Last year, roughly at this time, I wrote in my column, ?When the Met forecast was 96% of the Long Period Average with a variation of 5%?, we asked you not to worry but cautioned that in some fortnights and some regions (the Met has 36 such agro met zones) there could be problems around this average.? In 2009-10, the growth of agricultural GDP was 0%, which is not great news but since agriculture now accounts for less than a quarter of GDP, the economy still grew at 8% that year. Rainfall failures cause misery but its effect on growth is less than that of global slowdowns and declines in exports and FDI. In fact, India is no longer an economy that is a gamble on the monsoons. In the last three decades, we have had our share of droughts but low-growth years have been very few. In the mid-1990s, I wrote an inaugural address for a national economics conference, which showed that until the mid-1970s, half the year?s growth was negative and in the other half the economy grew between 3% and 6%, giving us the average Hindu growth rate. But since then, we had only two years with a growth of less than 3%. Arvind Panagariya and Arvind Virmani said so some years later, but the world discovered it only this decade. Our own understanding matters. Quicker understanding and reactions based on that is important for outcomes.

There are four stories here. First, a meteorological and an agricultural drought are, to an extent, two different issues. Second, the Indian economy is no longer a gamble on the monsoons. Third, an agricultural drought has very specific effects on crops and regions, and the rainfall pattern on more important effects like drinking water and employment. Fourth, tracking the events and ameliorating policies in a time-bound manner are essential. The name of the game is not to set up another EGoM, but to get going. These arguments were detailed in a Global Investor Conference Call organised by Morgan Stanley on August 13, 2009, and released as a research report titled Drought, Agriculture, and GDP Growth Outlook-A Perspective.

Take the agricultural and meteorological drought. Spacing or timing and regional spread of rainfall are important for agriculture and the economy. Last year, we were all Cassandra?s but we swam against the tide. Rainfall failures of above 60% occurred in Punjab, Haryana and western UP. But these are highly irrigated areas (above 80%, with Punjab above 90%) and so I argued that the impact on grain production would be little. Since in the non-grain areas rainfall failure was less, if there was an average rabi, agricultural GDP could almost be at the previous year?s level?the way it worked out. But I did argue that ?the loss on delay in sowing and to an extent in arable area has already taken place. Planted crops in the rainfed regions which did not get rain will give less yield. Marginally less, but less all the same. In some regions the story will be worse.? This year, last year?s stories seem to have been highly influential. For now, everybody is arguing that the rainfall pattern is not important.

This is equally wrong and we would like to swim against the tide again. The Met has told us that between June 1 and 23 the monsoon rainfall was 11% less than normal. The Met boys are happy because their forecast is that this deficiency will be made up. But that is a meteorological view. From the agricultural perspective, the delay in sowing has already taken place and the rains were 12% below normal until June 27. Unlike last year, the big losses are in the dry areas of Malwa, Gujarat and parts of the Deccan. Delayed sowing and the fall in acreage under the most profitable crops has already taken place. In some of these areas, last year was also less than normal, making it a second year effect. A three-week delay in sowing can affect yield up to between 6-9%, if we look at past data. The financial loss is more, on account of sub-optimal cropping sequences. The normal sowing pattern in the country is well known. For paddy, pulses and oilseeds, it is in early June, and in Kerala, Karnataka and the hilly areas it is in May. Cotton is sown earlier. So let?s get real. Now there is the Crop Weather Group under the secretary of agriculture and I am sure they know all this and they are resourceful and alert. I am sure will do their best. Some of our great agricultural scientists will go on the tube and we will get sound bites on the late planting seed. But the ministry of agriculture?s kharif preparation meetings are normally held in March because it takes time to mobilise policy. Crash programmes save some of the damage but have limits, even with the kind of extremely competent people we have.

The government needs to be supported in the stand it has taken on pulse prices. The problem now, as the deputy governor of RBI said last week, is that there is very little understanding of the structural issues. He was quite clear that this is the cause of the food price rise, not the rain delay. This is the problem to solve rather than fix the vegetable and oilseed grower. Incidentally, oilseeds are grown in a big way in the rain delay regions and to emasculate their incentives is both inefficient and callous. The Economic Survey repeats what we have said all along that for agriculture we need variable tariffs within bounds. This should be the framework for supply planning today, tomorrow and for the next year.

?The author is a former Union minister