#subsidised fertiliser

[farmerstrend]

Food shortage and rising cost of living are caused by the failure of large-scale agricultural projects and poor governance.

Discover the causes of Kenya’s food shortage crisis, from failed agricultural projects to corruption in subsidy programs, and explore solutions for achieving food security through better trade policies, irrigation expansion, and climate adaptation. Kenya faces a severe food shortage and rising costs. Learn how mismanaged irrigation schemes, corruption, and poor governance have exacerbated the…

[dailyanarchistposts]

Legislate or Die?

Governments of the industrialised countries signed a treaty in 1987, the Montreal Protocol, agreeing to halve the production of CFC’s (Chlorofluorocarbons, which damage the ozone layer causing global warming) by the year 2000. But it would take an 85% reduction to enable the ozone layer to repair itself. Acid rain is similarly being ‘tackled’: too little, too late, with the root causes being neglected. Similarly, the Earth Summits at Rio (1991), and Kyoto (2001), achieved little beyond needlessly destroying yet more rainforest to produce the tons of documents for them.

Lead-free petrol supposedly makes car exhausts okay, but cars are still major polluters and profoundly anti-social, killing 6000 people a year in Britain and injuring 40,000. The Conservative Government’s conversion to environmentalism in the 1990s (e.g. its marginal ‘green taxes’) were window dressing: the expansion of nuclear power and reprocessing was presented as green, not contributing to global warming (sic), in contrast to ‘dirty’ coal fired power stations. The reality is that nuclear power leads to radiation at all stages of the nuclear chain, but is more easily controlled by the State, as well as providing material for nuclear weapons. Despite the green promises of New Labour, in power Blair’s government have managed things for Capital. The introduction of GM crops under the guise of ‘trials’ despite mass opposition (including direct action) is a prime example. The reality of the dynamic of political power is that governments have power over the working class, and always use that power in the interests of Money.

Take the example of agriculture: in the “developed” world, it is mostly large-scale industrialised agribusiness. The emphasis is on growing single crops in huge fields — monoculture – creating an unstable ecosystem. The crops are much more vulnerable to pests, necessitating chemical pesticides. Chemical fertilisers are used to obtain (short term) high yields, in the long term these deplete the soil of nutrients and yields fall. Pesticides kill both pests and the creatures that prey on them, they also poison food and drinking water. Factory farming — concentration camps for animals — is morally indefensible, and produces unhealthy meat, eggs and milk. There is massive, government-subsidised over-production (leading to examples such as the famous butter mountains and wine lakes). This food is fed back to animals, producing delights such as CJD (‘mad cow’ disease, and foot-and-mouth) or destroyed. It’s more economic in capitalist terms, than selling it cheaply, or giving it to the millions of malnourished and starving people who need it. The Big Food-Big Government axis periodically tries to force famine-stricken countries to accept GM maize, knowing its seed stocks will be hopelessly polluted by GM contamination. Farmers are paid to keep good land fallow in order to keep prices high; food is stockpiled or destroyed for the reason.

[lethimfertilise]

While urea sales to farmers are subsidised in India, we see a different picture in Argentina. Until recently, there was a 10% import duty for any origin except Egyptian.

The government has made changes to import duties but has maintained the 'Impuesto País'. Here's an explanation:

Import Duty Lifted: This means that the specific tax of 10% on imported urea has been removed, which has significantly helped producers during the recent round of sales. Today's sales in Argentina are reported at $345-350 per metric ton CFR.

Impuesto País: Despite the removal of import duties, the 'Impuesto País' remains in place. 'Impuesto País' is a special tax applied in Argentina on certain foreign transactions. This tax, currently set at 17.5%, is designed to limit the outflow of foreign currency and to boost local consumption by making foreign transactions more expensive.

Therefore, while importers may no longer have to pay import duties on urea, they still need to account for the 'Impuesto País' when engaging in foreign transactions or importing goods. This tax applies to the purchase of foreign currency, payments made abroad, and other transactions that involve foreign exchange.

What about bringing urea, nationalising it, selling it, and getting paid in ARS (Argentine Peso), buying some wheat, and exporting it with USD payments? Well, it is a rather long and costly cycle, but still cheaper than the 17.5% 'Impuesto País'.

Just thinking out loud this morning.

#imstory #fertilisers #fertilizers #subsidy #tax #urea #argentina #wheat #agriculture

[head-post]

EU to set up rapid reaction force with up to 5,000 troops by 2025, Macron says

President Emmanuel Macron urged the EU on Thursday to build a stronger, more integrated defence sector and said the continent must not become a vassal of the US, Reuters reports.

“There is a risk our Europe could die. We are not equipped to face the risks,” Macron said in a speech at Sorbonne University in Paris, warning that military, economic and other pressures could weaken and split the 27-nation EU.

Macron called for increased European cybersecurity capabilities, closer defence ties with the UK post-Brexit and the creation of a European academy to train senior military personnel.

The French president said it was necessary to create “strategic intimacy” between the armies of EU countries. A European military academy should also be opened to start training military and civilian personnel in Europe to respond to security challenges, Macron said. He also added:

“There is no defence without a defence industry … we’ve had decades of under-investment,” he said, adding that Europeans should give preference to buying European military equipment. “We must produce more, we must produce faster, and we must produce as Europeans,” Macron said. Europe “must show that it is never a vassal of the United States and that it also knows how to talk to all the other regions of the world”, he said. “The EU should create a rapid reaction force of up to 5,000 military personnel by 2025,” the president added.

The EU should agree to exceptions to its own competition rules so it can support firms in sectors such as artificial intelligence and green energy in the face of “excessive subsidisation” by the United States and China, Macron said.

“The era when Europe bought its energy and fertilisers from Russia, had production in China, and entrusted its security to the US is over,” Macron said. “The rules of the game have changed.”

Read more HERE

[whattheabcxyz]

2024-04-07

Singapore

Humanitarian orthopaedic surgeon Dr Ang Swee Chai talks about helping Palestinians

Seniors urged to get handrails & other subsidised fittings under scheme to make HDB homes safer

Agriculture

Opening of Singapore's 4th egg farm delayed

Society

Singapore firm behind vape manufacturer's use of influencers to market products to youth

Technology

Drones help out with cleaning, watering & fertilising @ Singapore's Gardens By The Bay

Health

People who vaped at any point were more likely to develop heart failure - the stupids still don't care tho'

Internet

Google considering making users pay for AI search results - you'll still see ads, btw! 😟

Science

^ Who's planning to do what in space

What exactly is anxiety? - it arises when processes involving brain function, bodily perception, & possibly evolutionary factors, become dysregulated

Archaeology

Ancient Egyptian mummies reveal what diseases plagued the civilisation

[nano-dap]

An indigenous and non-subsidised fertiliser, Nano DAP is a commonly used fertiliser in India. Di-ammonium phosphate (DAP) contains two micronutrients - nitrogen and phosphorus. These nutrients aid in improving soil fertility, maintaining PH, productivity, and growth of plants.

[srinuvasaraju]

N Chandrababu Naidu’s Agricultural Policies For Empowering Andhra Pradesh Farmers

The Telugu Desam Party (TDP) has consistently demonstrated its unwavering commitment to the well-being of farmers in Andhra Pradesh. Under the leadership of former Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu, the TDP spearheaded a range of agrarian policies aimed at enhancing the lives and livelihoods of the state's farmers. This article delves into some of the TDP's remarkable achievements in the agricultural sector and the notable TDP contributions of Nara Chandrababu Naidu and other TDP leaders. One of the most significant TDP achievements in agrarian policy was the implementation of a comprehensive crop insurance scheme for farmers. Launched in 2014, this TDP scheme provided farmers with insurance coverage against crop damage, pest attacks, and other unforeseen factors that could jeopardise their yields. Farmers had the opportunity to acquire crop insurance at a subsidised rate, with the TDP government shouldering the remainder of the premium. This initiative particularly benefited small and marginal farmers, who are often the most vulnerable to crop losses.

Another pivotal initiative of this TDP agenda was the establishment of a dedicated agricultural credit fund, offering low-interest loans to farmers for various purposes, including crop cultivation, procurement of agricultural equipment, and irrigation facilities. This fund aimed to alleviate the financial burden on farmers who frequently grapple with difficulties in obtaining credit from traditional lending institutions. By providing accessible and affordable credit, the TDP empowered farmers to enhance their productivity and increase their incomes. N Chandrababu Naidu, who served as Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh from 2014 to 2019, played a pivotal role in shaping the agrarian TDP policies. Hailing from a farming family himself, Chandrababu Naidu possessed a deep understanding of the challenges confronting farmers in the state and was dedicated to addressing these challenges through strategic policy interventions. During his tenure, he championed innovative initiatives, including the creation of a network of soil testing laboratories, designed to assist farmers in optimising crop yields. Furthermore, other TDP leaders have also made significant contributions to shaping the party's agrarian policies. TDP MP has been a vocal advocate for farmer welfare and has advocated for a spectrum of initiatives aimed at promoting sustainable agriculture and enhancing the quality of life for farmers. 

Similarly, TDP MLA Gorantla Butchaiah Chowdary has been a fervent proponent of measures aimed at reducing the cost of agricultural inputs, such as seeds, fertilisers, and pesticides. In conclusion, the TDP party boasts a rich history of championing the cause of Andhra Pradesh's farmers. Through a series of pioneering policy interventions, the TDP party has significantly improved the lives and livelihoods of farmers throughout the state, thereby paving the way for a more prosperous and sustainable agricultural sector. With the unwavering commitment of N Chandrababu Naidu and TDP supporters, it is evident that the party will remain a potent force in championing farmer welfare in Andhra Pradesh and beyond. These efforts continue to serve as a roadmap for the empowerment of farmers and the development of the agricultural sector in the region. Follow the Political news and TDP news from the official website for the latest developments in Andhra Pradesh.

[seriousbusinessforhumans]

BY FRÉDÉRIC MOUSSEAU & ANDY CURRIER

MARCH 10, 2023

Against the wishes of hundreds of millions of farmers, the bank is backing a model that can push economic dependence, soil depletion and pollution.

After the largest food price spike in recent decades, 2022 was dubbed the “year of unprecedented hunger”. Africa was once again at the forefront of the catastrophe, with hundreds of millions suffering from severe food insecurity.

In May that year, the African Development Bank (AfDB) launched a $1.5 billion African Emergency Food Production Facility with the stated goal of boosting food and nutrition security on the continent. This strategy is largely geared towards expanding an industrial model of agriculture centred on monocropping and increased reliance on inputs such as “improved” seed and chemical fertiliser.

To boost food production – with a focus on wheat, corn, rice, and soybean – the facility is to deliver “certified seeds, fertilizer and extension services to 20 million farmers” and provide “financing and credit guarantees for large-scale supply of fertilizer to wholesalers and aggregators”. Additionally, and in a concerning echo of Structural Adjust Programmes, the AfDB also announced that it is working to “secure commitments from African governments on implementing policy reforms on fertilizer”, after consulting with “fertilizer company CEOs”.

Framed as a crisis response, this corporate-led strategy has actually been at the core of the AfDB’s agenda for years. Its Strategy for Agricultural Transformation in Africa (2016-2025), for instance, seeks to expand the use of commercial inputs and liberalise input markets. Meanwhile, through its Africa Fertilizer Financing Mechanism, the AfDB has worked closely with the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) and the International Fertilizer Development Center as well as controversial corporate giants like Syngenta, Yara, Dangote, Export Trading Group, and Omnia Fertilizer.

Is this approach what African farmers want or need amidst shifting precipitation patterns, rising temperatures, and more extreme weather? Is it compatible with the AfDB’s commitment to support a “transition [of] food systems compatible with climate and biodiversity imperatives”? Who truly benefits from this agenda?

Do synthetic fertilisers work?

According to the AfDB, the use of fertilisers and “improved” seeds increases agricultural productivity, leading to “a huge impact on [farmers’] yields, and therefore on their income”. This notion, however, ignores the vicious cycle that reliance on chemical fertilisers leads to. As research has shown, synthetic fertilisers can deplete the land’s nutrients, meaning more and more fertiliser is needed each year to produce the same yields. This creates a dead-end in which farmers have to spend more on inputs year on year, food security doesn’t improve, and the soil loses fertility over time.

This strategy can also prove extremely expensive for countries that subsidise synthetic inputs, a common intervention of many governments on the continent. At one point, for instance, Malawi was spending 16% of its entire government budget on a farm input subsidy programme that failed to reduce hunger. The costs of these kinds of subsidies may only increase; chemical fertiliser prices reached near record levels in 2022 and are projected to remain high for several years.

As well as being ineffective and costly, the use of chemical fertilisers also devastates the environment. The supply chain for synthetic nitrogen fertiliser is responsible for 2% of all global emissions. Meanwhile, runoff of nitrogen and phosphorus lays waste to local water supplies through algal blooms. These impacts are so serious that experts have called the flood of excess nitrogen into the environment “one of the most severe pollution threats facing humanity today”.

Who gains from chemical fertiliser use?

Agrochemical corporations have made record sums during the recent crisis as the prices of nitrogen, phosphate, and potash skyrocketed. For instance, Canada’s Nutrien took in a record $5 billion in net earnings in the first half of 2022. Norway’s Yara International reported a first-quarter operating income of $1 billion, more than triple the same figure a year earlier. US company Mosaic saw its earnings per share grow by over 250% in the same period, while Germany’s Bayer boasted “outstanding sales and earnings growth, with particularly substantial gains for our agriculture business”.

Fertiliser companies have a history of thriving in times of hunger. As detailed in a report from the NGO INKOTA, top fertiliser companies captured colossal profits during the last food price crisis in 2007/8, which they then used to consolidate and expand their power.

Today, agrochemical companies see Africa as the last expansion market. While an average 135kg of fertiliser is applied per agricultural hectare globally, that figure in sub-Sahara Africa is just 17kg. On the continent, smallholder farmers have been feeding hundreds of millions of people with little need for chemical fertilisers or so-called “improved” seeds. Entrenching a greater reliance on commercial inputs for African farmers is thus seen as a major opportunity for business growth.

What do farmers want?

Across the continent, organisations representing hundreds of millions of African farmers strongly oppose this Green Revolution model of large-scale, monocrop production reliant on chemical fertilisers. The Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) and many other networks of farmers reject these programmes and have urged governments and international institutions to instead support a move to sustainable and climate-friendly methods.

This starts with the rehabilitation of African crops, such as teff, sorghum, fonio, amaranth, millet, cassava, yam, and many others. While Indigenous plants have assumed a reputation as “food for the poor” due in large part to ideas engrained during colonial rule, they are central to the diet of hundreds of millions of people. These crops are adapted to local geoclimatic conditions, which makes them more resilient to climatic shocks and less reliant on inputs than foreign cereals. By using agroecological systems that nurture healthy ecosystems, these crops can form part of a wide diversity of crops – alongside cereals, vegetables, roots, tubers, nuts and fruits – to provide a range of socio-economic, nutritional and environmental benefits – unmatched by monocrops.

Building on Indigenous knowledge, millions of farmers across Africa have assembled an abundance of effective practices and innovations that don’t require costly and polluting inputs. In Kenya, fermenting organic matter to create a nutrient rich compost called Bokashi is helping farmers restore dry, depleted soils. Farmers planting nitrogen-fixing “fertiliser trees” in Malawi are benefiting from the high levels of biomass they create and the nutrients they capture as well as their resilience to drought. A variety of nitrogen fixing leguminous plants are widely used from Malawi to Benin. And in many countries – including Senegal – cover crops are planted to protect the soil and improve the fertility through increased nutrient retention. Coupling such practices with composting, farmers across the continent have seen drastic yield increases. Mixing plants, crops, and trees also makes communities more resilient to the climate crisis by providing different sources of food and income along the year.

These are just some of the many impactful agroecological practices that are backed by scientific studies. This growing body of research – along with centuries of experience – demonstrates that alternatives to chemical fertilisers are effective, affordable, and sustainable. Moreover, unlike synthetic inputs, these approaches restore the soil over time and are unaffected by erratic global price spikes.

These practices are not just solutions to hunger. They are also essential for a shift towards resilient, environmentally sustainable farming. Yet they will remain neglected and underfunded as long as corporate bottom lines are prioritised by international finance institutions such as the AfDB. Instead of doubling down on a failed model, now is the time to direct public funds to support the solutions that African farmers are calling for across the continent.

[citizen-new123]

The government is in the process of distributing subsidised farm inputs that includes fertilisers and seeds. Maize farmers have, however, said the government subsidised the wrong fertiliser known as NPK 23:23:0 instead of DAP which is now trading at over KSh 5000 per 50kgs in farm inputs outlets. Which of the two fertilisers is suitable for maize growing in the country? Farmers share your…

[762175]

Commercial Release of Nano-DAP Receives Nod from Centre, One Bottle to Cost Rs 600

Last Updated: February 10, 2023, 16:17 IST The nano-DAP is also called liquid urea, which is different from conventional granular urea (Reuters Image for Representation) One bag of conventional DAP at a subsidised price costs Rs 1,350 to farmers while actual cost in Rs 4000 Fertiliser nano diammonium phosphate (Nano-DAP) on Friday received a nod for its commercial release by the agriculture…

[sidnazpro2020]

Latest News Today - Cabinet Okays Subsidised Rates For Fertilisers

Latest News Today – Cabinet Okays Subsidised Rates For Fertilisers

Government has increased the subsidised price of fertilisers to help farmers in distress Amid rising global prices of raw materials of various varieties of fertilisers like DAP and Phosphatic and Potassic (P&K) which are widely used in India, that have put a lot of financial burden on farmers, the Government has increased their subsidy rates under the nutrient based subsidy (NBS) scheme for the…

[farmerstrend]

Kenyan Farmers Receive $2M Boost from Africa Fertiliser Financing Mechanism

The Africa Fertiliser Financing Mechanism has launched a project to help deliver 8,000 tons of fertilisers to 100,000 smallholder farmers in Kenya to boost harvests and incomes. Representatives of the African Development Bank, African Fertilizer Financing Mechanism, the Government of Norway and Apollo Agriculture at the Nairobi launch of the Financing for Sustainable Agriculture Management…

[msfbgraves]

Art subsidies have a function

A lot of people wonder, rightly, why tax money is used to sponsor what is often truly atrocious art. Self important, masturbatory drivel that nobody wants. Could that money not be better spent?

If you truly care about good art, no.

Good art needs the freedom to be uncommercial. Not all good art is, though. Nobody would have greenlit the pitch for Hamilton, be real. But good arts needs the freedom to be critical, niche, to not be an advertisement, to be and yet be shown for its own sake.

And yes that will lead to an amount of drivel that would be worrying if it weren't so funny. But if you want brilliance. Innovative, heartfelt brilliance. You have to take Big Money out of it.

Take Derry Girls. Who would have cared in Hollywood? Nobody. And yes, public money will likely only get you two seasons but as soon as Netflix got their claws in S3, you can see them trying to sex it up. Which is practically impossible, because this is Derry Girls, but suddenly there is a Liam Neeson cameo, because he may be the only Northern Irish actor who is Well Known. They're putting James in a fistfight and the girls cheer that on where they would have tried to stop it in S2 (Michelle would have jumped bodily in front of James while telling him to stop being such a dick, James!) There is a Chelsea Clinton cameo. It's tonally weird and it is 'broader appeal' and 'international markets' talking. But it only exists because it was made in part with public money.

We need to keep showcasing utter shite to act as a fertiliser for brilliance. And if you want something good, you need to learn to give 10 minutes of your time to some subsidised stuff and you find that again, it's utter shite, to stand up and leave.

But only among the uncommercial compost does the brilliance grow.

Big Money ruins everything.

[lethimfertilise]

Okay, it looks like there was a good trend regarding Indian urea yesterday.

Let me just add a couple more points today before I wrap it up.

A friend of mine, who’s in gas trading, sent me a valid comment yesterday. $16 per MMBtu equals €50 per MWh, which is 100% (sic!) higher, than last week's European price of €25 per MWh and significantly higher, than the usual “Asian premium” of €6-7 per MWh.

So, if the Iranian government delivers gas to local urea producers at such a high price, it is indirectly a kind of rent or duty, which is later distributed in favour of urea consumers. However, by subsidising farmers, the government essentially harms local urea producers, depriving them of any possible production margins.

Now, please tell me—how does the Indian government plan to achieve urea self-sufficiency? Something must change in this chain.

#urea #india #elections #ifa2024 #subsidy #production #fertilizers #fertilisers #imstory

[phoenixfire-thewizardgoddess]

I never understood vegans opposing eggs. Unlike milk, you dont do anything to get a chicken to lay an egg. They just do it. And if you don't take them the eggs will just rot and get gross.

It depends, anon.

Farm eggs and local eggs are great bc you know the animals are treated fine. It's the cage eggs I think they're protesting, and those animals have truly horrific lives and (where financially possible, although it isn't for everyone) we should aim to buy farm eggs.

Cage eggs are from chickens that live in tiny wire cages, many have the front half of their beaks removed, and only the girls are kept. You don't wanna know what they do to male chicks who are born, it's not good.

You should also be skeptical of the conditions for barn chickens, esp if thebox says a ridiculous amount of animals per metre or hectare. Do they get outside time, and what do they get fed? There's a farm near us which has a dedicated livestream on their chickens for people to see how they are cared for. Next time I get eggs I can share the link, its on the box.

Like any animal that's been domesticated, chickens have been carefully bred for their laying capacity so they do lay a lot of eggs, sometimes several a day.

It's best to ask a farmer about the hens and eggs, but realistically they're a byproduct unless they've been fertilised, and from what I recall of the chickens we had when I was little (and they were rescues so they might have been atypical) they would brood on these eggs until they started to get... smelly.

Unless we gave them ceramic/plastic alternatives to sit on and took the real ones. If there was no other food available, they'd eat their eggs too.

If we should be upset by anything, its the grain-fed cows.

There's a farm that does it in a town I drive past several times a week, and its awful. The animals are packed into this little paddock with no grass, its consistently a muddy churned mass bc urine and rain etc.

I don't know if the persistent muddiness is why there is no grass or if that's deliberate to make sure they only have grain fed. It's just not great, they don't DO anything during the day, just stand there and mill about a bit. As far as I'm aware the RSPCA and other organisations have visited and by the loopholes in laws, they're feeding and caring for the animals, so its fine. At least on a farm or in a paddock they get to do what cows do, and chill most of their life, these guys and grainfeds in other shady little places most likely, aren't getting a lot of that.

Not to mention those awful pig-breeding locations that keep being caught where sows are pinned to the ground by either a head or body restraint to prevent eating a piglet or rolling on one. Like, yikes.

And before anyone brings it up, shearing a sheep is safe. You do not take the whole goddamn skin off for the sake of wool, it's a haircut.

And yes, sometimes the little buggers wiggle about, so they get a nick or two but they naturally produce lannolin, which soothes and protects the cuts. If there's anything we should be angry about, it's the lack of regulations around mulesing and docking (trigger warning for blood, injury and medical proceedures without proper anaesthetics). If we had better protections and rules around animals, perhaps the government would be coerced into subsidising the provision of anaesthics and appropriate tools (medical grade) to farm areas with animals that need docking of tails or mulesing, to keep them safe.

Make no mistake, flystrike is horrific and needs to be prevented at all costs, but there's also a lot of people out there doing things without real training or proper equipment and the animals are the ones who suffer. You wouldn't call a person off the street to do your cosmetic surgery, bc they're not trained.

----

Back to the main topic, because my brain works like a whirlpool of little fragments of info:

But good farmers, good producers and people who know their business are out there doing right by their animals. They provide food and care appropriate, handle the removal of excess eggs or honey safely, because it's a business but its also a way of life.

It's when things get industrialised that the time, attention, care and empathy goes out the window. They become a thing in a box to be used and destroyed as soon as it stops making money; not a living thing that needs time, care and attention.

Or something eloquent that explains the point better

[fruitzu01]

Why Organic Food is so Expensive?

According to a 2002 article, 500 farmers in Andhra Pradesh perished as a result of pesticide exposure. When members of Parliament questioned the central government about what efforts it was doing to prevent these deaths, it stated that it was “promoting Integrated Pest Management (IPM) to reduce use of chemical pesticides.”

Farmers are urged to utilise natural pest management methods first, such as pheromone traps that attract male moths or planting marigolds along field borders to reduce nematodes, under the Integrated Pest Management approach. Chemical pesticides should only be used as a last resort and only at specified times in the cropping cycle to be effective. However, in India, Integrated Pest Management has had minimal success.

If you want to buy fruits online in Vadodara, contact Fruitzu to get the fresh & naturally ripened fruits delivered within 24 hours of placing your order.

The failure of the government's farm extension system, which is supposed to counsel farmers, is partly to blame for the uncontrolled use of pesticides. Chemical fertiliser plants receive massive financial subsidies (70000+ crores per year), but individual farmers/groups producing organic manures/pesticides, etc., receive no subsidies.

Private pesticide sellers have come in to fill the void, but they do not provide credible advise since they frequently have to achieve company sales targets. As a result, farmers use more chemicals than necessary. Customers pay for this in a variety of ways. It's all part of a cycle. The same businesses develop medicines to treat illnesses caused by toxins.

On our finite planet, where natural resources are becoming increasingly scarce, it is critical for producers to focus on doing more with less. Subsidies tend to weaken producers' incentives to improve efficiency and move their focus from crops to farming subsidies. As a result, many people wind up accomplishing more with less.

In India, for example, the cost of power needed to pump water for agriculture is subsidised, encouraging farmers to pump more water than they use. As a result, Indian manufacturers are among the world's inefficient water users. Given the scarcity of food and water, a more efficient approach to operate the system would be to promote those who produce more food with less water.

Fruitzu offers the best online fruit delivery in Vadodara, visit the official website to order fresh & naturally ripened fruits.

This is where community-supported agriculture and start-ups like communityfarm.in come into action. They bridge the gap between farmer and consumer, ensuring better agricultural pricing and protecting them from market swings. Helps him find other ways to boost his earnings and, most importantly, connects him with industry professionals to provide better counsel.

Cost Factors:

Labor and farming inputs: Organic farming requires a lot of work. The biofertilizers utilised are also quite costly. There is no government subsidy for organic fertilisers or pesticides. The cost of applying synthetic fertiliser and insecticide per acre per crop cycle is much under Rs. 2000/-. Organic manure, for example, cow dung, has a requirement per acre for organic farmers per crop cycle of 30 tonnes to 45 tonnes or more. The cost per tonne ranges from 1000/- to 1500/- Rs, depending on region. Their organic manure input cost per acre is in the region of 30000/- to 45000/- every crop cycle. This is around 15 to 20 times the traditional farmer's input cost. Organic pesticides and/or other similar methods are not included in this price.

Crop Rotation:

Organic farmers use sophisticated crop rotations instead of chemical weed killers to maintain their land healthy and avoid weed development. Following the harvest of a crop, an organic farmer may use that land to produce "cover crops," which supply nitrogen to the soil and benefit succeeding harvests. Conventional farmers, on the other hand, can maximise agricultural yield by utilising every available acre. Organic farmers are unable to produce the bigger quantities that are most cost-effective for conventional farmers since crop rotation lowers the frequency with which they can grow profitable crops.

If eating organic & healthy fruits is what you wish for, order fruit delivery service in Vadodara only at Fruitzu.

Consumers:

Furthermore, we customers reject their produce on a regular basis due to shape faults, pest damage, and so on. Many of us feel that because we pay a premium for organic produce, it should look much better than conventional produce; however, this is not the case; in fact, it may appear worse.

All of this adds up to increased costs for their produce. However, the survival of these farmers is critical for us and future generations. Because they have gone to great lengths to pursue the organic route in order to better serve us and future generations.