integrated pest management plan for rajasthan - world...
TRANSCRIPT
i
ANNEXURES-A
Page
Annexure I: Field Consultations under RACP-EA 96
Annexure II: List of pesticides banned by Government of India 129
Annexure III: List of pesticides not permissible 132
(WHO classes Ia, Ib and II)
Annexure IV: Integrated Pest Management Plan for Rajasthan 135
Annexure V: Best Practices 147
Annexure VI: Review of relevant projects of Word Bank 153
Annexure VII: OP 4.01 – Environmental Assessment 157
Annexure VIII: OP 4.09 – Pest Management 163
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
ii
ANNEXURE I: FIELD CONSULTATIONS UNDER RACP-EA
November 22-29, 2011
1. Objectives of the Field Assessment................................................................................. 96
2. Overview of Consultations in the Field ........................................................................... 97
3. Multi-stakeholders meeting at the Office of Jhotwara Panchayat Samiti, Jaipur ............ 99
4. Meeting with traders: Boraj Mandi ............................................................................... 103
5. Meeting with farmers at Bobas Village, Panchayat: Boraj Cluster ............................... 104
6. Meeting with Women at Anganwadi Centre, Bobas village: ........................................ 104
7. Meeting with the farmers: village Bassi Jhajra ............................................................. 106
8. Meeting at Dhinda Panchayat Bhavan, Boraj Cluster ................................................... 106
9. Meeting at Hirnoda village, Boraj Cluster .................................................................... 106
10. Meeting at Akhepura Panchayat, Mokhampura Cluster ........................................... 108
11. Meeting with farmers: village Manpura.................................................................... 108
12. Meeting with women: village Manpura .................................................................... 109
13. Meeting with women of herder families: Gujaron ki Dhani ..................................... 109
14. Meeting at Gangati Kala Dhani ................................................................................ 109
15. Village meeting at Ganga Ti Kala panchayat ........................................................... 110
16. Meeting with break-away group of farmers from the village meeting ..................... 110
17. Village meeting at Kadvo Ka Baas ........................................................................... 110
18. Mavali, NAIP ............................................................................................................ 111
19. Meeting at village NAIP office, Palana Khurd Panchayat, Udaipur ......................... 111
20. Meeting with farmers of command area village Bagora ........................................... 112
21. Meeting with farmers: village Lokia, Panchayat Arthuniya ..................................... 112
22. Visit to Custard Apple Processing Unit, Department of Horticulture, MPUAT ...... 113
23. Visit to Amala Producers Coop Society Limited, Baghpura, Jhadol, Udaipur ......... 114
24. Visit to Ginger Value Chain Cluster, Jhadol............................................................. 114
25. Meeting at village Patalia, Kushalgarh Block, Banswara ......................................... 116
26. Visit to wadi at village Mal Dholpura ....................................................................... 117
27. Meeting with women group, village Sodalia ............................................................ 117
28. Focus meetings with farmers at Bhoodanpura, Rohida Panchayat, Banswara ......... 117
29. Meeting with vegetable nursery growing farmer supported by Agriculture produce company
118
iii
30. Meeting at RCT office, Sagvadiya Gram Panchayat ................................................... 118
31. Multi-stakeholder meeting, KVK, Banswara .............................................................. 119
32 Summary of key environmental issues emerging from field consultations…….122
33 Stakeholder Consultation and Disclosure Workshop, Jaipur…………………….124
ANNEXURE- I
96
Objectives of the Field Assessment
The objectives of field visit were:
i. Validate findings from the desk review; ii. Understand social and environment impacts of current agriculture development disaggregated
by gender and marginalised groups; iii. Explore social and environmental impacts of interventions--water, agriculture and value chain-
- proposed in RACP by gender and marginalised groups; and, iv. Explore social and institutional gaps for implementing the proposed interventions.
The following framework was developed to understand issues emerging from the field.
Sr.No. Aspect of RACP Water sector interventions
Agriculture interventions
Markets/ value chain intervention
1 Perceived benefits
2 Adverse impacts and concerns (identify groups likely to be affected); associated solutions
3 Associated Risks: specifically exclusion, elite capture, displacement, loss of access etc.; Associated risk aversion measures
4 Other issues and constraints wrt identification, mobilisation, participation, inclusion, around water saving; associated approach for addressing the issues
5 Innovation, best practices etc
6 Feedback and overall suggestions
7 Suggestion on CACP formulation, implementation arrangements (general and specific)
ANNEXURE- I
97
Overview of Consultations in the Field
The field consultations comprised: roundtable meeting at cluster level to understand relevant issues in key intervention areas; focus group meetings with various groups in the select villages/ panchayats; and, village transect and visits to farmers’ lands. The table below shows details of field consultations held during November 22-28, 2011.
Field visit during 22/11/2011 to 28/11/2011
Date District Place Village Team
22/11/2011 Multi-stakeholder meeting
Office of the Jhotwara Panchayat Samiti, District Jaipur
Team-I and Team-II
23/11/2011 Jaipur Boraj
Dhindha
Hirnoda
Bobas
Bassi Jhajhed
Team-I
Team-II
24/11/2001 Jaipur Mokhampura
Akhepura
Manpura
Ganga ti Kalan
Ganga ti Khurd
Team-I
Team-II
25-11-2011 Udaipur Palana Khurd Jharna
Palana Khurd
Team-I + Team-II
26/11/2011 Banswara Bagora
Arthuniya
Bhagora Tank
Lokiya
Team-I + Team-II
Team-I + Team-II
27/11/2011 Banswara Patalia
Rohida
Patalia
Mal Dholpura
Sodalia
BhudanPura
Team -I
Team -II
ANNEXURE- I
98
Sagvadi Sagvadi
28/11/2011 Multi-stakeholder meeting
KVK, Banswara
Team-I and Team-II
Team-I Rajsekhar, Alka Awasthi, Dalbir Singh, Ladulal Sharma
Team-II Varsha Mehta, Shashikant Chopde, N.P.Singh
ANNEXURE- I
99
November 22, 2011
Multi-stakeholders meeting at the Office of Jhotwara Panchayat
Samiti, District Jaipur
A brief on the project “Rajasthan Agriculture Competitiveness Project (RACP) was made by the Integrated Environment and Social Assessment Team. During the presentation, the series of issues were raised relating to water, agriculture, markets and capacity building for in-depth discussion among the stakeholders. There was a sound and valuable discussion on the different aspects as agriculture, water, markets. The main points of the discussion are bifurcated into two categories as environment and social.
1. Environment
Agriculture
Emergence of commercial cropping pattern in the cluster caused sharp decline in groundwater. It resulted in increase in investment cost in installing or/ and deepening the bore wells. Most of the open wells were reported to be defunct.
Emerged from the discussion that the use of chemical input has increased considerably. While the consumption of manure has been decreased because of the sharp reduction in animal population.
In certain pockets of the cluster the quality of land also been affected by salinity that needs due attention to initiate appropriate measure to deal with this challenge.
Because of the growing use of chemical inputs, the land productivity affected considerably. To deal with challenge, the crop rotation is followed by the famers.
Farmers are ignorant about improved technologies and timely capacity building should be undertaken regarding suitable crop is grown keeping in view the soil suitability.
Growing incidences of encroachments of common lands was noticed as one of the major challenges for environment.
Some interesting insights were emerged regarding use of chemical fertilizer. In kharif crop, there was limited application of fertilizer and pesticides. In this region the farmers known as Mali never use chemical fertilizer.
Some of the farmers follows the organic farm practices. It is experienced that application of chemicals bring down the crop production in the long run that resulted to increase in the production cost and poor quality of the product.
Experience shared by progressive farmers shows that agriculture operations according to the changing climatic conditions, it may be proved as boon for the farmers rather than adverse application. For reaping the benefits of climate change, there is need to enhance knowledge base of the farmers.
ANNEXURE- I
100
The presence of blue-bulls (nilgais) is the major challenge for the farmers with regards to the protection of the crops. They reported a huge loss to the crops.
Water
During the in-depth discussion, it is emerged that poor quality of groundwater is one of the major problem in the selected micro-cluster namely Boraj. Farmers reported that use of groundwater results in increase in crop productivity considerably during the initial crop seasons. But two-three years, its decrease sharply due to salinity.
It was realized that there is urgent need to deal with the poor water quality through technological intervention.
The rehabilitation of water bodies was focused. Certain intervention by the civil society was put an example of success story. The intervention has not only useful in resolving immediate problem of water scarcity but also proved helpful in dealing with the emerging challenges of climate change at local level. To deal with the growing water scarcity, it is essential to harvest the rain water in scientific manner that help in meeting the immediate water requirement and restoration of aquifer in long run that may further helpful in encountering scarcity during drought condition that are prevalent in Rajasthan
Markets
Installation of food processing units may lead to waste management problem. But, the proposed intervention such as daal mill will not lead to such problems as waste can be converted into animal feed.
2. Social
Institutional building
Participating NGOs felt that capacity building should be undertaken with women’s groups or SHGs that already exist in the project villages, and some of the women could further disseminate the information among other women of the village.
Participation of women should be ensured in all people’s organizations.
There is a provision of training of female farmers regarding the pesticide application at the village level. It needs further intensification of the training program at the village level so that female workers can be benefited from the intervention.
Agriculture
Realizing that sub-division and fragmentation of land holding is one of the major challenges that restricts the farmer in to make investment in crop production at desirable level.
ANNEXURE- I
101
Marginal and small farmers are not facing problems in availing the institutional benefits as access to institutional credit facilities and marketing of agricultural produce.
Absence of land entitlement of the famers in nuclear family system, they are not able to avail certain required facilities. Such constraint is major cause of hindrance in improving the agriculture production.
It emerged that sometimes improved varieties have failed. Therefore, it is necessary to give due attention to the indigenous knowledge of the farming community. Participants felt that before introducing improved varieties on farmers’ fields, first they should be demonstrated in the area and their productivity should be compared with local varieties. After confirming the quality of introduced seed, it should be provided at the larger extent so that risk of failure may be avoided. Analysis of performance of new variety to be done by farmers
Besides, identified crop as pea in the irrigated and moong and chickpea in rain-fed villages, the stakeholders realized that there is need to give due attention to livestock development especially poultry.
Encroachment on commons by the influential as well as villagers at large is one of the challenges of exclusion of resources poor households. The participants realized the importance of effective legislative and social instrument for vacating the common from clutches encroachers.
Failure of crops and inefficient market operations lead to rural indebtedness. To deal with these challenges, there is urgent need to promote crop insurance schemes and make the existing marketing system more efficient.
The replacement of commercial crops like peas and other vegetables with staple food crops.
MGNREGS has led to growing scarcity of labor in agriculture sector and construction activities. The suggestions emerged that during the crop seasons MGNREGS operation should suspended so that demand for labour may be met.
Implementation of RACP will help in minimizing the migration of the households, promotion of opportunities for education attainment, reduction in domestic tension among the resources poor households.
Participants reported limited access of farmers to the agricultural extension services.
Water
Presentation of a successful intervention by NGO namely GVNML helped to understand the process of restoration of natural resources base in the rural settings. It was realized that it is essential to link up the intervention with prevailing cultural practices at the grassroots level. This helps in ensuring the participation not only of the community but also of individuals in managing the resources efficiently.
There is a provision of subsidies for the construction of water harvesting structures such as farm pond. But due to lack of awareness among the farmers in general and marginal and small farmers in particular they are not benefited at the desired level.
Limited awareness of the farmers regarding the drip irrigation and the complex process of availing the institutional support resulted in reluctance among the farmers. Participants realized the importance of capacity building of the farmers.
ANNEXURE- I
102
Interview with Mr. Laxman Singh, GVNML
If water is to be treated as a CPR then its use must also benefit all. Working on pastures helps everyone.
Chauka system is a low cost approach to pasture development and tank based irrigation development
CBOs formed are Gwala samiti, Chargaha samiti which are represented in the Village Development Committee which is supreme for all village level decisions
Pasture land development has been done keeping in mind water flow paths, pathways used by shepherds. Drinking water points for animals and humans (shepherds) have been provided in the pasture at various places.
This indicates the close involvement of the people in planning the pasture development
Pasture land development helps not only those with large ruminants but also sheep and goat rearers
There is need for learning from Laporiya and Lakshman Singh’s expertise to enrich RACP
For last 25 years GVNML has been organizing a Yatra in about 30-40 villages that happens every year on Dev Uthani Gyaras (11th day after diwali). Entire villages turn up and start walking along the water paths (from ridge to the final tank). All along they discuss how the water is being used, what benefits they are getting from it, how it should be managed better and finally worshipping every nadi/talab.kund, etc. for the prosperity they have brought to the village.
This is a huge community mobilizing, motivating and educating tool being used by GVNML. This is the forum to emphasize the community ownership and use of water as opposed to the dominant paradigm of water being an individual asset.
Markets
Marketing of agricultural produce was found to be a major problem not only in the selected cluster but also in the through out the state. Broadly, the problems relating to the markets were identified as the stakeholders as follows.
There is lack of regulated marketing facilities including infrastructure.
Dominance of local traders and they monopolize market operations.
Absence and inadequacy of public market agencies in marketing of agriculture produce that resulted in failure of Minimum Support Price (MSP) mechanism.
The inputs market was also found inefficient
Quality of product leads to efficient marketing of agriculture produce.
Market failures deprive the farmers in gaining the benefits.
How the agriculture produce can link to market conditions having wide price fluctuations? The subject needs further thought.
The project proposes to set up daal mills. The mills can also be used to add further value to millets and pulses by making badis using local crop varieties.
SHGs can be included in membership of producer companies. This will help women farmers and producers to have direct access to markets.
Capacity Building
To ensure the success of the RACP, it was realized that the participation of other departments like State Co-operative department and ICDS will useful. It was found that there exists farmers’ organization structure and there is a considerable proportion of female counterparts as well as marginal and small farmers and they an important role in successful operation of the organization. The participation of ICDS will ensure involvement of SHGs which is one of the important institutional
ANNEXURE- I
103
arrangements at the village level. Certainly, it will help in improving the participation of deprived sections of the society directly and indirectly.
There is need of awareness generation among the women regarding market operation and access.
Meeting with traders: Boraj
Mandi
Bagru agriculture market is located at a distance about 22km from the main city of Jaipur. Because of its location on the periphery of main city, it has importance in value chain. Groundnut growers belong to from other districts such as Nagaur, Jaisalmer Ajmer and Jaipur and sell their produce in this market. The buyers from other states have registered in this market for purchasing the produce.
There are 43 market traders including one Agriculture Co-operative.
Previously the traders had obtained the shops in this market on 99 years lease but now they have bought the shops. Therefore no new trader can participate in this market.
Different farmers bring 10 to 300 bags of agricultural produce. It is reported by the traders that there is no minimum and maximum limit for quantum of arrivals. Keeping in view future development in crop production, the existing market infrastructure will inadequate.
There is urgent need of storage/ godown facilities around the market yard so that the grain is not destroyed by rain.
There is a union of commission agents that works as pressure group.
The local traders are themselves the buyers of agriculture produce and they monopolize the market structure.
Access to the agriculture market facilities determined by the inter-personal and social relationship among the buyers and sellers of the produce.
If the farmers are not willing to sell at the current auction price they have the option of keeping the grain with the trader for a month till they find a better opportunity. In turn farmers are provided up to 70 to 80% of the value of their produce as loan. The cooperative provides loan of up to Rs.50,000 at an interest of 4%.
Traders use Information technology such as internet and pass on the information to farmers on mobile phones. Both electronic and print media also play an important role marketing of the products.
There is a lack of the timely and adequate supply of inputs includes seed, fertilizer and pesticides as reported by the cooperative.
The traders are organized into a Vyapar Mandal that acts as a pressure group to undertake advocacy with the government. Recent issues raised by the mandal include the demand for storage shed
ANNEXURE- I
104
November 23, 2011
Meeting with farmers at Bobas Village, Panchayat: Boraj Cluster
The meeting was held at the panchyat office. In the meeting, about 25 individuals participated actively. They belonged to various socio-economic categories.
Issues Emerged:
There is no project on agriculture development undertaken in the area. Absence of awareness of the ATMA program.
Access to agriculture extension services was limited to certain group of farmers.
Groundwater level decline 10 feet annually and deteriorating quality.
Demonstration effects from adjacent area as Chomu which is well known as vegetable production played an important role in agriculture development in Bobas village
There is threat of shifting from prevailing cropping pattern if the aquifer depletion rate will continue
Formation of farmer’s Organization known as All India Kisan Sabha is under process. One member from each village samiti will be member of the organization that will be integrated with the Akhil Bhartiya Kisan Union. The groups are of a political nature and will focus on farmers’ issues including price of crop produce, diesel, and availability of electricity.
The farmers are facing a serious problem of wildlife (blue bucks) that damage the crops.
Farmers are unable to get Minimum Support Price (MSP) because of monopolistic behavior of the informal buyers/ traders who purchase the agriculture production at the lower as compare to prevailing market price.
Limited access to the regulated markets especially in case of marginal and small farmers as they have the limited quantum of marketable surplus.
Farmers do not have information about prevailing market prices. KRIBHCO had given mobile phones to some farmers to get market information. But this facility is accessible to limited proportion of the farmers.
The major livelihoods are agriculture and livestock rearing; about 300 to 400 persons go to Jaipur daily in search of wage labour.
MGNREGS has resulted in labour scarcity in agriculture operation. According to the farmers this is because people have to work less and get high wages in MNREGS
Mechanism of crop insurance is not desirable. Because the failure of crops is declared on the basis of tehsil level metrological data. While local condition may be responsible for crop failure. This needs policy reform.
Lack of timely supply of agriculture inputs including seed and chemicals.
Common lands are encroached by the villagers. No land was available for grazing purpose.
Meeting with Women at Anganwadi Centre, Bobas village:
About 30 women participated in the meeting. Most of them were SHG members. The Anganwadi workers had promoted 14 SHGs in the village having a total membership of 150 women. The village has 3 Anganwadi centres having 3 workers at each centre. Some of the women did not participate in agricultural activities as their families were associated with service sector. Some of the participants were landless earning from goat rearing, agricultural labour and MGNREGS.
Issues Emerged
ANNEXURE- I
105
The women confirmed the facts on ground water scarcity, existence of 2 to 5 wells on each farm, rapid depletion of groundwater, poor ground water recharge even in good rainfall years, the problems associated with the availability of agriculture inputs including seeds and fertilizers, and changes in cropping patterns, and poor quality of groundwater mentioned in previous meeting at panchayat level.
Almost all the households are in the trap of indebtedness because of the substantial amount of loan ranging from 20,000 to 1,00,000 for the purchase of agriculture inputs and meeting the household needs. The women farmers felt that in spite of investing substantially but could not get the desirable benefits due to low reliability i.e. groundwater source i.e. tube-wells. Many of the tube-wells have dried up and the farmers who do not have functioning tube-wells have followed the rain-fed agriculture and are able to take only a single crop during year. Looking at the depleting ground water the farmers felt that they will shift to barley cultivation instead of wheat.
Women from landless families mentioned that they kept goats for livelihood, but apart from the rainy season they faced acute shortage of fodder and had to buy it from other more well off families that kept milch animals and can afford to allocate land for fodder production.
Women also mentioned that though they do most of the work in agriculture except for ploughing and selling, they have no role in decision making regarding purchase of inputs or selling of produce.
Women expressed their interest that if they were given training on improved techniques, and market information relating to prevailing market prices, then they can understand the processes and participate in decision making.
Participants from each Anganwadi Centre attend the Gram Sabha and bring up issues regarding agriculture but they feel that the issues raised are not addressed.
Women associated with non-farm activities hope that their livelihood security will also be addressed in this program.
Meeting with herder: village Bobas
The village has 2 herder families who had settled in the village. The farmer Shri Mangaram belonged to the Gujjar caste. He keeps a herd of 80 sheep and goats. He mentioned that he does not face any problem regarding fodder even though he does not own land. He has a mutually beneficial traditional relationship with the farmers of the village. Farmers ask him to trim the khejri trees on the boundaries of their fields so that their cops get enough sunlight. In turn the herder feeds the cut branches of khejri tree to his livestock. Fodder from one tree is consumed per day. No cash is exchanged in this arrangement. Water troughs for livestock have been constructed by philanthropists in the village therefore, there is enough water for the livestock.
For livestock health care a hospital exists at Panchayat level, but most medicines are not available and they have to go to hospitals at Panch Batti in Jaipur, or in Dudu. There is no arrangement for breed improvement, and the breeds kept by them are non-descript.
ANNEXURE- I
106
Meeting with the farmers: village Bassi Jhajra
The hamlet named Ganwalo ki dhani was part of the revenue village known as Bassi Jhajhra. This village is scattered in small hamlets having few families. The Panchayat has around 100 hamlets called dhanis having five to six families per dhani. In Ganwalo ki dhani there were about 3 families belong to Jat caste.
The family we met owned 211 bighas of land having 22 tube-wells. Sixty years ago they had only one well and could irrigate only 20 bighas. With water availability through tube-wells (since last 15 years) they can irrigate all their land and were taking three crops on certain pockets, and high value fruit and vegetable production.
The water table has gone down to 250 feet in the village. The farmer reported the depletion of groundwater at the rate of 15 feet annually. Farmers from this village also confirmed that even in good rainfall years the water levels in their wells does not recharge due to physical condition of the village.
Shifted from amla fruit crop to other traditional cropping pattern due to absence of linkage between production and markets.
Demonstration effect was also visible in fruit cultivation as also reported by the farmers.
Meeting at Dhinda Panchayat Bhavan, Boraj Cluster
About 30-40 villagers participated in this meeting comprising small and marginal farmers, agriculture labour, three PRI reps—Sarpanch, ex-Sarpanch and Ward Panch, Village Development Committee members and Government reps. Dhinda panchayat has 5 villages Dhinda, Kediya Ki Dhani, Bajpura, Chandsinghpura, Kerio ki Dhani.
Major issues:
Severe groundwater degradation, high decline in GW levels; GW quality is saline. Farmers have shifted from irrigated to totally rainfed agriculture
Farmers in all the 5 villages have deepened their wells and exploited GW by using higher HP pumps.
Problem of drinking water
Delay in wage payments in NREGA
Agriculture labour migrate for non-farm work, for example as construction labour
History of development programmes: Farm pond, bunding undertaken; sprinklers and drip irrigation technologies provided but currently not in use due to severe groundwater degradation.
Fertiliser use had increased when access to irrigation improved. But now the agriculture is totally rainfed as the GW resource is fully exhausted.
Meeting at Hirnoda village, Boraj Cluster
About 20 villagers participated in this meeting comprising small and marginal farmers, agriculture labourers, PRI reps, Village Development Committee members and Government reps.
Major issues:
This was a canal irrigated area. But due to reduced inflows into the dam due to rainwater harvesting activities in its catchment, the canal stopped flowing. Farmers shifted from irrigated to rainfed agriculture
ANNEXURE- I
107
Groundwater almost exhausted; GW quality is saline
Agriculture production and income decrease substantially; agriculture labour migrate for non-farm activities.
Green Pea replaced with Gram and mustard, and kharif vegetables replaced with Bajra and Moong.
Land fertility drastically reduced.
Drinking water problem is acute.
Farmers do not get even the MSP by sale of produce in mandi as they have to go through a very subjective quality assessment done by the traders.
ANNEXURE- I
108
November 24, 2011
Meeting at Akhepura Panchayat, Mokhampura Cluster
About 30 farmers participated in the meeting. The Akhepura Panchayat has 4 villages viz., Akhepura, Maheshpura, Manpura and Anantpura. There are about 3500 livestock in this panchayat.
Major issues:
There were three water ponds in the village. Due to road construction in the catchment area input into the ponds was blocked. Recently, the blockage was removed by the village that resulted to filling the pond.
Very few farmers have access to extension services.
Farmers are practicing low input rain-fed agriculture.
Except for bajra farmers use farm saved seeds or buy from each other. During droughts, the seeds saved by the farmers are lost and they have to replenish the stocks by buying from the market.
Farmer use ash and neem leaves for the protection of home produce seed.
Seed supplied by the different agencies found unreliable. Growth of plant is there but main product (grain) found missing.
Farmers follow crop rotation to maintain land productivity.
Due to erratic rain fall conditions, farmer replaced the maize with bajra.
Farmers do not get remunerative price for the produce such as mung since they are not growing improved varieties because of low or erratic rainfall. Due to low quality of produce it does not fetch market price. There is no standard system for testing and ascertaining grain quality.
The panchayat has 552 bighas of pastureland which is fully encroached. All households are involved in encroachment on commons except non-land owning families and certain castes such as balai and kumhar.
Access of household having grazing animals strictly restricted by the encroachers that caused social tension.
Since the advent of MNREGS the agricultural wage rates have increased from Rs.150 to Rs. 300. Thus, MNREGS had adverse implication on labour market in agriculture sector.
Meeting with farmers: village Manpura
About 70 farmers were present of which 35 claimed to be small and marginal farmers.
The farmers overarching concern was about water. Many farmers had constructed farm ponds on their lands, but it was mentioned that small farmers did not have access to government sponsored schemes.
Heavy rains cause crop damage due to low lying topography of the village.
Farmers wanted that the village pond should be further strengthened.
Constructing grain storage structures will not be useful as farmers have to sell their produce immediately since they have to pay back their loans.
Pastureland is heavily encroached and pieces of land are fenced off and used by farmers for cultivation. Small farmers and non-land owning families have no access to the pasturelands. Also because of growth of Prosopis in the pastureland women cannot go there to collect fuelwood.
Most of the small farmers have to migrate for wage employment with the state and out side the state such as Delhi and Chandigarh.
ANNEXURE- I
109
Meeting with women: village Manpura
Women from three families of Bairwa caste participated in the discussion. Highlights of the discussion are:
The families own 4 bighas or less of land. They have no access to the village pond because they cannot afford pipes to transport the water.
The pond had filled only this year after a gap of 15 years.
There is a drinking water supply in their village, but supply of water is irregular, about once in two days for an uncertain period of time ranging from 3 hours to full day.
The families have one buffalo each and also own a few goats. The animals are always stall-fed since they do not have access to pasturelands. The families who have encroached on the grazing land threaten these families with sticks if they try to enter the pastureland. They buy fodder at the rate of Rs.250 / quintal. Milk produced by livestock is enough only for household consumption.
There is only one shop of PDS at panchayat level.
These families experience food insecurity about 4 months a year. They take the help of other families by taking grain on loan during this period.
Meeting with women of herder families: Gujaron ki Dhani
The Dhani is populated by a single extended family comprising 11 households. Eight women of the family participated in the meeting. The family owns a large herd of 70 sheep as well as buffalos and cows.
The herders do not have access to the community pastureland. One man from the family migrates with the herd for about 4 months each year. They travel with five to six such groups from other villages. For the rest of the time the livestock are fed on crop residues.
Household also sell milk in the local market.
The income earned from sale of milk is received directly be women.
Females never visited the market for shopping of household articles. All requirement are met the male counterparts.
The family earns about Rs. 1.5 lakhs, including Rs. 30,000 from wool.
Meeting at Gangati Kala Dhani
Participants: 4-5 farmers from the Dhani
Major Issues:
Groundwater became saline since the time the canal that irrigated the area stopped flowing due to reduced inflows into the Kalak dam; but the recharge is good in openwells during normal to good rainfall years
Farm ponds constructed in the area are very effective in maintaining storages due to impervious layer at 3-4 m below ground level.
The agriculture produce in Kharif almost doubles with critical irrigation support; main crop is Gram and Moong
The farmers find use of weedicide effective so are interested in promoting its use
ANNEXURE- I
110
Village meeting at Ganga Ti Kala panchayat
Participants: 35-40 farmers (including women)
Major Issues:
There is need for strengthening agriculture marketing system; system for objectively assessing quality of produce needed
Need for warehouse/ storage facility for marketing
The use of pesticides is not effective
The cost of agriculture inputs is high; the inputs are not available timely and are inadequate
High degree of encroachment of pasture land—used for agriculture and housing; for warehouse land can be made available through private land donation
Meeting with break-away group of farmers from the village meeting
Participants: 8-10 farmers with wide variation of landholding
Major issues
Key Kharif crops grown: Moong, Jowar and Bajra; Irrigated crops: wheat, Barley and Cumin (Jeera)
The village tank used for domestic purpose got filled after many years; it has recharged many openwells downstream; if rainwater harvesting done in u/s areas it may affect inflows to the tank
Strong interest in collective action for marketing
Village meeting at Kadvon Ka Baas
Participants: 20-25 farmers and agriculture labourers
Marketing agriculture produce is challenge; farmers do not get even the MSP
Cost of agriculture inputs is high;
Open wells are 40 feet deep; the groundwater below that level is saline
Major kharif crop is Moong; this year both the production and quality of Moong and Bajra produce was low due to untimely rainfall
Strong interest for undertaking collective marketing; need for warehouse facility and land can be made available
ANNEXURE- I
111
November 25, 2011
Mavali, NAIP
IPM and INM are not being implemented in toto.
Focus and emphasis is on use of chemical pesticides only
Apart from emphasis on preparation of compost, INM also relies on chemical fertilizers only
Dosage of fertilizers is based on expert recommendations.
NAIP demonstrates many technologies that have been transferred from lab to land, but emphasis is also on transforming knowledge to the communities
Overall, while the Mavli NAIP area shows impressive economic empowerment of the farmers, its impact on soil, water and environment is not being mitigated by suitable measures
Similarly, on the social front, it has not significant community mobilization and organization efforts
Meeting at village NAIP office, Palana Khurd Panchayat,
Udaipur
Participants: About 30 villagers (majory tribals) from the 5 villages in the panchayat; representatives of Maharana Pratap University; NAIP NGO—Swami Vivekanand Seva Nyas
Major Issues:
It is the 4th year of NAIP project; good demonstrations of horticulture, BT cotton, vegetable farming and orchards—guava;
Water conveyance losses significantly reduced due to provision of pipes to farmers; led to expansion of irrigated area by about 150%.
ANNEXURE- I
112
November 26, 2011
Meeting with farmers of command area village Bagora
The meeting took place at KVK and scientists from KVK also participated. Major observations from the meeting are:
There is seepage from the canal system.
Canal system as poorly managed due to weak institutional arrangement at the project and village level.
Even in the mid-reach of the command area farmers do not get enough water. In fact there is no system for regulation of water use; since the construction of canal a maximum of 60% of command area has been irrigated in a single year.
Soil fertility is low and there is no proper system for soil testing; farmers are not aware about extent of nutrition deficiencies in their soils
Farmers have small and scattered land holdings situated at distance from their houses. This situation will pose a constraint in adoption of labour intensive work on the scattered land holdings.
Water logging/ salinity problem is in 40% of the command area.
Most of the farmers are small and marginal with holding around 0.1-0.2 ha; many farmers have Kisan Credit Card but are unable to use them; so most sell their agriculture produce in local markets only and not in mandi because the quantity is very small.
Supply of agriculture inputs (seeds, fertilizer etc.) is inadequate and untimely. Currently only one-tenth of the input demand is met.
There is no community based organization or WUA to manage equity in water distribution.
There is no marketing infrastructure. Although about 100,000 Qtls. of wheat is produced in the area, only about 10,000 Qtls. is marketed through the cooperative society.
Livestock kept by the farmers have low yield. Only the Patidars who keep improved breeds of buffalo are able to earn from livestock rearing.
Tribal women do the agriculture work but they lack decision making power and control over earnings. KVK organizes some trainings for women relating to use and maintenance of agricultural implements, livestock management, organic manures, IPM etc.
Meeting with farmers: village Lokia, Panchayat Arthuniya
The village is located at the tail end of the command area. The village comprises 250 households, 200 of which can be categorized as small and marginal farmers comprising Patidars, Bunkars, and tribals. Major findings are:
The village did not get water from the canal since the last 10 years except recent two years.
Nearly, one-fourth of the households in the village do not have access to irrigation (from canal or from wells) and they practice rain-fed agriculture taking only one crop a year in kharif.
Crops grown are makka, tuar, jhalar etc.
ANNEXURE- I
113
Different castes prefer to keep different types of livestock – Patidars keep buffalos, whereas tribals prefer cows and goats.
The tribal farmers have problems in accessing seeds, and have no knowledge of using fertilizers.
Land holdings are about 0.3 ha in size. The small farmers have to work in groups to access agricultural machinery and implements.
Dominance of local traders in agricultural marketing.
Livestock rearing is the main source of household income resource poor households.
Some farmers having the irrigation facilities grow the maize crop twice in a season
Goats are more useful for poor families. Any family member can take goats for grazing. There is no grazing land in this village.
Access to forest land is restricted for grazing due to plantation. The restriction will continue for about five years.
Families from all castes migrate in search of wage work, Patidars prefer to work in hotels and sweet shops, whereas tribals take up jobs in construction.
Both men and women’s saving groups exist in the village.
Visit to Custard Apple Processing Unit, Department of Horticulture,
MPUAT
Those met:
Dr. RA Kaushik, Prof. & Head, Department of Horticulture, MPUAT, Udaipur (09887281595)
Mr.Sanjay Bhanawat, Mr.Naresh Trivedi, Directors, Sugam Bio Foods Pvt., Ltd., Udaipur (09422359435)
Observations & Issues
This is a subproject under NAIP titled “ Value Chain Development on Commercial Exploitation of Underutilized Fruits of Tribal Zones of Rajasthan”
Since production period of custard apple is very short and shelf life is just 2-3 days, processing is vital to develop a value chain
Technology for extracting and preserving fruit pulp of custard apple has been developed by MPUAT
Currently, the technology developed depends on hand removal of pulp from the fruit, but technology for mechanical removal of pulp is on trial. This is important from a hygiene point of view
Sugam Biofoods has been purchasing all the pulp extracted at the centre (3 tons, this year). They are ready to purchase upto 100t/year.
Further, they are ready to invest in a processing plant close to the centres of custard apple production
They are also in parallel developing the technology for mechanical removal of pulp
They are on the lookout for opportunities for setting up a unit for frozen gram for export purpose. They could be potential value chain partners for the Mokhampura cluster
This partnership shows how a value chain could be developed with private and public cooperation and is instructive for RACP as well
ANNEXURE- I
114
Visit to Amala Producers Cooperative Society Limited, Baghpura,
Tehsil Jhadol, Udaipur
Those met:
Mr.Nagin Patel, Coordinator, Jhadol Block, BAIF (09414830200)
Mr. AP Thakur, Area Programme Officer, Jhadol Block, BAIF
Mr.Mangilal, President, Aonla Producers Coop Society Ltd.
Observation & Issues:
Society registered in 2003 and has 400 members
Aonla production started in the area with BAIF’s interventions that promoted a tree based farming model that included fruit trees, especially aonla.
The Society produces about 10 different aonla products, but by volume, Aonla Candy is the largest
It has a marketing outlet in Udaipur and a network of wholesalers in Rajasthan and Gujarat
The capital investment on the land, building and equipment was provided by BAIF and is estimated to cost around Rs.1 crore at present costs
To finance its working capital requirements, the Society has allotted shares to Jan Utthan Samiti to the extent of Rs.10 lacs.
The Jan Utthan Samiti is a federation of 18 Village Development Committees that were set by BAIF during the implementation of their various projects in Jhadol block.
All beneficiary contributions during the projects were channeled into a Sustainability fund which is worth Rs.42 lacs today. Of this the Samiti has invested Rs.10 lacs as shares in the Society
From a regulatory perspective, following are the permissions required before setting up a fruit processing centre:
o Gram Panchayat’s NOC for setting up the operation in its limits o Water sample testing report from PHED o FPO license which needs an application to the Ministry of Food Processing, GoI along
with copy of land title deed, water sample report, GP NOC and approved building plan
o The building plan should be as per FPO norms o FPO license is to be renewed every year o Sales Tax Registration, approval from Weights & Measures department and
registration under Udaipur Mandi and payment of mandi tax is required to act as a procurement centre for aonla
Disposal of waste water is an issue at this centre and needs to be addressed
Visit to Ginger Value Chain Cluster, Jhadol
Those met:
Khyalilal Jain, President, Udaipur Agro Producer Co., Ltd., Jhadol, Udaipur
Vishwadeepak Kumar, Project Coordinator, RKVY & Rabo Bank (09829760051)
ANNEXURE- I
115
Observations & Issues
This is a project being supported by RKVY and Rabo Bank and is focused on building a value chain around ginger
Jhadol is famous for it low fibre ginger, but in the last 15 years, area under ginger has declined due to repeated failure of crops due to ginger rot
Access Development Services is the service provider for delivering the value chain development
The project covers 4 clusters in Jhadol block. In all about 100 Farmer Business Groups have been formed which have been federated and registered as the Udaipur Agri Producer Co. Ltd. It has a total membership of about a 1000 farmers who grow ginger
Project interventions so far have been only on o Stabilizing ginger crop production o Organizing supply of inputs including disease free seed material
However, of the 300 demonstrations set up by Access, 50 plots were severely affected by ginger rot which resulted in total economic loss. In another 50-60 plots there was significant economic damage. Thus about 1/3rd of the demo plots were affected. Thus, as of now, the Package of Practices developed with help from MPUAT has not been fully validated.
Currently, more investigations are needed to identify how the plants are getting infected
The PoP has promoted intensive use of chemical pesticides and fungicides and would have implications for economics and environment as well. There was no clearly thought out IPM strategy being implemented on evidence during the visit.
Regulatory requirements for setting up operations of a Producer Company: o Registration of producer company under Section IX A of Companies Act, 1956 o Registration under VAT Act and Central Sales Tax, getting TIN o TAN and PAN of the company for carrying out financial transactions o Licenses for storage and sale of seeds, fertilizers and pesticides
License from APMC to carry out procurement and purchase of produce from farmers
ANNEXURE- I
116
November 27, 2011
Visit to Field Sites of Gramin Vikas Trust
Meeting at village Patalia, Kushalgarh Block, Banswara
Gramin Vikas Trust (GVT) initiated its intervention with livelihood project in the 25 villages during 1993. The second phase was launched since 2007 with Wadi project sponsored by the NABARD. A consultation was held at premises of GVT. In the consultation, the participants were from the project area of GVT. There were 80 participants including 57 women and 23 men from 25 villages of 5 Panchayats. Community members stated that in their villages 95 percent population belong to tribal community. Some of the tribes present were Amlia, Vasunia, Badia, Damor, Kharadi, Mahida, Khadia, Gadasia, Katara etc.
Major Issues emerging:
Farmers were in position to get crop production during the recent two crop years. Before this there was good rainfall in the year 2006. Intervening years had very low rainfall and farmers could hardly get one crop.
During water scarcity the farmers grow low water consuming crop like gram.
Some of the farmers who do not have irrigation source meet their water requirement through water markets. In water markets there are three stakeholders including a land owner, well owner and water pump owner. Pump owner charges Rs. 70 per hour for the whole set include pump set and pipes. Well owner charges Rs. 100 for the whole extracting period i.e. 3 to 4 hours.
Livestock kept by communities include cows, goats and poultry. Cows are kept mainly for manure, and milk production used domestically. Grazing lands are available only in some villages that are encroached largely.
Benefits of TAD schemes are routed through different departments and camps are organized for distribution of seeds etc. but many people are not able to avail the services due to lack of information or because the camps are held for a single day during which all beneficiaries may not be able to avail the service. Agricultural inputs such as seeds and fertilizers are distributed by concerned department but people have no proper knowledge of use of the inputs.
Existing community based organizations are Forest Protection Committees, Self Help Groups, Farmer Interest Groups, Pastureland groups. Kisan Clubs are being formed through support of NABARD. Traditional institutions called tadbi are active in resolving social conflicts and arranging marriages. The tadbi do not take direct interest in agricultural activities, but projects should consult with these institutions before implementation otherwise they can obstruct the functioning of the project.
Provision of agricultural implements with latest technology which can be use in small size of holds. It will help in sowing the crop in proper manner and other agriculture operations.
Forest Protection Committees are functioning well. Farmers depend on forests for major and minor produce. Households earn around one-third of the total household income from forests. Some of the households also benefited from the Jatropha cultivation.
The participants identified the problems associated with agriculture. Seeds are either bought from the local markets or kept from home produce. If farmers do not have home produced seeds because they were consumed as food grain, or because seeds had to be planted more than one time due to late arrival of rains. In such case it becomes difficult to obtain seeds on time. Availability of timely credit is important for agricultural activities. Part of the credit need is met by SHGs, but major source is the local moneylender (mahajan).
ANNEXURE- I
117
Access to institutional credit is difficult because farmers have small parcels of land or because land title is not transferred in their name (ownership lies with fathers of farmers).
According to the participants the most important interventions for enhancing income of farmers are support for installing tube wells, farm bunding, breed improvement for goats and access to information relating markets.
The farmers stated that the greatest bottleneck in raising agricultural incomes is the fact that they have to sell produce to the same moneylender from whom they meet their requirement of loans for agricultural inputs and therefore they are unable to get a good price agricultural produce.
Visit to wadi at village Mal Dholpura
The organization has promoted wadis through the support of NABARD. The wadi owned by Shri Dalsingh bhai and his brother was about 0.8 ha. Agro-horticulture model is followed on the farm where fruit trees like papaya, amla, mango are grown along with vegetable crops. During the visit a crop of cotton was seen among the fruit trees. Bamboo was also grown along the field borders. Some of the fruits were at fruit bearing stage. The farmer sale the produce both fruit and cotton and cereals in local market of Kushalgarh. The family also kept high yielding buffalos. About three year back the farmer installed an open well with financial support by the program implementing agency i.e. GVT. The reliability of well is not more than 3 hours a day and it takes about 24 hour to be recharged.
Along with fruit plantation, farmer grows cotton crop during kharif season and wheat and gram during rabi season. Farmer applies the domestic labour in agriculture operation but in collection of cotton hired labour is deployed i.e. costly as compared to other farm operations. It is reported by the female member that the present intervention has enhance the work load on them. But it is compensated by the improved household income level and drudgery has been reduced by implements promoted by the organization.
Meeting with women group, village Sodalia
The SHG leader was Srimati Sunder Bai Sarpota, and there were 8 other members.
The group was undertaking savings activities, but they had also received training on agriculture, livestock management, hygiene and sanitation. Members had gone on exposure trips to other states and felt that this increased their confidence to the level that they can participate effectively in decision making in village meetings. Women felt that if they are given intensive training they can function as jaankars to train other women farmers.
Women mentioned that with introduction of horticulture and cotton crops their workload had increased. The organization addressed the need of drudgery reduction for women by providing light weight pesticide sprayers, maize deseeding devices, improved sickles, and smokeless chulhas that required lesser amount of fuel wool and also reduced the cooking time. Provision of fibre sheets that could be inserted into the thatched roofs to serve as skylights reduced energy consumption.
Focus meetings with farmers at Bhoodanpura, Rohida Panchayat,
Banswara
Participants: Five farmers from the Dhani; one farmer having 10 goats
Major issues:
Cost of agriculture inputs cost increased due to intensive chemical input based agriculture
ANNEXURE- I
118
The farmers do not get appropriate price for selling agriculture produce when the production goes up.
There is lack of capacity on agriculture practices and awareness is low on resilient agriculture practices
Most of the pastureland is encroached.
All the 10 goats that were provided under the project died due to some strange disease; timely action could not be taken because the farmer did not inform the government; no scheme for insuring goats
Meeting with vegetable nursery growing farmer supported by
Agriculture produce company
Major issues:
Nursery promoted as a entrepreneurial activity on demonstration basis by (Jambu Khand) agriculture producers company
The failures of saplings in nursery are not compensated by the company
Meeting at RCT office, Sagvadia Gram Panchayat
Participants: 20 farmers, SHG members, Agriculture produce company representatives
Major issues:
Low productivity of crops especially Maize even in good rainfall years
Farmers take on rent the agriculture equipments kept at RCT and have benefited a lot from this service
Farmers do not get even the MSP price by sale of agriculture produce in the Mandi; middlemen corner most of the profits; the village does not have storage/ warehouse facility and there is a felt need for the same
Only 900 out of the 2600 farmers are members of Agriculture produce company; there seemed to be low awareness on existence of such an institution
ANNEXURE- I
119
November 28, 2011
Multi-stakeholder meeting, KVK, Banswara
The meet was attended by 26 participants representing NGOs and KVK and Agriculture department.
Key issues:
In the command area, the tail-end farmers do not receive canal water even in good rainfall conditions. Input consumption is growing at faster rate.
Large scale promotion of soya bean is affecting food security as area under maize cultivation decreases. We should take up mixed cropping to balance commercial as well as food crops.
In case rabi season crops farmer are coming ahead in following given package and practices that will help in balanced input usage.
Marketing aspect is very poor. The ultimate cost of the inefficient markets has born by the resource poor farmers. This inefficiency prevails in boat and poultry marketing.
Women’s participation in trainings is very poor, should consider trainings exclusively for women groups. There should be provision of required training in each and every project activities.
In order to ensure that project benefits reach the poorest of the community, a mechanism should be evolved for community to reach consensus on providing them benefits without charging contribution, or be leveraging common funds.
Sustainability Fund as envisaged in NAIP Udaipur is very essential so that community can undertake essential activities after project completion. Contributions from interventions on private lands should be used to build up the SF.
The project should explore differential contribution for farmers having different paying capacity. This will help in reaching out to resource poor households.
There are different village level institutions having the responsibility of managing different natural resources such as forests, grasslands, water bodies or watersheds. Health of forests is critical to water bodies and even for livestock that depend on pasturelands. Considering the functional linkage among these ecosystems, their management institutions should be integrated into an umbrella people’s organization to coordinate the management of interlinked ecosystems.
These common resources are critical for agriculture based livelihoods and consequently for raising agricultural incomes, therefore, management of commons should be addressed as overall strategy for agricultural competitiveness.
Stall feeding practices are followed by limited farmers. There is need to promote the stall-feeding practices rather than grazing. Largely households lack the awareness about the proper use of crop-residue as fodder.
Farmers use the silt from the water source dam/ talab as manure that improves the land productivity.
ANNEXURE- I
120
Participants gave examples of successful PIM in Bundi District, and group selling of agricultural produce by farmers in Chhoti Sharvan.
Participants said that genetically modified seeds should not be promoted in this project.
Participants felt that existing village level institutions should be absorbed into any new institution being facilitated by this project, however, producer companies being revenue based organizations should not be included.
The importance of PRIs was realized by the participants in efficient implementation of any development program like RACP at village level. Further it is essential to involve the democratic, community/ caste based institutions at different level keeping in view the nature of intervention.
Considering the variability in agricultural output and incomes, the project should also focus on rural non-farm livelihoods for extending the benefits to the households those having no land.
ANNEXURE- I
121
Summary of key environmental issues emerging from field
consultations
Sr. No. Environmental Issue from the field Environmental Guidances (EGs)/ Clauses proposed in Environmental Management Framework (EMF) to address the issue
RACP Intervention area: Water Augmentation (watershed development, groundwater recharge and Farm Ponds)
1 Downstream flow needs to be maintained from the viewpoint of economic and environmental consequences, especially minimum flow ensured for ecosystem maintenance downstream
EG Water 1: Water Harvest, Recharge & Storage Clause 7.3.1
2 Recharge structures need to consider scientific, hydrological and community concerns
EG Water 1: Water Harvest, Recharge & Storage Clause 7.3.1
EG Water 1: Water Harvest, Recharge & Storage Clause 7.2
EG Common 2: Tree Cutting & Pasture Land Use Clause 11.2
3 Farm ponds needs to be designed based on safe dependable yield from the individual private land catchment
EG Water 1: Water Harvest, Recharge & Storage Clause 7.3.1
4 RACP does not plan to undertake rehabilitation of any major canal—main canal or branch canal or distributary; rather it will select clusters for intervention in canal command where major canals have been rehabilitated. Some minor rehabilitation of small canals such as minors and sub-minors could be undertaken which might lead to potential environmental impacts.
There will be no major environmental impact of rehabilitating minors/ sub-minors; however, the EMF provides for EG Water Harvest, Recharge and Storage Clause 7.4 to take care of any potential minor impact due to such rehabilitation activities.
RACP Intervention area: Water Demand management
5 Effectiveness of implementation is a key concern; improved access to micro-irrigation efficient technologies can lead to farmers shifting to higher water use crops or increase the cropped areas
EG Agri 1: Crop Selection Clause 1.2
EG Agri 6: Water Use Management Clause 6.2
EG Agri 6: Water Use Management Clause 6.3
6 Water budgeting exercise needs to be undertaken in planning exercise for selection of type of crop and cropped area that can be irrigated
EG Agri 6: Water Use Management Clause 6.2
7 The project will need active efforts for promoting micro-irrigation efficient systems
EG Agri 6: Water Use Management Clause 6.2 (Compulsory use of micro irrigation devices)
ANNEXURE- I
122
RACP Intervention area: Climate-resilient Agriculture
8 Enhanced water regime has triggered increased use of agriculture inputs--use of pesticides, fertilisers and weedicides). Hence, IPM and INM needs to be made more effective by promoting Package of Practices (PoP) that should include vermicomposting, use of bio-control agents, bio-pesticides and trap crops.
EG Agri 2: Seed Selection Clause 2.3
EG Agri 3: Soil Health & Nutrient Management Clause 3.3
EG Agri 4: Pest & Disease Management Clause 4.2
In addition, an Integrated Pest Management Plan (PMP) is proposed as in Annex IV
9 The agriculture input supply system needs to gear up to requirement of INM and IPM. For this, the current gaps in soil testing system needs to assessment and strengthened apriori. An INM based on recommendations from soil tests needs to be promoted
EG Agri 3: Soil Health & Nutrient Management Clause 3.3
10 Overall Practices should not exacerbate vulnerability of agriculture to Climate Variability (The POP needs to balance risks and returns).
EG Agri 1, EG Agri 2, EG Agri 3, EG Agri 4 and EG Agri 6
EG Water 1
RACP Intervention area: Livestock development
11 Pastureland development needs to be assigned higher priority. It is important for goatery as it is seen to improve access of fodder to landless and the small and marginal farmers
EG Livestock 1: Goat Rearing Clause 8.2
12 Pastureland development should also been as part of catchment of rainwater harvesting structures
EG Water 1: Water Harvest, Recharge & Storage Clause 7.2 and also EG Common 2: Tree Cutting & Pasture Land Use Clause 11.2
RACP Intervention area: Value Chain
13 The producer company needs to be develop business plans based on code of practices
EG Agri 5: Storage & Handling of Agri-inputs Clause 5.4
14 Code of practices for Producer Company needs to include measures for reducing environmental footprint
EG Agri 5: Storage & Handling of Agri-inputs Clause 5.2 (Building a storage), 5.3 (Loading & Unloading)
EG Producer Organization 1: Code of Practices Clauses 12.2 & 12.3
ANNEXURE- I
123
Stakeholder Consultation and Disclosure Workshop, Jaipur
The Workshop was held at International Horticulture Innovation and Training Centre, Durgapura, Jaipur on 19th January, 2010. The event was attended by representatives of the State Agriculture Department, Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Department of Women and Child Development, NAIM, Agricultural University Bikaner, RACP officials, NGOs including RRIDMA, FES, CEDS, CECOEDECON, GVT, Morarka Foundation etc., ITC Ltd., Access Development, Consultants, farmers from the Boraj cluster, representatives of the World Bank and Environment Assessment (EA) consultants.
Presentations were made on the RACP and Environment Assessment. The environmental issues flagged by the participants and the way they have been addressed in RACP are presented in table below:
Sr.No. Environmental Issue Response from RACP/ World
Bank team
1 RACP is targeting farmers dependant on rainfed conditions,
groundwater and canal water irrigation. The project should
consider supporting surface water lift irrigation systems from
rivers
The project design only cover
rainfed and, groundwater and
canal irrigated areas and
supporting surface water lift
irrigation system from river is
out-of-scope of the project
2 RACP should explore use of use of wastewater for irrigation The issue is out-of-scope of the
project; however, EG Common 3:
General Environmental
Guideline has been provided to
address this issue
3 Is RACP considering water and air pollution issues (pollution
due to dust particles)?
The issue is out-of-scope of the
project; however, EG Common 3:
General Environmental
Guideline has been provided to
take care of this issue
4 RACP should learn from implementation of Assam
Agriculture Competitiveness Project (AACP) and promote
models of Shallow Tubewells (STWs), horticulture and
multicrop systems
STWs cannot be promoted in
RACP as the core project
principle is to reduce
groundwater/ subsurface water
extraction and use in the state
especially given the statewide
bleak scenario of groundwater
resource.
Horticulture and multicrop
systems are part of RACP design
5 Clarity was sought on whether RACP promotes crop
intensification or diversification.
RACP promotes crop
intensification and potential
environmental impacts due to
the same have been taken care
vide provision of EG Agri 1, EG
Agri 2, EG Agri 3, EG Agri 4 and
EG Agri 6
6 Seed varieties should be chosen for demonstration and
adoption based on farmer preferences and not based on
This has been addressed vide
provision of EG Agri 2: Seed
ANNEXURE- I
124
research centre recommendations alone. Selection Clause 2.2.1.
7 The pesticide management needs to take care of human
health issue
This issue has been addressed
vide provision of EG Common 4:
General Guidelines for Health
and Safety, and EG Common 3:
General Environmental
Guideline (on Hygiene aspects)
8 Common Land issues that are important from the viewpoint
of enhancing Fodder availability for goatery for small and
marginal farmers and landless need to be considered
RACP will promote on
demonstration basis
development of 150 ha common
land for fodder development in
each micro-cluster; thus, in total
150 x 10 (clusters) x 2 (micro-
clusters in each cluster) = 3000
ha common land will be
developed through project
support.
9 Energy conservation issues need to be considered. The issue is important but is out-
of-scope of the project design
10 The text of relevant World Bank Policies OP 4.01, OP 4.09
should be available on line
Is now part of Environment
Assessment report (Annex-VII
and Annex VIII
ANNEXURE- I
125
Stakeholder Consultation and Disclosure Workshop, Jaipur, 19th January 2012
ANNEXURE- I
126
ANNEXURE- I
127
List of Participants
S. No. Name Occupation Address Mobile No.
1 Ganga devi Farmer Gangatikalan Teh.-Mojmabad
2 Indra Devi Meena Farmer Gangatikalan Teh.-Mojmabad 9928429811
3 Ram lal Farmer Gangatikalan Teh.-Mojmabad 9928501917
4 Jagadish prasad Bairwa Farmer Gangatikalan Teh.-Mojmabad 9928466055
5 Jagan Singh Choudhary Farmer Mokhampura, Teh-mojmabad,
Jaipur
9829243046
6 Ridhkaran Gurjar Farmer Keriya, teh.-Mojamabad, 9636735096
7 Sivaji Ram Choudhary Farmer Jebliyo ka bass teh.- mojmabad 8104551251
8 Rajendra kumar Kadwa Farmer Kadwa ka bass teh.- Mojmabad 9887458689
9 Ramratan singh
Choudhary
Farmer Mokhampura, Teh-mojmabad,
Jaipur
9929516577
10 Sharvan Kumar Farmer Guddha Kumwatan , Gram- Bobas 9983371081
11 Bina devi Farmer Guddha Kumwatan , Gram- Bobas 99833091521
12 Kamla devi Farmer Guddha Kumwatan , Gram- Bobas 9983226188
13 Gulab devi Farmer Guddha Kumwatan , Gram- Bobas
14 Laxminarayan Farmer Guddha Kumwatan , Gram- Bobas 99833226188
15 Rajkumar Verma Farmer Guddha Kumwatan , Gram- Bobas 9983091345
16 Mahendra kumar Sharma Farmer Gram- Bobas, teh- Shambar, 9982497734
17 Visharam Meena Officer Additional Director SJED 9414322352
18 Narendra singh chouhan Officer Advisor, ICDS, DWCD 9413146941
19 Hotst reinhadt Officer 24 shivaji nagar jaipur 98080007
20 Dr. Phuspendra s. Rathor Officer Rridma, Sec-14, Udhaipur 9602508513
21 Sanjay joshi Officer FES 9460200406
22 Priya Tendan Officer Fes 7737204385
23 Ramkumar Jat Officer P.D ATMA, Jaipur 9414408704
24 Srivastav roy Officer ITC Limited jaipur 9928498949
25 H.B. Yadav Officer Add. Director hort. 9413345226
26 Mahesh Saxena Officer ITC Limited Jaipur 9929554443
27 Mahesh Chand Jain Officer Agri supervisor Bichun 9785274784
28 Babulal Prajapati Farmer Agri Director Bobas 9828750023
29 Goverdhan lal Verma Farmer Guddha Kumwatan , Gram- Bobas 9799400663
30 Bansi lal Verma Farmer Guddha Kumwatan , Gram- Bobas 9799748445
31 Pintu Gehalot Farmer Guddha Kumwatan , Gram- Bobas 998309154
32 Dr. R.P Jangid Officer Director RSS SKRAU Bikaner 9413248654
33 Hema Yadav Officer NIAM Jaipur 9829210019
ANNEXURE- I
128
34 Shyamendra Officer ACCESS Dev. Jaipur 9982436682
35 Rajesh Jain Officer ACCESS Dev. Jaipur 9414249226
36 Anand lal Mathur Officer RPCB 9667575990
37 S.S Rana
Officer
Zonal Programme
manager(Kribhco)
9414101919
38 Anil Chopra Officer GVT Jaipur 9414027299
39 Narand Pratap Singh Officer RACP 9414516630
40 Dalvir singh Officer RACP 9413848752
41 Ladhu Lal Sharma Officer RACP 9314448864
42 Satvendra Singh Morarka Foundation-Jaipur 9414063505
43 Ramdhan Farmer Teh.- Hindoli dist.-Bundi 9166433601
44 Devendra Solanki Farmer Teh.- Hindoli dist.-Bundi 9799072002
45 Kalu lal Meena Farmer Teh.- Hindoli dist.-Bundi 9928428662
46 Hajari lal Mali Farmer Teh.- Hindoli dist.-Bundi 9799163206
47 Satveer Beniwal Officer Morarka Foundation-Jaipur 9414063462
48 Dr. HS Yadav Officer Manorpur 9983134400
49 Rajesh kumar yadav Officer Navalpura 82339390
50 Kewal Likhyani Officer USA 9958274669
51 Dr. Sangeeta Ladha Officer Directo IHITC- Jaipur 9001098986
52 Kamlesh Choudhary Farmer Jhotwada (Basedi) Jaipur 9782753748
53 Khemaram Choudhary Farmer Guddha Kumwatan , Gram- Bobas 9828057594
54 Dr. VP Singh Officer Dy. Director RACP Jaipur 9414392741
55 Anil Kumar Vijay Officer Asst. Director RACP Jaipur
Teh= Tehsil
Annexure-II
129
Annex II: List of pesticides banned by Government of India
LIST OF PESTICIDES / PESTICIDES FORMULATIONS BANNED IN INDIA
A. Pesticides Banned for manufacture, import and use (28 Nos.)
1. Aldrin
2. Benzene Hexachloride
3. Calcium Cyanide
4. Chlordane
5. Copper Acetoarsenite
6. CIbromochloropropane
7. Endrin
8. Ethyl Mercury Chloride
9. Ethyl Parathion
10. Heptachlor
11. Menazone
12. Nitrofen
13. Paraquat Dimethyl Sulphate
14. Pentachloro Nitrobenzene
15. Pentachlorophenol
16. Phenyl Mercury Acetate
17. Sodium Methane Arsonate
18. Tetradifon
19. Toxafen
20. Aldicarb
21. Chlorobenzilate
22. Dieldrine
23. Maleic Hydrazide
24. Ethylene Dibromide
25. TCA (Trichloro acetic acid)
26. Metoxuron
27. Chlorofenvinphos
28. Lindane (Banned vide Gazette Notification No S.O. 637(E) Dated 25/03/2011)-Banned for Manufecture,Import or Formulate w.e.f. 25th March,2011 and banned for use w.e.f. 25th March,2013.
B. Pesticide / Pesticide formulations banned for use but their manufacture is allowed for export (2 Nos.)
29. Nicotin Sulfate
30. Captafol 80% Powder
C. Pesticide formulations banned for import, manufacture and use (4 Nos)
1. Methomyl 24% L
Annexure-II
130
2. Methomyl 12.5% L
3. Phosphamidon 85% SL
4. Carbofuron 50% SP
D. Pesticide Withdrawn(7 Nos)
1. Dalapon
2. Ferbam
3. Formothion
4. Nickel Chloride
5. Paradichlorobenzene (PDCB)
6. Simazine
7. Warfarin
LIST OF PESTICIDES REFUSED REGISTRATION
S. No. Name of Pesticides
1. Calcium Arsonate
2. EPM
3. Azinphos Methyl
4. Lead Arsonate
5. Mevinphos (Phosdrin)
6. 2,4, 5-T
7. Carbophenothion
8. Vamidothion
9. Mephosfolan
10. Azinphos Ethyl
11. Binapacryl
12. Dicrotophos
13. Thiodemeton / Disulfoton
14. Fentin Acetate
15. Fentin Hydroxide
16. Chinomethionate (Morestan)
17. Ammonium Sulphamate
18. Leptophos (Phosvel)
Annexure-II
131
PESTICIDES RESTRICTED FOR USE IN INDIA
S. No. Name of Pesticides
1. Aluminium Phosphide
2. DDT
3. Lindane
4. Methyl Bromide
5. Methyl Parathion
6. Sodium Cyanide
7. Methoxy Ethyl Mercuric Chloride (MEMC)
8. Monocrotophos
9. Endosulfan
10. Fenitrothion
11. Diazinon
12. Fenthion
13. Dazomet
Annexure-III
132
ANNEX III: List of pesticides not permissible (WHO classes Ia, Ib and II)
1. Extremely hazardous (Class Ia):
Common name
Aldicarb Ethoprophos
Brodifacoum Flocoumafen
Bromadiolone Hexachlorobenzene
Bromethalin Mercuric chloride
Calcium cyanide Mevinphos
Captafol Parathion
Chlorethoxyfos Parathion-methyl
Chlormephos Phenylmercury acetate
Chlorophacinone Phorate
Difenacoum Phosphamidon
Difethialone Sodium fluoroacetate
Diphacinone Sulfotep
Disulfoton Tebupirimfos
EPN Terbufos
2. Highly hazardous (Class Ib):
Common name
Acrolein Oxydemeton-methyl
Allyl alcohol Paris green
Azinphos-ethyl Pentachlorophenol
Azinphos-methyl Propetamphos
Blasticidin-S Sodium arsenite
Butocarboxim Sodium cyanide
Butoxycarboxim Strychnine
Cadusafos Tefluthrin
Calcium arsenate Thallium sulfate
Carbofuran Thiofanox
Chlorfenvinphos Thiometon
3-Chloro-1,2-propanediol Triazophos
Coumaphos Vamidothion
Coumatetralyl Warfarin
Zeta-cypermethrin Zinc phosphide
Demeton-S-methyl Famphur
Dichlorvos Fenamiphos
Dicrotophos Flucythrinate
Dinoterb Fluoroacetamide
Annexure-III
133
DNOC Formetanate
Edifenphos Furathiocarb
Ethiofencarb Heptenophos
Isoxathion Methiocarb
Lead arsenate Methomyl
Mecarbam Monocrotophos
Mercuric oxide Nicotine
Methamidophos Omethoate
Methidathion Oxamyl
3. Moderately hazardous (Class II):
Common name
Alanycarb Endosulfan
Anilofos Endothal-sodium
Azaconazole EPTC
Azocyclotin Esfenvalerate
Bendiocarb Ethion
Benfuracarb Fenazaquin
Bensulide Fenitrothion
Bifenthrin Fenobucarb
Bilanafos Fenpropidin
Bioallethrin Fenpropathrin
Bromoxynil Fenthion
Bromuconazole Fentin acetate
Bronopol Fentin hydroxide
Butamifos Fenvalerate
Butylamine Fipronil
Carbaryl Fluxofenim
Carbosulfan Fuberidazole
Cartap Gamma-HCH , Lindane
Chloralose Guazatine
Chlorfenapyr Haloxyfop
Chlordane HCH
Chlorphonium chloride Imazalil
Chlorpyrifos Imidacloprid
Clomazone Iminoctadine
Copper sulfate Ioxynil
Annexure-III
134
Cuprous oxide Ioxynil octanoate
Cyanazine Isoprocarb
Cyanophos Lambda-cyhalothrin
Cyfluthrin Mercurous chloride
Beta-cyfluthrin Metaldehyde
Cyhalothrin Metam-sodium
Cypermethrin Methacrifos
Alpha-cypermethrin Methasulfocarb
Cyphenothrin [(1R)-isomers] Methyl isothiocyanate
2,4-D Metolcarb
DDT Metribuzin
Deltamethrin Molinate
Diazinon Nabam
Difenzoquat Naled
Dimethoate Paraquat
Dinobuton Pebulate
Diquat Permethrin
Phenthoate Quizalofop-p-tefuryl
Phosalone Rotenone
Phosmet Spiroxamine
Phoxim TCA [ISO] (acid)
Piperophos Terbumeton
Pirimicarb Tetraconazole
Prallethrin Thiacloprid
Profenofos Thiobencarb
Propiconazole Thiocyclam
Propoxur Thiodicarb
Prosulfocarb Tralomethrin
Prothiofos Triazamate
Pyraclofos Trichlorfon
Pyrazophos Tricyclazole
Pyrethrins Tridemorph
Pyroquilon Xylylcarb
Quinalphos
Annexure- IV
135
ANNEXURE IV: Integrated Pest Management Plan for Rajasthan
1.0 Introduction
India has 16% of the world’s population. With an estimated population of 1.12 billion, India is the world’s second most population country and is expected to be the most populous by 2030. However, we have only 2% of the world’s geographic area, out of which only 56% is cultivated and 4 % of the world’s water. Under these situations, India cannot afford to have comparatively lower productivity of crops, when it has the responsibility of feeding nearly one sixth of the global population.
Loss due to pest and disease attack is one of the major causes for poor productivity. It is estimated that the losses caused due to pests and weeds range between 10-40%. Loss of about 50% in cotton, 35% in oilseeds, 30% in pulses and rice, 30-35% in fruits and vegetables and 15% in wheat in the absence of plant protection chemicals have been reported in the past.
Agricultural productivity in India made a quantum jump in the late 1960’s with the advent of “green revolution” technologies, predominantly based on use of hybrid seeds and chemical fertilizers and pesticides. However, realization has dawned now that excessive use of chemicals in agriculture has not only increased the cost of cultivation, but has also damaged the very soil, water and air on which crop production is dependant.
The environmental impact of widespread and intense use of chemical pesticides (these are poisons of varying lethality) is the poisoning of the ecosystem which not only affects humans and farm animals through the food cycle, but also the destruction of numerous predatory organisms which in nature check and maintain the growth of crop pests.
Thus, ironically, repeated and continuous use of chemical pesticides not only increases the resistance of the pest to the chemical but also regularly wipes out population of predators thereby providing an enemy-free environment for the growth of the very pests that one wants to control.
Specifically, excessive use of chemicals in agriculture has led to the following impacts:
Development of resistance in target insects/pests and they are no longer eliminated with recommended doses.
Resurgence of pests, as they are not wiped out and reappear time and again.
Destruction of useful insects that were natural predators of problem-insects due to continuous use of chemical insecticides.
Pollution of soil and water resources resulting in reduced soil productivity.
Deposition of pesticide residues in the environment that ultimately enters the human food chain leading to health hazards in the form of severe disorders such as, cancer,
miscarriage, infertility, birth-defects, kidney problems etc.
Outbreak of secondary pests due to loss of natural enemies.
Given the obvious importance of chemical pesticides in controlling pests and thereby managing higher productivity and also given the clearly adverse impacts of its excessive use, the RACP has adopted Integrated Pest Management (IPM) as the key strategy to combat pests and diseases in the project1. IPM is a key component of the Integrated Crop Management strategy based on “green agriculture” principles that RACP is seeking to promote in the project. Thus, IPM has already been mainstreamed in the RACP for implementation.
Further, IPM has been included in the Environmental Guidances (EG Agri 4: Pest & Disease Management) given in the EMF Toolkit along with the process for applying the EG and monitoring it. However, the Integrated Pest Management Plan for RACP is being spelled out here for purposes of
1 Pg.39 of Project Implementation Plan, RACP, GoR
Annexure- IV
136
abundant clarity and caution, apart from the fact that it is a requirement under OP4.09 of the World Bank.
2.0 Objectives of Integrated Pest Management Plan
The purpose of this document is to describe a Plan by which the project can promote and support safe, effective, and environmentally sound pest management in agricultural interventions undertaken under RACP. The plan further presents components to strengthen such capacity.
The Plan promotes the use of biological and environmental control methods and the reduction in reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides.
3.0 Integrated Pest Management
Integrated Pest Management is the approach now being adopted worldwide to address the issue of excessive use of chemical pesticides in agriculture. The World Bank’s Operational Policy 4.09 defines integrated pest management as a mix of farmer-driven, ecologically based pest control practices that seeks to reduce reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides. It involves
a) managing pests (keeping them below economically damaging levels) rather than seeking to eradicate them;
b) relying, to the extent possible, on non-chemical measures to keep pest populations low; and
c) selecting and applying pesticides, when they have to be used, in a way that minimizes adverse effects on beneficial organisms, humans, and the environment.
IPM is a broad ecological approach of pest control (insects, diseases, weeds, rodents etc) employing all methods and techniques viz. cultural, mechanical, genetic, regulatory, biological and chemical in a compatible manner to keep pest population below economic threshold level (ETL).
The revised International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides, FAO (2002) defines IPM as follows:
“IPM means the careful consideration of all available pest control techniques and subsequent integration of appropriate measures that discourage the development of pest populations and keep pesticides and other interventions to levels that are economically justified and reduce or minimize risks to human health and the environment. IPM emphasizes the growth of a healthy crop with the least possible disruption of agro-ecosystems and encourages natural pest control mechanisms.”
3.1 Tools of IPM
The main tools of IPM are:
o Monitoring: Crop monitoring, that keeps track of the pests and their potential damage, is the
foundation of IPM. This provides knowledge about the current pests and crop situation and is
helpful in selecting the best possible combinations of the pest management methods.
Pheromone traps have an advantage over other monitoring tools such as light and sticky traps.
Being selective to specific pests, they have proven their usefulness in large scale IPM
validations in cotton, basmati rice, chickpea and pigeon pea.
Annexure- IV
137
o Pest resistant varieties: Breeding for pest resistance is a continuous process. At the same
time the pests also, particularly the plant pathogens, co-evolve with their hosts. Thus,
gene transfer technology is useful in developing cultivars resistant to insects, plant
pathogens and herbicides. An example of this is the incorporation of genetic material
from Bacillus thuringensis
(Bt), a naturally occurring
bacterium, in cotton, corn, and
potatoes, which makes the
plant tissues toxic to the insect
pests. Scientific community is
impressed by its huge
potential in managing the
pests, but is also concerned
about the possibility of
increased selection pressure
for resistance against it and its
effects on non-target natural
fauna. However, due to
ethical, scientific and social
considerations, this potential
technology has been
surrounded by controversies.
o Cultural pest control: It includes crop production practices that make crop environment less
susceptible to pests. Crop rotation, fallowing, manipulation of planting and harvesting dates,
manipulation of plant and row spacing, and destruction of old crop debris are a few examples of
cultural methods that are used to manage the pests. Planting of cover crops, nectar- producing
plants and inter-planting of different crops to provide habitat diversity to beneficial insects are
important management techniques. Cover crops, often legume or grass species, prevent soil
erosion and suppress weeds. A cover crop can also be used as a green manure, which is
incorporated in the soil to provide nitrogen and organic matter to the subsequent crop. When
incorporated in the soil, some cover crops of the Brassica family have the ability to suppress
nematode pests and wilt diseases. Left in the field as residues, rye and wheat provide more than
90 percent weed suppression. Cultural controls are selected based on knowledge of pest biology
and development.
o Physical or mechanical controls: These are based on the knowledge of pest behaviour. Placing
plastic-lined trenches in potato fields to trap migrating Colorado potato beetles is one example of
the physical control. Shaking of the pigeon pea plant to remove Helicoverpa larvae is a common
practice in pigeon pea growing areas. Hand picking of insect pests is perhaps the simplest pest
control method. Installation of dead as well as live bird perches in cotton and chickpea fields has
proved effective in checking the bollworm infestation. Using mulches to smother weeds and
providing row covers to protect plants from insects are other examples.
o Biological controls: These include augmentation and conservation of natural enemies of pests
such as insect predators, parasitoids, parasitic nematodes, fungi and bacteria. In IPM
Key Components of IPM
Given here below is an outline of a typical IPM plan:
Identification of major pests & diseases for the crop in the area
Identification of the minor pests & diseases for the crop in the area
Assessment of ETL for major pests /diseases
Pest monitoring based on Agro Ecosystem Analysis (AESA) and conjunctive use of pheromone traps, sticky traps, etc.
IPM in action o Identification of pest & disease tolerant
/resistant varieties o Cultural methods o Physical / mechanical methods o Biological methods o Bio-pesticides o Chemical methods (preferably use chemicals
that are less toxic and have a shorter life after application
Annexure- IV
138
programmes, native natural enemy populations are conserved, and non-native agents may be
released with utmost caution. Trichogramma spp. is the most popular parasitoids being applied
on a number of host crops. A number of microorganisms such as Trichoderma spp., Verticillium
spp., Aspergillus spp., Bacillus spp. and Pseudomonas spp. that attack and suppress the plant
pathogens have been exploited as biological control agents.
o Chemical controls: Pesticides are used to keep the pest populations below economically
damaging levels when the pests cannot be controlled by other means. Pesticides include both
the synthetic pesticides and plant-derived pesticides. Synthetic pesticides include a wide range
of man-made chemicals. These are easy to use, fast-acting and relatively inexpensive. Ideally,
pesticides should be used as a last resort in IPM programmes because of their potential negative
effect on the environment. Pesticides with the least negative impacts on non-target organisms
and the environment are most useful. Fortunately, new generation pesticides with novel modes
of action and low environmental effects are being developed and registered for use. Pesticides
that are short-lived or act on one or a few specific organisms fall in this class.
o Assessment of Economic Threshold Level: This is based on the concept that most plants can
tolerate at least some pest damage. In an IPM programme where the economic threshold is
known, chemical controls are applied only when the pest’s damaging capacity is approaching the
threshold, despite application of other alternative management practices.
o Use of Botanical Pesticides: These can be prepared in various ways. They can be as simple as raw
crushed plant leaves, extracts of plant parts or as complex as chemicals purified from the plants.
Pyrethrum, neem, tobacco, garlic, and pongamia formulations are some examples of botanicals.
Some botanicals are broad- spectrum pesticides. Botanicals are generally less harmful to the
environment, because of their quick degrading property. They are less hazardous to transport.
The major advantage is that these can be formulated on-farm by the farmers themselves.
4.0 Implementing IPM - National Scenario
Currently, the major thrust areas of plant protection in India are promotion of Integrated Pest Management (IPM), ensuring availability of safe and quality pesticides, streamlining the quarantine measures and for human resource development including empowerment of women in plant protection skills. In India, IPM related activities are being implemented through 26 Central Integrated Pest Management Centres (CIPMCs) located in 23 states and Union Territories. The major activities under IPM approach include undertaking sample roving surveys for monitoring pest/disease situation on major crops, production and release of Bio-control agents and conducting Farmers’ Field Schools (FFSs).
5.0 Implementing IPM – Rajasthan
The Govt. of Rajasthan has adopted IPM2 as the key strategy to reduce the cost of cultivation and risk to farmers and also to reduce by 50% the use of chemical pesticides in the state by 2020.
2 Draft Agricultural Policy, GoR, Section 5.5
Annexure- IV
139
Measures taken in adoption/implementation of IPM in the State
State Bio-control Laboratory has been established in the state along with Regional IPM laboratories with the following objectives:
Promotion of biological methods and preparation of bio-agents.
To develop technology for mass rearing and release of parasites, predators, pathogens and other bio agents useful in different agro-climatic zones.
Preparation and maintenance of different cultures of bio agents.
To promote bio pesticides
To impart trainings to NGOs, Farmers and other organisations.
Regular pest and disease surveillance by extension network of Department of Agriculture, GoR, in addition to roving surveys being carried out by the CIPMC (Central Integrated Pest Management Centre) at Sri Ganganagar
Joint Director of Agriculture has been identified as Nodal Officer for planning and implementation of timely control measures. Frequent publicity is given in print and electronic media about affected areas and plant protection measures to be adopted as per the scientific recommendations.
Regular training to farmers, especially women at the Gram Panchayat level on IPM is being carried out by the DoA, GoR
Maintaining the quality of pesticides under the provision of Insecticide Act 1968 and Rule 1971, both at manufacturing/ formulating units and the sale points
Regular quality check before renewing /granting licence to sell or manufacture pesticides in the state
The state has 930 Insecticide inspectors spread across each district of the state to enforce the above act
In addition, agricultural universities and various KVKs in the state have also developed capacities to train farmers and also supply various biocontrol agents. May NGOs also have manpower to train farmers in participatory IPM through the means of Farmers Field Schools. However, the use of biopesticides and IPM is yet to take off in big way in Rajasthan as the table below shows: Area covered under use of chemical and bio pesticide in Rajasthan
(Area in‘000 ha.)
Year-(2010-11)
Total cultivated area
Chemical pesticide only
Bio- pesticide only
Both chemical pesticide &bio-pesticide
Application of chemical pesticide & bio-pesticide (kg. per ha.)
Rabi 7804 4800 185 4985 0.63
Kharif 13000 2900 150 3050 1.05
Source: Rajasthan agriculture statistics at glance for the year 2009-10 GOR, Zonal conference on inputs Rabi 2011-12, pp. 20.
The main reasons for slow uptake of IPM in Rajasthan (as well as the rest of the country) are:
Knowledge of IPM is still not widespread, as much as use of “green revolution” technologies is
Often inputs such as biocontrol agents, biopesticides, pest resistant varieties may not be available at all or not available in time to the farmer
The extension staff of the DoA, GoR itself needs reorientation and extensive training on IPM to be able to guide and advise farmers
Annexure- IV
140
IPM packages are not available for all crops, especially ETLs for all pests, hence there is a need to involve farmers and research institutions to develop ETLS.
Thus, one may conclude that in Rajasthan (as in the case of the rest of the country as well), adoption of IPM is limited by low levels of awareness among farmers which is a direct consequence of the limited outreach of the governmental extension system. Further, lack of convenient access to requisite inputs such as biocontrol agents, pheromone traps, etc., also hampers adoption of IPM even among farmers who are aware of the technology.
The situation is further stacked against the use of non-chemical pesticides in the face of strong commercial forces promoting chemical pesticides through a well organized dealer network backed by strong promotional support, as against which, IPM inputs are produced and promoted by state agricultural universities or small scale producers with no or negligible promotional support.
6.0 Implementing IPM in RACP
IPM forms the cornerstone of RACP’s pest management strategy. RACP has already identified the various IPM measures needed for crops that are likely to be taken up in some of the identified clusters.
The main crops grown in the targeted clusters are maize, chickpea, green gram (moong), green pea, groundnut, moth bean, cluster bean, soybean, cumin, coriander, and fruits and vegetables like mandarin, pomegranate, guava and tomato, brinjal, cauliflower, cabbage etc. Biocontrol measures for some of the pests and diseases are given below (also see Appendix 1: IPM packages for select crops):
Use of Trichogramma cards @ 8 cards per ha at 15 days interval four times for management of stem rot in maize;
seed treatment with Trichoderma @ 6 gm per kg seed for seed rot and fungal diseases in field in soybean; IPM package including proper spacing of 30 cm, seed rate of 80 kg/ha, use of sex pheromones @ 5 traps/ha for Spodoptera litura, and application of need based safer bio-pesticides for disease and pests in soybean are recommended.
For girdle beetle, trap crop of dhaincha around field and at 20-20 meter distance in field, and for control of vector for tobacco mosaic virus, pheromone traps (5 per ha) and light trap (one in 5 ha) are recommended.
For disease and insect pest management in groundnut, the IPM strategy includes soil and seed treatment followed by spray on the crop. Soil amendment with neem cake @ 250 kg/ha preferably 15 days before sowing, and soil application of Trichoderma harzianum @ 4.00 kg/ha incubated in 50 kg FYM for 15 days and applied before sowing; seed treatment with imidacloprid @ 2 ml/kg seed and T. harzianum @ 10 gm/kg seed; followed by foliar spray of mancozeb @ 2 gm/l at the time of 1st appearance of leaf spot disease are recommended.
For management of fruit borer in tomato and brinjal, use of 2.5 Trichogramma cards per ha at 45 days crop stage, 5-6 times at 7 days interval has shown good management. Also, in tomato, trap crop of marigold after every eight rows of tomato is beneficial.
The IPM package for cauliflower and cabbage includes soil application of T. harzianum through FYM (250 kg/ha), neem cake @ 50 g/m2 in nursery, soil solariztion, seed treatment with T. harzianum @ 4g/kg seed, sowing on raised beds, seedling dip in T. harzianum @ 4g/lt., monitoring population of S. litura and Plutella xylostella through pheromone traps, hand picking of larvae and egg masses of S. litura, application of biopesticides such as NPV
Annexure- IV
141
and NSKE and need based application of low risk insecticides like novaluron, cartap hydrochloride, spinosad, emamectin benzoate and mancozeb/ridomil.
Appendix 1 given at the end of this plan gives details of the IPM methods for various crops and also source of the various inputs that would be needed. Thus, it is clear that the RACP (with support from various SAU’s and ICAR research centres) has the capability in terms of sourcing inputs and knowledge to implement IPM in the project.
RACP proposes the following steps to do so:
Awareness creation: A multimedia approach that includes Kiosks, Print and e-media, Manuals, pamphlets, brochure, SMS over Mobile phones and Farmers fairs/group discussions would be used to create awareness about IPM in each of the clusters in RACP.
Input management: Inputs for IPM start with selection of the right varieties and seeds. In addition, IPM is more effective when coupled with INM and appropriate irrigation management. Therefore, RACP would provide support and help the farmer groups /Farmer Producer Company to source required inputs such as seeds of pest resistant varieties, biofertilizers, biocontrol agents, biopesticides, etc.
Capacity building: In order to train a large no. of farmers, Training of Trainers will be carried out which would cover Agricultural Extension Officers, SP2 staff who in turn would train farmers in the clusters.
Specifically, RACP proposes to deliver knowledge, skills and techniques of IPM to farmers in a cluster through a Farmer Field School (FFS) approach.
Each village in a cluster would have a Master Farmer on whose plot the entire package of practices for a crop, including IPM would be demonstrated
Groups of about 20 farmers (both men and women) would be attached to each such Master Farmer and his/her plot for meeting regularly and learning by observation and experimentation.
At every stage of the crop cycle the FFS groups would meet to observe and evaluate the impact of certain crop management decisions. For example, in IPM, they would observe the relationship between climate and pest incidence, extent of pest attack and economic damage, etc.
A Field Day would be organized at the time of harvest for the FFS group to evaluate the success of the package of practices, including IPM.
Teaching IPM to Farmers – FFS Way
The Farmer Field School is a form of adult education, which evolved from the concept that farmers learn optimally from field observation and experimentation.
It was developed to help farmers tailor their Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices to diverse and dynamic ecological conditions.
In regular sessions from planting till harvest, groups of neighbouring farmers observe and discuss dynamics of the crop’s ecosystem.
Simple experimentation helps farmers further improve their understanding of functional relationships (e.g. pests-natural enemy population dynamics and crop damage-yield relationships).
In this cyclical learning process, farmers develop the expertise that enables them to make their own crop management decisions.
Special group activities encourage learning from peers, and strengthen communicative skills and group building.
Annexure- IV
142
Based on the success, each FFS group member would be encouraged to adopt the entire package on their own plots and conduct FFS with a set of 20 farmers each.
Thus, a network of FFS plots and trainers would be created which would ensure that there is farmer-to-farmer dissemination of IPM.
RACP would provide the technical backstopping in terms of drawing expertise from SAUs, KVKs, NGOs as well as by providing input incentives to FFS farmers. It would also assist the FFS farmers in procuring inputs needed for implementing IPM.
Mainstreaming IPM in RACP
Training, demonstrations, FFS, input incentives, etc., for implementing IPM in RACP has been provided in the mainstream budget since the activity has been adopted as a mainstream activity. In addition, IPM has been included as a specific EG in the EMF Toolkit and has provided for the following monitoring indicators to be assessed periodically as part of internal monitoring, external audit as well supervision missions from the World Bank:
% of farmers who have adopted all components of IPM
% of farmers who are able to explain how to conduct AESA and assess ETL, identify pests and friendly insects, etc.
% reduction in use of chemical pesticides over baseline in l/Ha.
% increase in friendly pest population over baseline situation
As can be noted, the monitoring indicators cover both adoption as well as knowledge of IPM among RACP farmers.
8.0 Constraints in Implementing IPM
Despite the plan proposed for implementing IPM in RACP, several constraints exist. The table below summarizes the constraints in promoting IPM on a large scale in several clusters of Rajasthan:
Constraints/Risks in IPM Implementation and Mitigation Strategy
Constraint/Risks Mitigation
Availability of selective pesticides, effective against crop pests but not against natural enemies of pests, is a problem.
Make available selective bio-pesticides to farmers, as per their requirements.
One of the basic points of IPM is ETL, which have not been worked out for all
the pests and combination of pests for different varieties and regions.
Support p a r t i c i p a t o r y research programmes with farmers and research organizations to work out ETL for various pests within different project districts
Potential of bio-control agents has not been evaluated fully for many agents.
Do not introduce bio-control agents that have not been worked out in detail and are still in study stage. Use only ready to release and duly
approved bio-control agents.
Techniques of mass rearing of several bio-agents are still not well developed.
Ensure timely breeding and supply of predators to farmers; improve linkages with relevant line departments and other institutions.
Annexure- IV
143
Constraint/Risks Mitigation
Farmers in many cases are aware of new technologies but are unable to access it leading to disillusionment and consequently non-adoption of the technology
Ensure that demonstrations are alongside awareness building and that there is no gap between demonstration and supply of new technology, lest people lose interest.
Lack of adequate trained manpower at the field level to work with farmers to help them learn IPM
Ensure that a cadre of IPM resource persons are created in every cluster, especially in the SP2 teams. Ensure that regular trainings and refresher courses are conducted for IPM resource persons before the beginning of each crop season
Organizations such as Agri Man Ecology (AME) Foundation, PRADAN, FES, ASA may be contacted to develop appropriate training manuals for promoting IPM through FFS approach
7.0 Pesticide Use in RACP
Where chemical pesticides are deemed essential to control pest attack, RACP shall ensure that pesticides procured or used in the project are not on the list of pesticides banned by GoI or belong to Classes Ia, Ib or II of the WHO classification of pesticides ( See Annex II & III and also Regulatory Requirements List given in the EMF Toolkit). As a ready reckoner, the basis for WHO classification of pesticides is given in the table below:
WHO Hazard classification schedule based on WHO Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2009
GROUP
LD50 for the Rat(mg/kg body mass) Distinctive label marking
Oral Dermal Hazard statement
Colour band Solids* Liquids* Solids * Liquids*
Ia Extremely hazardous
5 or less 20 or less 10 or less
40 or less VERY TOXIC RED
Ib Highly hazardous
5-50 20-200 10-100 40- 400 TOXIC RED
II Moderately hazardous
50-500 200-2000 100-1000
400-4000 HARMFUL YELLOW
III slightly hazardous
Over 500 Over 2000
Over 1000
Over 4000
CAUTION BLUE
IV Acute hazard unlikely in normal use
Over 2000
Over 3000
- - GREEN
Annexure- IV
144
Appendix 1: Sample IPM Plans for Select Crops in Rajasthan
Maize:
Management Techniques:
(i) The normal sowing period in the first fortnight of July provides the best possible
alternative, the infestation being of moderate type and grain yields significantly
higher as compared to early and late plantings.
(ii) Release of Trichogramma chilonis3 i.e. 8th and 12th day after germination of the
crop @ 1.5 lakh eggs/ha at evening time (after 4.0 P.M.) at 40 spots/ha.
(iii) Insecticidal application i.e. spray of quinalphos 25 EC @ 1.25 l/ha at 10-15 days
after germination and 25 to 30 days after germination.
Chickpea:
Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) – Gram pod borer is an important pest of chickpea in Rajasthan and causes huge losses if not controlled timely and properly.
Pest Management Techniques:
(i) Sowing of chickpea crop during middle of October usually recorded least damage
while highest damage recorded in the late sown crop i.e., in the months of
November to December.
(ii) Application of insecticide at threshold values i.e. 5adults/pheromone traps/day
using 5 trap/ha or 2 larvae/meter row length plants during flowering and 1
larvae/meter row length plants during podding.
(iii) Application of HaNPV4 @ 250 LE along with adjuvant at weekly interval or use of
followed by insecticide application at initiation of pest during flowering stage.
Adjuvants like Teepol, Tinopal and Jaggery should be added.
(iv) Application of recommended insecticide –Flubendiamide 150-200 ml/ha.
(v) Use of ‘T’ shape bird perch at least 50-60/ha to provide the sitting place for
insectivorous birds.
(vi) Seed treatment with Trichoderma5 @ 8 to 10 g/kg seed to reduce the infection of
soil born fungi.
3 Egg parasitoids are available at Biocontrol laboratory, Department of Entomology, R.C.A. Udaipur and Biocontrol laboratories of GOR.
4 HaNPV is available in the Biopesticides Laboratory, Deptt. of Entomology, R.C.A. Udaipur. 5 Trichoderma is available in the Biopesticides Laboratory, Deptt. of Entomology, R.C.A. Udaipur and Biocontrol laboratories of GoR..
Annexure- IV
145
Soybean:
Semiloopers especially Chrysodeixis acuta and Plusia orichalcia, girdle beetle, Obreopsis brevis and tobacco caterpillar Spodoptera litura are important insect pest and cause tremendous loss since vegetative stage to podding.
Pest Management Technique:
(i) Clipping of infested plant part by girdle beetle in early stage of crop i.e., 3rd week
to 6th week old crop to remove the eggs population.
(ii) Usually early sown crop i.e. upto June suffers with infestation of girdle beetle and
July sown crops with semilooper and tobacco caterpillar.
(iii) Spray of insecticide Triazophos 800 ml/ha against girdle beetle at 30 to 40 days
or initiation of insect infestation and Indoxacarb 14.5 SC @ 300 ml/ha or
Emamectin benzoate 5 SG @ 180 g/ha at initiation of infestation of semiloopers
and tobacco caterpillar.
(iv) Release of Trichogramma chilonis @ 1.0 lakh/ha at 40-50 spots at 30 and 40 days
old crop.
(v) Crop geometry is having very important role in pest population buildup,
therefore 30 to 45 cm row to row and 15-20 cm plant to plant spacing should
maintain.
Vegetables:
Cruciferous vegetables: Cole crops especially cauliflower and cabbage suffers the huge infestation of diamond back moth, tobacco caterpillar, saw fly and aphids. Following pest management techniques helps in the effective management of pests:
(i) Application of commercial powder or liquid forms of Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki at 0.3 to 0.5kg/ha. The number of applications are decided on the availability of young larvae of diamond back moth.For suppression of Spodoptera litura on cole crops, a higher dosage 1-1.25kg/ha is required.
(ii) Release of Cotesia plutellae, solitary endo larval parasitoid6 at 15000/ha at initiation of infestation of diamond back moth.
(iii) Sucking insects especially aphids and leaf hopper can be controlled effectively by spray of Imidacloprid at 1ml/3litre of water.
Solanaceous vegetables: The tomato, chilli and brinjal are important crops in this group and damaged heavily by leaf hopper, white fly, aphids, tomato fruit borer, and brinjal fruit and shoot borer.
Tomato and chilli: For leaf hopper, white fly, aphids, tomato fruit borer management:
6 The parasitoid is available at NBAII, Bangalore.
Annexure- IV
146
(i) Application of commercial powder or liquid forms of Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki at 0.3 to 0.5kg/ha. The number of applications is decided on the infestation of tomato fruit borer.
(ii) Release of Trichogramma brasiliensis7 at 1.0 lakh/ha at initiation of pest population.
(iii) Application of HaNPV8 @ 250 LE along with adjuvant at weekly interval or use of followed by insecticide application at initiation of pest during flowering stage. Adjuvants like Teepol, Tinopal and Jaggery should be added.
(iv) Sucking insects especially aphids and leaf hopper can be controlled effectively by spray of Imidacloprid at 1ml/3litre of water. Release of Chelomens sexmaculata @ 5000larvae or adults/ha enough to manage the sucking insect population. Role of other predators viz., Orius, Coccinella and Chrysoperla is very important against sucking insect.
7 The parasitoid is available at NBAII, Bangalore, Biocontrol laboratory, Department of Entomology, R.C.A. Udaipur and Biocontrol laboratories of GOR.
8 HaNPV is available in the Biopesticides Laboratory, Deptt. of Entomology, R.C.A. Udaipur.
Annexure-V
147
ANNEXURE V: BEST PRACTICES
Andhra Pradesh Farmers Groundwater Management System (APFAMGS)
APFAMGS, a 51 months project started in mid-2004, is a logical extension of the Netherlands’ funded project Andhra Pradesh Groundwater Bore-well Irrigation Schemes (APWELL) implemented during 1996 and 2003. The AFAMGS was implemented in the 7 most drought prone districts of the state.
There was a strong perceived need of such an intervention by the community. In the project districts the groundwater over-exploitation and decline of water table posed serious threats to agriculture production and food security with compounding problem of increased indebtedness of farmers’ families leading to high suicide rates and social unstability.
The institutional arrangement was multi-tier: BIRDS--the nodal NGO—partnered with 8 NGOs. The project is implemented through a Hydrological Unit Network of federation of 63 registered farmer’s institutions (also called Groundwater Management Committees—GMCs--with each managing one Hydrological Unit—HU) guided by the 9 NGOs. The 63 HUs covered 638 habitations across 40 mandals forming part of 303 panchayats in the 7 project districts.
Effective mechanisms were promoted for sharing of information between the APFAMGS project and the two key departments—Groundwater and Rural Development. Although there was no direct funding support from these departments there was high degree of appreciation amongst the depts about the project. The depts were committed to adopt and scale-up the approach.
The core approach is to empower People’s Institutions and demystify science of groundwater hydrology, impart skills and knowledge, so that farmers make informed-choices on groundwater use in irrigation. Especially women’s participation in decision making improved groundwater governance.
The Farmers Water School (FWS) adapted from FFS (Farmers Field School under agriculture extension programme) catalysed the intervention. Formal hydrology was taught in an informal manner. Fifteen farmers met every 15 days in the FWS to discuss problems and issues associated with groundwater availability and use for 12 months.
Overall, the GMCs and HUN are robust and display excellent form of democratic setup. They tap government schemes on efficient irrigation technologies—drip and sprinkler, share annual statements of income and expenditure, and hold regular meetings.
The project promoted farmer-led data collection and, analysis and presentation of resource condition in a user-friendly format. The data was collected regularly from 190 rainguage stations, water levels of 2109 monitoring wells, discharge measurements from 969 wells, stream flow discharge from 63 flow guage stations, and groundwater quality of 300 drinking water sources. The results of analysis were extensively shared with the farmers (especially through display boards in habitations on real time data) and the relevant government departments. The data is used for computing water balance and crop planning (both type and extent of area).
The APFAMGS led to controlling groundwater pumping for 4 years, favourably altered groundwater balance in 53 HUs led by demand side management. The demand management interventions included efficient irrigation technologies, selection of low water using crops, checking growth of wells.
Annexure-V
148
The FAO-APFAMGS is fully equipped to offer technical and training support to government agencies in other states.
Relevance of APFAMGS model to RACP
As noted in the environment baseline section of the report groundwater is a major source of irrigation and its development is very high (falling in OE or dark category) in most of the blocks of Rajasthan. Hence, there is need to manage the resource judiciously and sustainably to foster agriculture development in the region. Further, as per project design, RACP plans intervention in two micro-clusters in each of the 10 intervention blocks with one micro-cluster focusing on irrigated agriculture and other on rainfed conditions. APFAMGS model can demonstrate ways to manage groundwater in RACP intervention areas.
Common Land and Poor Livestock-keepers: Experiences from Common Land Development in the states of Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh
Small and marginal farmers constitute about 78% of the farming community and own 70% of livestock in India. With very low landholding they rely on common lands for meeting significant part of fodder needs. Livestock is major source of income for small and marginal farmers and the landless. FES and BAIF have been working on developing common lands in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. During 1966-2000 common lands have reduced drastically to only 3.9 Mha i.e. by 24%.
The study covers 10 intervention villages (8 of FES and 2 of BAIF) across 4 districts of Rajasthan—Ajmer, Bundi, Bhilwara and Udaipur. The common lands in these villages range from 42% to 88% (with average of 56%) of the geographical area of the village and are managed in FES villages by Tree Growers Cooperative Society (TGCS) or the Village Forest Protection and Management Committees (VFPMC) or Charagah (pasture land) Vikas Samitee (CVS) or Watershed Development Committee (WDC). In BAIF villages they are managed by Village Management Committee.
Specifically, village pastures are protected by CVS as per policy provision of 73rd Amendment, Panchayati Raj Act and Watershed Development Guidelines, Forest lands are protected by VFPMC as per the provision under JFM guidelines, and Revenue wasteland are protected by TGCS under MoU between State Government, NDDB and FES.
The results of protection of common lands by various committees have been encouraging:
Significant increase in biomass from common lands: The increase in number of trees per ha of protected patch ranged 100 - 350 trees in Rajasthan while in case of Madhya Pradesh the figure was 100-120 trees. Acacia nilotica, Acacia leucophloea, Butea monosperma, Anogeissus pendula, Azadirachta indica and Prosopis cineraria are some of the important species of trees found in the study villages. The natural regeneration efforts led to high density growth of shrubs too in the commons. Overall, in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh an increase of 450% and 300%, respectively, of palatable biomass was observed in protected patches.
Increase in type of fodder increase has driven significant increase in holding of particular cattle types: The contribution of leaf and pods to fodder availability in Rajasthan is higher. This led to the households increasing the herd size of small ruminants, while in case of Madhya Pradesh where grass cover improved significantly the households showed preference over large ruminants such as buffalo.
Annexure-V
149
Higher fodder contribution from common lands: Though protected patches constitute smaller proportion of common land (average across villages being 25%) but these patches contribute 60% of the total fodder availability.
Improved water regime and agriculture development: The assured availability of water (as compared to pre-intervention period) boosted the agricultural area under double crop by almost 94%, while the wasteland category showed a reduction of 81% in 2006 compared to 1993.
Soil enrichment: The organic content of the soil increased by 45% as compared to soil of the control micro-watershed. Other soil nutrients of the area too show like results. There was a 9% increase in nitrogen, 7.5% increase in phosphorus and 22% increase in available potassium as compared to control watershed.
Relevance of Common Land protection to RACP
The need for goatery development (promoting improved breed of goats) is described in the PIP of RACP. Goatery development is proposed to provide a source of sustainable and assured income for landless and small and marginal farmers. The field consultations show that small and marginal farmers and the landless depend on common lands for meeting significant part of fodder needs. At the same time, with decreasing sizes of common lands due to encroachment and diversion for alternative uses as noted in the field consultations, the intervention on protection of common lands can provide the needed fodder for goats.
Best Practice: Tree based farming system TBFS (popularly referred to as “Wadi” model)
“Wadi” model consists of integrating growing trees into the cropping pattern. The choice of trees is such that it covers horticultural, forestry, fodder yielding and fuel-wood species. Thus, while the basic agricultural crop provides grain to the farmer, the trees provide fruits and timber for marketing and fodder and fuel-wood for own consumption. The dryland farmer is thus able to meet needs of grain, fodder, fuel-wood as well as income. Further, given the different durations of gestation, yield and returns, the dry land farmer is assured income in short (grains, vegetable), medium (fuel-wood, fodder) and long term (timber species). Thus, the model also enhances income security of the dryland farmers. It consists of:
Digging trenches & rainwater harvesting pond: Digging trenches (10’ x 1.5’ x 1.5’) along the farm bunds and across contours in the farmers field. The soil from the trenches is piled on to the bunds, thus strengthening it; The trenches are connected in such a way that excess rainwater from one trench flows into another trench that is at a lower contour; A rainwater harvesting pond of 30’ x 30’ x 10’ (for an acre plot) is dug at the lowest level of the plot such that all the excess flow from the trenches and the run-off from the plot is channelized into the pond.
Tree plantation: Timber species such as teak, acacia, silver oak, sisum, casurina etc. are planted at the rate of 2-3/ trench; Fuel, fodder and other species such as subabul, Cassia siamea, drum stick are planted on the farm bunds such that an acre has about 200-300 plants. Sometimes even plants such as papaya are planted on the bunds; The main crop land is planted with fruit trees such as mango, sapota, guava, etc., depending on the choice of the farmer; In between these trees, the normal agricultural crop of the farmer is taken; Along the border of the plot, live fence in the form of Euphorbia, Glyricidia, etc. are planted to provide protection to the plantations from grazing. Further,
Annexure-V
150
these also provide a ready source of green leaf for manure and fodder purposes; thus, an acre of farmland is planted with 400-600 trees along with providing enough space to grow agricultural crops.
The “Wadi” model is implemented through: raising nursery of forestry seedlings by the project beneficiaries—managed by individual/ groups. This ensured raising species of their choice in nursery locations that would facilitate timely plantation and avoid long distant transportation of saplings.
SHGs were formed to facilitate collective action but with individual ownership. They played a crucial role in the planning and distribution of inputs, execution of community activities such as establishing farm ponds, mobilization of savings and credit, important decision-making regarding control of grazing, etc.
Micro-level Plans (MLPs) were prepared for each farmer level plot with active inputs from the farmer, SHG and BAIF. The aggregation of such plans helped in planning decentralised nurseries. Monitoring of implementation of MLPs is done by the farmer and a monitoring committee of the community.
The “Wadi” model has resulted in array of environmental benefits:
Groundwater recharging and prevention of soil erosion: Trenches capture run-off water and thereby recharges groundwater. A single filling of a trench holds upto 1000 litres of water. Trenches also trap the soil that comes along with the run-off water and thereby prevent loss of fertile soil.
Improvement of soil-moisture regime: The rainwater harvesting pond can harvest 2.5 lakh litres of water in a single filling. Hence, trenches and these ponds together help in improving the soil moisture regime in the plot.
Increased soil cover in the form of trees helps in checking soil erosion and in reducing soil moisture loss, especially during summers.
Increased availability of biomass including leafy green manure helps in preparation of compost, beneficial for enhancing the soil organic content
Increased availability of fodder leaves helps in reducing grazing pressure on common lands and helps regenerate them better.
Trees act as windbreaks and help in protecting crops and soil during storms.
Relevance of “Wadi” model to RACP
One of the key objectives of RACP is to enhance the agriculture production by groundwater recharge and enhancing the local soil-moisture regime. Hence, watershed development activities are proposed. The “Wadi” model has effectively demonstrated ways to meet this objective while substantially increasing farmer’s income.
Annexure-V
151
Best Practice: Marketing KB Drip – A Low Cost Drip Solution
Lack of irrigation is the single most important limiting factor for increasing productivity, cropping intensity and thus, returns to the farmer. In the last three decades in the absence of large public investments in creating irrigation infrastructure in the country, ground-water based irrigation driven by private initiative has emerged as the largest contributor to increase in irrigated area. Aided by little or no electricity costs and low cost of owning an electric pump set, shallow tube wells have emerged as the major source of irrigation (>40% of net irrigated area9) in the country.
However, indiscriminate use of groundwater has resulted in fast depletion of the resource, frequent failure of the tube well, shortened period of yield and the need to dig deeper and deeper tube wells. Drip irrigation is a well known technology to help conserve such precious water with the added benefit of improving yield and quality of produce due to maintenance of suitable soil moisture status. However, conventional drip technology despite subsidies (often available to limited no. of farmers) has remained beyond the reach of small and marginal farmers. Further, the technology has been often promoted only for wide-spaced crops such as coconut, mango, grapes, etc., mainly due to the high cost of the equipment, especially, the lateral tubes and the emitters.
International Development Enterprises (India) (IDE-India) a Section 25 company first challenged this notion by introducing micro-tube based drip irrigation technology that could be used in close-spaced crops such as mulberry, cotton, tomato, chillies, etc. However, even this technology was found costly for most small and marginal farmers.
In a quantum leap of innovation, IDE-India introduced “pepsi tapes10” with punched holes into which microtubes were inserted. At one stroke it reduced the cost of the equipment and did away with the need for an engineer to design and install the drip system in the farmer’s field. Needless to say, this was more affordable but still needed considerable labour in installation and in removing after the crop season and re-laying it for the next crop.
The next generation of “pepsi tapes” now called KB11 Drip tapes were made of better material; a mixture of LLDPE & LDPE12 and came with pre-punched drip holes. They were also available in different thicknesses of 125, 250 & 500 microns. As compared to conventional drip systems these systems were cheaper by 70-80% depending on the thickness of the KB Drip tape. A comparison of costs for conventional drip with KB Drip for close-spaced vegetable crops is given in Table XX.
9 Groundwater Irrigation in India: Gains, Costs and Risks. Vasant P. Gandhi, N.V. Namboodiri, IIM(A),
March 2009 10 Ice candy is sold in transparent polythene tubes. Locally, they are called “pepsi”, hence the name
“pepsi tapes” for low cost IDE drip tapes. 11 Krishak Bandhu is the brand name of IDE-India products 12 Linear Low Density Polyethylene and Low Density Polyethylene
Annexure-V
152
Table: KB Drip vs. Conventional Drip
Crop: Vegetables, Tapioca, Turmeric, Cotton, spacing: 3.5 feet
125mic with Prepunch KB Drip
250mic with Prepunch KB Drip
Regular system with In line lateral
Sr.NO. Particulars Amount (Rs./ acre)
Amount (Rs./ acre)
Amount (Rs./ acre)
1 Tube 16 mm 4604 9207 33500
2 Dripper 0 0 0
3 GTO16mm 540 540 540
4 joiner & End cap 308 308 550
5 Lateral 16 578 578 975
6 Ball valve 63mm 135 135 300
7 S/m pipe 63mm 2024 2024 2730
8 installation 500 500 750
9 TOTAL 8688 13292 39345
Soon other products followed such as Ventury Injectors for fertigation and KB Layflat pipes that replaced costly PVC pipes that are used as mains and sub-mains in conventional drip systems.
Relevance of KB Drip to RACP
A core feature of RACP is to promote sustainable and efficient use of water for irrigation. At the same time viability of any irrigation efficient technology is dependent on affordability and ease of use. The KB drip—promoted by IDE has demonstrated to address these issues effectively.
Annexure-VI
153
Annexure VI: Review of relevant projects of WB
Key issues from Maharashtra Agriculture Competitiveness Project (MACP)
The project focused on expanding market infrastructure and farmers’ access to market opportunities; and, facilitating intensification and diversification of production
The methodology and approach involved: desk review of various safeguard policies of WB and, relevant environmental regulatory frameworks and policies/ acts at the state and national levels; primary data was collected extensive stakeholder consultations by visit to 20 field sites selected for sub-projects proposed to be implemented; and, Focus Group Discussions and interviews with potential stakeholders were conducted to identify and assess the environmental implications of the project.
The IESA study shows that while there is very low risk of environmental impacts there are high positive social impacts and opportunities to enhance the environmental performance of the project.
Majority of the interventions proposed are not new, efforts are to improve the existing practices and consequently spatially and temporally limited impacts may occur. Mitigation measures are proposed in the report to contain/ minimize/ reverse any adverse impacts.
o Sites proposed for infrastructure are in close proximity to the centre of production and accessible by all weather roads.
o Land required for the project does not come under forestland or protected area and any upgrading of marketing facilities will alter the land use in a significant way.
o Improved markets could lead to generation of solid/ organic waste. The report proposes measures to address these.
o Improved access to markets could drive intensification of production leading to increased use of fertilisers and pesticides. The project proposed an Integrated Nutrient and Pest Management (INPM) strategy.
But the project seeks to address a number of issues to minimise adverse environmental impacts that include: locating sub-projects on lands free of encumbrances; using environmental friendly practices in construction—fly ash bricks, hollow cement blocks etc.; adequate waste management practices both solid and liquid wastes; capacity building of farmers to strengthen implementation of INPM and groundwater management strategy.
The EMF is developed based on three distinct phases of project cycle—project preparation (planning and designing sub-projects), project implementation (supervision and quality control) and project operation (including M & E). For each stage environmental issues are identified and mitigation measures proposed in the EMF. The framework incorporates key issues on use of pesticides, capacity building and institutional arrangements. It also includes screening process of sub projects and monitoring measures. A key strategy of the project is to exclude any activity for support through the project that can lead to physical displacement or significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats.
Annexure-VI
154
The INPM strategy aims to maximise production with minimum inputs that minimises waste pollution and manage pests below the economic threshold level
As part of the institutional arrangement the project clearly identifies the need to have an Environmental Cell within the PMU for coordinating the PIUs. At the level of PIU Community Extension worker is proposed who will be responsible for community mobilization as well as addressing social and environmental concerns at the sub-project level.
The monitoring and evaluation proposed in the project involves both internal and external mechanisms which also cover the EMF activities. The project proposes an independent third-party mid-term evaluation. Further, the indicators for monitoring are proposed to be built into the implementation process to improve project performance.
Key issues from Assam Agriculture Competitiveness Project (AACP)
Identification of Impacts: The risk associated with the interventions has been assessed based on experiences from site visits, consultations and review of secondary information. To identify traces of pesticide reduces and heavy metals, 10 samples of milk and 6 samples of different vegetables were collected from Guwahati and Barpeta respectively and analyzed.
Identification of options: possibility of use of locally available materials and traditional
practices were considered for developing cost effective measures. The EMF addresses all environmental issues considering the WB Operational Policies and
Safeguard Requirements, apart from the legal requirements of the State Governments and the Government of India. All necessary information for compliance to the WB and GoI requirements to address the various issues as the clearance requirements, procedures, survey formats etc have been worked out in this framework. The EMF will facilitate the executing agencies to follow a process of project planning to tailor a project as per the local conditions and for different points of time.
Environmental Codes of Practice (ECPs) have been compiled for each mitigation/ management
measure finalised. These address environmental issues arising out due to the proposed interventions. The draft codes of practices developed for each of the activities have been discussed with the PCU and representatives from respective departments, beneficiaries and other stakeholders to solicit their views on the ECPs prior to their finalisation.
Key issues from Rajasthan Rural Livelihood Programme (RRLP)
The project is proposed to be implemented in 17 districts of Rajasthan with an aim to increase and sustain income of the poor, especially women through five components: Institution building and social empowerment; Community investment support (support asset creation by SHGs and their federations through SHG seed capital investment fund, village investment fund and innovation
Annexure-VI
155
support fund); Skill development and employment promotion; Climate change adaptation (awareness and pilot adaptation activities); and, Project implementation support.
Methodology: Review of secondary data (including from government departments, World Bank documents, SHGs/ CIGs, producer organizations etc.). Specifically, it incorporated lessons learnt from implementation of DPIP–I; Review of legal and regulatory systems (of government of India and government of Rajasthan); Stakeholder consultations and disclosure (FGDs with especially 62 SHGs/ CIGs, federation, and producer organizations from seven sample districts--Dausa, Dholpur, Sawai Madhopur, Tonk, Banswara, Churu, and Udaipur). In addition, two multi-stakeholder workshops were conducted at Jaipur and Sawai Madhopur which were participated by representatives from government, academia, NGOs, federations and SHGs.
The EMF comprises a detailed strategy and procedures for environmental appraisal of activities to be promoted at SHG, CDO or producer organization level, capacity building and monitoring to enable the adoption of mitigation measures, and the promotion of environment-friendly activities as pilot subprojects. It details out Environmental Management toolkit, promotion of proactive environmental sub-projects, institutional arrangements, internal monitoring mechanism, external environmental audit, performance indicators, capacity building, budget and timeline.
Specifically it encompasses:
The toolkit includes integration of environmental issues in livelihood plans, environmental screening of activities, environmental appraisal and environmental guidelines (EG):
Integrate environmental issues in the development of livelihood plans by SHGs. Towards this a format for the natural resource assessment at village level has been developed.
Environmental screening of activities: Preliminary screening of the SHGs’ livelihood activities, cluster development plans, and business plans of producer organizations were conducted and all the activities likely to be promoted have been categorized as having negligible (like sewing, retail sale), low (like agriculture, horticulture, dairy, NTFP, stone carving), and medium (irrigation well, brick making) and high environmental impacts.
Environmental appraisal: For assessing the adverse environmental impacts of any proposed livelihood plan. This exercise will be undertaken by the field-level project facilitation teams (PFTs) with the participation of the SHGs/ CDOs/ POs.
Environmental Guidelines (EGs) have been prepared for the various livelihood activities. It includes the potential impact, needed mitigation measures, and the possible government schemes for convergence.
Promotion of proactive environmental subprojects to demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of good practices such as rainwater harvesting (farm ponds, roof top rainwater harvesting and Kund bagwani), fodder management, organic farming and community pasture land development. These activities will be identified in the select two PFTs and implemented with facilitation support through trainings by Sector Specific Organisations (SSOs).
Annexure-VI
156
Institutional arrangement: States overall responsibility and roles at the state, district, block, and village levels in order to ensure the successful implementation of EMF.
Internal monitoring: Based on desk review and field visits by state and district level teams. In all 10 such exercises are proposed over 5 years. In addition, the details on the sampling design and methodology have been also provided.
External environmental audit: Two independent external audits will be undertaken to identify ways to strengthen the EMF and identify the best practices. A Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA) study will be undertaken as part of the mid-term external environmental audit.
Performance indicators: A set of performance indicators are proposed to monitor the effectiveness of EMF implementation for all the components like process of environmental appraisal, pilot implementation of proactive environment subprojects, institutional arrangement, and so on.
Capacity building: Trainings are proposed at various institutional levels for capacity building of project staff and beneficiaries to ensure effective implementation of EMF.
Annexure-VII
157
ANNEXURE VII: OP 4.01 – Environmental Assessment
Operational Manual
OP 4.01 - Environmental Assessment
These policies were prepared for use by World Bank staff
and are not necessarily a complete treatment of the
subject.
OP 4.01
January, 1999
This Operational Policy statement was updated in February 2011 to clarify the use of framework instruments and to add strategic environmental and social assessment (SESA) to the list of available instruments. It was previously revised in March
2007 to reflect the issuance of OP/BP 8.00, Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies, and in August 2004 to ensure
consistency with the requirements of OP/BP 8.60. Questions on this policy may be addressed to OPCS Quality Assurance and Compliance (OPCQC).
Note: OP and BP 4.01 together replace OMS 2.36, Environmental Aspects of Bank Work; OD 4.00, Annex A, Environmental Assessment; OD
4.00, Annex B, Environmental Policy for Dam and Reservoir Projects; OD 4.01, Environmental Assessment; and the following Operational
Memoranda: Environmental Assessments: Instructions to Staff on the Handling of the Borrower's Consultations with Affected Groups and
Relevant Local NGOs, 4/10/90; Environmental Assessments: Instructions to Staff on the Release of Environmental Assessments to Executive
Directors, 11/21/90; and Release of Environmental Assessments to Executive Directors, 2/20/91. Additional information related to these
statements is provided in the Environmental Assessment Sourcebook (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1991) and subsequent updates
available from the Environment Sector Board, and in the Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook.1 Other Bank statements that
relate to the environment include OP/BP 4.02, Environmental Action Plans; OP/BP 4.04, Natural Habitats; OP 4.07, Water Resources
Management; OP 4.09, Pest Management; OP/BP 4.10, Indigenous
Peoples; OP/BP 4.11, Physical Cultural Resources; OP/BP 4.12, Involuntary Resettlement; OP/BP 4.36, Forests; and OP/BP 10.04, Economic
Evaluation of Investment Operations. These OP and BP cover all projects for which a PID is first issued after March 1, 1998. Questions
may be addressed to the Chair, Environment Sector Board.
Revised February 2011
1. The Bank2 requires environmental assessment (EA) of projects proposed for Bank financing to help ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and thus to improve decision making.
2. EA is a process whose breadth, depth, and type of analysis depend on the nature, scale, and potential environmental impact of the proposed project. EA evaluates a project's potential environmental risks and impacts in its area of influence;3 examines project alternatives; identifies ways of improving project selection, siting, planning, design, and implementation by preventing, minimizing, mitigating, or compensating for adverse environmental impacts and enhancing positive impacts; and includes the process of mitigating and managing adverse environmental impacts throughout project implementation. The Bank favors preventive measures over mitigatory or compensatory measures, whenever feasible.
3. EA takes into account the natural environment (air, water, and land); human health and safety; social aspects (involuntary resettlement, indigenous peoples, and physical cultural resources);4 and transboundary and global environmental aspects.5 EA considers natural and social aspects in an
Annexure-VII
158
integrated way. It also takes into account the variations in project and country conditions; the findings of country environmental studies; national environmental action plans; the country's overall policy framework, national legislation, and institutional capabilities related to the environment and social aspects; and obligations of the country, pertaining to project activities, under relevant international environmental treaties and agreements. The Bank does not finance project activities that would contravene such country obligations, as identified during the EA. EA is initiated as early as possible in project processing and is integrated closely with the economic, financial, institutional, social, and technical analyses of a proposed project.
4. The borrower is responsible for carrying out the EA. For Category A projects,6 the borrower retains independent EA experts not affiliated with the project to carry out the EA.7 For Category A projects that are highly risky or contentious or that involve serious and multidimensional environmental concerns, the borrower should normally also engage an advisory panel of independent, internationally recognized environmental specialists to advise on all aspects of the project relevant to the EA.8 The role of the advisory panel depends on the degree to which project preparation has progressed, and on the extent and quality of any EA work completed, at the time the Bank begins to consider the project.
5. The Bank advises the borrower on the Bank's EA requirements. The Bank reviews the findings and recommendations of the EA to determine whether they provide an adequate basis for processing the project for Bank financing. When the borrower has completed or partially completed EA work prior to the Bank's involvement in a project, the Bank reviews the EA to ensure its consistency with this policy. The Bank may, if appropriate, require additional EA work, including public consultation and disclosure.
6. The Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook9 describes pollution prevention and abatement measures and emission levels that are normally acceptable to the Bank. However, taking into account borrower country legislation and local conditions, the EA may recommend alternative emission levels and approaches to pollution prevention and abatement for the project. The EA report must provide full and detailed justification for the levels and approaches chosen for the particular project or site.
EA Instruments
7. Depending on the project, a range of instruments can be used to satisfy the Bank's EA requirement: environmental impact assessment (EIA), regional or sectoral EA, strategic environmental and social assessment (SESA), environmental audit, hazard or risk assessment, environmental management plan (EMP) and environmental and social management framework (ESMF).10 EA applies one or more of these instruments, or elements of them, as appropriate. When the project is likely to have sectoral or regional impacts, sectoral or regional EA is required.11
Environmental Screening
8. The Bank undertakes environmental screening of each proposed project to determine the appropriate extent and type of EA. The Bank classifies the proposed project into one of four
Annexure-VII
159
categories, depending on the type, location, sensitivity, and scale of the project and the nature and magnitude of its potential environmental impacts.
(a) Category A: A proposed project is classified as Category A if it is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts that are sensitive,12 diverse, or unprecedented. These impacts may affect an area broader than the sites or facilities subject to physical works. EA for a Category A project examines the project's potential negative and positive environmental impacts, compares them with those of feasible alternatives (including the 'without project' situation), and recommends any measures needed to prevent, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse impacts and improve environmental performance. For a Category A project, the borrower is responsible for preparing a report, normally an EIA (or a suitably comprehensive regional or sectoral EA) that includes, as necessary, elements of the other instruments referred to in para. 7.
(b) Category B: A proposed project is classified as Category B if its potential adverse environmental impacts on human populations or environmentally important areas--including wetlands, forests, grasslands, and other natural habitats--are less adverse than those of Category A projects. These impacts are site-specific; few if any of them are irreversible; and in most cases mitigatory measures can be designed more readily than for Category A projects. The scope of EA for a Category B project may vary from project to project, but it is narrower than that of Category A EA. Like Category A EA, it examines the project's potential negative and positive environmental impacts and recommends any measures needed to prevent, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse impacts and improve environmental performance. The findings and results of Category B EA are described in the project documentation (Project Appraisal Document and Project Information Document).13
(c) Category C: A proposed project is classified as Category C if it is likely to have minimal or no adverse environmental impacts. Beyond screening, no further EA action is required for a Category C project.
(d) Category FI: A proposed project is classified as Category FI if it involves investment of Bank funds through a financial intermediary, in subprojects that may result in adverse environmental impacts.
EA for Special Project Types
Sector Investment Lending
9. For sector investment loans (SILs),14 during the preparation of each proposed subproject, the project coordinating entity or implementing institution carries out appropriate EA according to country requirements and the requirements of this policy.15 The Bank appraises and, if necessary, includes in the SIL components to strengthen, the capabilities of the coordinating entity or the implementing institution to (a) screen subprojects, (b) obtain the necessary expertise to carry out EA, (c) review all findings and results of EA for individual subprojects, (d) ensure implementation of mitigation measures (including, where applicable, an EMP), and (e) monitor environmental conditions during project implementation.16 If the Bank is not satisfied that adequate capacity exists for carrying out EA, all Category A subprojects and, as appropriate, Category B subprojects--including any EA reports--are subject to prior review and approval by the Bank.
Financial Intermediary Lending
10. For a financial intermediary (FI) operation, the Bank requires that each FI screen proposed subprojects and ensure that subborrowers carry out appropriate EA for each subproject. Before approving a subproject, the FI verifies (through its own staff, outside experts, or existing
Annexure-VII
160
environmental institutions) that the subproject meets the environmental requirements of appropriate national and local authorities and is consistent with this OP and other applicable environmental policies of the Bank.17
11. In appraising a proposed FI operation, the Bank reviews the adequacy of country environmental requirements relevant to the project and the proposed EA arrangements for subprojects, including the mechanisms and responsibilities for environmental screening and review of EA results. When necessary, the Bank ensures that the project includes components to strengthen such EA arrangements. For FI operations expected to have Category A subprojects, prior to the Bank's appraisal each identified participating FI provides to the Bank a written assessment of the institutional mechanisms (including, as necessary, identification of measures to strengthen capacity) for its subproject EA work.18 If the Bank is not satisfied that adequate capacity exists for carrying out EA, all Category A subprojects and, as appropriate, Category B subprojects--including EA reports--are subject to prior review and approval by the Bank.19
Emergency Operations under OP 8.00
12. The policy set out in OP 4.01 normally applies to emergency operations processed under OP/BP 8.00, Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies. However, when compliance with any requirement of this policy would prevent the effective and timely achievement of the objectives of an emergency operation, the Bank may exempt the project from such a requirement. The justification for any such exemption is recorded in the loan documents. In all cases, however, the Bank requires at a minimum that (a) the extent to which the emergency was precipitated or exacerbated by inappropriate environmental practices be determined as part of the preparation of such projects, and (b) any necessary corrective measures be built into either the emergency operation or a future lending operation.
Institutional Capacity
13. When the borrower has inadequate legal or technical capacity to carry out key EA-related functions (such as review of EA, environmental monitoring, inspections, or management of mitigatory measures) for a proposed project, the project includes components to strengthen that capacity.
Public Consultation
14. For all Category A and B projects proposed for IBRD or IDA financing, during the EA process, the borrower consults project-affected groups and local nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) about the project's environmental aspects and takes their views into account.20 The borrower initiates such consultations as early as possible. For Category A projects, the borrower consults these groups at least twice: (a) shortly after environmental screening and before the terms of reference for the EA are finalized; and (b) once a draft EA report is prepared. In addition, the borrower consults with such groups throughout project implementation as necessary to address EA-related issues that affect them.21
Annexure-VII
161
Disclosure
15. For meaningful consultations between the borrower and project-affected groups and local NGOs on all Category A and B projects proposed for IBRD or IDA financing, the borrower provides relevant material in a timely manner prior to consultation and in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to the groups being consulted.
16. For a Category A project, the borrower provides for the initial consultation a summary of the proposed project's objectives, description, and potential impacts; for consultation after the draft EA report is prepared, the borrower provides a summary of the EA's conclusions. In addition, for a Category A project, the borrower makes the draft EA report available at a public place accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs. For SILs and FI operations, the borrower/FI ensures that EA reports for Category A subprojects are made available in a public place accessible to affected groups and local NGOs.
17. Any separate Category B report for a project proposed for IDA financing is made available to project-affected groups and local NGOs. Public availability in the borrowing country and official receipt by the Bank of Category A reports for projects proposed for IBRD or IDA financing, and of any Category B EA report for projects proposed for IDA funding, are prerequisites to Bank appraisal of these projects.
18. Once the borrower officially transmits the Category A EA report to the Bank, the Bank distributes the summary (in English) to the executive directors (EDs) and makes the report available through its InfoShop. Once the borrower officially transmits any separate Category B EA report to the Bank, the Bank makes it available through its InfoShop.22 If the borrower objects to the Bank's releasing an EA report through the World Bank InfoShop, Bank staff (a) do not continue processing an IDA project, or (b) for an IBRD project, submit the issue of further processing to the EDs.
Implementation
19. During project implementation, the borrower reports on (a) compliance with measures agreed with the Bank on the basis of the findings and results of the EA, including implementation of any EMP, as set out in the project documents; (b) the status of mitigatory measures; and (c) the findings of monitoring programs. The Bank bases supervision of the project's environmental aspects on the findings and recommendations of the EA, including measures set out in the legal agreements, any EMP, and other project documents.23
___________
1. The 1998 Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook is being updated. For complete reference, consult the World Bank Group Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines. The EHS Guidelines are intended as living documents and may be amended and supplemented from time to time. Please check the website [http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/Content/EnvironmentalGuidelines] for the most recent version.
2. 'Bank' includes IBRD and IDA; 'EA' refers to the entire process set out in OP/BP 4.01; 'loans' includes IDA credits and IDA grants; 'borrower' includes, for guarantee operations, a private or public project sponsor receiving from another financial institution a loan guaranteed by the Bank; and 'project' covers all operations financed by Bank loans or guarantees except development policy lending (for which the environmental provisions are set out in OP/BP 8.60, Development Policy Lending, and also includes projects under adaptable lending-adaptable program loans (APLs) and learning and innovation loans (LILs)-and projects and components funded under the Global Environment Facility. The project is described in Schedule 2 to the Loan/Credit Agreement. This policy applies to all components of the project, regardless of the source of financing
3. For definitions, see Annex A. The area of influence for any project is determined with the advice of environmental specialists
Annexure-VII
162
and set out in the EA terms of reference. 4. See OP/BP 4.12, Involuntary Resettlement; OP/BP 4.10, Indigenous Peoples; and OP/BP 4.11, Physical Cultural Resources.
5. Global environmental issues include climate change, ozone-depleting substances, pollution of international waters, and adverse impacts on biodiversity.
6. For screening, see para. 8. 7. EA is closely integrated with the project's economic, financial, institutional, social, and technical analyses to ensure that (a)
environmental considerations are given adequate weight in project selection, siting, and design decisions; and (b) EA does not delay project processing. However, the borrower ensures that when individuals or entities are engaged to carry out EA activities, any conflict of interest is avoided. For example, when an independent EA is required, it is not carried out by the consultants hired to prepare the engineering design.
8. The panel (which is different from the dam safety panel required under OP/BP 4.37, Safety of Dams) advises the borrower
specifically on the following aspects: (a) the terms of reference for the EA, (b) key issues and methods for preparing the EA, (c) recommendations and findings of the EA, (d) implementation of the EA's recommendations, and (e) development of environmental management capacity.
9. See footnote 1. 10. These terms are defined in Annex A.
11. Annexes Guidance on the use of sectoral and regional EA is available in EA Sourcebook Updates 4 and 15. 12. A potential impact is considered 'sensitive' if it may be irreversible (e.g., lead to loss of a major natural habitat) or raise issues
covered by OP 4.04, Natural Habitats; OP/BP 4.10, Indigenous Peoples; OP/BP 4.11, Physical Cultural Resources or OP 4.12,
Involuntary Resettlement. 13. When the screening process determines, or national legislation requires, that any of the environmental issues identified
warrant special attention, the findings and results of Category B EA may be set out in a separate report. Depending on the type of project and the nature and magnitude of the impacts, this report may include, for example, a limited environmental impact assessment, an environmental mitigation or management plan, an environmental audit, or a hazard assessment. For Category B projects that are not in environmentally sensitive areas and that present well-defined and well-understood issues of narrow scope, the Bank may accept alternative approaches for meeting EA requirements: for example, environmentally sound design criteria, siting criteria, or pollution standards for small-scale industrial plants or rural works; environmentally sound siting criteria, construction standards, or inspection procedures for housing projects; or environmentally sound operating procedures for road rehabilitation projects.
14. SILs normally involve the preparation and implementation of annual investment plans or subprojects as time slice activities over the course of the project.
15. In addition, if there are sectorwide issues that cannot be addressed through individual subproject EAs (and particularly if the SIL is likely to include Category A subprojects), the borrower may be required to carry out sectoral EA before the Bank appraises the SIL.
16. Where, pursuant to regulatory requirements or contractual arrangements acceptable to the Bank, any of these review functions are carried out by an entity other than the coordinating entity or implementing institution, the Bank appraises such alternative arrangements; however, the borrower/coordinating entity/implementing institution remains ultimately responsible for ensuring that subprojects meet Bank requirements.
17. The requirements for FI operations are derived from the EA process and are consistent with the provisions of para. 6 of this OP. The EA process takes into account the type of finance being considered, the nature and scale of anticipated subprojects, and the environmental requirements of the jurisdiction in which subprojects will be located.
18. Any FI included in the project after appraisal complies with the same requirement as a condition of its participation. 19. The criteria for prior review of Category B subprojects, which are based on such factors as type or size of the subproject and
the EA capacity of the financial intermediary, are set out in the legal agreements for the project. 20. For the Bank's approach to NGOs, see GP 14.70, Involving Nongovernmental Organizations in Bank-Supported Activities.
21. For projects with major social components, consultations are also required by other Bank policies--for example, OP/BP 4.10,
Indigenous Peoples, and OP/BP 4.12, Involuntary Resettlement.
22. For a further discussion of the Bank's disclosure procedures, see The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information. Specific
requirements for disclosure of resettlement plans and indigenous peoples development plans are set out in OP/BP 4.10,
Indigenous Peoples, and OP/BP 4.12, Involuntary Resettlement.
23. See OP/BP 13.05, Project Supervision.
Annexure-VIII
163
ANNEXURE VIII: OP 4.09 – Pest Management
Operational Manual
OP 4.09 - Pest Management
These policies were prepared for use by World Bank staff and are
not necessarily a complete treatment of the subject.
OP 4.09
December, 1998
This Operational Policy statement was revised in August 2004 to ensure consistency with the requirements of OP/BP 8.60, issued in August
2004.
Note: This OP 4.09 replaces the version dated July 1996. Changes in wording have been made in paras. 1 and 3 and footnotes 2, 3, and
4. Further guidance for implementing the Bank's pest management policy is in the Environmental Assessment Sourcebook (World Bank:
Washington, D.C., 1991). Questions regarding agricultural pest management may be addressed to the Director, Rural
Development. Questions regarding pesticide use in public health projects may be directed to the Director, Health Services.
1. In assisting borrowers to manage pests that affect either agriculture or public health, the Bank1supports a
strategy that promotes the use of biological or environmental control methods and reduces reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides. In Bank-financed projects, the borrower addresses pest management issues in the context of the project's environmental assessment.
2
2. In appraising a project that will involve pest management, the Bank assesses the capacity of the country's regulatory framework and institutions to promote and support safe, effective, and environmentally sound pest management. As necessary, the Bank and the borrower incorporate in the project components to strengthen such capacity.
Agricultural Pest Management3
3. The Bank uses various means to assess pest management in the country and support integrated pest
management (IPM)4and the safe use of agricultural pesticides: economic and sector work, sectoral or project-
specific environmental assessments, participatory IPM assessments, and investment projects and components aimed specifically at supporting the adoption and use of IPM.
4. In Bank-financed agriculture operations, pest populations are normally controlled through IPM approaches, such as biological control, cultural practices, and the development and use of crop varieties that are resistant or tolerant to the pest. The Bank may finance the purchase of pesticides when their use is justified under an IPM approach.
Pest Management in Public Health
5. In Bank-financed public health projects, the Bank supports controlling pests primarily through
environmental methods. Where environmental methods alone are not effective, the Bank may finance the use of pesticides for control of disease vectors.
Annexure-VIII
164
Criteria for Pesticide Selection and Use
6. The procurement of any pesticide in a Bank-financed project is contingent on an assessment of the nature and degree of associated risks, taking into account the proposed use and the intended users.
5 With respect to
the classification of pesticides and their specific formulations, the Bank refers to the World Health Organization's Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification (Geneva: WHO 1994-95).
6 The following criteria apply to the selection and use of pesticides in Bank-financed
projects:
(a) They must have negligible adverse human health effects.
(b) They must be shown to be effective against the target species.
(c) They must have minimal effect on nontarget species and the natural environment. The methods, timing, and frequency of pesticide application are aimed to minimize damage to natural enemies. Pesticides used in public health programs must be demonstrated to be safe for inhabitants and domestic animals in the treated areas, as well as for personnel applying them.
(d) Their use must take into account the need to prevent the development of resistance in pests.
7. The Bank requires that any pesticides it finances be manufactured, packaged, labeled, handled, stored, disposed of, and applied according to standards acceptable to the Bank.
7 The Bank does not finance
formulated products that fall in WHO classes IA and IB, or formulations of products in Class II, if (a) the country lacks restrictions on their distribution and use; or (b) they are likely to be used by, or be accessible to, lay personnel, farmers, or others without training, equipment, and facilities to handle, store, and apply these products properly.
____________
1. 'Bank' includes IBRD and IDA, and 'loans' includes IDA credits and IDA grants. 2. See OP/BP 4.01, Environmental Assessment. 3. OP 4.09 applies to all Bank lending, whether or not the loan finances pesticides. Even if Bank lending for pesticides is not involved, an
agricultural development project may lead to substantially increased pesticide use and subsequent environmental problems. 4. IPM refers to a mix of farmer-driven, ecologically based pest control practices that seeks to reduce reliance on synthetic chemical
pesticides. It involves (a) managing pests (keeping them below economically damaging levels) rather than seeking to eradicate them; (b) relying, to the extent possible, on nonchemical measures to keep pest populations low; and (c) selecting and applying pesticides, when they have to be used, in a way that minimizes adverse effects on beneficial organisms, humans, and the environment.
5. This assessment is made in the context of the project's environmental assessment and is recorded in the project documents. The project documents also include (in the text or in an annex) a list of pesticide products authorized for procurement under the project, or an indication of when and how this list will be developed and agreed on. This authorized list is included by reference in legal documents relating to the project, with provisions for adding or deleting materials.
6. Copies of the classification, which is updated annually, are available in the Sectoral Library. A draft Standard Bidding Document for Procurement of Pesticides is available from OPCPR.
7. The FAO's Guidelines for Packaging and Storage of Pesticides (Rome, 1985), Guidelines on Good Labeling Practice for Pesticides (Rome, 1985), and Guidelines for the Disposal of Waste Pesticide and Pesticide Containers on the Farm (Rome, 1985) are used as minimum standards.