The Indian Meteorological Department (IMD) in its 16 April forecast of the 2003 South-West (SW) monsoon has sent out somewhat confusing signals. It says that ?for the country as a whole (the SW monsoon) is likely to be 96 per cent of the Long Period Average (LPA) with a model error of +/- 5 per cent.? It further states that there is ?21 per cent probability of drought (rainfall less than 90 per cent of LPA) and 39 per cent probability of below normal rainfall (90 to 97 per cent of LPA)?. Which amounts to saying that there is 60 per cent probability of ?drought? or ?below normal? rainfall.
Remember, however, that the IMD has made major changes in definition, starting 2003. Previously, rainfall of 91 per cent and above of LPA was considered ?normal?. Thus, the ?normal? SW monsoon in 1999, 2000 and 2001 brought precipitation of 96, 92 and 92 per cent of LPA respectively. And kharif 2001 harvest was a record. By the new definition, however, all of these three years would have to be re-classified as ?below normal?. We also know that in previous years a ?normal? (by the earlier standards) monsoon did not preclude select regions from receiving rainfall that was much below average. When the regions affected are relatively arid and rain-dependant, such as Rajasthan and Gujarat, drought-like conditions develop there, notwithstanding good rains in the rest of the country.
The only conclusion that one can reasonably draw from IMD?s nimble foot-stepping is that, in the worse case (if not the worst case), average precipitation during SW monsoon 2003 would be 96-5=91 per cent of LPA. That would have been just ?normal? by yesteryear?s standard, indicating that some regions may get scarce rains, although on the whole things are satisfactory. If the negative variation is geographically skewed, and the skew is loaded against the more arid parts of the country, unrelieved drought conditions in Rajasthan, Gujarat and other arid regions would be further compounded.
The pre-monsoon (March to May) season has till date been much better than last year, with 24 of 36 divisions receiving normal or excess rains. However, western and eastern Rajasthan, Gujarat and east Madhya Pradesh remained largely dry. One must also remember that these vulnerable regions have experienced poor rainfall for several years in succession. Selective failure of the 2003 SW monsoon, were it to effect them once again, would bring great hardship.
Australian sources suggest that the 2002 El Nino is close to ending and that neutral/normal conditions are becoming established in the Pacific, while other indicators such as sea surface temperatures are ?positive?. Australian climate forecast stations are also predicting heavier rain during the period May to July 2003. ?The chances of above median rainfall for the May to July period are between 60 and 75 per cent in the south east quarter of Queensland and much of the eastern half of New South Wales. So with the climate patterns like the current, about 6 to 7 seasons out of 10 are expected to be wetter than average in these areas…The chances of above median rainfall are between 40 and 45 per cent over much of southern South Australia and north west Tasmania.? Thus spoke the Commonwealth Bureau of Meteorology in its release of 15 April 2003.
Is the IMD not in a position to provide forecasts with similar level of detail for different regions of India? It did try last year and got burnt. Which is no reason not to present its forecast findings to the public this year. It is unfortunate that in the political economy that has emerged in this country, the IMD can find itself caught, as it did last year, in the line of efforts by some quarters to raise a self-serving crop in the parched soil of drought. However, by not making public the details of its own forecasting exercises, the IMD is gratuitously staying prisoner to the exigencies of vote bank politics. The only way to establish its professionalism is to make public the product of its exertions without an eye to the comfort or discomfort of politicians. Else, it fails to serve the public interest.
The author is economic advisor to ICRA (Investment Information and Credit Rating Agency)