Presentation short abstract

Through subsidies, government has promoted micro-irrigation to combat drought in Southern India. But, adopting the narrative of Equality, political class has succeeded promoting "Productive Irrigation' at the cost of 'Protective Irrigation'.

Presentation long abstract

How the narrative of 'Equality' became a political tool in making agricultural drought a perpetual phenomenon

The state of Karnataka in southern India has 30 districts. About 12 blocks in its northern region are located in the semi-arid climatic zone with rainfed agriculture and prone to droughts, and have low human development indices. Contrary to this, the southern region is well endowed with water resources, and water-guzzling crops have brought prosperity.

Technical investigations in the northern region by the Central Ground Water Commission of the Government of India have indicated that adoption of micro-irrigation (Drip/Sprinklers) can, to a large extent, enhance water use efficiency in agriculture and thus combat drought, as has been proved elsewhere in India.

To encourage the adoption micro-irrigation, the Government has made budgetary allocations in the form of a subsidy. They vary from 90 to 55 per cent depending on the size of land holdings, and the rest was to be borne by the farmer to purchase the drip and sprinkler instruments. Accordingly, on average, about 5 million US$ annually was sanctioned.

It was during the disbursement of subsidies, the political forces from the prosperous southern region demanded 'Equality' for all regions and succeeded in getting their share of subsidies. Consequently, southern blocks have used subsidies for 'Productive Irrigation' and northern blocks have used it for 'Protective Irrigation'. Ultimately, a large part of the northern districts remains drought-prone.

A narrative by political forces from that of 'Equity' to 'Equality' has continued the legacy of agricultural drought.