.
.
.
3.61
3.95
HAVERI
.
.
.
9.22
7.81
KODAGU(COORG)
.
.
.
36.73
29.46
KOLAR
.
.
.
0.41
1.23
KOPAL
.
.
.
7.43
4.01
MANDYA
.
.
.
1.68
4.45
MYSORE
.
.
.
2.16
2.2
RAICHUR
.
.
.
2.69
0.89
RAMANGARA
.
.
.
.
0.06
SHIMOGA
.
.
.
60.57
70.82
TUMKUR
.
.
.
0.69
1.21
UDIPPI
.
.
.
0
0
UTTARA KANNADA
.
.
.
8.1
4.69
ANUPPUR
0
0
0
0
.
ASHOK NAGAR
0
0
0
0
.
BADWANI
0
0.06
0
0
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
117
Name of the State
118
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
BALAGHAT
0.6
0.03
0.36
0.33
.
BETUL
0
0
0
0
.
BHIND
0
0
0
0
.
BHOPAL
0
0
0
0
.
BURHANPUR
0
0
0
0
.
CHHATARPUR
0
0
0
0
.
CHINDWARA
0.12
0.08
0.09
0.11
.
DAMOH
0.02
0.03
0
0
.
DATIA
0
0.06
0.01
0.01
.
DEWAS
0
0
0
0
.
DHAR
0.05
0.05
0.13
0.04
.
DINDORI
0
0
0
0
.
EAST NIMAR (K)
0
0
0.08
0.03
.
GUNA
0
0
0
0
.
GWALIOR
0.71
0
0
0
.
HARDA
0
2.13
0
0
.
HOSHANGABAD
2.94
0
0.28
0.31
.
INDORE
0
0
0.33
0
.
JABALPUR
0.02
0.04
0.01
0.16
.
JHABUA
0
0
0
0
.
KATANI
0.11
0.17
0.23
0.14
.
MANDLA
0.15
0.12
0.27
0.22
.
MANDSAUR
0
0
0
0
.
MORENA
0
0
0.17
0
.
NARSIMPUR
0.02
0
0
0
.
NIMACH
0
0
0
0
.
PANNA
0
1.43
0.02
0
.
RAISEN
0
0.13
0
0
.
RAJGARH
0
0
0
0
.
RATLAM
0.03
0
0.04
0.02
.
REWA
0
0
0
0
.
SAGAR
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
.
SATNA
0
0
0
0
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
2007
Name of the State
MAHARASHTRA
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
SEHORE
0
0
0
0
.
SEONI
0.01
0.02
0.08
0.09
.
SHAHDOL
0
0
0
0
.
SHAJAPUR
0
0
0
0
.
SHEOPUR
0
0.04
0
0
.
SHIVPURI
0
0.03
0
0.03
.
SIDHI
0.03
0
0
0
.
TIKAMGARH
0
0
0
0
.
UJJAIN
0
0.01
0
0
.
UMARIYA
0
0
0
0
.
VIDISHA
0
0
0
0
.
WESTNIMAR(KHA
0
0
0
0
.
AHMEDNAGAR
0
0
0
.
.
AKOLA
0
0
0
.
.
AMRAVATI
0
0
0
.
.
AURAGABAD
0
0
0
.
.
BEED
0
0
0
.
.
BHANDARA
0
0
0
.
.
BULDHANA
0
0
0
.
.
CHANDRAPUR
0
0
0
.
.
DHULE
0
0
0
.
.
GADCHIROLI
0
0
0
.
.
GONDIYA
0
0
0
.
.
HINGOLI
0
0
0
.
.
JALGAON
0
0
0
.
.
JALNA
0
0
0
.
.
KOLHAPUR
0
0
0
.
.
LATUR
0
0
0
.
.
NAGPUR
0
0
0
.
.
NANDED
0
0
0
.
.
NANDURBAR
0
0
0
.
.
NASIK
0
0
0
.
.
OSMANABAD
0
0
0
.
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
119
Name of the State
ORISSA
120
Name of the district
2003
2004
PARBHANI
0
0
0
.
.
PUNE
0
0
0
.
.
RAIGAD
0
0
0
.
.
RATNAGIRI
0
0
0
.
.
SANGLI
0
0
0
.
.
SATARA
0
0
0
.
.
SINDHUDURG
0
0
0
.
.
SOLAPUR
0
0
0
.
.
THANE
0
0
0
.
.
WARDHA
0
0
0
.
.
WASHIM
0
0
0
.
.
YEVATMAL
0
0
0
.
.
ANGUL
.
.
0
2.09
4.05
BALASORE
.
.
0
52.68
55.57
BHADRAK
.
.
0
32.95
48
BOLANGIR
.
.
0
3.54
5.85
BOUDH
.
.
0
2.83
3.46
BURAGARH
.
.
0
13.63
4.99
CUTTACK
.
.
0
39.71
43.82
DEOGARH
.
.
0
7.57
10.79
DHENKANAL
.
.
0
5.13
8.1
GAJAPATTI
.
.
0
0.95
1
GANJAM
.
.
0
0.67
6.9
JAGATSINGPUR
.
.
0
25
27.07
JAJPUR
.
.
0
33.25
44.63
JHARSUGDA
.
.
0
2.22
3.22
KALAHANDI
.
.
0
14.54
13.45
KEDRAPARA
.
.
0
49.22
51.6
KEONJHAR
.
.
0
2.91
12.75
KHURDA
.
.
0
4.66
20.4
KORAPUT
.
.
0
23.46
25.97
MALKANGIRI
.
.
0
13.45
25.26
MAYURBHANJ
.
.
0
8.36
23.03
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
2005
2006
2007
Name of the State
RAJASTHAN
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
NAWAPARA
.
.
0
1.01
2.66
NAWORANGPUR
.
.
0
12.39
9.25
NAYAGARH
.
.
0
1.65
2.8
PHULBANI
.
.
0
3.01
0
PURI
.
.
0
0.43
15.03
RAYAGADA
.
.
0
10.23
9.33
SAMBALPUR
.
.
0
6.6
5.79
SONEPUR
.
.
0
4.21
7.11
SUNDARGARH
.
.
0
3.02
11.75
AJMER
0.25
.
0.33
0.56
.
ALWAR
79.97
.
27.33
48.41
.
BANSWARA
13.5
.
19.78
33.71
.
BARAN
10.45
.
23.18
38.85
.
BARMER
0.09
.
0.33
0.16
.
BHARATPUR
3
.
3.94
6.71
.
BHILWARA
6.42
.
5.04
5.9
.
BIKANER
1.85
.
0.48
0.93
.
11.66
.
40.76
39.97
.
CHITTORGARH
5.67
.
17.13
29.91
.
CHURU
0.05
.
0.06
0.06
.
DAUSA
21.89
.
6.04
5.18
.
DHOLPUR
26.95
.
17.01
13.41
.
9.61
.
7.68
14.55
.
52.68
.
73.66
85.81
.
HANUMANGARH
5.17
.
4.55
10.34
.
JAIPUR
9.85
.
10.49
8.68
.
54.33
.
53.83
39.24
.
JALORE
0.01
.
0.26
0.1
.
JHALAWAR
6.99
.
33.38
.
JHUNJHUNU
0.28
.
2.83
2.76
.
JODHPUR
0.63
.
0.28
0.46
.
KARULI
1.84
.
7.14
5.79
.
KOTA
2.03
.
2.43
5.01
.
BUNDI
DUNGARPUR
GANGANAGAR
JAISALMER
26.1
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
121
Name of the State
UTTAR PRADESH
Name of the district
2003
NAGAUR
1.27
PALI
2005
2006
.
1.38
1.81
.
0.06
.
0.07
0.3
.
RAJSAMAND
0.11
.
0.97
3.2
.
SAWAI MADHOPU
0.86
.
2.95
1.89
.
SIKAR
1.39
.
3.39
3.48
.
SIROHI
0.68
.
1
2.4
.
TONK
0.11
.
0.82
0.4
.
UDAIPUR
4.12
.
32.48
38.48
.
AGRA
6.19
5.26
.
9.61
.
65.87
60.94
.
66.49
.
ALLAHABAD
0.97
5.97
.
0
.
AMBEDKAR NAGA
4.86
1.74
.
3.31
.
.
1.39
.
1.59
.
14.84
7.94
.
1.53
.
1.5
1.59
.
0.55
.
ALIGARH
AURAIYA
AZAMGARH
BADAUN
BAGPAT
BAHRAICH
100
2007
.
100
.
0
0.17
.
0
.
60
38.89
.
0
.
BALRAMPUR
0
0.54
.
0
.
BANDA
0
0
.
0
.
BARABANKI
0.78
0.43
.
0.23
.
BAREILLY
0.34
0.44
.
0.43
.
BASTI
0
0
.
0
.
.
45.5
.
BALLIA
BIJNOR
BULLANDSHAHR
34.31
38.19
100.57
100
.
100
.
CHANDAULI
0.91
0
.
0
.
CHITRAKUT
0
0
.
0
.
DEORIA
0
0
.
0
.
ETAH
122
100
2004
24.89
39.81
.
48.62
.
ETAWAH
4.81
7.39
.
12.65
.
FAIZABAD
1.2
1.7
.
1.42
.
FARRUKHABAD
4.49
4
.
4.36
.
FATEHPUR
0.05
0.07
.
0.03
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Name of the State
Name of the district
FEROZABAD
GAUTAM BUDDHA
GHAZIABAD
2003
15.52
100
97.65
2004
2005
6.16
.
2006
16.1
2007
.
100
.
100
.
100
.
100
.
GHAZIPUR
0.17
0.8
.
0
.
GONDA
0
0
.
0
.
GORAKHPUR
0
0
.
0
.
HAMIRPUR
0
0.01
.
0.01
.
HARDOI
0.07
0.13
.
0.12
.
90.11
79.34
.
88.84
.
JALAUN
0.02
0.02
.
0.01
.
JAUNPUR
0.1
0
.
0.02
.
23.43
.
24.76
.
0.01
.
10.67
11.89
.
16.75
.
KANPUR (D)
0.04
0.03
.
0.01
.
KANPUR (S)
0.22
0.32
.
11.77
.
KHERI
0.37
0.23
.
0.74
.
KOSHAMBHI
0.28
0.27
.
0.15
.
KUSHINAGAR
3.33
64
.
2.22
.
LALITPUR
0
0
.
0
.
LUCKNOW
0.47
0.45
.
0.33
.
MAHARAJ GANJ
0
0
.
0
.
MAHOBA
0
0
.
0
.
MAINPURI
66.9
77.18
.
84.95
.
MATHURA
12.53
21.48
.
19.23
.
5.88
.
HATHARAS
JBFLUE NAGAR
JHANSI
KANNAUJ
MAU
MEERUT
18.62
0
0
.
0
0
.
100
100
.
100
.
MIRZAPUR
0.57
0
.
0
.
MORADABAD
1.79
1.55
.
2.11
.
MUZAFFARNAGAR
99.93
100
.
100
.
PILIBHIT
0
0.92
.
3.67
.
PRATAPGARH
0
0
.
0.02
.
RAEBARELI
0
0.01
.
0.01
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
123
Name of the State
Name of the district
2003
2004
2005
2006
RAMPUR
0.83
0.98
.
2.19
.
S.RAVI DAS NG
0
0
.
0
.
SAHARANPUR
124
83.09
80.89
.
88.29
2007
.
SANT KABIR NG
0
0
.
0
.
SHAHJAHANPUR
0.63
0.47
.
4.59
.
SHRAVASTI
0
0
.
0
.
SIDHARTHA NAG
0
0
.
0
.
SITAPUR
0.26
0.13
.
0.25
.
SONBHADRA
0
0
.
0
.
SULTANPUR
0.54
0.58
.
0.39
.
UNNAO
0.12
0.02
.
0.04
.
VARANASI
0.04
0
.
0
.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Annexure V : Progress of National Watershed Development Project for
Rainfed Area Programme (NWDPRA) (Area in ha)
State
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Total (XI Plan)
(2007/08 to
2010/11) (up to
Sep 10 )
AP
2970
5400
1334
11797
Arunachal Pradesh
4250
4350
15045
28660
Assam
2400
5525
0
7925
Bihar
2180
52
4020
8778
0
7258
6860
15634
4665
587
6164
11416
Gujarat
23561
4253
37377
69039
Haryana
5505
2654
5004
13163
Himachal Pradesh
1262
5270
3286
11226
J&K
3222
9056
4165
17224
Karnataka
44771
24227
64878
137258
Kerala
11080
1570
13905
27798
MP
39094
26062
23920
96477
Chhattisgarh
7483
12287
7125
30858
Maharashtra
31006
15561
30423
86531
Manipur
10189
3798
3826
21036
Mizoram
4975
10581
11012
36132
Meghalaya
5320
5000
8635
25476
Nagaland
14695
9000
9500
40495
Orissa
28816
8225
27144
67844
Punjab
5192
4785
819
13494
34091
0
47071
93373
2936
3324
4950
11210
29227
9192
44111
84726
2255
3410
4406
13861
UP
32334
53156
51609
158031
Uttarakhand
18189
15562
14620
53797
1946
4065
12860
20449
373614
254210
464069
1213708
Jharkhand
Goa
Rajasthan
Sikkim
Tamilnadu
Tripura
WB
Total
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
125
Annexure VI : Districts covered under NWDPRA during XI Plan
126
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
127
Annexure VII : Statewise Summary of projects appraised & cleared by the
steering committee during 2010-11
Date of meeting
12th meeting24.06.10(1st in 2010-11)
th
13 Meeting14.07.10(2
nd
in 2010-11)
14th meeting01.09.10(3rd in 2010-11)
th
th
15 meeting 30.09.10(4 in 2010-11)
State
Total no. of
projects cleared
1.
Karnataka
127
546640
2.
Rajasthan
207
1222127
Sub-Total
334
1768767
Meghalaya
29
52000
Rajasthan
6
35115
3.
4.
Tamil Nadu#
59
310993
5.
Uttar Pradesh
(Bundelkhand
2010-11)
50
270157
Uttar Pradesh
(Bundelkhand
2011-12)
53
269843
Sub-Total
197
938108
6.
Andhra Pradesh
171
740889
7.
Arunachal Pradesh
32
91000
8.
Tripura
10
30026
Uttar Pradesh
(non Bundelkhand)
101
487475
Sub-Total
314
1349390
67
299227
103
515328
38
198342
141
713670
370
1617058
12. Manipur#
27
127626
13. Nagaland
19
83081.64
14. Orissa
62
349904
15. Uttarakhand
39
203687
725
3394254
4
16050
17
97040
9.
Chhattisgarh
#
10. Gujarat – Phase-I
Phase-II
Total
11. Maharashtra
Sub-Total
th
th
16 meeting 25.11.10(5 in 2010-11)
16. Assam
17. Jharkhand
128
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Area (ha)
#
Date of meeting
State
Total no. of
projects cleared
Area (ha)
18. Punjab
13
53296
19. Sikkim
3
14039
Sub-Total
37
180425
Assam
52
343938
20. Himachal Pradesh
44
237650
21. Kerala#
15
89722
22. Madhya Pradesh
71
397258
182
1068568
Total appraised during 2010-11
(incl. UP-Bundelkhand 2011-12)
1789
8699512
Total appraised for 2010-11
1736
8429669
17th meeting 18.01.11(6th in 2010-11)
Total
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
129
Annexure VIII : Seed-Sufficiency in Legumes at the Village Level Development and Popularization of ‘Model’ Seed System(s)
for Quality Seed Production proposed by ICRISAT.
1. Introduction
A baseline survey conducted in selected districts of the major pulses growing states of
India (Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa and Uttar Pradesh) indicated
that (i) lack of awareness of newly developed improved varieties, (ii) non-availability of seed
of improved varieties in required quantities at affordable price, (iii) faulty seed procurement
and distribution system of Department of Agriculture (DoA), (iv) use of own-saved seed or
buying seed from neighboring farmers or local traders, and (v) lack of distinction between
grain and seed are some of the reasons responsible for continued use of old local varieties by
the farmers. Local traders play an important role by purchasing grain at harvest; storing it and
selling it back to farmers as ‘seed’ at the time of sowing (processed or unprocessed). Legume
productivity is linked to quality seed of improved farmer-preferred improved varieties (FPVs)
at village level. Formal seed system (National and State Seed Corporations) has failed to meet
the aspirations of farmers for supply of quality seed. A strong informal seed sector can play an
augmenting role in popularizing and disseminating improved high yielding varieties of leading
to enhanced legumes production in the country.
There is also a need to relook at the variety ‘release’ system in the country. Many
varieties released at the national/regional/state level fail to meet farmers’ requirements at the
local level. Farmers’ preference for improved varieties could vary from village to village
depending on the soil type, rainfall pattern, cropping system, existing insect pest/disease
problems, fodder requirement and socioeconomic conditions of the farmers. The farmerparticipatory on-farm varietal selection helps in identification of location specific varieties,
which are widely accepted and adopted by the farmers. There should be policy changes to
allow data from participatory varietal selection (PVS) and on-farm trials to recommend release
of farmer-preferred varieties.
2. Development and promotion of informal and formal seed systems
Both formal and informal seed sectors need strengthening to overcome the shortage of
quality seeds of improved legume varieties and to promote and disseminate improved varieties
to raise productivity in legumes.
2.1. Constraints in Breeder-Foundation-Certified seed production chain
(Formal seed systems)
The constraints in seed production chain are listed below. Many of these constraints
discourage active participation of farmers in the formal seed production programs.
State Department of Agriculture (DoA) and public sector seed producing agencies (Seed
Corporations) continue to indent Breeder seed of ‘obsolete’ varieties in large quantities, which
130
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
restricts the Breeder seed production of newly released varieties. There is a need for
denotification of old varieties and their removal from formal seed production chain and in
Central and State Governments’ programs
•
The indent of Breeder seed of newly released varieties given by various agencies
is usually less than the actual demand of quality seed of these varieties by the
farmers.
•
Breeder-Foundation-Certified seed production chain is not maintained properly by
the seed production agencies responsible for its implementation. The production of
Certified seed from Foundation seed and of Foundation seed from Breeder seed is
less than expected.
•
Lack of appropriate infrastructure and shortage of manpower in public seed production
institutions.
•
Low inherent seed multiplication ratio in legumes because of large seed size such as
groundnut.
•
Seed production under rainfed conditions, further reduces seed multiplication ratio
considerably.
•
Delay in lifting of Certified seed from farmers (contracted to produce seed) by various
governmental and non- governmental agencies.
•
Delay in notification of state-released varieties.
•
Difficulty in maintaining genetic purity at the Foundation and Certified seed
production stages in often cross pollinated crops (such as Pigeonpea).
•
Exclusion of seed certification of pigeonpea in pigeonpea + cotton intercropping (a
dominant cropping system in Maharashtra) discourages farmers to participate in
formal seed production program of the crop.
•
Minimum area requirement under seed production for certification in a village.
•
Seed processing and storage only in designated processing plants/godowns, which
involves transportation of the produce to far away godowns.
•
Requirement of producing land records for registering the plots for seed certification
(as in Uttar Pradesh).
•
Delays in fixing seed procurement price by public sector seed agencies.
2.2. Issues related to informal seed sector
Very often farmers do not distinguish between a ‘seed crop’ and a ‘commercial crop’. To
produce high quality seed, it is essential that the crop is grown under assured growing conditions
with appropriate management inputs. With increased yield in seed plots, the cost of seed can
be reduced. The major issues that have emerged so far and have bearing on policies related to
informal seed system are as follows:
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
131
1.
Need for formal recognition and notification of farmer preferred varieties (FPVs)
identified through farmer-participatory varietal selection.
2.
Inclusion of FPVs in Central and State Governments’ programs, particularly those
involving seed subsidy programs.
3.
Absence of linkages between informal seed sector and public sector seed agencies.
4.
Lack of arrangements to buy surplus seed from farmers with price incentive soon
after harvest.
5.
Need for provision of seed processing and storage facilities at village level (cluster
of villages).Promotion and recognition of seed growers’ associations.
6.
Need for buy-back of seed from farmers in case of delayed or failed monsoon to
avoid distress sale of seed as commercial grain (The seed so collected can be made
available to farmers in the next season).
3. Model seed systems developed and promoted
After appraising the existing seed systems in selected districts in the major legumes growing
states through baseline surveys, functional seed system models were devised in consultation
with farmers and other stakeholders (see Annexure 1). These were validated at selected locations
and replicated at other locations within the districts. Public sector seed agencies (NSC Ltd.,
SFCI, MSSC Ltd., OSSC Ltd. and others) were also linked with these model seed systems to
ensure their long-term sustainability. These models are based on ‘seed village concept’, linking
Kharif-Rabi-Kharif season seed production and promoting local seed enterprises through seed
growers’ associations, with the supportive role of public sector seed agencies. In the case of
pigeonpea, the strategy of ‘One village-One Variety’ is advocated due to its out crossing nature.
For the success and long-term sustainability of these models, however, some policy support is
needed. These include: (i) recognition of FPVs (in case they are not formally released), (ii)
inclusion of FPVs in formal seed production chain and government sponsored programs, (iii)
buy-back arrangement and remunerative price for the seed produced by farmers, (iv)
simplification of registration and certification processes, (v) fixing proper price and purchasing
and timely release of payment by the public sector seed agencies, and (vi) creation of seed
processing and storage infrastructure at village level. For pigeonpea, particularly in Maharashtra,
registration of pigeonpea under pigeonpea + cotton intercropping system for seed production,
and certification fee based on net area under Pigeonpea need to be implemented.
These model seed systems have been very successful in producing sizeable quantities of
quality seed of legumes. An example of chickpea seed production in Madhya Pradesh is given
in Table 1. Table 1. Summary of seed availability of different categories of seed of farmerpreferred chickpea varieties with farmers/farmers’ cooperative seed production societies in
Madhya Pradesh, 2009/10 cropping season.
132
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Year of start of seed Quantity of BS
production chain
used (t)
Quantities of different categories of seed available at
the end of 2009/10 cropping season (t)
FS
CS
TLS
2006/07
12
174.7
3009.2
11,691.7
2007/08
17
275.0
3943.7
20,745.0
2008/09
15
242.9
3007.7
2009/10
15
291.5
Total
59
984.1
9960.6
32,436.7
(FS=Foundation seed, CS=Certified seed, TLS=Truthful Labeled seed)
4. Promotion of Farmers’ seed cooperative societies
Farmers’ knowledge empowerment and capacity building in seed production, processing
and storage and integrated crop management technologies are essential to ensure seed
self-sufficiency of FPVs at village level and increase productivity of pulses and oilseeds in
the country.
To ensure sustained availability of quality seed of improved legumes varieties in
selected districts in different states, the following farmers’ cooperative seed societies were
promoted:
Madhya Pradesh : Matrabhumi Kisan Beej Utpadak Cooperative Society, Sironj, Vidisha;
Adarsh Kisan Beej Utpadak Cooperative Society, Atarikheda, Vidisha;
Shri Yogeshwar Krishak Sahakarita Samuh, Bannad, Sagar; Nibodia Seed
Society Nibodia, Rahatgarh, Sagar; Garahakota Beej Utpadak Cooperative
Society, Garhakota, Sagar; Sothhia Beej Utpadak Cooperative Society,
Jaisingh nagar, Sagar; Pradumna Seed Society, Tyonda, Vidisha;
Samruddh Seed Society, Vardha, Vidisha and Samarth Seed Society,
Vidisha. As these cooperative seed societies take up seed production of
both kharif and rabi season crops, they earn handsome profit besides
making quality seed available to farmers.
Uttar Pradesh
: Chaudgra Kisan Sewa Samiti, Chaudgra, Fatehpur and Krishak Beej Vikas
Samiti, Kuitkheda and Barhapur Kisan Sewa Samiti, Barhapur, Kanpur
Dehat.
Maharashtra
: Registration of village co-operative societies at Gorvha (Akola district)
and Kotha (Yavatmal district) has been carried out by the farmers and
they were encouraged to go for hired storage space. Strong linkages have
been established with MSSC Ltd. and seed growers in Akola and Yavatmal.
Andhra Pradesh : In several villages in Anantapur, farmers organized themselves into seed
producers’ societies to carry on the seed production and marketing
activities in the district. Some of these include the following: Groundnut
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
133
Rythu Association for Seed Production (GRASP) in Kothapeta village,
Anantapur Seed Federation (ASF) in Sivapuram village, Anantapur
Groundnut Farmers’ Association (AGFA) in Y Kothapalli village,
Anantapur Groundnut Farmers’ Association in Pampanur thanda village
and Venkateswara Groundnut Farmers’ Association in Pampanur village.
In addition to these, in 230 villages in operational area of Accion Fraterna,
5-8 Shahsya Mitra Groups each with 25-30 members plan, implement all
activities of village seed bank. Like Anantapur, farmers in Chittoor district
have also organized themselves into seed producers groups.
Orissa
134
: Jageswari Krushak Club, Singhbrahmpur, Ghanteswari Self Help Group,
Padampur (Only lady members) and Jay Kisan Seed Grower Association,
Kukurimunda.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
Annexure 1: Seed system models promoted in selected districts in
different states in India.
Model seed system in operation in chickpea seed production in MP.
Model seed system in operation in chickpea and
pigeonpea seed production in UP.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
135
Model seed system in operation in pigeonpea seed production in MS.
Model seed system in operation in groundnut seed production in AP.
136
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
OUA&T model for formal / informal seed sector for groundnut seed
production in Orissa
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
137
Annexure IX
‘Alagh Committee on WTO Impacts on Price Policies, 2003’
1) A Committee report placed in Parliament on the role of the Commission on Agricultural
Costs and Prices (CACP) in India to be reformulated in a WTO regime, had made the
point of integrating price policy with tariff policies. (Alagh Committee on WTO Impacts
on Price Policies, 2003) on which recent decisions have been taken by the Government in
January 2009.
2) This Committee developed the concept of an ‘efficiency shifter’ with which Indian
agriculture can move from a subsistence low yielding activity to a dynamic competitive
sector capitalizing on the advantage of a peasantry which has historically proved its
enduring and hard working nature and the real resources with which the nation is endowed.
3) It argued that to make agriculture competitive, the farmer has to be supported in terms of
the cost of production of efficient farming. “these costs monetize existing practices, meet
the immediate costs of technology and learning and are sometimes embodied in new
inputs. Many of them are of immediate kind and after an initial thrust and support, the
farmer will compete on its own.” The capital cost for such an economy at the margin
would be higher than the historical costs. But current output costs would be lower per unit
of output.”
4) The Committee also argued that a roadmap for principal crops not based on historical
costs but opportunity costs at the margin be developed so that technological progress and
India’s competitive advantage such as bright sunshine and cheap labour are given a free
reign to play. It argued that India needs to develop a Road Map for each of the Major
Crops, which had to be WTO compatible and filling in the gap required by the “Efficiency
Shifters”.
5) “The Government of India has now accepted a major recommendation of the Alagh
Committee and added to the Terms of Reference of the CACP by adding on to ToR n.2
(iii) on the likely eff ects of price policy on the rest of the economy, the words
“competitiveness of agriculture and agro-based commodities” and has added a new ToR
entry “To effectively integrate the recommended non-price measures with price
recommendations and to ensure competitive agriculture.”
6) A Road map it was argued is essential for each crop to reverse the profitability trends.
Initial capital requirements of progressive farming, lead to costs around a sixth higher as
compared to the ‘average‘ procurement prices. Tariiff, tax and monetary policies must
make the difference. (Alagh, 2003) Each region has to lobby with facts for its crops, with
facts.
7) Apparently the Government, or parts of it did not want tariffs to be integrated with price
policy in agriculture. It therefore did not agree with the Alagh Committee’s real concern
that integrated policy should be followed to give incentives for a competitive agriculture.
The report keeps on even at the risk of being monotonous belabouring this point with
138
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
numerical examples. It takes crops, works out the efficient farmer set and shows how
within tariff bounds, with some monetary policy built in (the Venugopal Reddy simulation)
it is possible to hold the farmer’s hand for the transitional period in which he moves over
to a lower cost per unit of output, not land, or in which global trade is modernized.
It calls it ‘efficiency pricing’ ‘efficiency shifters’ or a variant of long range marginal cost
pricing, fully aware that it is not talking of industry. It does it again and again for it is
aware of going into virgin territory. Anybody who reasons against it needed to do the
serious home work.
8) There seemed to be sections of Government which didn’t want this.
i) Turf battles could be one reason.
ii) Policy coordination is always easy in a textbook and a report but normal persons
don’t like to give up power. Only the exceptional become more powerful by shedding
power and coordinating for the larger good.
iii) Another reason could be the fear of rule based systems for then you are not seen as
the benefactor and this can be important.
iv) There is a trend in not having a chapter on perspectives in the Eleventh Plan and not
accepting the challenge of creating a medium term environment for a competitive
agriculture. But then there are real problems. For to have MSPs and separately free
imports is like pouring water in a leaking bucket. India did this at great cost a few
years ago in the grain crisis period
v) Finally there could be the fear of the unknown. But we are going on uncharted territory.
After the dithering of the Nineties we are doing a superb job in the WTO. Having
accepted a trade dominated regime we will finally accept the challenge of the rational
transition to it. The friendly ghost of the Alagh Committee will keep on coming back
and will be exorcised only when we are fully competitive in our agriculture.
9) Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India placed a summary in Parliament in answer
to an unstarred question. (GOI, 2005) “ The Honourable Home Minister, who was handling
the intricacies of this subject, informed some press persons that the report was accepted.
The PIB hand out detailing Government of India’s decisions (PIB, 2009) gives the
recommendations accepted and goes out of the way for such handouts to list those which
are not accepted, suggesting that there are perhaps differences in perspectives in the
Government itself. Also in such controversial matters experience is that recommendations
rejected once have an uncanny habit of coming back if they are based on reasoning.
10) Most of the recommendations on market based cost account categories to be used and
where more work is to be done like credit periods, have been accepted. Also concepts and
policies, not very common in the early part of this decade when this work was done like
futures, management and distribution costs, the need to accept flexibility in markets beyond
the APMC and newer groups like SHGs, producer companies and so on have been
reinforced. A remarkable advance is the acceptance by Government that the emergence of
a competitive agriculture will be the bedrock for its policy recommendations.
Report of Expert Group on Pulses
139