BOOSTING BIODIVERSITY AND IMPROVING FARMER ...

BOOSTING BIODIVERSITY AND IMPROVING FARMER LIVELIHOODS THROUGH CROP DIVERSIFICATION

THE PRACTICE AND IMPACT OF SCALING CROP DIVERSIFICATION IN INDIAN ORGANIC COTTON-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS

A RESEARCH PROJECT FROM IN COLLABORATION WITH UNDER FUNDING SUPPORT FROM

CELEBRATING PARTNERSHIPS IN THE ORGANIC COTTON JOURNEY

BEYOND THE COTTON CROP: IMPROVING THE BUSINESS CASE FOR ORGANIC COTTON-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS

READING GUIDE

1. INTRODUCTION1.1. How India shifted to monocropping systems1.2. Organic cotton: unlocking the benefits of crop diversification1.3. Purpose and objectives of the study

2. METHODS EMPLOYED FOR THE STUDY2.1. Where?2.2. Who?2.3. How?

3. SITUATION ANALYSIS: STATUS-QUO, ROOT CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF CURRENT CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES IN ORGANIC COTTON FARMS3.1. There is room for further crop diversification at organic cotton farms3.2. What are the effects of poor diversification in organic cotton farms?3.3. What are the causes of poor diversification in organic cotton farms?

4. UNDERSTANDING THE AGRONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES FOR ORGANIC COTTON FARMS4.1. Tackling the diversification of cotton-based farming systems at different scales4.2. Crop rotations4.3. Intercropping4.4. Border crops4.5. Trap crops4.6. Green manure4.7. Genetic diversity at crop level4.8. Beyond crops: the integration of livestock with cropping systems

5. SELECTING BENEFICIAL CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES FROM AN AGRONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE5.1. Benefits of key crop groups for cotton-based farming systems5.2. Recommended crops for crop rotation and intercropping with cotton

6. MANAGING DIVERSIFIED CROPS AT THE ORGANIC FARM: BEST PRACTICES6.1. Getting the timing right: cropping calendars6.2. Soil fertility and nutrient management in diversified organic cotton-based farming systems6.3. Pest and disease management in diversified organic cotton-based farming systems

7. ECONOMIC COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF BENEFICIAL CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES7.1. The benefit-cost ratio, an indicator to assess and compare the economic benefits of crop diversification practices7.2. Cost-benefit comparison of crop groups and single crops under organic farming conditions7.3. Cost-benefit analysis of recommended crop diversification practices under organic farming conditions

8. CHALLENGES AND LEVERS TO BOOST THE USE OF CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES AND MAXIMISE ORGANIC COTTON FARMERS’ INCOME8.1. Challenges and levers at the seed research and supply industry level8.2. Challenges and levers at farm level8.3. Challenges and levers at procurement and market level8.4. Optimising contextual factors for farmers’ livelihood8.5. Leveraging the policy environment8.6. Fostering the empowerment of female farmers

9. STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ORGANIC AND SUSTAINABLE COTTON SECTOR9.1. Pushing for more crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems9.2. Pulling for more crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems9.3. Bridging Push and Pull strategies: recommendations for the Organic Cotton Accelerator and its partners

10. CONCLUSION

ANNEXES

REFERENCES

page 4

page 5

page 6

page 7page 7

page 7page 9

page 10page 10page 11page 11

page 13

page 13

page 16

page 17

page 18page 18page 18page 19page 19page 19page 20

page 20

page 21

page 21

page 26

page 26page 26

page 29

page 29

page 30

page 30

page 30

page 31

page 32

page 33page 33page 34page 35page 35page 37

page 39

page 39

page 39

page 40

page 41

page 45

page 46

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FIGURE 1. Overview of the benefits of crop diversification in cotton-based farming systems FIGURE 2. Farmer in his field intercropping cotton with maize (Credit: Pratibha Syntex)FIGURE 3. The amount of organic cotton produced per Indian stateFIGURE 4. Cotton and Okra grown as trap crop (Credit: FiBL)FIGURE 5. Primary organic-cotton producing states in India and representative districts chosen for each agro-climatic zoneFIGURE 6. Expertise and regional distribution of participants for the technical interview questionsFIGURE 7. Representation of the key activities along the study timelineFIGURE 8. Zone Portraits: Farm characterisation and status of crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming system across different geographiesFIGURE 9. Practices with the most potential for crop diversification (Source: Poll with workshop respondents)FIGURE 10. Problem tree: root causes and effects of poor diversification in organic cotton-based cropping systemsFIGURE 11. The different scales or spatial levels of crop diversificationFIGURE 12. Path diagram of crop diversification practice (Border Crops) influencing crop-ecosystem components (adapted from47)FIGURE 13. Farmer performing intercultural operations (Credit: FiBL)FIGURE 14. Cropping Calendar - Central Zone (Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat)

FIGURE 15. Cropping Calendar - Eastern Zone (Odisha)FIGURE 16. Cropping Calendar - Northern Zone (Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan) FIGURE 17. Cropping Calendar - Southern Zone (Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana)FIGURE 18. Benefit-cost ratios of different crop groups FIGURE 19. Benefit-cost ratios of single crops FIGURE 20. Benefit-cost ratio based on two-year season (2 Kharif + 2 Rabi) calculation of recommended crop rotationsFIGURE 21. Benefit-cost ratio based on one season (Kharif) calculation of different intercrop combinationsFIGURE 22. Key levers to foster crop diversification in organic cotton-based cropping systemsFIGURE 23. Expert evaluating cotton cultivars with lead farmers (Credit: FiBL)FIGURE 24. Important factors to foster crop diversification at farm level (Source: Poll with workshop respondents)FIGURE 25. Different levels for market linkagesFIGURE 26. Suitability of the current policy environment to support crop diversification (Source: Poll with workshop respondents)FIGURE 27. Female farmers sowing cotton (Credit: FiBL)FIGURE 28. Female farmers preparing natural farming inputs (Credit: FiBL)FIGURE 29. Critical success factors needed to ensure that women benefit from crop diversification (Source: Poll with workshop respondents)FIGURE 30. Strategic recommendations to foster crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems

TABLE 1. Different types of diversification adapted from2⁸TABLE 2. Summary of the agronomic and environmental benefits of 3 crop groups in rotation or intercropping with cottonTABLE 3. Recommended crop rotation combinations for organic cotton-based farming systems as an alternative to cotton-wheat monoculture TABLE 4. Recommended intercropping combinations for organic cotton-based farming systems as an alternative to sole cotton cropping

page 5

page 5

page 8page 8page 10

page 11

page 11

page 14

page 15

page 15

page 17

page 19

page 27

page 28

page 17

page 21

page 26

page 26

page 28

page 28

page 29page 30page 31

page 31

page 31

page 32

page 33

page 34page 34

page 36page 37

page 38

page 38

page 44

ATTRIBUTION: The crop diversification study was commissioned by the Organic Cotton Accelerator (OCA) and conducted by the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) under funding support from the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH.

CITATION: Riar A., Joshi T., Goldmann E., Joshi S., and Tournebize M. (2020) Boosting biodiversity and improving farmer livelihoods through crop diversification: The practice and impact of scaling crop diversification in Indian organic cotton-based farming systems. OCA, Amsterdam, pp 48.

CONTACT: For more information, contact the OCA SecretariatOCA, Watersteeg 3, 1012 NV, Amsterdam, Netherlandssecretariat@organiccottonaccelerator.orgwww.organiccottonacelerator.org

3

TABLES

FIGURES

OCA envisions a future where we have fully realised the Organic Cotton Effect - organic cotton’s powerful and positive impact on people, planet and prosperity. We unite the sector to unleash the potential of organic cotton because we believe that by working together, we can create the conditions for organic cotton to thrive. Since our establishment in 2016, with founding partners Laudes Foundation, H&M, Kering, Eileen Fisher, Textile Exchange, Tchibo, Inditex and C&A, OCA has been committed to convening the sector around a common agenda and using our platform’s collective investments to act as a catalyst for change to bring integrity, supply security and measurable social and environmental impact to organic cotton.

We know we can’t do this alone, so we warmly welcome partners to join our movement. Partners who know there is no such thing as a turnkey organic solution; they’re as committed as we are to the long-term work required to create meaningful change in this sector.

We are fortunate to have key partners walking alongside OCA in this journey, amongst them the Research Institute of Agriculture (FiBL). We would like to thank FiBL for harnessing their network at both an international and local level, and for using participatory approaches to center farmer organisations at the heart of this work. By conducting this study on crop diversification in collaboration with FiBL, we are convinced that we have a solid foundation on which to further build our own work and also that of the broader sustainable agriculture sector. Thank you to Dr Amritbir Riar, Dr Tanay Joshi, Eva Goldmann and Smita Joshi for their deep commitment to this study, especially in the challenging times of the COVID-19 pandemic.

We are also grateful to the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH for making it possible to collect these recommendations for the Indian organic cotton sector. We are pleased that these outcomes will directly inform our Organic Cotton Training Curriculum, a key tool for capacity building for organic cotton farming in India, that is currently being developed with the same partners.

On behalf of both OCA and FIBL, we would like to extend our special appreciation and gratitude to the field partners of the Farmer Engagement Development (FED) Programme and the Seeding the Green Future participatory breeding programme, and thank the Indian partners and experts interviewed for sharing their valuable inputs in the framework of this study. We also acknowledge the constructive inputs from Monika Messmer, Gurbir Bhullar, Florentine Meinshausen, Toralf Richter, Thomas Bernet, Gian Nicolay, and other colleagues from the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) for the same.

And finally, we want to give special recognition and appreciation to organic cotton farmers in India and across the globe for their continuous efforts to achieve sustainable production.

Thank you,

The OCA Team

4

CELEBRATING PARTNERSHIPS IN THE ORGANIC COTTON JOURNEY

Crop diversification aims to increase the diversity of crops grown at different times and scales at the farm. Such practices play an essential role in organic agriculture, representing real potential that is yet to be leveraged. Solid research results have proven the agronomic and environmental benefits of crop diversification on agricultural systems compared to monoculture. Indeed, by maximising synergies between the crops grown together (e.g. intercropping), or after each other (e.g. crop rotation), on the same field, organic farmers can maintain crop and soil health and ensure that fields can be arable in the long term with a good yield. Crop diversification practices also contribute to diversified and more resilient income sources for farmers, which gives them the opportunity to sustain their businesses and invest in their family’s future.

For a cotton farmer, producing organically means moving from a crop centric approach towards a cropping system approach, and from an input-based production logic towards knowledge-based farming. Knowledge is the key to unlocking the benefits of organic cotton-based farming systems. Hence, improving the business case for organic cotton farming in India means bridging the knowledge gap on crop diversification and considering the profitability of the whole farming system.

The Organic Cotton Accelerator (OCA) places organic cotton farmers at the core of its mission and strategy because we see farmers as the true stewards of the land. OCA’s current activities focus on improving the business case for Indian farmers to grow cotton organically as OCA believes in the multiplier effect: with a higher income, farmers have the chance to invest in healthy cropping practices which can guarantee a prosperous future for both their family and community.

OCA initiated this study with three main objectives in mind. Firstly, to understand which crop diversification practices can offer the best combination of agronomic, environmental and economic benefits to organic cotton farmers in India. Secondly, to identify the levers which would encourage the use of crop diversification

practices at organic cotton farms and maximise the potential of such techniques for actual income generation. Finally, to highlight the way forward to achieve a higher level of diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems.

This study provides recommendations on the selection and management of crop diversification practices as well as the next steps necessary to achieve a higher level of diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems. By aligning complementary initiatives and interventions that push and pull crop diversification at farm level, we can harvest the benefits of such practices for Indian producers and the planet. The findings from this study will be used to inform OCA’s Farm Programme* which is projected to work with ~30,000 organic cotton farmers across 5 Indian states in the cotton season 2021/22, with further growth anticipated. As such, an increasing number of Indian farmers will benefit from these recommendations as part of the Organic Cotton Training Curriculum, that is aimed to leverage capacity building for organic cotton farming in India.

Beyond the organic cotton sector, the findings will also be of interest to the broader sustainable agricultural sector and could inspire collaborations across crops and sustainability initiatives like agroecology and regenerative agriculture, as ultimately, we all chase similar goals. Hence, we are sharing this study report openly with a broader public, with the hope to inspire others to take action, build on existing initiatives and identify synergies across organisations.

Now more than ever, the diversification of cropping systems is needed at a large scale, so that, we can boost the resilience of our farming systems to pests and diseases, climate change and other environmental stresses, whilst sustainably supporting farmer livelihoods.

Partnership is needed to accelerate the shift towards more diversified organic farming systems. If you would like to support crop diversification research or the income resilience of Indian organic cotton farmers, please contact us at:[email protected]

* For more information about OCA’s programmes, please visit www.organicottonaccelerator.org.

FIGURE 2. Farmer in his field intercropping cotton with maize (Credit: Pratibha Syntex)

FIGURE 1: Overview of the benefits of crop diversification in cotton-based farming systems

BiodiversitySoil health

Reduces pressure on land resources

THE BENEFITS OF CROP DIVERSIFICATION ARE

ENVIRONMENTALAGRONOMIC

Long-term yield stabilityCrop health

Nutrient-use e�ciency

ECONOMIC

Varied income streamsHousehold food security

5

BEYOND THE COTTON CROPIMPROVING THE BUSINESS CASE FOR ORGANIC COTTON-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS

What are you

interested in?

Then go straight to the section

indicated below…

The methodological approach taken to

conduct this study, hearing more about

the geographic areas studied and the profile of the stakeholders that

contributed to it

The status-quo, root causes and e�ects of current crop diversification practices

in organic cotton farms

3. Situation analysis

2. M

ethods employed

for the study

4. U

nderstanding the agronom

ic and environm

ental benefits of crop diversification

practices for organic cotton farm

s

5. Selecting beneficial crop diversification practices from

an agronom

ic and environm

ental perspectives

page 21page 17

page 13page 10

page 30page 26

page 39page 32

6. M

anaging diversified crops at the organic farm

: best practices

7. Econom

ic cost-benefit analysis of beneficial crop diversification

practices

8. C

hallenges and levers to boost the use of crop diversification

practices and m

aximise organic

cotton farmers’

income

9. Strategic

recomm

endations to the organic and

sustainable cotton sector

The crop diversification practices that can o�er the best com

bination of agronom

ic, environmental and

economic benefits to organic cotton

farmers in India

Recomm

endations on the m

ost suitable crops for crop rotation and intercropping in Indian organic cotton-based farm

ing systems, based

on the agronomic and

environmental benefits

of the crop groups to w

hich they belong

Best practices for diversified cropping system

managem

ent under organic conditions, including cropping calendars

Cost-benefit analysis

of the individual crop groups that can be used to diversify organic cotton-based farm

ing systems.

Cost-benefit analysis

of the recomm

ended crop rotations and intercrops

Agronomic and

environmental benefits

of the main types of

crop diversification practices: crop rotations, intercropping, border crops, trap crops and green m

anure

The levers that will encourage the use

of crop diversification practices at organic cotton farm

s and maxim

ise the potential of such techniques for actual

income generation

The way forw

ard to achieve a higher level of diversification in organic cotton-based farm

ing systems

6

RE

AD

ING

GU

IDE

The reading guide below w

ill help you navigate the wealth of inform

ation collected during this study.

1.1. HOW INDIA SHIFTED TO MONOCROPPING SYSTEMS

What would the Indian agricultural sector be without cotton? Indian cotton-based farming systems share the trait of providing employment and remuneration in rural areas, which makes cotton a significant cash crop and an influential crop for the country’s economy. However, cotton-based farming systems are very different throughout the ‘cotton belt’, as the crop is grown under diverse agro-climatic conditions that are unique in their annual rainfall distribution and soil characteristics.

The ‘green revolution’ propagated the intensification and commercialisation of agriculture, as did new agricultural technology such as external synthetic inputs and genetically modified crops. These technological advancements paired with the economic liberalisation of India over the last decades of the 20th century supported a shift towards crop specialisation and commercial agriculture,1 with trends of specialisation varying across regions.2,3 This turned subsistence farming into the monoculture of commercial crops we know today, resulting in large-scale farmers becoming heavily reliant on inputs that were promoted as package practices, and, in turn, dependant on financial investments. The need for increased productivity, the geographical structuring of agro-industrial supply chains and processing infrastructure⁴ and the development of technical crop-specific skills have strongly influenced this crop specialisation trend.

However, while cotton is currently grown on 5% of gross cropped area of India and accounts for 36-50% of the nationwide pesticide usage,⁵,⁶,⁷ the national productivity of lint cotton is stagnating at 496 kg/ha and ranks well below other leading cotton producing countries. Increases in cotton production in India tended to occur at the expense of crop area expansion rather than improved productivity.

This often led to other crops being pushed to marginal lands and a reduction in acreage,⁹,2 driven by crop price competition.1⁰ Indeed, when specialising in set crops, farmers often choose the most profitable ones.⁴ For example, in central rainfed areas, cotton was historically rotated with sorghum, but low sorghum prices led to the introduction of continuous cotton cultivation, and in other areas sorghum was replaced with soybean. This mechanism - combined with the widespread adoption of Bt hybrid cotton – fostered the steady conversion of traditional multi-cropping systems into mono-cropping systems.11

While monoculture-based farming provides valuable agronomic benefits in the short-term, it can also result in several undesirable effects such as the decline of local and regional biodiversity, deteriorated soil health and fertility, greenhouse gas emissions, and eutrophication - all of which invariably reduce the productive capacity and growth potential of agriculture over the long-term.12 Monoculture-based farming is also associated with the development of pesticide resistance through co-evolution of

pests, a decline in farm employment, and nutrient imbalances, due to depletion of soil nutrients.13,1⁴ This can jeopardise the productivity of the farm in the medium to long term, and result in farmers over-compensating for the negative effects of monoculture or short rotations by using additional synthetic inputs.⁴

However, other types of farming systems do offer alternatives to monocropping systems and their undesirable effects by taking cropping system approaches instead of crop centric approaches. They especially invest in crop diversification practices, which increase the diversity of crops grown on a farm or field. These practices usually range from structural and genetic diversity in the field to spatial and temporal diversity of crop types grown on a farm.1⁵

Such farming systems are fast becoming more structured, recognised and adopted worldwide. Amongst them: organic farming.

1.2. ORGANIC COTTON: UNLOCKING THE BENEFITS OF CROP DIVERSIFICATION

Organic farming uses a holistic approach where crop diversification plays a central part, especially through optimised crop rotation, the planting of intercrops and the use of green manure. By farming organically, multi-cropping systems can be fostered, and several agronomic, environmental and economic benefits can be unlocked.

India is the biggest producer of organic cotton growing 51% of the global organic cotton output in 2018-2019.1⁶ That year, organic cotton was grown on 212,000 hectares of land. The average yield for cotton among organic farmers was 549 kg/ha in 2017-2018.1⁷

The ten major cotton-growing states in India can be categorised into four distinct zones. The northern zones are formed by the states of Punjab, Haryana, and Rajasthan, the central zone of Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Maharashtra, and the southern zone of Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu. In the East, cotton production is predominant in Odisha.⁹

Organic cotton is primarily produced in the states of Odisha, Maharashtra, Madya Pradesh, Gujarat, and Rajasthan, as shown in Figure 3.1⁶

7

1. INTRODUCTION

FIGURE 4 Cotton and Okra grown as trap crop (Credit: FiBL)

RAJASTHAN 6,205 MT

GUJARAT 28,556 MT

HARYANA 287 MT

MADHYA PRADESH 23,675 MT

ODISHA 32,990 MT

TELANGANA 619 MT

TAMIL NADU 391 MT

MAHARASHTRA 27,944 MT

FIGURE 3. The amount of organic cotton produced per Indian state16

8

Backed by solid research results, the agronomic, environmental and economic benefits of crop diversification have been proven compared to monoculture. Crop diversification has been recognised as an effective strategy for achieving the objectives of food security, nutrition security, income growth, poverty alleviation and employment generation. It can also lead to the judicious use of land and water resources, sustainable agricultural development, and environmental improvement.1⁸ The diversification of cropping systems through intercropping, cover crops, bund crops, barrier crops, and trap crops is also known to provide a biological insurance against pest risks and unfavourable environmental conditions.1⁹ Crop diversification is also proposed as a lever to reduce inputs from outside the farm and the environmental damage caused by their excessive use.⁴ It also increases the productivity and stabilises the income of smallholders.2⁰ For example, a long term comparison of organic and conventional systems showed comparable gross margins in the two-year crop rotation of Cotton-Soybean-Wheat.21

As an organised and recognised movement, organic farming has the potential to create a true paradigm shift from an input-based production logic towards knowledge-based farming, and to create the market linkages needed so that such cropping system approaches can be adopted for the long run.

To make sure that farmers select crop diversification practices that are agronomically and environmentally favourable at farm level4, the continuous development and dissemination of knowledge really is essential. Efforts to enhance the production and productivity of cotton remain incomplete without a transfer to the use of improved production technology.

Economically speaking, improving the business case for organic cotton farming in India implies looking beyond the cotton crop and considering the profitability of the entire farming system. It entails seeking opportunities for revenue growth (e.g., through yield improvements, quality improvements and price increases)

and minimising costs (e.g., through reduced dependency on external inputs and leveraging on-farm resources), while keeping in mind the fluctuations in both input and output prices. Stable market linkages and permanent supply chain infrastructures are also essential to maintain this business case in the long run.

106 842 95 73

1INTRODUCTION

1.3. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

OCA initiated this study on crop diversification in the context of Indian organic cotton farmers to help find answers to the following questions for the Indian organic cotton sector:

With these questions in mind, this study on crop diversification aimed to:

1. Which crop diversification practices can offer the best combination of agronomic, environmental and economic benefits to organic cotton farmers in India, so we can harvest the benefits of such practices for Indian producers and the planet?

2. Which levers will encourage the use of crop diversification practices at organic cotton farms and maximise the potential of such techniques for actual income generation in order to leverage the profitability of the whole farming system?

3. What is the best way to achieve a higher level of diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems? How can we bridge the knowledge gap on crop diversification to move from an input-based production logic towards knowledge-based farming? What does it take to move from a crop centric approach towards a cropping system approach? How can OCA and other stakeholders from both the organic and broader sustainable cotton sector play a role in this process?

• Screen and identify crop diversification practices in organic cotton-based systems across different regions that offer the best agronomic, environmental and economic benefits to farmers.

• Deliver recommendations on the selection and management of crop diversification practices as well as the subsequent marketing of the different crops.

• Highlight levers that can encourage the use of crop diversification practices at organic cotton farms and maximise the potential of such techniques for actual income generation.

• Propose a way forward to achieve a higher level of diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems.

9

106 842 95 73

1INTRODUCTION

2.1. WHERE?

The study focused on five primary cotton-growing states: Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Gujarat and Rajasthan.

But even within these states, cotton is grown under diverse agro-climatic conditions characterised by annual rainfall distribution and widely varying soil conditions. These differences are accounted into the classification of different countrywide agro-climatic zones and state-specific agro-climatic zones (sub-regions)*.

The agroclimatic zones of the five states were screened and further narrowed to select the major cotton growing districts factoring in soil type and rainfall patterns, and the basic administrative units where crop production statistics were available from the states, as shown in Figure 5 (for further details, please see Annex 1). The locations of existing organic cotton project sites were also taken into strong consideration.

*Please note that here we refer to agro-climatic zones (sub regions) that were regionalised under Agro-Climatic Regional Planning (ACRP) for each state, whereas the entire country of India is divided into 15 agro-climatic zones by the Planning Commission, Government of India.

It was essential to use participatory methods, throughout this study on crop diversification in the context of Indian organic cotton farmers. The deliverables were produced by and for the Indian organic cotton sector, to ensure local farming nuances were considered.

The following section explains the methodological approach taken to conduct this study, highlight its geographic focus and the profile of the stakeholders that contributed to it.

RAJASTHAN

GUJARAT

MAHARASHTRA

KHARGONEJAJPUR

BALANGIRKALAHANDIRAYAGADA

JHABUAMADHYA PRADESH

ODISHA

NAGAUR

SRI GANGANAGAR

KUTCH

AHMEDABAD

BHAVNAGARSURATAKOLA

PARBHANI

FIGURE 5. Primary organic-cotton producing states in India and representative districts chosen for each agro-climatic zone

10

2. METHODS EMPLOYED FOR THE STUDY

2.2. WHO?

The methods used to carry out this study were participatory to ensure the practical relevance of the findings and the inclusion of on-the-ground expertise.

The study was conducted in close cooperation with organic cotton stakeholders from OCA and the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL)’s networks. Stakeholders from the broader cotton sector in India, including the State Agriculture Department, State Agricultural Universities, central research institutions dedicated to cotton research and other crops, Krishi Vigyan Kendra’s (KVKs), seed producers, NGOs, and other actors engaged directly or indirectly in the organic cotton sector were also invited to participate.

These stakeholders were involved via in-depth interviews and/or participatory feedback workshops. The graphs below in Figure 6 showcase the area of expertise and the regional distribution of the stakeholders who provided inputs during the interviews.

2.3.1. STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS

Researchers, scientists, extensionists, market experts, organic farm groups and agricultural academicians from the organic and broader cotton sector provided their input via one-on-one interviews or through focus group discussion, following ‘semi-structured’ interview methods. Their expertise was sought to gain a better understanding of the current levels of crop diversification including: connection and characterisation of farmers, prominent region-specific cotton-based farming systems, awareness of policies that support crop diversification, market-related challenges associated with the diversified produce, strategies to promote diversification amongst farmers, and overcoming market-linkage barriers. In total, 40 interviews focused on the technical aspects of crop diversification while 21 zoomed into the set-up of marketing linkage and policy consideration for diversified produce.

2.3.2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review included relevant scientific literature on Indian cotton production, government and state publications such as contingency plans, policy documents, recommendations, reports from the State Agriculture Department, Ministry of Agriculture data and recommendations, statistics from the Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, Directorate of Economics and Statistics (DACNET) and the agricultural extension centre Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK), Package and Practices from Agricultural Universities, the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), the Central Institute for Cotton Research (CICR) as well as extension service documents and literature from partner organisations and other nodal research institutes in India. Most importantly, the data on farm economics was referred from the latest reports on price policy for Kharif and Rabi from the ‘Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP)’, under the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India.

2.3. HOW?

The study was based on literature research as well as participatory input collection and validation. The completion of the situation analysis as well as the input validation using participatory feedback workshops constituted the two milestones of the study workflow over the course of 9 months, initiated in January 2020 and finalised in October 2020.

Research48%Extension

49%

Research and extension3%

EXPERTISE OF PARTICIPANTS

Centralzone68%East zone

10%

South zone6%

North zone2%

Pan India14%

REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS

SITUATIONANALYSIS

STAKEHOLDERINTERVIEWS

PARTICIPATORY FEEDBACK WORKSHOPS

STUDY TIMELINE

LITERATURERESEARCH

FIGURE 6. Expertise and regional distribution of participants for the technical interview questions

FIGURE 7. Representation of the key activities along the study timeline

11

106 842METHODS EMPLOYED

FOR THE STUDY

95 731

2.3.3. SITUATION ANALYSIS

The situation analysis phase of the study made use of the problem tree approach, which maps the anatomy of cause and effect around an issue and helps enable understanding of the interconnectedness of effects and causes of the problem22 - in our case; the poor diversification of organic cotton-based farming systems. The problem tree was carried out in a workshop among FiBL cotton experts, and further input was given by stakeholders through the interviews and complemented by relevant literature.

2.3.4. PARTICIPATORY FEEDBACK WORKSHOP

The comprehensive input collected via literature research and stakeholder interviews was validated using two online feedback workshops. Each workshop included focus group discussions to ensure high levels of stakeholder participation and in-depth validation. The technical session focused on the agronomic, environmental, and economic benefits of the crop diversification practices identified, while the market and policy session focused on the market challenges and opportunities with regards to crop diversification. In each group, the participants fully endorsed the findings, with only a few participants who came up with minor suggestions and recommendations. Participants also unanimously advocated the objectives of the study and reflected the urgent need for suitable crop diversification practices in cotton-based farming systems.

12

106 842METHODS EMPLOYED

FOR THE STUDY

95 731

3.1. THERE IS ROOM FOR FURTHER CROP DIVERSIFICATION AT ORGANIC COTTON FARMS

3.1.1. PROFILE OF INDIAN ORGANIC COTTON FARMS

Organic cotton farms in India have an average size of 2 hectares, ranging between 1-4 hectares with households of an average of 6 members.23 Many of the smallholders growing organic cotton are located in very remote areas and often have low levels of formal education.

Up to a certain extent, organic cotton farmers grow several different crops on their farms. The farm size can be decisive for the ability and willingness to use diversified cropping patterns: under irrigation small farms (up to 1 hectare) show higher levels of diversification than large farms (more than 4 hectares).2 An average of 8 crops are grown (range: 5-16) and an average of 66% of farm area is dedicated to cash crops while 34% of the total area is used for own food production to ensure household food security.23 A vast majority of farmers primarily grow cereals and legumes for their food consumption, however nuts, oilseed, and seasonal vegetables are also grown for household consumption. This organic cotton sustainability assessment initiated by Textile Exchange found that on average 59% of household income is generated from organic cotton production, 22% from other crops, 10% livestock, and 9% from off-farm income.23

Most organic cotton is produced in India under rainfed conditions similarly to India’s overall total cotton production, of which 65% is from rainfed fields.2⁴,2⁵ Organic farmers also use several techniques to conserve water; with crop selection, field bunding, and rainwater harvesting alongside more efficient irrigation systems considered as popular interventions.23 Crop rotation and composting are primary methods for improving soil fertility in organic farming. The most common methods of controlling pests include the use of botanicals, pheromones, biological control agents and trap crops such as sunflower and okra along with crop rotation and pest scouting. Producer groups observed a higher level of biodiversity on organic farms.23

3.1.2. STATUS-QUO OF CROP DIVERSIFICATION IN ORGANIC COTTON-BASED CROPPING SYSTEMS

Organic cotton farmers often grow different crops in their farming systems for household food security and also because organic regulations require the integration of different crops, as per the Indian National Programme of Organic Production: ‘Where appropriate, the organic farms shall be required to maintain sufficient diversity in a manner that takes into account pressure from insects, weeds, diseases, and other pests, while maintaining or increasing soil, organic matter, fertility, microbial activity, and

general soil health. For non-perennial crops, this is normal, but not exclusive, achieved through crop rotation preferably by leguminous crops.’ (Article 6. ii. from2⁶)

Nonetheless, farmers mainly depend on cotton for in-season income generation and hence focus their production on cotton. While several farm groups have initiated structured crop diversification interventions, the general status of diversification in the major organic cotton-growing regions is regarded as low (based upon results from stakeholder interviews).

A prevalent cropping sequence in organic cotton-based production systems is the growth of wheat in Rabi season (winter cropping season) after cotton where sufficient irrigation is available, and the subsequent growth of cotton on the same field in the next Kharif season (rainy or monsoon cropping season). Farmers usually uproot cotton (after the second or third flush) to grow wheat or chickpea in the Rabi season. Growing wheat is often more profitable than simply continuing to harvesting cotton as wheat yields compensate for the missed cotton harvest and additional production cost.2⁷

3.1.3. UNDERSTANDING LOCAL NUANCES ACROSS INDIAN STATES

Figure 8 provides an overview of the primary cotton-producing zones: North, East, South and Central zones according to the perception of the stakeholders interviewed for the situation analysis. It describes the current level of crop diversification in cotton-based farming systems in general, using a traffic light system, with green representing a high level of diversification and red representing areas where farming takes place mainly as monocropping. This overview is provided along with some indications on water management (irrigated or rainfed farming) as well as the share of each state in the Indian organic cotton production.

The East zone, with the state of Odisha, is the area where crop diversification is frequently observed in (organic) cotton-based farming systems, while the other zones show only low levels of diversification. Overall, little regional variation was observed when it comes to the crops used to diversify conventional and organic cotton-based cropping systems.

The situation analysis showed that there is also room for improvement in existing organic cotton farming systems with regards to crop diversification across the Indian states studied. As expressed by the stakeholders interviewed during the course of this study: ‘at this stage, there is too little crop diversification in the cropping system of organic cotton farmers.’

13

3. SITUATION ANALYSIS STATUS-QUO, ROOT CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF CURRENT CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES IN ORGANIC COTTON FARMS

MAHARASHTRA

GUJARAT

MADHYA PRADESH

ODISHA

PUNJAB

RAJASTHANHARYANA

KARNATAKA

TELANGANA

ANDHRA PRADESH

IRRIGATED

MAINLYMONOCROPPING

RAJASTHAN 6%

Water management

Level of crop diversification among cotton-based farming systems

Share of total Indian organic cotton production

ZONE PORTRAIT - CENTRAL ZONE

ZONE PORTRAIT - NORTH ZONE

ZONE PORTRAIT - EAST ZONE

ZONE PORTRAIT - SOUTH ZONE

GUJARATMADHYA PRADESH / MAHARASHTRA

Source: Textile Exchange Organic Cotton report 2019

Largely irrigated

21%

Largelymonocropping

Guj

arat

Mad

hya

Prad

esh

Rainfed

Less diverseto monocropping

29% 15%

Mah

aras

htra

Water management




Water management




RAINFED

DIVERSE

ODISHA 28%

Water management




LARGELY RAINFED

LESS DIVERSE TOMONOCROPPING

TELANGANA 1%

KARNATAKA 1%

Figure 8. Zone Portraits: Farm characterisation and status of crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming system across different geographies

14

106 842 95 73

SITUATION ANALYSIS

1

3.1.4. EXISTING AWARENESS FOR CROP DIVERSIFICATION, ESPECIALLY INTERCROPPING

While there is room for improvement, there is clearly an awareness for crop diversification already, amongst organic cotton stakeholders, extensionists and researchers, with some farm groups already marketing diversified crops such as chillies and other spices.

In the participatory feedback workshops, the participants were asked which crop diversification practice they deemed the most important for organic cotton farming systems. As shown in Figure 9, they cited intercropping followed by crop rotation in second position. These two types of crop diversification practices are currently the main ones in use at organic cotton farms in India.

Why is the level of crop diversification practices in organic cotton-based farming systems currently so low? And what are the consequences for organic cotton farmers and the broader sector? The problem-tree approach was used to map the causes and effects and understand how these elements interconnect. Figure 10 illustrates these findings, which are further explained in the sections below.

MOST IMPORTANT CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES (%)

Intercropping Crop rotation Trap / border crops0

50

10074

215

FIGURE 9. Practices with the most potential for crop diversification (Source: Poll with workshop respondents)

Increase monetary risks farmer

Dependency on marketsfor nutrition

EFFECTS

PROBLEM

CAUSES

Poor DIVERSIFICATION in organic cotton-based cropping systems

Destabilise livelihood security Higher production cost

More labour required for intercultural operations

Increase dependencyon cash crop

Lack of infrastructureKnowledge gap on

compatibility of crop combinations

Research gap

Lack of agronomic expertise of

di�erent crops

Lack of capacity building

Extension servicenot aware of crop

diversification

Choice of crops withfocus on cash crops

Lack of marketing opportunities for other

crops

Farmers notaware of crop diversification

Dominance of male decision making

Organic: lack of premium for non

cash crops

Lack of value addition/ food processing

possibilities

Economy of scale

Small land size Physical distanceto market

Bad linkage of farmers to market

Lack of marketing skills

Lack of skilled labour

Lack of seeds adapted for organic

Lack of equipment

Lack of adapted policy schemes

High weed pressure

Dependency of external inputs

Less habitat for beneficial insects

No benefit of system approach

Little capacity to adapt to climate change

Low skills to cultivateother cropsMonoculture

Dependency oncash crops

Less available NPK Low infiltration Low nutrient cycling Low farm resilience

High pest and disease incidence Declining soil fertility Low availability of organic

matter on farm level Less biodiversity

Figure 10. Problem tree: root causes and effects of poor diversification in organic cotton-based cropping systems

15

106 842 95 73

SITUATION ANALYSIS

1

3.2. WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF POOR DIVERSIFICATION IN ORGANIC COTTON FARMS?

Focusing on a few single crops combined with the need to increase yields often leads to soil fertility depletion; one of the main causes of stagnating yields.2⁸ Declining soil fertility impacts both the soil’s water absorption capacity and the amount of nutrients available for plants. Farmers therefore need to compensate for the nutrient demands of their crops which are not covered by the soil, often with external synthetic inputs.

Short rotations and dominance of a single crop in an entire farming system can alter agrobiodiversity. Sole cropping of cotton in one field can increase the pressure of emerging weeds, compared to a more diversified cropping system where the intercrops can suppress weed growth. Intercrops and functional biodiversity outside the field can offer habitat for beneficial insects, which help alleviate pest incidents. But focussing on a specific, limited number of crops often comes at the expense of a functional agro-biodiversity and on-farm biomass. The usage of on-farm biomass, possibly provided by a variety of crops grown is crucial to close the nutrient cycle, secure soil fertility, and deliver the benefits of a farming system effect.

Overall, the diversity of the cropping system is strongly linked to the adaptive capacity of a resilient farm that can adapt to changing environments. If farmers only grow a limited range of crops, they may lack the necessary skills to diversify and adapt their farming systems when environmental or market situations change. Resilience and diversity of farming systems not only offers many benefits on the environmental, biophysical side of a farm but can also affect the economic performance of the farm.

When specialising in crops, farmers often choose the most profitable crops and compensate for the negative effects of short rotations or monoculture by additional inputs.⁴ When focusing on just a few crops, farmers increase their financial risk as they spend more money on producing their crops due to higher input costs. Producing more, or solely cash crops also often comes at the expense of staple crops. When reducing their production of staple food for home consumption farmers become more dependent on markets for diversified and healthy household nutrition.

3.3. WHAT ARE THE CAUSES OF POOR DIVERSIFICATION IN ORGANIC COTTON FARMS?

Limited diversification of farming systems is often linked to a strong dependency on cash crops to generate income for farmers. This focus on cash crop production spans a wide range of factors which influence farmers’ behaviour. Specialisation processes can be explained by increasing technical skills necessary in each type of production, the need to increase productivity and the geographical structuring of agro-industrial supply chains and processing infrastructure.⁴ Farmers often lack the skills to diversify their cropping systems and manage a range of different crops.

This is often because capacity building for farmers focuses on the management of cash crops and neither the extension services are sensitised to the need to diversify the cropping system, nor is there strong policy support to optimise the extension service in that direction.

Limited extension services and policy support does not solely contribute to the knowledge gap on the farmers’ field but also to a considerable research gap on how best to manage combinations of multiple crops. Research and industry are often focused on dominant crops, resulting in a lack of seed and inputs for marginal crops which might be ideal for crop diversification at the farm level.⁴ Skilled labour, suitable tools, and seeds adapted to organic production are needed to adequately manage a more diversified range of crops on the farm.

Technical and organisational challenges may push farmers to simplify their cropping plans and rotations. Greater diversification raises logistic challenges beyond the farm level, such as transport, storage, and market access.⁴ The long distances from farmers’ fields to markets make it difficult for them to sell their produce, and this is exacerbated if, due to limited land size, the amount of produce is too small to be cost-effectively transported to distant markets. Even though improved marketing and processing skills could alleviate some of the challenges faced, the fact that premium prices for organic are mostly only paid for cash crops put strong constraints on the profitable production of other crops in organic cotton-based farming systems. The production of small quantities (e.g. intercrop) or crops, which are less prominent in the area is less appealing as intermediates or consumers might not be interested in small quantities of lesser-known crops.⁴

Adjusting to the market, taking more risks, and changing their cropping system can be a challenge to farmers. In the early years of incorporating new crops – the learning phase – the variability of yields is a huge risk to farmers. Most small-scale farmers in India only grow food crops to meet their family’s demand for food grains; thus farmers tend to stick to stable cropping patterns.2

Lacking premium or fair prices may influence farmers’ decision to focus their production on a limited range of crops. It’s also useful to bear keep in mind the impact of gender roles in the decision-making process of which crops to grow. Often these decisions are dominated by the male members of the household, who may have less interest in staple food production over cash crops, in comparison to the female members of the household.

Now that we have a clear picture of the status quo of crop diversification in various Indian states, and of the root causes and consequences of the choices made at farm level, let’s explore the key crop diversification practices that exist, and the benefits they can provide.

16

106 842 95 73

SITUATION ANALYSIS

1

4.1. TACKLING THE DIVERSIFICATION OF COTTON-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS AT DIFFERENT SCALES

Diversification at the farm can be regarded on different spatial and time scales as shown in Figure 11 - from the cultivated species to the production field right up to the ecosystem - with promising benefits that could be provided at each level through a range of practices. Table 1 describes the different types of diversification at various scales, explains the concept behind each of them and showcases the most common practices within each type.

Why should we diversify cotton-based farming systems? The following sections describe the agronomic and environmental benefits of crop diversification practices for organic cotton farms.

While structural and genetic diversity of the same crop, as well as the integration of non-crop vegetation, do offer many agronomic and environmental benefits, their potential to directly contribute to an increase in farmers’ household income is limited.

Agroforestry is an important and promising aspect of diversifying farming systems, increasing soil fertility, and increasing the climate resilience of farms.

Polycultures, including intercrops, trap crops, and border crops as well as adapted crop rotations do offer the optimal combination of agronomic, environmental, and economic benefits as well as

practical feasibility on farm level.1⁵ These crops play a significant role in the different stages of production and across the seasons. They could contribute to soil fertility (rotation crop, green manure crop), help control pests and weeds (trap crop, cover crop, border crop), keep the family food and nutrition secure (intercrop-pulses), be a valuable cash crop (oilseed) and improve household income from local and/or regional markets (vegetable, spices, flowers) - all of this contributes to the socio-economic viability of the farm system to produce organic cotton.

TABLE 1. Different types of diversification adapted from²⁸

SCALE TYPE OF DIVERSIFICATION KEY CONCEPTS EXAMPLES OF DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES IN AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS

CULTIVATED SPECIES

Genetic diversity within a cultivated species

Use of genetically diverse cultivars from a same species used at the farm

Growing different cultivars of the same species in one field

PRODUCTION FIELD

Increased structural diversity Make crops within the field more structurally diverse

Strip harvesting: Temporal variations in harvesting of the same crop

Crop rotationsTemporal diversity of crops, by rotating crops grown after each other on a same production

fieldCrop rotation

Diversified non-crop vegetation Growing weed strips or vegetation banks within and alongside crops Flower or fallow strips

Polycultures Growing two or more crop species within the field; spatial diversity of crops

Intercropping, trap crops and border crops, mixed cropping, cover cropping

Agroforestry Growing crops and trees together; spatial diversity

Combination of trees and crops grown on the same arable land

ECOSYSTEM Mixed landscapes Development of larger-scale diversified landscapes with multiple ecosystems

A balanced combination of diversified agricultural land, natural vegetation and

habitats on landscape level

CULTIVATED SPECIES

ECOSYSTEM

PRODUCTION FIELD

FIGURE 11. The different scales or spatial levels of crop diversification

17

4. UNDERSTANDING THE BENEFITS OF CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES FOR ORGANIC COTTON FARMS

Let’s now zero in on five types of crop diversification practices to understand how and why they benefit cotton-based farming systems: crop rotations, intercropping, border crops, trap crops and green manure, which are essential cropping techniques to maintain crop and soil health at the organic farm. Beyond these key practices, the importance of genetic diversity as well as the integration of livestock with cropping systems have also be emphasised.

4.2. CROP ROTATIONS

Crop rotation is the practice of cyclically growing a sequence of different plant species on the same parcel of land following a defined order of the crop succession with a fixed length.2⁹ The succeeding crop may be of different species (e.g., grain crops followed by legumes) or variety from the previous crop. A well-managed crop rotation fosters soil fertility, breaks pest and disease cycles and reduces weed pressure, leading to increased yields of different crops and improving the economic viability of the farm.

Crop rotation is one of the most essential elements in organic cotton production to maintain soil fertility and ensure balanced nutrient content in the soil.3⁰ Crop rotation practice has continued to evolve as a strategy to increase harvestable yields in dryland environments by improving water-use efficiency, nitrogen (N) fixation, and breaking disease cycles.31 Replenishment of nitrogen is achieved through the integration of legume and other nitrogen-fixing crops in the rotation as well as the use of green manure crop. The soil structure can be improved through an adapted rotation by alternating deep and shallow-rooted plants. Including deep-rooted crops in rotations helps to better distribute phosphorous and potassium from deep within the soil profile to the soil surface, where plant roots have better access to them. Rotating to a different crop improves the physical, chemical and biological environment of soil and produces large amounts of biomass and residue for incorporation in the soil for C sequestration.32

Rotations are used to prevent or at least partially control several pests and at the same time to reduce farmers’ reliance on chemical pesticides. Crop rotation is often the only economically feasible method for reducing insect and disease damage.33 Crop rotation replaces a crop that is susceptible to a serious pest with another crop that is not susceptible. Each food crop comes with its own set of pests that attack that particular crop. By planting a different crop each time, the farmer can starve out those pests.33

Crop rotation is one of the most powerful cultural management techniques available to farmers for reducing weed seed and seedling densities.3⁴ When rotation sequences include crops that differ in planting and maturation dates, competitive and allelopathic characteristics and associated management practices (e.g., tillage, cultivation, mowing, and grazing), weeds can be confronted with an unstable and frequently inhospitable environment that prevents their development.3⁴

In addition to the biological advantages of crop rotations, there are positive economic and social aspects that result from diverse plant combinations on the farm. Economic diversity can be enhanced by both crop rotations and the diverse products that come from

the farm. New economic opportunities can be created for on-farm sale or partnership with neighbours for other direct sale options3⁵.

A number of crop rotation patterns are available i.e., cotton is grown every alternate or every third year. In organic production, cotton should not be grown on fields where the previous year’s crop was also cotton (in short: no cotton after cotton). If cotton is grown in the same field year after year, soil nutrients will deplete, pest pressure increases, and risks for soil-borne diseases increase. Another crop should be grown for at least one or preferably two years before cotton is planted on the same field again.2⁷

4.3. INTERCROPPING

Intercropping is the cultivation of two or more crop species simultaneously on the same field.3⁶ The main concept of intercropping is to increase total productivity per unit area and time, enabling equitable and judicious utilisation of land resources and farming inputs including labour, in addition to offering insurance against the failure of one or more of the crops planted.

The total yield can be increased with intercropping over sole cropping as the different component crops use growth resources differently so that when grown together, they complement each other and make better overall use of growth resources than when grown separately.3⁷ This effect, the increase of productivity over sole cropping is known as the ‘intercropping effect’. This complimentary use of resources among the different crops also benefits soil fertility as it can balance the nutrient requirements and management.

There are several types of intercropping systems including mixed, row, strip, and relay.3⁸ In mixed intercropping two or more crops are grown together in no specific order. Strip intercropping is a system in which two or more crops are grown simultaneously in different strips narrow enough to develop inter-crop interference yet with the advantage of facilitating independent crop management.3⁹ Strip intercropping is the growth of component species in strips in the field, whereas in row intercropping the component species are alternated in rows. In relay intercropping the growing period of the component species only partially overlap.

The more plants growing in the field, the higher the diversity of natural enemies of pests occurring.2⁷ Relay intercropping aids the early arrival and continuous population increase of predators in cotton, thereby reducing numbers and postponing the initial population increase of the sucking pest, especially aphids.⁴⁰ However, a decline in the abundance of natural enemies with increasing distance between host crops is also observed.⁴1

Cultivating intercrops contributes to weed suppression because their biomass shades the soil, reducing resource availability to weeds and the allelopathic effects of some intercrops produces components that limit or inhibit the growth of other plants nearby, such as weeds.⁴2

18

106 84UNDERSTANDING

THE BENEFITS OF CROP

DIVERSIFICATION

2 95 731

Rainfed cotton is mostly planted at a wider row spacing which makes it especially suitable for growing an intercrop or companion crop alongside it. This could improve the economic viability of rainfed cotton as it yields additional returns. The efficient usage of water is essential and requires an adapted choice of companion crops.⁴3 Intercrops are also reported to reduce the risk of total crop failures in drought-prone cotton-growing regions, by intercropping with drought-resistant crops such as sorghum, safflower, sesame, and castor.2⁷ Intercropping improves the economic viability of rainfed cotton as it yields additional returns.⁴3 Any short duration intercrop used in the system will pay the farmer the much-needed interim income or meet the domestic requirement of food and fodder. Therefore, compatible pulses (green gram, black gram, cowpea, etc.), oilseed (soybean, groundnut, etc.) and commercial crops (onion, chili), vegetables, (cluster bean, etc.) are commonly intercropped with cotton.⁴⁴

4.4. BORDER CROPS

Insect pests are major constraints in organic production systems. Therefore, attention has been diverted to include various cultural practices to suppress insect pest populations – including border crops and/or trap crops as a popular pest control measure. Border crops are planted around the circumference of the field to be protected and are often used as trap crops to attract pests from the cultivated crop.⁴⁵

The increased abundance of predators in fields planted with border crops is often reported because higher diversity of plants provide ‘resource pools’ for the predators. The additional plants provide food sources (nectar, pollen, honeydew, etc.), as well as breeding habitats and refuges for these predators, allowing them to increase their longevity and fecundity thereby increasing predation on pest populations.⁴⁶

4.5. TRAP CROPS

Trap crops attract insects and pests away from the main crop (in this case cotton). By growing trap crops at critical moments and places in the pest's or crop’s life cycle, the pest will concentrate within a preferred trap crop instead of the main crop.⁴⁸ Therefore, trap crops could also be planted as companion crops or border crops depending on the choice of the farmer, the target pest and the trap crop.⁴⁹

The spatiotemporal arrangement of the trap crop around the main crop is one of the vital factors for its effectiveness. A trap crop can be an early or a late crop of the same cultivar as the main crop, or a different plant species.⁵⁰ For agricultural pest management, trap cropping potentially reduces crop damage and pesticide applications, though their effectiveness without accompanying measures is often contested.⁴⁵,⁵1

4.6. GREEN MANURE

Intercropping and the incorporation of green manure crops is important for accumulating nitrogen through biological nitrogen fixation and for building up soil fertility in organic arable cropping systems.⁵2 Green manure crops are sown between the cotton rows when the cotton seedlings already emerged. They are cut before or at the flowering stage and used either as mulch or incorporated into the soil.2⁷ A biennial leguminous green manure crop can mitigate weed problems in organic annual crops.⁵3 However, green manure crops do compete with cotton for water, light, and nutrients. Thus, appropriate timing for sowing and cutting is crucial to get the maximum benefits with minimum competition.2⁷ Also, green manure crops are neither cash crops nor food crops and this is yet another factor for green manure crops not becoming popular amongst farmers.

BORDER CROPSPLANT

DIVERSIFICATION

Increased level

PREDATORABUNDANCE

Increased level

PESTABUNDANCE

Decreased level Decreased pesticide usage

OUTCOMEYield and

pesticide usage

Increased yield

FIGURE 12. Path diagram of crop diversification practice (Border Crops) influencing crop-ecosystem components (adapted from⁴⁷)

19

106 84UNDERSTANDING


DIVERSIFICATION

2 95 731

4.7. GENETIC DIVERSITY AT CROP LEVEL

In organic agriculture, farming conditions are not artificially buffered by using synthetic inputs. Hence, it is essential that farmers use quality seed from cultivars that fit their local organic farming conditions. Besides fostering genetic diversity in a farming system (by using different varieties from the same crop) quality seed from local cultivars is known to make the farm less vulnerable to emerging agro-environmental challenges i.e., pest attacks and drought, and thus more resilient to climate change. However, the integration of different varieties in the cropping system also implies mastering the challenges of different growing patterns, such as sowing and harvesting periods, achievable yield, product quality, and other important factors that might influence their performance as a companion crop in organic cotton-based farming systems. This is another reason why it is especially important for organic cotton farmers to choose suitable varieties that perform well under local farming conditions. Additional research knowledge is needed on the benefits and handling of genetic diversity to foster profitable crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems.

4.8. BEYOND CROPS: THE INTEGRATION OF LIVESTOCK WITH CROPPING SYSTEMS

The integration of crop production with livestock is one of the key synergies sought in organic farming to help close the nutrient cycles. Indeed, as crop residues can be used as animal fodder and as the manure can secure plant nutrition, crop production and livestock are mutually beneficial. As such, livestock can be considered an integral part of farming systems, and livestock rearing can also benefit from crop diversification as especially intercrops can be used as additional fodder provision to animals. Besides, livestock integration also can offer a valuable addition to the households’ nutrition and income.

20

106 84UNDERSTANDING


DIVERSIFICATION

2 95 731

We have now seen the benefits of different types of crop diversification practices and highlighted two especially promising ones: crop rotation and intercropping. To reap the maximum benefits from these techniques, maximise synergies of multi-cropping systems and minimise competition between crops on the field, suitable crop rotations and intercrops grown along with cotton need to be selected. The question is thus: which crops perform best in cotton-based farming systems from an agronomic perspective and also provide environmental benefits?

5.1. BENEFITS OF KEY CROP GROUPS FOR COTTON-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS:

Let’s start by understanding the agronomic and environmental benefits of three crop groups that are especially valuable for cotton-based farming systems: legumes, oilseed and cereals, used either as a rotational crop, or as an intercrop. A glossary of the crops belonging to each group can be found in Annex 2, including the botanical, English and Hindi name of each crop. A summary of the benefits of each crop group is provided in Table 2 below. Further information can be found below on the agronomic and environmental benefits of legumes, oilseed and cereals.

Similar details are also available for vegetables, spices and trees. While these crop groups also show agronomic and environmental benefits for cotton-based farming systems, they haven’t been taken into further consideration in the recommendations from this study as no complete dataset was found on their economic performance.

Let’s dive into the agronomic and environmental benefits of different crop groups in more detail.

TABLE 2. Summary of the agronomic and environmental benefits of 3 crop groups in rotation or intercropping with cotton

CROP GROUP GROWN ALONGSIDE

COTTON

LEGUMES / PULSES OILSEED CEREALS

e.g., pigeon pea, chickpea, cow pea, soybean, green gram / mung bean,

black gram, sunhemp

e.g., safflower, sunflower, canola,

mustard, castor, groundnut, linseede.g., pearl millet, finger millet, wheat, barley, paddy, sorghum, maize/corn

AGRONOMIC BENEFITS

When used in crop rotation

• Organic Carbon content• Available soil nitrogen • Support biological pest control

• Disease break• Allelopathic effect (in sorghum)

i.e. weed suppression through the release of growth inhibiting substances

When used in intercropping

• Low incidence of sucking pests• Low nitrogen requirements

• Trap crop• Biological pest control

• Some cereals work as trap crop to manage American bollworm

ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS

When used in crop rotation

• Carbon sequestration• Low water footprint • Low greenhouse gases emissions • Reduction of runoff and erosion

When used in intercropping

• Water conservation • Efficient utilisation of scarce natural resources • Resilient to climate change

21

5. SELECTING BENEFICIAL CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES FROM AN AGRONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE

5.1.2. THE AGRONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF LEGUMES OR PULSES

Cereals in crop rotation with cotton

Crop diversification with the inclusion of cereals is popular and often done by adopting different practices including crop rotation with wheat, barley, and paddy; intercropping with sorghum, maize, pearl millet, and finger millet. These crops are very well suited to no-till situations and excellent for cotton disease break. Winter cereals have higher root density, which helps improve soil structure in the long term.

Rotation with these crops can improve overall soil quality conditions across the range of climates where cotton is grown. It offers greater resilience to tillage, greater recycling of leached nitrogen, higher levels of readily decomposable soil organic matter, and a lower incidence of soil-borne diseases.⁵⁴

Cotton/barley rotation systems are reported to contribute to the improvement of soil quality.⁵⁵ The organic carbon content, soil organic matter and available soil nitrogen content were found to be higher in the cereal-based cropping systems in which pulses are included.⁵⁶ Cereal-legumes sequester atmospheric carbon, thus helping to mitigate the adverse effects of greenhouse gasses.31 Furthermore, under an organic system burning of stubbles is considerably reduced and in situ incorporation of residues into the soil is practiced, which helps control air pollution.⁵⁷

Legumes in crop rotation with cotton

Legumes, also called pulses, can easily add to different agro-ecosystems in cotton-based farming systems. Pulses efficiently utilise the light, nutrients, and moisture left over by the previous crop as they cover the land very quickly due to change in growing and rooting patterns.⁶2 Legumes are known to fix atmospheric nitrogen and benefit the crops grown in succession.23 Root exudates are also a key factor influencing microbial association in the legume rhizosphere, attracting beneficial microorganisms.⁶3 Cotton-legume rotations have also been found to be effective in keeping pests below the economic threshold level. Under resource constraints, particularly irrigation water, chickpea is more remunerative than winter cereals as chickpea leaves behind moisture lower in the profile for use by the following cotton crop.⁶2

The inclusion of lentil in 2 pulse and a cereal crop rotations improves the physical properties of soil and increases the yield of succeeding cereal crop due to biological nitrogen fixation and other rotational effects.⁶⁴ Soybean, as a typical legume, is a good preceding crop to alternate with heavier feeding plants such as corn.⁶⁵

Cereals in intercropping with cotton

Minor millets like finger millet and coarse cereal like sorghum are highly suitable for intercropping with cotton grown in rainfed and drought conditions. They are hardy, disease-resistant, effective in suppressing weed growth, and able to grow on marginal lands with poor soil fertility.⁵⁸ Pink bollworm incidence was significantly reduced when cotton was intercropped or bordered with maize.⁵⁹

The fast-growing and tillering nature of millets contributes to weed suppression although seed cotton yield declines stronger than other intercrops.⁴2 Coarse cereal and millet recognised as hardy crops are known to be resilient to climate change.⁶⁰ A taller crop like maize also plays a vital role as a windbreak and protects erosion caused by wind.⁶1

Legumes in intercropping with cotton

Many of the legumes proposed as intercrops are short-duration crops (mung bean, urad bean, pigeon pea), so farmers are reluctant to grow them as a sole crop, which makes the intercropping with a wider-spaced crop like cotton especially interesting.2⁸ Intercropping of legumes is an important aspect of biological farming systems not only for weed control but also in reducing the leaching of nutrients, pest control, and reducing soil.⁶⁸

Nitrogen fixed by the legumes not only benefits the crop itself, but it also benefits the companion crop grown with it. The legume-based intercropping aims to produce a higher yield from a unit area by making optimal use of all available resources that could not be utilised by a single crop.⁶⁹ Intercropping of cowpea and green gram could suppress or ensure a low incidence of sucking pests such as whiteflies, leafhoppers, aphids, and thrips in cotton. Green gram also helps store soil moisture and provides habitat for beneficial insects.2⁴ Planting cowpea is effective as an intercrop for the management of Heliothis sp. as the maximum number of predators were recorded in cotton cowpea intercropping.

5.1.1. THE AGRONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF CEREALS

22

106 842 95SELECTING

BENEFICIAL CROP DIVERSIFICATION

PRACTICES

731

5.1.3. THE AGRONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF OILSEED

Oilseed in crop rotation with cotton

Oilseed can be grown on all kinds of soil and due to their extensive root system, the oilseed crop shows considerable tolerance to drought stress. They contribute to increased soil organic matter and improved soil structure through bio tillage which can reduce the need for mechanical cultivations.

In oilseed and two cereal rotations, safflower acts as a soil ameliorant to improve soil structure. It is used strategically as a first crop in the rotation after cotton to break up subsoil to remove compacted layers, improve aeration and water infiltration; and root development to subsequent crops. It has low nitrogen requirement compared to cotton and can be grown after winter cereals, as it is a good host to arbuscular mycorrhizae fungi (AMF). In wet years, safflower can be a management tool to dry out soils and thus reduce the build-up of soil-borne diseases.

Legumes in crop rotation with cotton

Plant residues of pulses under such a system have a narrow carbon: nitrogen ratio, which enables easy decomposition and provides nitrogen to high nitrogen-demanding grain crops. The integration of pulses in the crop rotation can decrease the carbon footprint of wheat-based crop rotations.⁶⁶ Pulses require the least amount of water for producing protein and this results in a reduction in the water footprint. Thus, pulses efficiently use the residual moisture content in the soil, and therefore it produces an excellent protein source from the minimum resources.

In brief, pulses are climate-smart and hardy crops since they adapt to climate change. Pulses need fewer external inputs, reduce soil erosion, and help in lowering greenhouse gas emissions.⁶⁷

Oilseed in intercropping with cotton

Groundnut, sesame, and sunflower are the most prominently used intercrops in cotton. Nitrogen-fixing bacteria near root nodules of groundnut results in low nitrogen requirement. Sesame contributes by adding beneficial residue within the whole soil profile, resulting in improved tillage and topsoil properties. It is also proven to suppress purple nutsedge due to its alleopathic potential.⁸1 Heliothis populations are observed much higher on sesame inter-sown in cotton reducing its incidence on cotton thereby ensuring higher yields.⁸2 Sunflower also attracts and plays host to numerous beneficial insects especially the predatory insects of the Helicoverpa species which supports successful boll development and higher yields.

Legumes in intercropping with cotton

Weeds were found to be significantly reduced under high-density cotton and paired-row planting with black gram as an intercrop, as black gram effectivity suppresses weed growth due to its thick canopy.2⁸ Intercropping with black gram significantly improved the availability and absorption of nitrogen owing to better nitrogen fixation by legumes⁷⁰ and it also increased the growth and yield of cotton.⁶⁸

Pigeon pea is known to limit the pest population to the Economic Threshold Level (ETL) and has a role in cotton Integrated Pest Management (IPM) as a trap crop.⁷1 A high rate of parasitisation and lower aphid population is reported when pigeon pea is cultivated as a border crop.⁷2 It also offers a ‘conditioning’ effect to improve the permeability of sodic and saline-sodic soils.⁷3 Strip cropping of medium duration hybrid cotton with long-duration pigeon pea is commonly practiced in central and south India for protein food supplement and firewood needs .⁷⁰

Ammonia emissions from the legume intercropping system are low compared to the combined amounts released by monoculture.⁷⁴ The introduction of legumes into agricultural rotations helps reduce the use of fertilisers and energy in arable systems and consequently lowering nitrate pollution and GHG emissions.⁷⁵ Intercropping of diversified pulses controls soil disintegration by preventing precipitation drops from directly hitting the soil surface. This potential sealing of surface pores increases the water infiltration and reduces the runoff volume and therefore ultimately soil erosion. This promotes the in-situ conservation of soil and water. Pulses improve the microbial environment in the soils resulting in the build-up of below-ground biodiversity including microbes, parasites, and soil microfauna.⁶⁹

23

106 842 95SELECTING


PRACTICES

731

Oilseed in crop rotation with cotton

Canola is known for its role as a biofumigant, helping in the suppression of nematodes and soil-borne diseases.⁷⁶,⁷⁷ Two oilseed rotations including sunflower, which with its deep roots, can make use of nutrients at depth (nutrient cycling), and enable the fast degradation of cultural debris can deliver these nutrients rapidly into the next crop.⁷⁸

The organic carbon content and available soil nitrogen content were found to be higher in those cropping systems where oilseed-cereals-pulses are included. Including soybean in a crop rotation can contribute to soil nitrogen⁷⁹ and help reduce the leaching of nitrogen into groundwater ultimately improving the availability of nitrogen.⁸⁰ Most importantly, the integration of oilseed in a crop rotation can lead to improved soil structure and improved moisture conservation. Due to negligible tillage or demand for intercultural operations less particulate matter is released in the air.

5.1.4. THE AGRONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF VEGETABLES AND SPICES

Vegetables and spices in croprotation with cotton

Vegetables and spices generally are short duration, non-competitive crops that do not suppress the growth of the base crop in rotation. They contribute to high soil organic matter and high nutrient carryover. The varying rooting habits result in improved soil structure and water holding capacity. Vegetables and spices provide habitat to beneficial insects and improve whole-farm biodiversity.⁸3 Also, allelopathic compounds released from the vegetable crops selectively suppress weed emergence. As cover crops, they also promote moisture conservation and control soil erosion.

Vegetables and spices inintercropping with cotton

Intercropping of vegetables brings many benefits because of their spatial and temporal complementarity with cotton. Increased organic input efficiency and water use efficiency are reported. Vegetable sown as living mulches can provide many benefits such as weed control, reduced erosion, enhanced soil fertility, and improved soil quality,⁸⁴ they are also found to reduce herbivorous insects and the damage caused by them.⁷2

Spices and cucurbits, because of the different root growth patterns of component species support the exploration of the entire soil mass in the rooting zone resulting in higher system yield. Intercropping coriander with chillies and cotton recorded higher uptake of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium.⁸⁵ Turmeric is a shade-tolerant intercrop, which when planted under density cotton can improve overall resource use efficiency in a cotton-based farming system.⁸⁶

Onion intercropping systems improved nutrient uptake compared to that of either of the sole crops. Intercropping of onion improved potassium uptake of cotton due to its root exudations.⁸⁷ Intercropping cotton with ginger can increase cotton yield as it repels pests. Garlic has also been effectively incorporated into an intercropping system as a companion crop due to its allelopathic and antimicrobial effects which helps to suppress pests and diseases, as well as weeds.⁸⁸ Cluster bean intercropped in cotton reflected higher seed cotton yield due to none or very little interplant competition for growth as well as the yield attributing characters.

24

106 842 95SELECTING


PRACTICES

731

Vegetables and spices inintercropping with cotton

Flowering plants that provide habitat to natural enemies, can potentially support pest suppression in agroecosystems.⁸⁹ Marigold, a multipurpose commercial flower crop is grown profitably in Central India as a potential refuge for Bt cotton hybrid.⁹⁰

The spatial and temporal compatibility with cotton ensures the efficient utilisation of scarce natural resources. They positively contribute to microclimate, reduce surface runoff, and control erosion due to fast growth and ground coverage. This group of crops act as a host to several beneficial insects and predators and improves biodiversity by offering a range of inter-specific benefits.

5.1.5. THE AGRONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF TREES

Planting trees alongside cotton

Farmers prefer fruit-producing species to other trees for on-farm planting, and appreciate the dual contributions of food for consumption and the potential for income generation.⁹1 Several important tree species like banana and papaya start fruiting in the first year while other fruit trees like jujube, custard apple, pomegranate, guava, Indian gooseberry, mango, citrus, and sapota start fruiting from the third year; these are popularly grown in cotton-growing regions.

Tree plantations as intercrop or border crops can improve soil’s physical, chemical and biological properties through accretion and decomposition of organic matter through litter-fall and roots.⁹2 The deep and extensive root systems of trees enable them to absorb substantial quantities of nutrients below the rooting zone of crops and transfer them to surface soil. The higher soil microbiological activity under the tree-based cropping system as compared with sole agriculture shows the pivotal role of trees for the ecosystem functioning.⁹3

From the current knowledge, it can be generally seen that tree roots in agroforestry systems can reduce nitrogen and phosphorus residues in soils from 20% up to 100%.⁹⁴ Trees can provide benefits to the soils by erosion control, improvement of soil quality, and positive effects on biodiversity.⁹⁵ While most of the farmers consider profitability as the primary consideration, beautification, conservation and improving micro-climatic are the other important benefits of the inclusion of trees in farm.⁹⁶

25

106 842 95SELECTING


PRACTICES

731

5.2. RECOMMENDED CROPS FOR CROP ROTATION AND INTERCROPPING WITH COTTON

Using literature research and stakeholder interviews, this study identified a shortlist of the most suitable crops to be used to diversify cotton-based farming systems in the states considered for this study, namely Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Gujarat and Rajasthan, to enable the Indian organic cotton sector to reap the agronomic and environmental benefits of these companion crops.

Based upon the selected crop group combinations, Table 3 provides an overview of recommended two-year crop rotations in Kharif and Rabi seasons, and Table 4 recommends intercropping combinations for cotton-based farming systems in Kharif season.

Table 3 recommends different crop rotations that can offer a balanced and integral management of resources compared to monoculture. In this case, monoculture is described as the combination of wheat grown in Rabi season after cotton and subsequently cotton and wheat in the next year, which is regarded as an example of an unbalanced cropping sequence.

Five crop combinations are recommended for two-year crop rotations, where cotton is only grown every alternate year on the same field. In case the alternate growth of cotton on the same field is not possible, the cropping sequence should be diversified via different Rabi crops and the integration of intercrops in cotton.

Table 4 recommends different crops that have been found beneficial for intercropping with cotton. Whereas pulses such as green gram and black gram are beneficial for household nutrition, cereals can be used as an additional fodder for livestock.

26

TABLE 3. Recommended crop rotation combinations for organic cotton-based farming systems as an alternative to cotton-wheat monoculture

RECOMMENDED CROP ROTATION COMBINATIONS FOR ORGANIC COTTON-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS

ROTATIONCOMBINATION

Season Cotton-Wheat Monoculture

3 Legumes 2 Legumes Oilseed

Oilseed 2 Cereals

2 Cereals Legume

OilseedCereal Legume

YEAR 1

Kharif Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton

Rabi Wheat Lentil Chickpea Canola Wheat Canola

YEAR 2

Kharif Cotton Soybean Pigeon pea Sorghum Maize Pearl millet

Rabi Wheat Chickpea Canola Wheat Chickpea Lentil

TABLE 4. Recommended intercropping combinations for organic cotton-based farming systems as an alternative to sole cotton cropping

RECOMMENDED INTERCROPPING COMBINATIONS FOR ORGANIC COTTON-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS

INTERCROP COMBINATIONS

SOLE COTTON CROPPING

LEGUMES OILSEED CEREALS

Main crop (cotton) Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton

Intercrop recommended in Kharif season

Crop type

N/A

Black gram Pigeon Pea

Green Gram Groundnut Sesame Maize Sorghum Pearl Millet

Duration Short Short-Medium Short Short Short-

Medium Short Short Short

106 842 95SELECTING


PRACTICES

731

6.1. GETTING THE TIMING RIGHT: CROPPING CALENDARS

Cotton is a warm-season crop and requires a mean annual temperature of 16°C and rainfall of at least 1200mm during the growing season. The crop duration ranges from 165-210 days and the planting of cotton begins in April / May when most of the irrigated cotton is sown in the Northern and Central zones. With the onset of the Monsoon in the Central Zone in June-July, the planting of rain-fed cotton begins, followed by the planting of irrigated cotton in the Southern Zone.

Even though the different crops that are recommended as companion crops to cotton do not differ significantly across the different geographic zones where cotton is produced, their sowing and harvesting times might differ. To account for these regional variations, cropping calendars of different regions are provided in

Figures 14, 15, 16 and 17, based on data provided by the Ministry of Agriculture (except for crops marked in darker grey where no data was available). These calendars can be used by practitioners to optimise the management of diversified organic cotton-based systems.

On the calendars, the orange colour represents the recommended timings for sowing, the green colour represents the growth phase of the crop, and the blue colour represents the expected harvest time.

The successful management of crops according to organic principles requires a diverse and balanced farming system. Organic agriculture, compared to conventional agriculture, refrains from the intensive usage of external inputs and is based on a holistic understanding of the farming system.

Instead of troubleshooting, organic agriculture aims to prevent problems by following a systemic approach, ensuring that the interaction between soil, plants, the environment, and people is well balanced.

A thorough understanding of soil health, nutrients, pests, and diseases is required to manage the different crops that can be grown in cotton-based organic farming systems. In addition, ongoing observation and learning is essential to tailor and adapt farming practices to the local conditions of each farmer and unlock the benefits of a systems approach. This section presents guiding principles for the management of diverse crops in an organic cotton-based farming system.

FIGURE 13. Farmer performing intercultural operations (Credit: FiBL)

27

6. MANAGING DIVERSIFIED CROPS AT THE ORGANIC FARM: BEST PRACTICES

FIGURE 16. Cropping Calendar - Northern Zone (Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan)

FIGURE 15. Cropping Calendar - Eastern Zone (Odisha)

FIGURE 14. Cropping Calendar - Central Zone (Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat)

GUJARATMADHYA PRADESH

MAHARASHTRA

PUNJABHARYANA

RAJASTHAN

ODISHA

SeasonMonth of year MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR

Week of month 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Kharif

MaizePearl milletSorghum

Finger milletPaddy

Black gramGreen gramPigeon pea

SoybeanGroundnut

SesameSunflower

CastorCotton

Rabi

BarleyWheat

ChickpeaLentil

Canola/mustardSafflowerLinseed


Week of month 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Kharif


Finger milletPaddy


SoybeanGroundnut

SesameSunflower

CastorCotton

Rabi

BarleyWheat

ChickpeaLentil



Week of month 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Kharif


Finger milletPaddy


SoybeanGroundnut

SesameSunflower

CastorCotton

Rabi

BarleyWheat

ChickpeaLentil


Sowing

Growth period

Harvesting

Sowing

Growth period

Harvesting

Sowing

Growth period

Harvesting

28

106MANAGING

DIVERSIFIEDCROPS AT THE

ORGANIC FARM

842 95 731

6.2. Soil fertility and nutrient management in diversified organic cotton-based farming systems

Soil fertility is the foundation of a functioning farming system that provides the ground for good yielding crops and thus offers the farmers possibilities to sustain their livelihoods. A guiding principle for organic farmers should be preserving and increasing the nutrients available in the soil as opposed to depleting them. Farmers should also prevent soil erosion and refrain from burning crop residues or cow dung.

Loss of soil fertility is often linked closely with the loss of soil organic matter, which can be provided through plant residues left on the field or organic manures. Soil organic matter increases the aeration of the soil, its water infiltration, and holding capacities as well as stores and releases nutrients that can be accessed by the plants. It holds many benefits for soil organisms which are central to soil health and a functioning agroecosystem.

The supply of organic material and balanced nutrient management is essential to get good and stable yields for the different crops to grow. Soil organic matter can be increased in the soil through crop residues – a diverse and balanced supply can be granted through adapted crop rotation and intercropping patterns – complemented by farmyard manure, other organic manure, and compost. Finally, the integration of leguminous crops, that can replenish the nutrient resources of the soil, as well as a well-balanced combination of high and low nutrient demanding crops is needed to adapt the nutrient management to the specific crops grown in organic cotton-based farming systems.

6.3. Pest and disease management in diversified organic cotton-based farming systems

Organic farming aims to prevent pests and diseases from attacking the crops rather than combating symptoms once the crops are deluged. Establishing a diverse and balanced farm ecosystem through the integration of different crops in the crop rotation is one of the best ways to break cycles of pests and diseases. The integration of intercrops, as well as trap and border crops, can help divert pests from the main crop. Increasing the number of natural enemies such as beneficial insects or birds, by providing them with a habitat through a diverse agroecosystem will also help control pest populations. Thus, a functioning agrobiodiversity on the field is a key element to help to prevent pests and diseases in organic farming.

The basis for a good yielding plant that has little susceptibility to damage from pests and diseases is plant health. Plant health represents the holistic concept of organic farming as it is strongly linked to soil health and fertility, sufficient nutrient and water supply, as well as the selection of a suitable variety that is adapted to the local conditions and shows low disease susceptibility.

If pest and disease incidents severely damage the crops even after these measures have been put into place, organic inputs such as neem spray or the release of biological control measures (e.g., parasitic wasps, Nuclear Polyhedrosis Virus) should be put in action. It is now universally acknowledged that the cost and efforts of any external inputs required to directly control a pest are often higher than the cost caused by its damage.

FIGURE 17. Cropping Calendar - Southern Zone (Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana)

TELANGANAANDHRA PRADESH

KARNATAKA


Week of month 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Kharif


Finger milletPaddy


SoybeanGroundnut

SesameSunflower

CastorCotton

Rabi

BarleyWheat

ChickpeaLentil


Sowing

Growth period

Harvesting

29

106MANAGING

DIVERSIFIEDCROPS AT THE

ORGANIC FARM

842 95 731

In section 5.1, crops that are beneficial for growth in rotation or as intercrops with cotton in organic cotton-based farming systems were identified. These crops mainly range over three crop groups: legumes or pulses, cereals and oilseed.

The following section looks at the economic benefits that these different crop groups can offer to farmers, as well as the economic benefits of the recommended crop combinations.

7.1. THE BENEFIT-COST RATIO, AN INDICATOR TO ASSESS AND COMPARE THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES

Farming practices can be decisive for farmers' income.1⁰ At the most basic level, a smallholder farmer’s income is simply revenue minus costs so improving incomes appears superficially straightforward. It requires support for changes that lead to growing revenues (e.g., through yield improvements, quality improvements, and price increases) while minimising costs. The relative economic performance of different farming practices is sensitive to the ratio of input costs to the value of outputs.⁹⁷ Monocropping systems and diversified farming systems are vulnerable to fluctuations in both input and output prices, but the effect of a given change will differ between the two approaches.

As such, the benefit-cost ratio is a good indicator for the economic benefits specific practices offer because it not only takes the production cost and income generated into account but also calculates a ratio that can illustrate how much income can be generated from a given invested cost. It is calculated by dividing the revenue by the cost. When a benefit-cost ratio is strictly greater than 1.0; positive economic outcomes are expected from the cropping system.

The results of the aggregate costs and benefits are compared quantitatively to determine if the benefits outweigh the costs. The outcome of the analysis will determine whether a particular diversification practice is financially feasible or not. In general, by minimising different types of costs involved in a diversification practice or a system, the benefits can increase.

7.2. COST-BENEFIT COMPARISON OF CROP GROUPS AND SINGLE CROPS UNDER ORGANIC FARMING CONDITIONS

Figure 18 below features the benefit-cost ratio of the three different crop groups when grown individually under organic farming conditions. As no significant differences were observed in the benefit-cost ratio across the groups of cereals, oilseed, and pulses, this makes the potential economic benefits of these crop groups relatively comparable for organic farmers.

The good news is while there are no significant differences on the benefit-cost ratio of all three crop groups, they also offer possibilities to reap economic benefits when integrated into the

farming system of organic cotton farmers.

The variation is not just within a crop group but also for the different benefit-cost ratios that can be achieved with single crops (see benefit-cost ratio of single crops in Figure 19). This shows that the potential of different crops to generate income for farmers depends on the prices that can be achieved for the produced goods, but also on the individual farm performance. Overall, often the variability of performance is much higher between different farms than the performance differences between different crops.

Data source:

The calculations of benefit-cost ratios for different crops and crop combinations shown here are based on data from the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices.⁹⁸,⁹⁹ To adapt the data to production under organic conditions, a reduction in the cost of production of 8% and in the yield of 14% was assumed. These assumptions are based on unpublished data and scientific publications on the performance of organic cotton.21,1⁰⁰,1⁰1 Furthermore, it was assumed that no premium prices were paid for organic produce. Overall, these assumptions make the following calculations conservative towards the performance capacity of organic farming.

FIGURE 18. Benefit-cost ratios of different crop groups

BEN

EFIT

CO

ST R

ATIO 3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

CEREALBarley

Finger milletMaize

Pearl milletSorghum

Wheat

OILSEEDSunflower

CanolaSesame

GroundnutSa�ower

PULSESBlack gramGreen gram

ChickpeaPigeon Pea

SoybeanLentil

7. ECONOMIC COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF BENEFICIAL CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES

30

7.3. Cost-benefit analysis of recommended crop diversification practices under organic farming conditions

In section 5.1, specific crop combinations have been recommended both for crop rotation and intercropping based upon the agronomic and environmental benefits of the different crop groups for organic cotton-based farming systems. Let’s now look at the economic benefits of these selected crop combinations.

7.3.1. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF RECOMMENDED CROP ROTATIONS

7.3.2. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF RECOMMENDED INTERCROPS

Slight differences were observed in benefit-cost ratios calculated on a two-year span (without significant differences, as shown in Figure 20) across the recommended combinations for crop rotations. Thus, it can be assumed that the recommended crop rotations pose comparable economic benefits compared to the reference cropping sequence of continuous cotton cropping with wheat.

The benefit-cost ratios of different intercrop combinations for cotton in Kharif showed no significant difference, as shown in Figure 21. Thus, it can be assumed that the recommended intercrops offer comparable economic benefits to the sole cropping of cotton.

The key takeaway on the economic benefits of crop diversification practices should remain the following: By diversifying their cropping practices, organic cotton farmers can maintain similar earnings while mitigating the risks of agronomic failure and price volatility of the cotton crop and harvesting the environmental benefits of these practices. Looking beyond this economic data, the potential to generate income from the produced intercrops always depends on the farm performance and on the farmer’s ability to reliably sell the produce in markets. These two aspects currently constitute challenges for most organic cotton farmers.

BEN

EFIT

CO

ST R

ATIO

4

3

2

1

Cot

ton

Barle

y

Blac

k gr

am

Chi

ckpe

a

Fing

er m

illet

Gre

en g

ram

Gro

undn

ut

Lent

il

Mai

ze

Mus

tard

Pear

l mill

et

Pige

on p

ea

Sa�

ower

Sesa

me

Sorg

hum

Soyb

ean

Sunfl

ower

Whe

at

CROP

BEN

EFIT

CO

ST R

ATIO

2.5

2.0

1.5

Cotton

Wheat

Cotton

Wheat

Cotton

Lentil

Soybean

Chickpea

Cotton

Chickpea

Pigeon pea

Canola

Cotton

Canola

Sorghum

Wheat

Cotton

Wheat

Maize

Chickpea

Cotton

Wheat

Pearl millet

Lentil

Kharif

Rhabi

Kharif

Rhabi

YEAR 1

YEAR 2

BEN

EFIT

CO

ST R

ATIO

2.25

2.50

2.00

1.75

1.55

Cotton Cotton

Blackgram

Cotton

Pigeonpea

Cotton

Greengram

Cotton

Sesame

Cotton

Sorghum

Cotton

Groundnut

Cotton

Maize

Cotton

Pearlmillet

KHARIFMain crop

Intercrop

FIGURE 19. Benefit-cost ratios of single crops

FIGURE 20. Benefit-cost ratio based on two-year season (two Kharif + two Rabi seasons) calculation of recommended crop rotations

FIGURE 21. Benefit-cost ratio based on one season (Kharif) calculation of different intercrop combinations

31

106 842 957

ECONOMIC COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF


31

To understand the obstacles and levers to foster crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems, it is necessary to take all value chain levels into account, starting with seed availability for farmers, considering challenges on farmers’ fields up to market access and volume supply barriers. While technical and organisational challenges at farm level may push farmers to simplify their cropping plans and rotations, greater crop diversification also raises logistic problems beyond the farm level, such as transport, storage, and market access.⁴ Figure 22 below provides an overview of the levers identified that can foster crop diversification at organic farms, maximise farmers’ income and thereby make the business case for the addition of beneficial crops in the farming system of organic cotton farmers.

Increase monetary risks farmer

Dependency on marketsfor nutrition

Destabilise livelihood security Higher production cost

More labour required for intercultural operations

Increase dependencyon cash crop

High weed pressure

Dependency of external inputs

Less habitat for beneficial insects

No benefit of system approach

Little capacity to adapt to climate change

Low skills to cultivateother cropsMonoculture

Less available NPK Low infiltration Low nutrient cycling Low farm resilience

High pest and disease incidence Declining soil fertility Low availability of organic

matter on farm level Less biodiversity

LEGEND


Root causes of poor diversification

Levers to foster crop diversification


Choice of diverse crops Poor marketing opportunities / linkage


Poor market access Poor marketing skills

Economy of scale

Lack of infrastructureand organic inputs

Improved publicand private sector

investments

Improved accessto technology

and inputs

Support through multi-stakeholder

platforms

Upscale processing of

diversifiedproduce

Adopt di�erent diversification

practices

Recommendation of better management

practices

Support on- and o�-farm enterprise of diversified produce

Incentives onadoption of new

technology

Enhance market information system

Establish/ strengthen crop specific producer

groups

Female-centricpolicies promoting

diversification

Inter-institutional framework for

technology transfer

Increase linkages to formal financial

services

Gap in researchand extension

Lack of capacity buildingand agronomic expertise


No premium price – other crops

Lack of value addition / processing

Poor sensitization and awareness

FIGURE 22. Key levers to foster crop diversification in organic cotton-based cropping systems and income’s maximisation of organic cotton farmers

32

8. CHALLENGES AND LEVERS TO BOOST THE USE OF CROP DIVERSIFICATION PRACTICES AND MAXIMISE ORGANIC COTTON FARMERS’ INCOME

8.1. CHALLENGES AND LEVERS AT THE SEED RESEARCH AND SUPPLY INDUSTRY LEVEL

In organic agriculture, farming conditions are not artificially buffered by using synthetic inputs. Hence, it is essential that farmers can access the right quality and the right type of seed that fits their local environment and the way that they are farming. However, organic farmers currently face low availability of improved cultivars suitable for local organic farming conditions and the lack of linkages established between the farm and seed and bio-input providers. Some reasons for this include; the focus of the seed research and supply industry on dominant crops, the consolidation of the seed industry and the lack of investment from public research systems in organic inputs.

RECOMMENDED LEVERS:The engagement of seed research and industry partners is strongly needed to foster crop diversification from the seed stage onwards. Farmers should be supported when learning how to grow a cultivar via the strengthening of variety trials for companion crops, the provision of advisory services and the encouragement of farmer network creation and sharing of experiences. Beyond seed, further research investments on other inputs are also required, such as the approval of plant health products. Further agronomic trials would also be beneficial to identify the most suitable companion crops to be grown alongside cotton and develop the technical expertise required to fully reap their agronomic benefits.

8.2. CHALLENGES AND LEVERS AT FARM LEVEL

Adapting their cropping system, taking more risks and adjusting to the market can constitute real challenges for farmers. Due to variable prices and climatic uncertainties, farmers may take decisions on diversification using a short-term perspective, especially if they are uncertain about the long-term benefits of the proposed diversification measures. Most small-scale farmers in India grow food crops to meet their families' demand for food grains - thus farmers tend to stick to stable cropping patterns.2

Furthermore, in organic farming, resource-related factors such as soil health and pest control are a major concern. Besides this, organic manure contains a lower amount of nutrients which directly affects the achievable yield. Low yield during the conversion period is also a major challenge that tends to hinder farmers’ motivation to grow organically.

In this framework, extension services are important to raise awareness among farmers about the benefits of diversified cropping patterns and share the technical expertise required to tackle the variability of yields in the first years and manage multi-cropping systems. This need was confirmed by the stakeholders present during the participatory feedback workshops carried out as part of this study, as indicated in Figure 24.

When fostering crop diversification at farm level, extension services and and field staff need to consider the risk that farmers are taking when incorporating a new crop in their farming system. Ultimately, farmers must be able to rely on long-term strategies to make significant changes in their cropping patterns.

Though the diversification of the cropping system can generate income from more than one or two major crops and offer much-needed stability in times of price volatility, the economic benefits of crop diversification must be considered in more detail. One decisive, but often biased, argument for farmers as to which crop to grow is often the price. When the prices of the main crops are high, farmers favour these crops, even if the prices of diversification crops are also rising.⁴

RECOMMENDED LEVERS:Fostering crop diversification at farm-level does not solely require capacity building to raise farmers’ awareness for the benefits of such practices and develop their technical understanding to help farmers face their underlying challenges. Crop diversification initiatives also need an attractive and stable price environment that is secured for the long run.

SEED RESEARCHAND SUPPLY

INDUSTRYFARM PROCUREMENT

AND MARKET



AND MARKET

FIGURE 23. Expert evaluating cotton cultivars with lead farmers (Credit: FiBL)

33

106 8CHALLENGES AND LEVERS TO BOOST THE USE OF CROP DIVERSIFICATION

42 95 731

8.3. CHALLENGES AND LEVERS AT PROCUREMENT AND MARKET LEVEL

When diversifying a farming system, the production of small quantities (e.g., intercrops) or crops which are less prominent in the area poses a challenge for marketing them, as intermediaries or consumers may be disinterested in small quantities of lesser-known crops. Furthermore, the establishment of a supply chain is more difficult when the produce amount is small as it requires special adaptations to transportation, storage, and other infrastructure aspects.

To tackle the challenges of produce amount and transportation and storage infrastructures, crop diversification can be induced by market developments and price changes, governmental policies, with prominence given to specific crops (e.g., National Mission on Oilseed and Oil Palm (NMOOP)).1⁰2 Additionally, higher resilience and adaptation of specific crops to environmental conditions can foster changes in the cropping pattern.1

Beyond produce quantities and the need for infrastructures, linking farmers to markets also raises different challenges depending on the market that is targeted (see Figure 25). Farmers commonly have extremely limited market options where they can sell their intercrop produce, with zero guarantee of purchase. Poor analytical marketing strategy and research also make it hard to identify market opportunities.

Pooling produce quantities, as well as developing and optimising storage and transportation infrastructures are commonly the main issues when connecting farmers to local markets and, depending on the farm location, selected urban markets. Indeed, farmers usually have to invest heavily on transportation which affects their total cost of cultivation. The challenge increases when farmers are smallholders, produce a small quantity of intercrops and have difficulties in achieving economies of scale.

The linkage to broader urban markets, however, requires certain levels of processing up to packaging and branding activities. For organic farmers, this is especially significant, as their diversified produce complies with organic standards and therefore does offer an added-value and higher product quality. For farmers to be able to sell their produce and being compensated for their higher production standard special efforts need to be made to distinguish their products on the market. When international markets are targeted, the branding of the produce is indispensable.

RECOMMENDED LEVERS:Both public sector and industry stakeholders have a role to play in the successful establishment of market linkages. The first step is to improve the investment in market research on the supply and demand gap of suitable crops for cotton-based farming system, as well as mapping and identifying opportunities to foster market linkages across diverse farm groups and within the existing supply chain. The public sector can play a major role (Agriculture Department, State Agricultural Universities, research institutes, KVK agricultural extension centres) in market research to inform policy development in the context of crop diversification. Stakeholder coordination and supply chain structuring into market linkages could be tackled through the engagement of the industry, NGO and other facilitating bodies, and Farmer Producer Organisation partners. Some essential activities required include:

• Streamlining the mechanism to tackle the challenges at collection and market-level by building a strong market infrastructure, especially for the collection of diversified produce.

• Aggregation of the diversified produce (especially intercrop) coupled with a purchase guarantee to tackle the challenges of produce amount and cost incurred on transportation.

MOST IMPORTANT FACTORS TO FOSTER CROPDIVERSIFICATION AT FARM LEVEL (%)

30

60

80

10

50

70

0

20

40

613 13

69

Invest more research in crop

diversification

Awareness creating among

farmers

Economicincentive for

farmers

Practical know-how on managementof multi-cropping

systems

Localmarkets

Urbanmarkets

International markets

Diversified range of produce

Processing Branding

LEVELS OF ENGAGEMENT

FIGURE 24. Important factors to foster crop diversification at farm level (Source: Poll with workshop respondents) FIGURE 25. Different levels for market linkages



AND MARKET

34


42 95 731

• Support farmers with premium prices for diversified organic produce by setting up a strong network between the key organisations that can provide such premiums.

• Business skills related training, strategic hiring in Farmer Producer Organisation (FPO) and collaboration with NGOs are other solutions which could foster market linkages.

• The role of women has been identified as one of the strongest factors in the success of crop diversification being practiced by farmers. Women are powerful change agents and can motivate male farmers (practicing monocropping) to adopt intercropping. This diversified produce can be made marketable and profitable through value addition either by supporting the installation of household processing units or by promoting group aggregation and processing of produce at small scale local processing plants.

8.4. OPTIMISING CONTEXTUAL FACTORS FOR FARMERS’ LIVELIHOOD

When considering the key contextual factors that play a role in organic cotton-based farming systems, two stakeholder groups are especially important in the farmer context: research and extension services, as well as Farmer Producer Organisations. These stakeholders can directly help harvest the full potential of crop diversification for farmers’ livelihood and income improvement.

8.4.1. STRUCTURE OF INDIAN COTTON RESEARCH AND EXTENSION SERVICES

The Indian research on cotton is coordinated by the ICAR-CICR based in Nagpur, the ICAR-CIRCOT in Mumbai, and the All India Coordinated Research Project on Cotton (AICRP). ICAR-CICR has regional stations in Northern India at Sirsa and in Southern India at Coimbatore and aims for yield and quality improvement through cultivar improvements and input management.

The AICRP has a network of 22 cotton research centers across 11 cotton-growing states and focuses its research on applied and multi-disciplinary aspects including developing varieties and evaluating agro-technologies. The ICAR-CIROT specialises in the post-harvest processing of cotton and its seeds.1⁰3

RECOMMENDED LEVERS:It is highly recommended that ICAR build on its strong infrastructure and network of institutions to strengthen region-specific research activities with regard to crop diversification. Maximum efforts should be directed toward updating the crop production technology for the most

suitable crop diversification practices for cotton-based farming systems. Capacity building and dissemination of knowledge developed should be given particular prominence, while ensuring that their key learnings and recommendations reach the state and central government to influence their policies and crop diversification strategies.

8.4.2. FARMER PRODUCER ORGANISATIONS

Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs) are an important way of addressing structural challenges faced by small-scale farmers in the market, especially the lack of capital and access to training and information, their poor bargaining situation, the fact that farmers need to pay high transaction costs compared to the small size of their production, and their limited options to influence policies and markets.1⁰⁴

Farmer organisations focus on collective marketing strategies to alleviate these disadvantages and can support farmers when they need to comply with industry standards.1⁰ The organisation of smallholders into farmer groups and cooperatives is often considered the most important benefit of a smallholder farmer who is producing organically, along with other livelihood benefits such as the building of social networks, the integration of traditional knowledge, the access to trainings, health and credit programmes through certifying and export agencies.1⁰⁵,1⁰⁶

RECOMMENDED LEVERS:Farmer Producer Organisations have the potential to make diversified agriculture profitable by creating both backward and forward linkages across the entire agricultural value chain that integrate farmers with diversified farming systems. In order to obtain maximum benefits and economies of scale, the setup, strengthening and registration of crop-based FPOs under distinct crop-wise sections is recommended.¹⁰⁶

8.5. LEVERAGING THE POLICY ENVIRONMENT

Policies that support market development are crucial factors to induce farmers to adopt more diverse cropping systems.1⁰⁷ Public procurement schemes and policies specially designed for the organic sector in India are among the major policy schemes that can influence the status of crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems. As expressed by the attendees of the participatory feedback workshop presented in Figure 26, there is definitely room to improve the suitability of the current Indian policy environment for supporting crop diversification. Integrating the policy recommendations hereafter into existing advocacy frameworks for organic and sustainable farming practices would be a step in the right direction.


INDUSTRY

PROCUREMENT AND MARKET

Contextual Factors

FARM

Research andextension services

Farmer ProducerOrganisations



AND MARKET

Policy environment

35


42 95 731

Let’s look at the current policy environment in greater detail, zooming into the public procurement schemes, as well as organic farming-specific policies.

8.5.1. PUBLIC PROCUREMENT SCHEMES

Public procurement schemes of goods and services account for 50 percent of the total government expenditure in developing economies1⁰⁸ and are core instruments to governments to influence markets and regulate market players, to achieve desired social, economic, and environmental goals. In many developing countries public procurement schemes in agriculture are adopted as a tool to strengthen smallholder livelihoods.1⁰⁹

In India, the public food procurement aims to provide minimum prices to farmers, known as the Minimum Support Price (MSP). The assurance of a remunerative and stable price environment is considered as key to increasing agricultural production and productivity, as it offers farmers the guaranteed price to sell their produce even when the markets are unstable and prices are low, falling below the MSP.

The MSP is given for 23 commodities, which comprise 7 cereals (paddy, wheat, maize, sorghum, pearl millet, barley, and ragi), 5 pulses (gram, tur, moong, urad, lentil), 7 oilseed (groundnut, rapeseed-mustard, soybean, sesamum, sunflower, safflower, niger seed), and 4 commercial crops (copra, sugarcane, cotton and raw jute).1⁰⁹ It is fixed each year by the government based upon recommendations of the Commission for Agricultural Costs & Prices (CACP). The recommendations of the MSP are guided upon the demand and supply, cost of production, price trends in domestic and international markets, as well as the concept that MSP should offer a minimum of 50 percent as the margin over the cost of production.11⁰

Currently, the MSP operations are intended to focus more on the inclusion of smallholders as in some states of India it was reported that a high share of medium to large farms benefit from the MSP.⁹⁸

The MSP is closely linked to the Indian Public Distribution System, promoting food security through the procurement of food grains and distributing them to poor households through food subsidies

and in-kind transfers. As such, it is not just central to support and strengthen the livelihoods of smallholders but also to ensure nation-wide food security.

Pulses and oilseed constitute promising crop groups to foster crop diversification in cotton-based farming systems but did not become popular among farmers due to an unpredictable price environment over the years. This makes these crop groups risky, both in terms of yields and prices.

As higher market prices cannot compensate for low yields over a long period of time, the development of policies that support crop diversification require to implement long-term strategies.

RECOMMENDED LEVERS:As it offers farmers a guaranteed price for specific commodities, the role of Market Support Price (MSP) provision in the selection of crops grown at organic cotton farms should not be underestimated. To foster crop diversification, the extension of the MSP to a diversified range of produce is recommended.⁹⁹

To promote alternative crops, the governments need to evolve a long-term strategy which makes the production of diversified crops more profitable than conventional farming system. A guaranteed buyback of diversified produce at initial transition stages from monocropping to multi-cropping systems could also help in promoting crop diversification to farmers.

8.5.2. POLICIES SPECIFIC FOR ORGANIC FARMING

Policies specially designed for the organic sector in India are among the major policy schemes that can foster crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems. A major step to foster organic production in India was taken with the launch of the National Programme for Organic Production (NPOP) in 2001 which created an institutional mechanism for promotion and certification of organic products.

Major policy schemes that followed to promote organic production fell within the Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojna (PKVY). Within this programme, not only are technical aspects of cultivation covered but also marketing and market access aspects such as the Participatory Guarantee System (PGS). Other policies aiming to strengthen the organic sector in India have often been region-specific.

RECOMMENDED LEVERS:Policies aiming to strengthen organic farming and crop diversification practices need to account for the ecosystem services provided by such diversified farming systems. Supporting the development of market opportunities for organic produce does offer potential to strengthen sustainable and economically viable farming systems that can sustain and enhance farmers’ livelihoods. Market actors should especially be encouraged to adopt quality-based produce differentiation systems. Organic certified produce constitutes a real opportunity from this perspective.

NOT SURE47%

YES16%

NO37%

FIGURE 26. Suitability of the current policy environment to support crop diversification (Source: Poll with workshop respondents)

36


42 95 731

8.5.3. Other entry points for the development of crop diversification-related policies

Policies like free electricity or water supply for agriculture should not be encouraged as these initiatives result in overexploitation of lands and restrict farmers desire to venture into new crops. Instead, governments should focus on policies that support technologies and infrastructures that are favourable for crop diversification.

RECOMMENDED LEVERS:Policy initiatives on improving water availability especially under rainfed conditions could positively offer scope for increasing crop diversity. For example, promoting water harvest structures as a supplemental irrigation will facilitate controlled water release, which is key to integrate crops like vegetables and spices into cotton-based farming systems.

Focusing on policies that enable access to better market infrastructure, like road networks and storage facilities, small scale processing units, will also constitute another entry point for policy development favourable to crop diversification.

8.6. FOSTERING WOMEN FARMERS EMPOWERMENT

8.6.1. THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN AGRICULTURE IN INDIA

The extent to which women are involved in agriculture in India varies widely between regions, farming systems, castes, and classes. But regardless of these differences, there is hardly any activity in farming, except for ploughing, where women are not actively involved. Women are often the predominant actors on the farm when it comes to processing and storing activities.111

Depending on the socio-economic status of their family and regional factors women are mainly engaged in three different ways: They work as (i) Paid Labourers (ii) Cultivator carrying out labour on their own land and (iii) Managers of certain aspects of agricultural production by way of labour supervision and participation in post-harvest operations. Women often fulfil multi-dimensional roles in the rural context, in agriculture as unpaid labour (sowing, weeding, harvesting), domestic (cooking, firewood collection, child-rearing), and allied sectors (cattle management, fodder collection). They are often over-burdened with work, working 15-16 hours a day111 and in agriculture, their work often involves monotonous drudgery tasks.

Traditional roles for women in cotton farming include sowing, weeding, and picking as well as the application of manure. Among producer groups of organic cotton, the share of women ranges between 0-64% in each group, with 26% of female members on average.23 On many organic cotton farms, most decisions are still taken by men2⁷ and only around 13% of organic cotton-based farms are governed by women in India even though organic smallholder

farms show a higher proportion of female lead farmers than their conventional counterparts.1⁰⁰

Even though women provide a large part of the labour in cotton production they are underrepresented in decision-making positions such as farmers associations and cooperatives. Compared to male farmers, they also have fewer contracts with cotton companies, less access to inputs, and lower attendance in training sessions.1⁰

It is estimated that if women could have the same access to productive resources in agriculture as men, they could increase the yields on their farms by 20-30%, thereby raising the agricultural outputs of developing countries by up to 4%.112 It is therefore key to continue identifying levers that can generate income for women, provide them with opportunities and alleviate the inequalities between men and women.

8.6.2. EXISTING INITIATIVES FOR WOMEN EMPOWERMENT

From a policy perspective, the need for rural women to generate their income is recognised by the Indian government, which put the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) into practice as a means to offer employment and income opportunities to women.

The National Gender Resource Centre in Agriculture (NGRCA) was set up in the Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare. Acknowledging the important role of women in agricultural and the need to strengthen their access to resources, it ensures that policies and programmes are specifically taking women farmers into account when designing programmes and assigning resources.

Beyond the levers provided by the policy environments, an inclusive approach from policies to the implementation of on-the-ground changes is essential to empower women with direct access to resources and knowledge.

FIGURE 27. Female farmers sowing cotton (Credit: FiBL)

37


42 95 731

8.6.3. CROP DIVERSIFICATION, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR WOMEN EMPOWERMENT

Crop diversification could be beneficial to Indian women in different ways: i) providing employment opportunities ii) generating additional income and iii) as a means to ensure and diversify household food security with nutritional food.

Organic farming offers women a range of crops and harvest modalities, either in rotation or as an intercrop, that include short-duration pulses (green gram, chickpea), minor millets (foxtail, finger millet), vegetables (sweet pea, radish, cucurbits), flowers (rose, marigold, chrysanthemum) as well as spices and herbs (chili, turmeric, coriander). These crop sets offer a multitude of benefits including household consumption i.e., at least a small amount of what they grow is kept for their own needs. Cultivating these crops alongside the main crop helps secure a protein-rich balanced diet.

On-farm processing and value addition of a diversified range of crops sold in the local market or to the local processor can generate additional income - thereby achieving the household’s self-sufficiency - and offering empowering opportunities for women.

Promising crops for organic cotton-based farming systems include cereals (maize, finger millet); spices (turmeric, chilly, fenugreek); pulses (soybean); oilseed (groundnut, sesame) and vegetables (pea).

8.6.4. LEVERS TO USE THE FULL POTENTIAL OF CROP DIVERSIFICATION TO LEVERAGE FEMALE EMPOWERMENT

Female empowerment and crop diversification should be brought into synergy. The role of women has been identified as one of the critical success factors for the practice of crop diversification techniques at farm level. However, reaching this mutually beneficial situation is not without its challenges. To fulfil the potential that crop diversification can offer, female empowerment needs to be a key focus for every next step taken to foster diversification of cotton-based farming systems.

First, the policies developed to foster crop diversification should also be female-focused. The inclusive and participatory approach of cooperatives and Farmer Producer Organisations are known to be key to raising the voices of female farmers in the decision-making process, both at the farm and household level.

When scaling up crop diversification, the promotion of gender-sensitive rural advisory and agricultural investment services is key. To increase women’s access to rural advisory services, training

programmes should be redesigned. Female and male farmers should have equal access to productive resources and services so that the expertise acquired through capacity building and training can be put into practice.113 The participatory feedback workshop carried out in the framework of this study confirmed that the involvement of women in training and capacity building is key to enable women to be agents of change for crop diversification, as shown in Figure 10.

Finally, to make crop diversification a powerful tool that can generate extra income and employment opportunities that also include women, the private sector needs to engage in new product development from diversified crops, improving access for farmers to the supply chain and integrating them to the value chain through increased investments in the processing sector. Together all these measures will enable an environment that promotes crop diversification amongst both male and female farmers.11⁴

0%

30%

40%

20%

10%

50%

60%

STAKEHOLDERS RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE MEASURES NEEDED TO ENSURE THAT WOMEN BENEFIT FROM CROP DIVERSIFICATION

Training Processing opportunities Awareness raising Access to financial support Market access

54%

26%

11% 6% 3%

FIGURE 28. Female farmers preparing natural farming inputs (Credit: FiBL)

Figure 29. Critical success factors needed to ensure that women benefit from crop diversification (Source: Poll with workshop respondents)

38


42 95 731

For the Indian organic cotton sector to harvest the benefits of crop diversification, we need to sustainably leverage the use of crop diversification practices in organic cotton-based farming systems. To achieve this goal, the engagement of all stakeholders across the value chain and partnering organisations is needed.

This study recommends the development of a conducive environment that pushes and pulls the production of a diversified range of products at the cotton farm, as well as bridges these interventions. These recommendations are not only valid for the organic cotton sector, but also to the broader sustainable cotton sector (agro-ecology, regenerative farming etc…), as ultimately, different initiatives are chasing similar objectives.

9.1. PUSHING FOR MORE CROP DIVERSIFICATION IN ORGANIC COTTON-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS

To create a push for more crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems, significant changes are needed at farm level. Organic cotton farmers must be aware of the benefits of crop diversification. Their awareness will foster more long-term thinking in their decision-making process when integrating diversified crops in their farming systems. Beyond awareness, farmers need to be supported in the choice and management of crops that are suitable and feasible for their local farming conditions and meet their needs.

To be able to successfully manage diversified crops, farmers also need access to suitable inputs such as adapted seed cultivars and technical tool supply. Hence, strong engagement and sensitisation of extension services toward the need and benefits of crop diversification is needed to support farmers in creating a push for more crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems.

Ultimately, while support in technical expertise can help reduce the risk for farmers to integrate new crops on their farms to some extent, it cannot compensate for economic stability. Farmers’ access to long-term financial support is essential to increase their risk-bearing capacity to make long-term investments in diversified cropping patterns and secure their livelihood.

9.2 PULLING MORE CROP DIVERSIFICATION IN ORGANIC COTTON-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS

A push for more crop diversification at farm level needs to be completed by a pull, which basically means offering farmers the opportunity to sell their diversified range of products. To facilitate this, the partnership of different market stakeholders to organise and pool diversified products coming from organic cotton-based farming systems is just as necessary as linking farmers to existing markets through the optimisation of storage and transportation infrastructures. A first step in this direction is to improve public investments in market research on the supply and demand gap of suitable crops for cotton-based farming system, as well as mapping and identifying opportunities to foster market linkages across diverse farm groups and within the existing supply chain.

Beyond these structural initiatives, a fair and stable price environment needs to be provided to encourage and support farmers in making long-term investments in crop diversification. This can be partially reached through policy advocacy. Furthermore, as organic farmers offer a differentiated product from conventional ones through sustainable production methods, their efforts need to be compensated by choosing markets options where farmers can also sell companion crops as organic produce, and ideally granting farmers premiums for this organic produce.

39

9. STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ORGANIC AND SUSTAINABLE COTTON SECTOR

9.3. BRIDGING PUSH AND PULL STRATEGIES: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE ORGANIC COTTON ACCELERATOR AND ITS PARTNERS

To successfully match push and pull initiatives, a bridge between the two needs to be built through a conducive policy environment and the engagement of organic cotton sector partners.

As the global organic cotton platform and key player to strengthen the business case for farmers to grow organic cotton, the Organic Cotton Accelerator could engage in multiple ways to foster crop diversification.

OCA can initiate push interventions through its Farm Programme.

• The technical knowledge delivered in this study will be integrated into OCA’s Organic Cotton Training Curriculum, which will be used to train field staff, extensionists and ultimately farmers on crop diversification practices. This will also spread the expertise required for good risk management through capacity building.

• OCA could also monitor and collect additional information and data on the agronomic and economic benefits of specific crop diversification practices trialled by its partnering Farm Groups on the ground. By implementing both qualitative and quantitative feedback loops as part of OCA’s Farm Programme, on-farm crop diversification knowledge could be gathered and optimised in a participatory and ongoing manner, and finetuned for local organic farming conditions of farm partners. It is highly recommended to keep track of the economic benefits of specific crop diversification practices using the benefit-cost ratio as a data indicator to further develop the economic assessments conducted during this study.

• OCA could build additional R&D partnerships to develop further knowledge on both current and potential new crops suitable for organic and low-input cotton-based farming systems.

OCA could also help create a pull effect for more crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems from a market perspective

• A first step towards building such partnerships would be a mapping of current market linkages across Farm Groups, as well as a mapping of key organisations (cooperatives, sustainability initiatives etc..) who are specialised in different agricultural products. These organisations could collaborate to successfully link farmers to markets and open up opportunities to market different crops as organic.

• The quest for new sources of added value can also lead operators in supply chains to promote the production of diversification crops, but the quality of coordination between these stakeholders will be a determining factor to consolidate the production chain, right from the start of the process.

• Hence, once such a map is available, OCA should work to establish a strong level of coordination between the various market stakeholders, at different market levels.

• At local market level, awareness should be created about local demand and supply equations of local markets, in order to leverage crop diversification at farm level through partnerships with Farm Groups.

• At urban market level, different with Farm Groups should be linked to existing processing facilities. Multi-stakeholder platforms can also play a vital role to address challenges beyond the farm level by creating the environment to pool produce amounts, and addressing infrastructural challenges

• At an international market level, multi-stakeholder platforms could also help with Farm Groups network internationally to foster knowledge sharing and capacity building about the complexity associated with international value chains, using the example of the organic cotton sector.

Joint policy advocacy efforts can deliver meaningful impact

• OCA’s organic advocacy network can play a major role in linking policymakers to organic cotton stakeholders by providing a dynamic environment for communication and collaborative action towards leveraged crop diversification practices in organic cotton-based farming systems.

• OCA should actively share the policy advocacy recommendations from this study with local advocacy bodies within its network.

40

106 842 9STRATEGIC

RECOMMENDA-TIONS

5 731

This study on crop diversification in the context of Indian organic cotton farmers, has produced the following recommendations for the Indian organic cotton sector on the key questions below:

By screening, identifying and recommending crop diversification practices in organic cotton-based systems across different regions, the following companion crops have been recommended for crop rotations (see Table 3) and intercropping (see Table 4) with cotton.

These companion crops are most likely to perform best at organic cotton farms from an agronomic perspective whilst also providing environmental benefits. Generally, the benefits of crop diversification can be maximised when a systemic and holistic farming approach is taken at the organic farm.

While little geographic variation was observed when screening crop diversification practices across the different agroclimatic zones of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Gujarat and Rajasthan, the recommended practices should be finetuned for the local environmental and farming conditions of farm groups. Setting up qualitative and quantitative feedback loops on the use, agronomic performance and economic benefits of crop diversification

at Farm Groups via OCA will help define best practices in a participatory manner, whilst nuancing these recommendations at local level.

In our cost-benefit analysis, the potential economic benefits of the crop rotations and intercropping combinations were found to be relatively comparable between each other and in comparison, with the reference monoculture system. This means that, by diversifying their cropping practices, organic cotton farmers can maintain similar earnings while mitigating the risks of agronomic failure and price volatility of the cotton crop and harvesting the environmental benefits of these practices.

The economic benefits of crop diversification can of course be boosted by maximising the farm’s agronomic performance, as well as the prices that can be achieved for the produced goods through the established market linkage, especially when a price premium could be granted to organic farmers on all crops produced.’

Which crop diversification practices can offer the best combination of agronomic, environmental and economic benefits to organic cotton farmers in India, so that we can harvest the benefits of such practices for Indian producers and the planet?

41

10. CONCLUSION

TABLE 3. Recommended crop rotation combinations for organic cotton-based farming systems as an alternative to cotton-wheat monoculture

RECOMMENDED CROP ROTATION COMBINATIONS FOR ORGANIC COTTON-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS

ROTATIONCOMBINATION

Season 3 Legumes 2 Legumes Oilseed Oilseed 2 Cereals

2 Cereals Legume

OilseedCereal Legume

YEAR 1

Kharif Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton

Rabi Lentil Chickpea Canola Wheat Canola

YEAR 2

Kharif Soybean Pigeon pea Sorghum Maize Pearl millet

Rabi Chickpea Canola Wheat Chickpea Lentil

The engagement of seed suppliers is essential to make crop diversification an agronomic success at the farm. As organic farming conditions are not artificially buffered by using synthetic inputs, it is essential that farmers can access the right quality and the right type of seed that fits their local environment and the way that they are farming.

Indian cotton research and extension services have a special role to play to raise awareness among farmers about the benefits of diversified cropping systems, and to disseminate the technical expertise and transfer the technology required to manage them. In doing so, it is essential that the key learnings and recommendations reach the state and central government to influence their policies and crop diversification strategies.

When fostering crop diversification at farm-level, the stability and resilience of cropping systems should not be overlooked. An attractive and stable price environment is absolutely essential so that farmers can invest in crop diversification practices, afford to bear risks and benefit from crop diversification in the long run.

In this framework, policies that support market development are crucial factors to encouraging the adoption of more diverse cropping systems by organic farmers. Several entry points for further policy development are economic policies like quality produce support prices, public procurement schemes and policies specially designed for the organic sector in India, as well as policies on farm and farmer development.

Both public sector and industry stakeholders have a role to play in the successful establishment of market linkages for diversified produce. While the public sector could invest in market research on the supply and demand gaps of suitable crops for cotton-based farming system, Farm Groups have the potential to make diversified cropping systems profitable by creating both backward and forward linkages across the entire agricultural value chain and integrating farmers with diversified produce in order to obtain maximum benefits and economies of scale.

Crop diversification can significantly leverage female empowerment, essentially by providing employment opportunities, generating additional income and by ensuring and diversifying household food security with nutritional food. Reciprocally, the role of women has been identified as a critical success factor for the practice of crop diversification techniques at farm level. Therefore, interventions implemented to promote crop diversification should remain female-focused.

Which levers will encourage the use of crop diversification practices at organic cotton farms and maximise the potential of such techniques for actual income generation in order to leverage the profitability of the whole farming system? Figure 30 provides an overview of levers identified which can encourage the use of crop diversification practices at organic farms, maximise farmers’ income and thereby make the business case for the addition of beneficial crops in the farming system of organic cotton farmers. These levers tackle the various aspects of the value chain: from the seed research and supply industry to the farm as well as procurement and market level. Here are the key levers identified in this study:

42

RECOMMENDED INTERCROPPING COMBINATIONS FOR ORGANIC COTTON-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS

INTERCROP COMBINATIONS

LEGUMES OILSEED CEREALS

Main crop (cotton) Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton

Intercrop recommended in Kharif season

Crop type Black gram Pigeon Pea Green Gram Groundnut Sesame Maize Sorghum Pearl Millet

Duration Short Short-Medium Short Short Short-

Medium Short Short Short

TABLE 4. Recommended intercropping combinations for organic cotton-based farming systems as an alternative to sole cotton cropping

10CONCLUSION

6 842 95 731

The push strategy consists in raising farmers’ awareness for the benefits of crop diversification, investing in capacity building to disseminate the technical know-how required for selecting and managing companion crops, considering and buffering the risks taken by farmers when introducing a new crop in their farming system, as well as facilitating farmers’ access to suitable inputs such as adapted seed cultivars and technical tools. The engagement of extension services is absolutely essential in the implementation of this push strategy.

The pull strategy consists in ensuring economic stability for farmers, which is essential for them to make long-term investments in diversified cropping patterns and secure their livelihood. This means that farmers need to be offered the opportunity to sell their diversified produce range in the long run. This can be done through structural interventions like organising and pooling the diversified produce across farmers and farm groups, as well as linking farmers to existing markets through the optimisation of storage and transportation infrastructures. But this also should be achieved by providing a fair and stable price environment that especially reward organic produce through premiums.

Push and pull interventions can first be bridged by leveraging existing policies. By ensuring communication and collaborative action between policymakers and organic cotton stakeholders, we can create a dynamic environment that can help leverage crop diversification practices in organic cotton-based farming systems.

Above all, push and pull interventions should be bridged through partnerships. Only then we will be able to establish the logistics, market linkages and economical support required to provide farmers with stability. OCA would especially like to emphasize that these recommendations on crop diversification can be applied beyond the sole organic cotton sector. Ultimately, Organic farming, agro-ecology, regenerative agriculture and other sustainable farming initiatives are chasing relatively similar objectives.

What is the way forward to achieve a higher level of diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems?The organic cotton sector should aim for the development of a conducive environment that pushes and pulls the production of a diversified range of products at the cotton farm and bridges these interventions through policies and partnerships.

43

10CONCLUSION

6 842 95 731

Partnership is essential to boost the use of crop diversification practices in sustainable farming systems overall. This means that we all need each other. By sharing these study recommendations openly with a broader public, we hope to build on existing initiatives and identify synergies across organisations.

OCA looks forward to continued cooperation with existing advocacy bodies for policy adaptation and the fostering of public investments in market research on the gaps between supply and demand of companion crops to cotton.

Beyond this, OCA also aims to identify key organisations (cooperatives and sustainability initiatives etc.) who specialise in

agricultural products other than cotton and would be interested in successfully linking farmers to markets and enabling their economic stability.

If you are interested in partnering with us to implement these strategic recommendations, enable further crop diversification research or take the support for the income resilience of Indian organic cotton farmers to the next level, please contact us at [email protected]

Figure 30 summarises the strategic recommendations to foster crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems, for the benefit of Indian organic cotton farmers and the planet.


Strategic recommendations

LEGEND

Root causes of poor diversification

Levers to foster crop diversification

PUSHSupport organic farmers

• Awareness of benefits

• Expertise on management of multi-cropping systems

• Bu�er risk bearing

• Adapted inputs

PARTNERS

Bridge

POLICIES

PULLO�ering opportunities to sell produce

• Linking farmers to markets

• Granting good prices

• Strengthening the options for organic produce


Choice of diverse crops Poor marketing opportunities / linkage


Poor market access Poor marketing skills

Economy of scale

Lack of infrastructureand organic inputs

Improved publicand private sector

investments

Improved accessto technology

and inputs

Support through multi-stakeholder

platforms

Upscale processing of

diversifiedproduce

Adopt di�erent diversification

practices

Recommendation of better management

practices

Support on- and o�-farm enterprise of diversified produce

Incentives onadoption of new

technology

Enhance market information system

Establish/ strengthen crop specific producer

groups

Female-centricpolicies promoting

diversification

Inter-institutional framework for

technology transfer

Increase linkages to formal financial

services

Gap in researchand extension

Lack of capacity buildingand agronomic expertise


No premium price – other crops

Lack of value addition / processing

Poor sensitization and awareness

FIGURE 30. Strategic recommendations to foster crop diversification in organic cotton-based farming systems

44

10CONCLUSION

6 842 95 731

ANNEX 1: SELECTED AGRO-CLIMATIC ZONES AND REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT PER STATE

ANNEX 2: CROP GLOSSARY

State Agro-climatic zone Representative district

Madhya Pradesh

Malwa Plateau Jhabua

Nimar Plains Khargone

Jhabua Hills Jhabua, Alirajpur

Maharashtra

Central Plateau Akola

Central Vidarbha Parbhani

Odisha

North Eastern Coastal Plain Jajpur

East and South Eastern Coastal Plain Jajpur

North Eastern Ghat Rayagada

Eastern Ghat Highland Rayagada

Western Undulating zone Kalahandi

Western Central Table Land Balangir

Gujarat

South Gujarat Heavy Rainfall Area and Hilly Area Surat

South Gujarat Surat

Middle Gujarat Ahmedabad

North Gujarat Ahmedabad

Bhal and Coastal Area Bhavnagar

South Saurashtra Botad

North Saurashtra Botad

North West Zone Kutch

Rajasthan

Irrigated northwestern plain Sri Ganganagar

Internal drainage dry zone Nagaur

Total 22 16

Crop group English name Botanical name Hindi name

Cereals & Millets

Pearl millet Pennisetum glaucum Bajra

Wheat Triticum Gehun

Paddy Oryza sativa Dhann

Sorghum Sorghum bicolor Jowar

Maize/Corn Zea mays Makka

Finger Millet Eleusine coracana Raagi

Barley Hordeum vulgare Jau

Pulses/Green manure

Pigeon pea Cajanus cajan Arhar

Chickpea Cicer arietinum Chana

Cow pea Vigna unguiculata Chwali/Lobia

Soybean Glycine max Soybean

Green gram/Mung bean Vigna radiata Moong

Black Gram Vigna mungo Udad Daal

Sunhemp Crotalaria juncia Sanai

Oilseed

Safflower Carthamus tinctoruis Kusum

Sunflower Helianthus Surajmukhi

Canola Brassica napus Canola

Mustard Brassica nigra Sarson

Castor Ricinus communis Rendee

Groundnut Arachis hypogaea Mungfali

Linseed Linum usitatissimum Alasee ka beej

Vegetables and Spices

Pea Pisum sativum Matar

Garlic Allium sativum Lehsun

Fenugreek Trigonella foenum-graecum Methi

Onion Allium cepa Pyaaz

Melon Cucumus melo Kharbooj

Turmeric Curcuma longa Haldi

Cucumber Cucumus sativum Kheera

Okra Abemoschus esculentus Bhindi

Cluster bean Cyamopsis tetragonoloba Guwarfali

Fruits and Flowers

Papaya Carica papaya Papita

Guava Psidium guajava Amrud

Banana Musa Kela

Marigold Tagetes Genda

Chrysanthemum Chrysanthemum Guldaudi

45

ANNEXES

46

REFERENCES

1. FAO. Crop diversification in ASIA-PACIFIC REGION. (2001).2. Kumar, P. & Mittal, S. Crop Diversification in India: Analysis by State

and Farm Size Group. Agric. Situat. India 273–280 (2003).3. Jha, B., Kumar, N. & Mohanty, B. Pattern of Agricultural Diversification

in India. 69–77 (2009) doi:10.1007/978-81-322-1997-2_6.4. Meynard, J. et al. Crop diversification : obstacles and levers. (2013).5. Devi (2010). Pesticides in agriculture-a boon or a curse? A case study of

Kerala. Economic and Political Weekly, 199-207.6. FICCI (2013). Indian Agrochemicals Industry: Imperatives of Growth.

Knowledge and Strategy Paper released at 3rd National Agrochemicals Conclave 2013, Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, viewed on 16 October 2016, http://ficci.in/spdocument/20292/petro1.pdf

7. Bhardwaj, T., & Sharma, J. P. (2013). Impact of pesticides application in agricultural industry: An Indian scenario. International Journal of Agriculture and Food Science Technology, 4(8), 817-822.

8. Index Mundi. Cotton Yield by Country in KG/HA. https://www.index-mundi.com/agriculture/?commodity=cotton&graph=yield (2020)

9. Blaise, D. Cotton based cropping systems. Enhancing Nutr. Use Effic. 369–384 (2017).

10. FAO & ICAC. Measuring sustainability in cotton farming systems. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4170e.pdf (2015).

11. Suresh, A. Impact of technology and policy on growth and instability of agricultural production: The case of cotton in India. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 83, 939–48 (2013).

12. Altieri, M. (2011). Modern Agriculture: Ecological impacts and the possibilities for truly sustainable farming. Agroecology in Action. http://nature. berkeley. edu/~ agroeco3/index. html.

13. Jayaraman, K. S., Fox, J. L., Jia, H. & Orellana, C. Indian Bt gene mono-culture, potential time bomb. (2005).

14. Altieri, M. A. Green deserts: Monocultures and their impacts on biodi-versity. Emanuelli MS. Jons J, Monsalve S, Eds. Red Sugar, Green Deserts Lat. Am. Rep. Monocultures Viol. Hum. Rights to Adequate Food Hous-ing, to Water, to L. to Territ. Sweden FIAN Int. 67–76 (2009).

15. Lin, B. B. Resilience in agriculture through crop diversification: Adaptive management for environmental change. Bioscience 61, 183–193 (2011).

16. Textile Exchange. Organic Cotton Market Report 2020. (2020).17. Textile Exchange. Organic Cotton Market Report 2019. (2019).18. Turkhede, A. B. et al. Diversification in Cotton Based Cropping System

under Mechanization in Rainfed Condition of Vidarbha of Maharashtra, India. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci. 6, 2189–2206 (2017).

19. Mithiya, D., Mandal, K. & Bandyopadhyay, S. Diversification towards horticulture as a source of income and employment: a case study of West Bengal. Int. J. Curr. Res. 10, 71996–72004 (2018).

20. FAO. Crop diversification increases productivity and stabilizes income of smallholders. www.fao.org/3/CA1562EN/CA1562EN.pdf (2018).

21. Forster, D. et al. Yield and economic performance of organic and conventional cotton-based farming systems - Results from a field trial in India. PLoS One 8, (2013).

22. ODI. Planning tools: Problem tree analysis. https://www.odi.org/publica-tions/5258-planning-tools-problem-tree-analysis (2009).

23. Textile Exchange. Organic cotton sustainability assessment. (2015).24. Prasad, B., Gupta, M. & Sam, S. Manual on Better Management Practices

for Cotton Cultivation. WWF-India, New Delhi 24 (2010).25. Gutierrez, A. P., Ponti, L., Herren, H. R., Baumgärtner, J. & Kenmore, P.

E. Deconstructing Indian cotton: weather, yields, and suicides. Environ. Sci. Eur. 27, 12 (2015).

26. Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Author-ity. National Programme for Organic Production. https://apeda.gov.in/apedawebsite/organic/organic_contents/national_programme_for_or-ganic_production.htm (2014).

27. Eyhorn, F., Ratter, S. & Ramakrishnan, M. Organic Cotton Crop Guide-A manual for practitioners in the tropics. http://orgprints.

org/9250/ (2005) doi:ISBN 3-906081-67-2.28. Jayakumar, M. & Surendran, U. Intercropping and balanced nutri-

ent management for sustainable cotton production. J. Plant Nutr. 40, 632–644 (2017).

29. Bullock, D. G. Crop rotation. CRC. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 11, 309–326 (1992).

30. Castellazzi, M. S. et al. A systematic representation of crop rotations. Agric. Syst. 97, 26–33 (2008).

31. Ryan, J. et al. Implications of cereal-based crop rotations, nitrogen fertilisation, and stubble grazing on soil organic matter in a mediterrane-an-type environment. Turkish J. Agric. For. 32, 289–297 (2008).

32. Bronick, C. J. & Lal, R. Manuring and rotation effects on soil organic carbon concentration for different aggregate size fractions on two soils in northeastern Ohio, USA. Soil Tillage Res. 81, 239–252 (2005).

33. NRAES. Crop rotations on Organic Farms - A planning manual. (Natu-ral Resource, Agriculture, and Engineering Service, 2009).

34. Liebman, M. & Dyck, E. Crop rotation and intercropping strategies for weed management. Ecol. Appl. 3, 92–122 (1993).

35. Francis, C. A. & Clegg, M. D. Crop rotations in sustainable production systems. Sustain. Agric. Syst. 107–122 (1990).

36. Willey, R. Evaluation and presentation of intercropping advantages. Exp. Agric. 21, 119–133 (1985).

37. Singh, G., Choudhary, P., Saini, D. & Jat, B. L. Effects of legume inter-crops on growth, yield and economics of hybrid american cotton under controlled. Glob. J. Bio Sci. Biotechnol. 6, 61–82 (2017).

38. Mousavi, S. R. & Eskandari, H. A General Overview on Intercropping and Its Advantages in Sustainable Agriculture. J. Appl. Environ. Biol. Sci. 1, 482–486 (2011).

39. Potdar, M., Anders, M. & Sharma, M. Yield Advantages and Economic Returns from Pigeonpea/cotton Strip Intercropping Rotations on a Verti-sol in the Indian Semi-Arid Tropics. Ser. Int. Agric. Res. 58–72 (1996).

40. Parajulee, M. N., Montandon, R. & Slosser, J. E. Relay intercropping to enhance abundance of insect predators of cotton aphid (aphis gossypii glover) in texas cotton. Int. J. Pest Manag. 43, 227–232 (1997).

41. Deguine, J. P., Ferron, P. & Russell, D. Sustainable pest management for cotton production: A review. Sustain. Agric. 28, 411–442 (2009).

42. Blaise, D. et al. Allelopathic intercrops and its mulch as an integrated weed management strategy for rainfed Bt-transgenic cotton hybrids. Crop Prot. 135, 105214 (2020).

43. Sankaranarayanan, K., Praharaj, C. S., Nalayini, P. & Gopalakrishnan, N. Grain legume as a doable remunerative intercrop in rainfed cotton. J. Food Legum. 24, 18–22 (2011).

44. Singh, R. J. Sustainable intensification of transgenic cotton in India - A review. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 87, 1267–1276 (2017).

45. Shelton, A. M. & Badenes-Perez, F. R. Concepts and Applications of Trap Cropping in Pest Management. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 51, 285–308 (2006).

46. McCabe, E., Loeb, G. & Grab, H. Responses of crop pests and natural enemies to wildflower borders depends on functional group. Insects 8, 73 (2017).

47. Wan, N.-F. et al. Increasing plant diversity with border crops reduces insecticide use and increases crop yield in urban agriculture. Elife 7, e35103 (2018).

48. Smyth, R. R., Hoffmann, M. P. & Shelton, A. M. Effects of host plant phenology on oviposition preference of Crocidolomia pavonana (Lepi-doptera: Pyralidae). Environ. Entomol. 32, 756–764 (2003).

49. Nderitu, J., Kasina, M. & Malenge, F. Evaluating border cropping system for management of aphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae) infesting okra (Mal-vaceae) in Kenya. (2008).

50. Nielsen, A. L., Dively, G., Pote, J. M., Zinati, G. & Mathews, C. Identi-fying a potential trap crop for a novel insect pest, Halyomorpha halys (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae), in organic farms. Environ. Entomol. 45, 472–478 (2016).

47

51. Holden, M. H., Ellner, S. P., Lee, D. H., Nyrop, J. P. & Sanderson, J. P. Designing an effective trap cropping strategy: The effects of attraction, retention and plant spatial distribution. J. Appl. Ecol. 49, 715–722 (2012).

52. Vaiyapuri, K., Amanullah, M. M. & Somasundaram, E. Green Manure 5Intercropping in Cotton- a Review. Agric. Rev. 29, 157–166 (2008).

53. Melander, B., Rasmussen, I. A. & Olesen, J. E. Legacy effects of legu-minous green manure crops on the weed seed bank in organic crop rotations. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 302, 107078 (2020).

54. Farrell, T., Hulugalle, N. & Gett, V. Healthier cotton soils through high input cereal rotations. in In Proceedings of the 14th Australian Cotton Conference 1–9 (2008).

5. Yao, R.-J. et al. Short-term effect of cultivation and crop rotation systems 5on soil quality indicators in a coastal newly reclaimed farming area. J. Soils Sediments 13, 1335–1350 (2013).

56. Porpavai, S., Devasenapathy, P., Siddeswaran, K. & Jayaraj, T. Impact of various rice based cropping systems on soil fertility. J. Cereal. oilseed 2, 43–46 (2011).

57. Sharma, S. N. et al. Crop diversification and residue incorporation for making Rice–Wheat cropping systems sustainable. J. Sustain. Agric. 34, 342–364 (2010).

58. Samarajeewa, K. B. D. P., Horiuchi, T. & Oba, S. Finger millet (Eleucine corocana L. Gaertn.) as a cover crop on weed control, growth and yield of soybean under different tillage systems. Soil Tillage Res. 90, 93–99 (2006).

59. Kavitha, G., Ram, P. & Saini, R. K. Impact of strip crops on the popula-tion of arthropod predators and isect-pests in cotton. J. Biol. Control 17, 17–21 (2003).

60. Krupa, K. N., Dalawai, N., Shashidhar, H. E. & Harinikumar, K. M. Mechanisms of drought tolerance in Sorghum: A Review. Int. J. Pure Appl. Biosci. 5, 221–237 (2017).

61. Kinama, J. M., Habineza, J. P. & Jean Pierre, H. M. A review on advan-tages of cereals-legumes intercropping system: case of promiscuous soy-beans varieties and maize. Int. J. Agron. Agric. Res. 12, 155–165 (2018).

62. Singh, K. K., Ali, M. & Venkatesh, M. S. Pulses in cropping systems. Tech. Bull. IIPR, Kanpur (2009).

63. Sugiyama, A. & Yazaki, K. Root exudates of legume plants and their in-volvement in interactions with soil microbes. in Secretions and exudates in biological systems 27–48 (Springer, 2012).

64. Unkovich, M. J. & Pate, J. S. An appraisal of recent field measurements of symbiotic N2 fixation by annual legumes. Technical Bulletin IIPR (2009).

65. Smith, C. R. et al. Microbial community responses to soil tillage and crop rotation in a corn/soybean agroecosystem. Ecol. Evol. 6, 8075–8084 (2016).

66. Gan, Y., Liang, C., Wang, X. & McConkey, B. Lowering carbon footprint of durum wheat by diversifying cropping systems. F. Crop. Res. 122, 199–206 (2011).

67. FAO. Pulses and climate change. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_up-load/pulses-2016/docs/factsheets/Climate_EN_PRINT.pdf (2016).

68. Harisudan, C., Senthivel, S., Arulmozhiselvan, K., Vaidyanathan, R. & Manivannan, V. Blackgram As Intercrop in Cotton – a Review. Agric. Rev. 30, 219–223 (2009).

69. Meena, R. S., Das, A., Yadav, G. S. & Lal, R. Legumes for Soil Health and Sustainable Management. (Springer, 2018).

70. Giri, A. N., Deshmukh, M. N. & Gore, S. B. Nutrient management in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)-based cropping systems. Indian J. Agron. 51, 116–118 (2006).

71. Jambhrunkar, S. R., Nachane, M. N., Sonalkar, V. U. & Sadawarte, A. K. Management of sucking pests in cotton through cropping systems. J. soils Crop. 8, 50–52 (1998).

72. Piñero, J. C. & Manandhar, R. Effects of increased crop diversity using trap crops, flowering plants, and living mulches on vegetable insect pests. Trends Entomol. 11, 91–109 (2015).

73. Blaise, D., Bonde, A. N. & Chaudhary, R. S. Nutrient uptake and balance of cotton + pigeonpea strip intercropping on rainfed vertisols of central India. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosystems 73, 135–145 (2005).

74. Fung, K. M., Tai, A. P. K., Yong, T., Liu, X. & Lam, H.-M. Co-benefits of intercropping as a sustainable farming method for safeguarding both food security and air quality. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 44011 (2019).

75. Reckling, M. et al. Trade-offs between economic and environmental

impacts of introducing legumes into cropping systems. Front. Plant Sci. 7, 1–15 (2016).

76. Smith, B. J., Kirkegaard, J. A. & Howe, G. N. Impacts of Brassica break-crops on soil biology and yield of following wheat crops. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 55, 1–11 (2004).

77. Kirkegaard, J. A. & Matthiessen, J. N. Developing and refining the biofu-migation concept. Agroindustria 3, 233–239 (2004).

78. Rodriguez-Lizana, A., Carbonell, R., Gonzalez, P. & Ordonez, R. N, P and K released by the field decomposition of residues of a pea-wheat-sunflower rotation. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosystems 87, 199–208 (2010).

79. Bagayoko, M., Mason, S. C. & Sabata, R. J. Effects of previous cropping systems on soil nitrogen and grain sorghum yield. Agron. J. 84, 862–868 (1992).

80. Varvel, G. E. & Peterson, T. A. Nitrogen fertilizer recovery by soybean in monoculture and rotation systems. Agron. J. 84, 215–218 (1992).

81. Iqbal, J., Cheema, Z. A. & An, M. Intercropping of field crops in cotton for the management of purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus L.). Plant Soil 300, 163–171 (2007).

82. Laster, M. L. & Furr, R. E. Heliothis populations in cotton-sesame inter-plantings. J. Econ. Entomol. 65, 1524–1525 (1972).

83. Delate, K. & Nair, A. Crop rotations, composting and cover crops for organic vegetable production. (2016).

84. Teasdale, J. R., Abdul-Baki, A. A., Mill, D. J. & Thorpe, K. W. Enhanced pest management with cover crop mulches. in XXVI International Hor-ticultural Congress: Sustainability of Horticultural Systems in the 21st Century 638 135–140 (2002).

85. Duragannavar, F. M. et al. Yield, nutrient uptake and economics as influ-enced by chilli+ cotton intercropping system. Karnataka J. Agric. Sci. 26, 20–25 (2013).

86. Alam, B., Chaturvedi, M., Singh, R., Newaj, R. & Dhyani, S. K. Physio-logical determinants for adaptive potential of turmeric (Curcuma longa) for its growth and yield under different regimes of shade in semiarid Region of Central India. Indian J. Agrofor. 16, 25–29 (2014).

87. Shanmugham, K. Effect of onion and greengram intercrops on phospho-rus release and its uptake by cotton. Curr. Sci. 57, 1128–1130 (1988).

88. Xiao, X. et al. Intercropping of Green Garlic (Allium sativum L.) Induces Nutrient Concentration Changes in the Soil and Plants in Continuously Cropped Cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) in a Plastic Tunnel. PLoS One 8, (2013).

89. Landis, D. A., Wratten, S. D. & Gurr, G. M. Habitat management to conserve natural enemies of arthropod pests in agriculture. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 45, 175–201 (2000).

90. Raju, A. R. & Thakare, S. K. Profitability and FUE of intercropping with Bt hybrid cotton in vertisols of central India. African J. Agric. Res. 8, 3177–3185 (2013).

91. Bellow, J. G., Nair, P. K. R. & Martin, T. A. Tree–Crop Interactions in fruit tree-based agroforestry systems in the western highlands of Guate-mala: Component Yields and System Performance. in Toward Agrofor-estry Design 111–131 (Springer, Dordrecht., 2008).

92. Dhillon, W. S., Chauhan, S. K., Jabeen, N., Singh, C. & Singh, N. Growth Performance of Intercropping System Components and Nutrient Status of Soil under Horti-silvicultural System. Int. J. Environ. Resour. IJER 1, 31–38 (2012).

93. Dhaliwal, J., Kukal, S. S. & Sharma, S. Improving soil microbiological properties in typic ustochrepts through tree-based cropping system. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 66, 222 (2018).

94. Allen, S. C., Nair, V. D., Graetz, D. A., Jose, S. & Nair, P. K. R. Phosphorus loss from organic versus inorganic fertilizers used in alleycropping on a Florida Ultisol. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 117, 290–298 (2006).

95. Pavlidis, G. & Tsihrintzis, V. A. Environmental benefits and control of pollution to surface water and groundwater by agroforestry systems: a review. Water Resour. Manag. 32, 1–29 (2018).

96. Hegde, N. G. Trees for improving farm productivity. https://leisaindia.org/trees-for-improving-farm-productivity/ (2016).

97. Mittal, S. & Hariharan, V. K. Crop Diversification by Agro-climatic Zones of India-Trends and Drivers. Indian J. Econ. Dev. 12, 123 (2016).

98. CACP. Report on Price Policy for Rabi crops for marketing season 2021-22. https://cacp.dacnet.nic.in/KeyBullets.aspx?pid=40 (2020).

48

99. CACP. Report on Price Policy for Kharif crops of 2020-21 season. https://cacp.dacnet.nic.in/KeyBullets.aspx?pid=39 (2020).

100. Riar, A., Mandloi, L. S., Poswal, R. S., Messmer, M. M. & Bhullar, G. S. A diagnosis of biophysical and socio-economic factors influencing farmers’ choice to adopt organic or conventional farming systems for cotton production. Front. Plant Sci. 8, 1289 (2017).

101. Riar, A. et al. Technical Efficiencies and Yield Variability Are Compa-rable Across Organic and Conventional Farms. Sustainability 12, 4271 (2020).

102. National Mission on Oilseed and Oil Palm (NMOOP). https://nmoop.gov.in/Default.aspx

103. Venugopalan, M. V, Yadav, M. S. & Satish, V. Institutional Structure of Cotton Research in India. Cotton Research (2016).

104. Penrose-Buckley, C. Producer organisations: A guide to developing collective rural enterprises. (Oxfam, 2007).

105. Valkila, J. Fair Trade organic coffee production in Nicaragua - Sustaina-ble development or a poverty trap? Ecol. Econ. 68, 3018–3025 (2009).

106. Bray, D. B., Sanchez, J. L. P. & Murphy, E. C. Social dimensions of organ-ic coffee production in Mexico: lessons for eco-labeling initiatives. Soc. Nat. Resour. 15, 429–446 (2002).

107. FAO. Strengthening sector policies for better food security and nutrition results. (2017).

108. World Bank Group. Benchmarking Public Procurement 2016: Assessing Public Procurement Systems in 77 Economies. (World Bank Publica-tions, 2015).

109. CACP. Organisation. https://cacp.dacnet.nic.in/content.aspx?pid=32 (2020).

110. CACP. Determinants of MSP. https://cacp.dacnet.nic.in/content.aspx-?pid=62 (2020).

111. NIAEM. Capsule Module on Gender Budgeting.112. Food and Agriculture organisation (FAO). (2011). Women in Agricul-

ture. Closing the Gender Gap for Development.113. Beuchelt, T. D. & Badstue, L. Gender, nutrition-and climate-smart food

production: Opportunities and trade-offs. Food Secur. 5, 709–721 (2013).114. Bonnet, F., Vanek, J. & Chen, M. Women and men in the informal econ-

omy: A statistical brief. vol. 20 https://www.wiego.org/sites/default/files/migrated/publications/files/Women and Men in the Informal Economy - A Statistical Brief - for web.pdf (2019).

BOOSTING BIODIVERSITY AND IMPROVING FARMER ...

Documents