Pradhan Mantri KISAN Samman Nidhi(PM-KISAN)

Pradhan Mantri KISAN Samman Nidhi(PM-KISAN)

  1. Introduction
  2. Objective
  3. Benefits and Eligibility conditions
  4. Exclusion Categories
  5. Details required from the beneficiary
  6. Similar programmes by state governments:
  7. Criticism
  8. Conclusion

Introduction

The Government with a view to augment the income of the farm families is implementing a Central Sector Scheme, namely,”Pradhan Mantri KIsan SAmman Nidhi (PM-KISAN)“. The Scheme is in effect from 01.12.2018.

Objective

  • With a view to provide income support to all land holding eligible farmer families, the Government has launched PM-KISAN.
  • The scheme aims to supplement the financial needs of the farmers in procuring various inputs to ensure proper crop health and appropriate yields, commensurate with the anticipated farm income.

Benefits and Eligibility conditions

  • All land holding eligible farmer families (subject to the prevalent exclusion criteria) are to avail of the benefits under this scheme, as per the recent cabinet decision taken during May 2019.
  • The revised Scheme is expected to cover around 2 crore more farmers, increasing the coverage of PM-KISAN to around 14.5 crore beneficiaries, with an estimated expenditure by Central Government of Rs. 87,217.50 crores for year 2019-20.
  • Earlier, under the scheme, financial benefit has been provided to all Small and Marginal landholder farmer families with total cultivable holding up to 2 hectares with a benefit of Rs.6000 per annum per family payable in three equal installments, every four months.

Exclusion Categories

The following categories of beneficiaries of higher economic status shall not be eligible for benefit under the scheme:

  • All Institutional Landholders.
  • Farmer families in which one or more of its members belong to the following categories
  • Former and present holders of constitutional posts
  • Former and present Ministers/ State Ministers and former/present Members of LokSabha/ RajyaSabha/ State Legislative Assemblies/ State Legislative Councils, former and present Mayors of Municipal Corporations, former and present Chairpersons of District Panchayats.
  • All serving or retired officers and employees of Central/ State Government Ministries /Offices/Departments and its field units Central or State PSEs and Attached offices /Autonomous Institutions under Government as well as regular employees of the Local Bodies (Excluding Multi Tasking Staff /Class IV/Group D employees)
  • All superannuated/retired pensioners whose monthly pension is Rs.10,000/-or more (Excluding Multi Tasking Staff / Class IV/Group D employees) of above category
  • All Persons who paid Income Tax in last assessment year
  • Professionals like Doctors, Engineers, Lawyers, Chartered Accountants, and Architects registered with Professional bodies and carrying out profession by undertaking practices.

Details required from the beneficiary 

  • The States shall prepare database of eligible beneficiary landholder farmer families in the villages capturing the Name, Age, Gender, Category(SC/ST), Aadhaar Number (in case Aadhaar Number has not been issued then Aadhaar Enrollment Number together with any other prescribed documents for purposes of the identification such as Driving Licence, Voters’ ID Card, NREGA Job Card, or any other identification documents issued by Central/State/UT Governments or their authorities,etc.), Bank Account Number and the Mobile Number of the beneficiaries.
  • In case of beneficiaries in States of Assam, Meghalaya, J&K where Aadhaar number has not been issued to most of the citizens, Aadhaar number shall be collected for those beneficiaries where it is available and for others alternate prescribed documents can be collected for identity verification purposes.
  • Responsibility of identifying the landholder farmer family eligible for benefit under the scheme shall be of the State/UT Government.

Similar programmes by state governments:

  • Bhavantar Bhugtan Yojana in Madhya Pradesh was sought to provide relief to farmers by providing the differential between MSPs and market prices.
  • The Rythu Bandhu scheme of the Telangana government provides ₹4,000 per acre for every season to all the farmers of the state. Similar initiatives have also be framed in Jharkhand and Odisha.
  • In December 2018, Odisha launched the Krushak Assistance for Livelihood and Income augmentation (KALIA). KALIA is more complicated in design and implementation. It commits to give Rs 5,000 per SMF, twice a year, that is Rs 10,000 a year.

Criticism

  • PM-KISAN is not reaching all farmer households as intended. Most of the farmers in UP, Haryana and Rajasthan own land and should be receiving benefits.
  • But only 21 per cent of the cultivators interviewed reported receiving the benefit. The exclusion is greater in UP than in Haryana and Rajasthan.
  • this scheme is not pro-poor since recipients of PM-KISAN seemed to be better off than the general rural population even before the lockdown.
  • Given this uncertainty over the reach of PM-KISAN and its targeting, the relevance of the scheme needs to be carefully evaluated during this period.
  • PM-KISAN is not reaching all farmer households.
  • In a survey, the proportion of households that had to borrow to meet their day-to-day consumption needs during the lockdown was relatively low for the farmers (34 per cent) compared to casual wage workers and business households.
  • While 7 per cent of farm households suffered from occasional unavailability of food during the lockdown, this figure was much higher for casual workers (24 per cent) and business households (14 per cent).
  • On the whole, when compared to non-recipients of PM-KISAN (including both farm and non-farm households), these households exhibited lower signs of economic distress.
  • About 35 per cent of rural PM-KISAN recipients suffered income losses to a large extent in comparison to more than half of the non-recipients.
  • A little more than a third of PM-KISAN recipients borrowed money during this period as against 48 per cent of non-recipients.
  • However, these households were somewhat better off than the general rural population even before receiving PM-KISAN benefits.
  • Thus, their relative immunity to the income shock may not be solely due to PM-KISAN.
  • Due to the volatile market and price fluctuations in different regions, it is important to index the cash transfers to local inflation.
  • Also, the failure of Direct Benefit Transfer in kerosene in Rajasthan is a case in point, where the cash transferred to families has been insufficient to purchase kerosene, as the market price increased substantially.
  • The scheme does not provide a clear design of transfers and a framework for effective grievance redress.

Conclusion:

PM-KISAN is an ambitious scheme that has the potential to deliver significant welfare outcomes. However, the current top-down, rushed approach of the government ignores governance constraints and is therefore likely to result in failure. An alternative bottom-up strategy and well- planned implementation mechanism would allow weaknesses to be identified and rectified at the local level. The most effective modalities can then are scaled nationally and ensure success.