40K Globe - Deep Dive Project

FEBRUARY2016
CASEYBLAKE
ALEXANDERMURPHY
TIMNORRIS(TL)
ELLENRYAN
JORDANWHITE
MADELEINEWICKENS
Deep Dive
Agriculture Report

BANNIKUPPE BIG
FEBRUARY 2016

Jordan White
Alexander Murphy
Casey Blake
Ellen Ryan
Madeleine Wickens-Robinson
Tim Norris

Contents
Contents ............................................................................................................................ 2
1. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 4
2. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 4
2.1.
Background ................................................................................................................... 4
2.2.
Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 6
3. Method ............................................................................................................................. 7
3.1.
Farmers Surveys ............................................................................................................ 7
3.2.
Government Interviews ................................................................................................. 7
4. Research Findings ............................................................................................................. 7

4.1.
Farmers Survey Findings .................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.2.
Government Interview Findings ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.
Secondary Research ......................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
5. Research Results ............................................................................................................. 15

5.1.
Solution Set 1 Financial Security ............................................................................... 15
5.1.1.
Overview .................................................................................................................. 15
5.1.2.
Potential Impact ...................................................................................................... 15
5.1.3.
Viability .................................................................................................................... 15
5.2.
Solution Set 2 Water Storage ................................................................................... 16
5.2.1.
Overview .................................................................................................................. 16
5.2.2.
5.2.3.
Viability .................................................................................................................... 16
5.3.
Solution Set 3 Extension Worker (Farmer-trains-Farmer) ......................................... 16
5.3.1.
Overview .................................................................................................................. 16
5.3.2.
5.3.3.
Viability .................................................................................................................... 17
5.4.
Solution Set 4 Farmers Meeting/Farm Walk ........................................................... 17
5.4.1.
Overview .................................................................................................................. 17
5.4.2.
5.4.3.
Viability .................................................................................................................... 18
5.5.
5.5.1.
Solution Set 5 NGO Mediation .................................................................................. 18

Overview .................................................................................................................. 18
5.5.2.
5.5.3.
Viability .................................................................................................................... 19
6. Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 19
6.1.
Recommended Future Direction .................................................................................. 19
6.2.
Tips and Tricks ............................................................................................................. 19
6.3.
General Observations .................................................................................................. 19
7. Contact Details ................................................................................................................ 19

7.1.
Government Contacts .................................................................................................. 19
7.2.
General Contacts ......................................................................................................... 21
1. Executive Summary
2. Introduction
2.1. Background
The majority of this background information is taken from the Jangriculture Team's research
report, with slight modifications to reflect the additional knowledge gained by our team's
research. Detailed information into the commodities produced in the local area is also
provided in the initial January report under the commodities section, but left out of this
report for conciseness.

Agriculture
Indian Agriculture is unique with its weather where the monsoon season falls during June to
July, whereby early showers occur late May. The soil described around Bannikuppe,
Ankanahalli, Anjanapura are red clayey soils which are good to grow a wide variety of crops.
From our observations, good/simple farming practices are in place in these villages. It was
also noted that any farm > 5 acres are considered by locals as a commercially viable farm.
Examples of crops grown in these villages include: ragi, silk (leaves and cocoon), mangoes
and coconuts. Smaller products mainly for home-use include tomatoes, banana and papaya.
The leasing of land, whereby mango trees are leased to other growers is another form of
income for the landowner.

From the surveys conducted from these villages, it was found that soil ranged from dry to
wet/damp. These soils tend to have good water holding capacity as clay particles are able to
bind with the water but when it does dry, leaching becomes an issue due to large pore
space, enabling water to seep through easily down the soil profile. Factors contributing to
the dryness of the soil have resulted to limited and inefficient use of water around the
region. It was found that bore wells were being dug when a new water source is needed. It
was reported that farms receive Government subsidies (loans) to dig the bore well. It then
becomes the growers own expense and loss if that bore well is found to have failed (not
able to provide water). As a result, farmers continue to dig down (> 20 feet = > 6.2 m) so
that they are able to reach more water. This has consequences because as you move further
down the water table, contamination with heavy metals makes it unsafe for human
consumption and for plants as well. Farmers continue to use this water because this is the
only resource they have. It is costly for water storage systems because they currently cost
approximately 5 lakhs (equivalent 10,600 AUD). Their other resource is rain and they heavily
rely on it. When there are insufficient volumes, there is the high risk of the crop failing,
equating to loss of productivity and income/profit. Hence, farmers have expressed interest
from our surveys for a water storage solution.

Class-System
Surveys show that there is an imbalance between rich and poor farmers. Poorer farmers
receive less or no help at all from the government and/or cooperative bodies. On the other
hand, well-off farmers are able to receive funding because they are seen as more successful.
Further group discussions resulted in a potential solution to develop productivity so they are
able to produce more food (variety) over a small area of land. This allows land-use, as a
whole, to be more efficient

It was also found that salary differences occurred between men and women. From our
surveys, men received between 300-500 rupees (all rounded workload) and women 120-200
rupees (cutting and harvesting).

Caste-System
Ramifications of the caste-system is evident in modern India.
After Independance, programs were put in place to remove
the Caste system and to boost the lower Castes into
mainstream socio-economic sufficiency. However, in 2016,
these programs were debated by many as unfair.
Eg. If there are two identical farming families with the
same socio-economic background but from two
different castes, the family from the lower caste will receive more benefits from the
government.

Generational Farming
Education has become the first priority when it comes to their children's future. Farming is
now a discouraged occupation because it provides little income/return, farmers stated they
do not want their children to go through what they have gone through. Hence, there is less
incentive for children to return to their parent's farm as they now have the opportunity to
earn high earning jobs. This is also an area we would like to tackle through the Impact
Process because what is the future of farming without farmers? This places a large
responsibility on the younger generation.

Findings from the Government
There is some help offered by the Indian Government for certain subsidies given to some
farmers. Some of these include: food rations such as 1 kg ragi and rice per week; subsidies
for every litre of milk produced; and subsidies for better productive produce such as mango
and silk.

Correspondence/Connection
From the surveys and interviews we conducted, it was found that scientists, government
officials and farmers do not communicate their findings to each other. Higher class workers
such as university scientists and government officials are under the assumption that they
are not inclined to share new information/technology/farming techniques to growers in the
field. This, we found, suppresses development to the farmer, but also to the village as a
whole.

From all the surveys conducted in the January period (around 50), only one man talked
about suicide. It is widely known in India that suicide is a large contributing factor of death
in these families.

2.2. Limitations
The major limitation that the group found was the local elections (at the Zillat Panchayat
and Thaluk Panchayat level), with voting conducted on the 13th February and results being
announced on the 20th February. This impacted the project in multiple ways, both directly
and indirectly. Difficulties were encountered in contacting all government levels from Zillat
Panchayat downwards, due to staff members working on the campaign and being too busy
to speak with us. Many farmers would also be busy campaigning or attending rallies, with
rallies made up of villagers bribed to walk behind local candidates passing through the
village multiple times in the lead up to the vote. Furthermore, villagers were self-restricted
in who they would talk to before the vote, refusing to communicate with villagers in
different castes to themselves. This made organizing a farmers' meeting difficult, requiring
us to organize the meeting on the 23rd February, rather than earlier in the program as was
hoped for greatest benefit.
The project was also limited by the length of time between the next group arriving in the
village, with the inability to continue running farmers' meetings and a lowered ability to
maintain relationships between important villagers being a problem faced by the team.
However, having a different group being in the village so soon before our group also came
with its problems, with some villagers getting frustrating at answering questions that they
felt were repeated from the previous group. Future groups should take care to minimize
repeating questions asked already as much as possible to avoid increasing villagers'
frustrations.
Furthermore, after reading the initial report from Jangriculture, the group felt that we had a
few clear directions to pursue. However, after talking with our intern and talking to farmers
at the local dairy, it became clear that the project had a greater scope than we anticipated
and required further effort in the deep dive stage. From this further research it became
clear that the problem with cow mastitis (disease affecting milk quality) discovered in
January wasn't as large an issue as first thought, with tests already conducted on a daily
basis and system in place to address the problem. Secondly, the issue with farmers
agriculture license turned out to be misunderstood, with no license required for farmers to
sell their produce to the markets the farmers hire agent due to time constraints and
convenience. This lead to the group decided to continue the deep dive stage of the project
to gain a further understanding of the local situation.
3. Method
In this stage of the project, the bulk of time was spent doing primary research directly
speaking with farmers and other stakeholders with supplementary findings provided from
further secondary research. Gaining information was initially done in an unstructured way,
before a survey was drawn up focusing on 3 mains areas that were found to be the major
problems for the farmers in the area power, water and finance. Speaking to government
officials, private businesses and NGOs working in the region also provided further
perspective into the local situation. Finally, secondary research into areas in which local
knowledge was limited (or we needed further background knowledge on) was conducted to
gain a more rounded understanding of the findings from the primary research.
3.1.
Farmers Surveys
3.2.
Government Interviews
4. Research Findings
4.1. Water Issues
Water was repeatedly raised as a major issue for the farmers in the Bannikuppe area, due to
the lack of a perennial water source and a change in the rainy season's make up.
Traditionally, farmers would rely solely on the rains in the monsoon season in Karnataka.
With the introduction of bore wells, water could be used on crops during the dry season.
However, the monsoon season is shortening in duration and increasing in intensity. Due to
the characteristics of clay, this means that the clay is absorbing less water, with increased
soil run off. This also affects the bore water, with the lower soil absorption leading to the
water table not being topped up and the bore wells decreasing in effectiveness.
Bore Wells
Bore wells are commonly used in the Bannikuppe area, with the majority of farmers in the
area telling us that they have a bore. However, digging a bore well and finding water is a
matter of luck, with many farmers spending a large amount of money to find that their bore
hasn't hit the water table or soon dries up (either due to using up the water in the ground or
the bore breaking). Farmers also use extremely basic techniques in locating the optimal
location to dig a bore well, with a farmer (Reajanna) describing two techniques commonly
used by the farmers in the area. The first involved using a coconut and a mug of water, with
the second involved using two divining rods. Employing a geologist is costly, with the
average cost found to be between 6,000 and 7,000 rupees for a consultation. However,
balanced against the risk taken in drilling a bore well, this expense is easily justifiable in our
opinion.
A working bore well provides many farmers with sufficient water for their farm during the
dry season. However, many farmers dig bore wells and find that there is no 'aquifers' traced
underground in the chosen location, or choose to not dig a bore and solely rely on rain
water. In this case, farmers generally purchase water from other farmers who have
sufficient water coming from their bore or rely on farming only during the rainy season. In
the case of farmers purchasing water, the water costs differed depending on which farmer
we talked to. In the case of (Mango Farmer), we were told that he purchased around 400
litres of water for 600 rupees. Another farmer, Prathima, told us that he purchased water
for 500 rupees for a tank of water (which varied between 500 and 1000 litres of water).
Both of these farmers used the additional water on their mangoes during the initial growth
stage during the dry season and the storage and selling of agricultural water is a definite
avenue with a possibility to pursue.
Rain Water
As mentioned before, the change in the character of the monsoon season has added to the
water issues that the farmers were already finding. Although the amount of rain falling is
still of the same quantity, a lower amount of water is absorbed by the soil. This is due to
clay's absorption rate being low, but retention rate being high. A possible avenue to look
into is farm ponds, with the additional water falling in the monsoon season being stored in
these ponds for use later on. From our research, we discovered a farm pond being built on a
farm nearby to Ramanagara. The pond was 80x80x10ft in size and was dug in 1 week.
However, due to the large size of this farm (12 acres), the stored water would be used on
the farmland in one day after filling up (50% on crops and 50% on his 1 acre greenhouse).
The government also informed us that they subsidized farm ponds are a rate of 50%, with a
20x20x3m farm pond costing approximately 1.5-2 lakh rupees. The large size of farm pond
required to be of any use with regards to water storage provides the greatest barrier to
implementation on the farms in the Bannikuppe area. Firstly, the farms don't have the
required additional land to be able to justify using land on a water storage facility. Secondly,
the farms don't have the required capital to be able to pay for a farm pond.
The farmer we visited also was in the process of constructing a farm pond. It was 80x80x10ft
deep, and took approximately 1 week of digging. A full pond of water will last one day of
watering is farm. Half will be used for sprinkler and drip irrigation in the greenhouse, and
the other half will be used to water the other crops on his land, such as coconuts.
Furthermore, this farmer had an underground water storage system, which was filled from
his bore. This water storage was 35x45x12ft deep.
Conclusion
Lack of water is a problem in Bannikuppe, but not due to scarcity. The issue with water in
this area is that farmer's use water inefficiently and that the intensity of the monsoon
season now has reduced the amount of water that infiltrates into the soil. This causes the
soil to not absorb enough water as it needs, not providing the crops with enough money
and not increasing the water level. We have also been in conversation with a NGO, called
the Water Literacy Foundation (contact details in appendix), who confirmed this problem.
From our conversations, they seemed interested in organizing a training session run in the
Bannikuppe village to teach the farmers better farming practices to conserve water. If
possible, this is an avenue that the February team should pursue, with the training session
being of additional benefit to the farmers on top of anything else done.
4.2. Power Issues
Power issues also play a part in the water issues that the Bannikuppe area face, being
majorly interconnected. However, power is an extremely complex issue, multi-faceted by
limitations due to the government supply and also by the large financial burden needed to
alleviate the issue in any way. A different team in the Southern area looked into attempting
to find a solution to the power problem, but could find no solution due to the large financial
expense of anything they looked into.
Electricity in Bannikuppe
The Bannikuppe area gets general electricity from 6pm-6am (time variable), however only
received 3 phase power for 3 hours a day at either 3pm-6pm or 4pm-7pm. This 3 phase
power is needed for pump operation, limiting the length of time that farmers are able to use
their pumps to draw water from the bore well. The timing of the 3 phase power also causes
issues with the farmers, with the timing of the power being outside of the optimal time for
watering crops. Ideally, the power would be best to have in the morning or night, when the
soil is moist and absorbs the maximum amount of water without evaporation.
Conclusion
The power issue is a major one, but one that we feel shouldn't be focused on due to the
limited viability of any solution that focuses on this problem. Some time was spent in the
initial stages of our month asking farmers about pumps and electricity in the area, with our
research concluding that the issue is out of our depth. It is the responsibility of the
government to provide the farmers with electricity for as many hours as possible and at the
right time, with the issue unable to be solved by 40K Globe apart from mediation. If 40K is
to address the problem in any way, it should be finding ways in which to use the available
electricity more effectively, rather than increasing the availability of the electricity.
4.3. Financial Issues

Similarly to the power issues, the financial issues that the farmers face are somewhat out of
the depth of 40K. Financial issues are a problem for the majority of farmers.
Finance in Bannikuppe
Details of bank loans and an in depth look into the financial situation in the area can be
found in the Jangriculture report. Lack of finance is one of the most direct causes of suicide
in the area, with the majority of the suicides in the area stemming from a failure to pay back
a loan to the bank. If a farmer takes out a loan from the bank and the crops fail, the bank
will seek to seize the collateral that the farmer used to get the loan. Furthermore, the
farmer will be unable to take out another loan to buy crops for the next season, further
worsening their situation. The pressure on a farmer builds up as the bank becomes more
forceful in attempting to seize the collateral, with some farmers deciding that suicide is the
best way out. After a suicide, the debt is wiped and the government provides a substantial
sympathy payment to the surviving family.
Self Help Groups
Maddi write some stuff here
Conclusion
To focus only on alleviating the financial problems that the farmers have would be
extremely difficult due to the large amount of capital required for any solution. The
Jangriculture team had micro financing from western backers as a possible solution set, but
this team believes that the solution isn't viable due to the difficulty in raising the amounts of
money required by the farmers from a micro financial institute.
4.4. Agricultural Practices
One of the main problems with the farming situation in this area is the continued use of
primitive techniques, with little appetite for change. Although the farmer's generally know
their land reasonably well, the unwillingness to adopt new techniques leaves the farmers
vulnerable to changing conditions due to climate change and increased competition.
Irrigation Techniques
One of the most noticeable examples of this is the continued and widespread use of flood
irrigation in the village. Although flood irrigation is a simple technique, it requires a lot of
manpower and uses a lot more water than other irrigation techniques, such as drip
irrigation (in which the water is fed directly to the roots of the crops. From our surveys, we
found that all of the farmers in our village still employed flood irrigation, apart from one
farmer (the ex-Gram Panchayat). The most common reason for not using drip irrigation was
found to be the financial burden need to initially set up the irrigation system, with farmers
unwilling to take the risk of changing their irrigation technique when it meant also taking a
financial risk that they couldn't afford. However, from our meetings with government
officials in the Joint Office of Agriculture in Ramanagara, we found that substantial
government subsidies are provided towards the installation of drip irrigation, with the
government paying for 80% of the total cost of the system for farms between 2 and 5 acres.
Furthermore, some farmers didn't see the benefit of drip irrigation, with one farmer
surveyed (the ex-Gram Panchayat), who had drip irrigation installed, stating that he didn't
like his new system as he saw it as being not as effective as flood irrigation. This is despite
numerous secondary sources stating the benefits of drip irrigation with respect to water
usage. This also compared with another village we visited, Ankanahalli (not the one near
Bannikuppe), where farmers had enthusiastically taken to drip irrigation and all saw benefits
in both lower manpower and lower water usage. Another farmer (Reajanna) told us that
drip irrigation wouldn't work on his land because it was too flat. This however also
conflicted with secondary sources which agreed that flat land was optimal for drip irrigation
as the water could be evenly spread along the crops and wouldn't build up at any
topographical locations (e.g. the top of a hill).
Flood Irrigation
Cost
Benefits
Issues
Free
Free to install
Farmers are already using this technique and know it
works
Requires a lot more water than the crops need
Man power needed to dig trenches and close
floodgates

Drip Irrigation
Cost
Benefits
Issues
2.5 lakhs for 5 acres of land for installation, with 2

lakhs subsidised by Govt (cost of 0.5 lakhs to
farmers)
Sprinkler system (less efficient version of drip
irrigation) costs 21,000 rupees for 2.5 acres, with
17,000 subsidies by the Govt
Uses much less water
Uses much less manpower
Crops can be evenly watered
Spacing between holes in drip irrigation was roughly
30cm apart, while crops were spaced closer together
Needs to be maintained to keep particles from
clogging up pores
General Practices
The use of other primitive agricultural techniques is also limiting the productivity of farming
in this area, with many farmers not educated on what works best for their land and crops
sticking to traditional techniques that are outdated. Numerous crops were randomly
spaced, with the farmers choosing the distances between seeds based on estimation rather
than having a fixed distance between the crops for optimal growth. This was highlighted by
a farmer who told us that she planted her banana trees far enough apart to avoid collisions
between the tops of the trees. However, this distance changed tree to tree, even though the
trees grew to the same relative height and width. We also found that crop choice was
sometimes also done on a random basis, with the same farmer stating that she chose to
plant bananas because she likes the fruit. However, many farmers did choose their crops
well, changing their crop to a different crop after a failed season (as suggested to be best
practice).
Another agricultural issue to note is the limited land size of the farms in the Bannikuppe
area. Our surveys found that the vast majority of farms were 1 or 2 acres in size. This issue
will also develop further with time, with the inheritance policy of splitting the farm between
children further reducing the land size of farms in the Bannikuppe area. The problem with
limited land sizes is that the profit margins are small, leaving farmers unable to purchase
new technologies to increase their productivity and increase their profit. The small land size
also reduced the loan amount possible due to limited collateral. Finally, smaller farms have
limited durability against crisis events, such as crop failure, because of the limited mix of
crops and inability to rotate crops.
Fertilizers are used by the vast majority of farmers, with farmers generally using either
natural fertilizers (using either cow or goat manure) or chemical fertilizers (urea). Farmers
generally don't produce their own natural fertilizer, buying it from Ramanagara at 1000
rupees at a time (for an unknown quantity). Farmers told us that this was very expensive
and chemical urea can be bought at 500 rupees per 50kg. It would be beneficial to the
farmers to produce their own organic fertilizer. However, organic fertilizer is hard to
produce in bulk quantity, taking 3-4 months for a farmer to produce. There is little use of
insecticides or pesticides in the area, with farmers generally confusing fertilizer and
pesticides. This was found out to be due to cultural reasons, with farmers not willing to kill
the insects that infect their crops.
Advanced Farming Techniques
A beneficial practice for the farmers to do would be to fully convert to organic farming, with
the benefit of being able to sell the produce at a premium price to the organic markets in
Bangalore. There is a growing demand for organic farming in India, with a need for a growth
in organic farming to match the increased demand. The conversion to organic farming
should be fairly simple due to the limited changes needed to have a completely organic
farm, with the biggest issue being the sourcing of a large enough quantity of organic
fertilizer. From our meeting with the Joint Office of Agriculture in Ramanagara, we were told
of a few NGOs (Green Foundation) who were currently working on organic farming in the
South Karnataka area, with the government giving the organizations 250 acres to turn into
organic farms. The success of this program, Savayava Bhagya Yojane, was so great that the
program has been extended to 1381 acres in size, with 543 farmers involved in the program
and the government telling us that the farmers have seen prosperity from participating in
the scheme.
We also investigated the use of Greenhouses in the area. A Greenhouse requires an
extremely large initial investment, but provided a high profit margin and is self-sufficient
water-wise. From our discussions with a farmer (who was located just outside of
Ramanagara), we discovered that a 1 acre greenhouse cost the farmer 1.2 crore rupees. This
required an initial deposit of 100 lakh rupees, with an initial deposit of 100 lakh rupees
required (with only 30% of this subsidized by the government). New innovative farming
techniques, such as the greenhouse, provide farmers with protection from the climate and a
steady income stream. However, the large cost of installment required provides a barrier to
entry for the farmers, which makes the installation of greenhouses unrealistic without the
support of an NGO or large government subsidies.
The farm visit was incredibly informative in understanding estimated costs of innovative and
new farming techniques and the support the government provided through subsidies. In an
idealistic world, these practices would undoubtedly aid farmers in Bannikuppe, however the
cost of installment and ample water supply still remain the main challenges. Due to this,
these farming practices would be unrealistic to implement in Bannikuppe due to the farmers
financial difficulties.
The use of other advanced agricultural techniques is also limited in the Bannikuppe area.
Farmers are risk adverse and aren't educated to see the benefits of using new techniques.
This was evidenced by the government officials telling us about new soil infiltration
techniques such as mulching, which were unknown to the farmers who we surveyed.
Conclusion
From our research into agricultural practices, we have discovered a few areas in which we
can see potential improvement in. These areas focus on helping farmers use power and
water more efficiently, but require some financial input;
Implementation of Drip Irrigation to reduce water usage

Need to provide capital for initial instillation
Need to educate farmers on the benefit of drip irrigation
Education of Farmers on Basic Agricultural Practices e.g. Mixed Cropping,
Intercropping, Crop Rotation
Education of Farmers on Advanced Farming Techniques e.g. Mulching, Organic

Farming
Finding a way to implement Organic Farming in the area and obtain the correct
licensing
Improve availability of Natural Fertilizer
Educate farmers on changes needed to be made to sell on the Organic Market
Contact NGOs to potentially implement their scheme in Bannikuppe area
4.5. Smallholder Farming

In conjunction with the issues detailed in the previous sections, it is important to focus on
the differences between the situation in which the Bannikuppe farmers are in and other
farmers. The farmers in the Bannikuppe area are smallholder farms, with small land sizes
and labour provided by a single family. This comes with advantages and disadvantages when
compared to large scale farms and future groups should focus on finding ways for the
farmers to take advantage of their situation to create a sustainable future for the village and
smallholder farms in the surrounding areas.
Disadvantages
The problems faced by smallholder farmers are generally the same worldwide, with the
limited size of the land and limited financial capital available causing the farms to be
vulnerable to climatic or economic shocks (Creating a fertile future for smallholder farmers
in Africa, guardian.co.uk). Limited access to new technologies and training schemes also
causes many smallholder farms to be poorly managed and have a limited take up of
improved technology or techniques (A future for smallholder farming?, rural21.com).
Furthermore, smallholder farmers have limited access to commercial marketing channels,
with the majority of farmers selling their produce to smaller markets (Smallholder
Agriculture in Africa: An Overview and Implications for Policy, pubs.iied.org).
Advantages
However, smallholder farming also has its advantages over large-scale farming. Research
has shown that the yield per hectare on a small farm is greater than on a larger farm (Is
there really a future for Africa's smallholder farmers, mgaafrica.com). Smallholder farmers
also have the advantage of easily being able to integrate farming approaches such as;
combining plant crops with animal farming, crop rotation, and recycling schemes
(Smallholder agriculture: what is its future and how will it affect ecology,
researchgate.com). Finally, the labour is more flexible due to the labour generally being
done by the family. The time on the farm can be easily increased when required by the
farmer, and decreased when not needed (e.g. dry season vs wet season), This flexibility
provides an advantage over large-scale scale farms which have difficulties in finding the
required labour at the times in which they need it.
Conclusion
There are many suggested ways to create a sustainable future for smallholder farmers and
the aim of the next stages of this Agriculture project should be to focus on implementing
one of the suggested options or something similar. The same Guardian article mentioned
previously suggested that training is currently ineffective due to being run by the
government, with the low quality and mistrust of the government making the training
schemes unpopular. It is suggested that training schemes be run by farmers, with the local
knowledge and respect making the training sessions a lot more useful. It is also suggested
that by multiple secondary sources that a farmers' group is formed, with the focus on
pooling resources together to optimize production (e.g. a community food storage facility)
and sharing of information to improve the farming practices in the area.
5. Research Results
5.1.
Solution Set 1 Financial Security
5.1.1. Overview
The first solution is the creation of a local financial instrument to mitigate the farmers
credit risk and provide a steady income. This would be done either by starting a business to
act as a middle man between the farmers and a B-corporation financial institute providing
microloans, or by starting a local farmer run bank giving smaller loans than possible from
large financial institutions but at a much lower interest rate.
5.1.2. Potential Impact
Finance is a large problem for the local farmers, with suicides generally directly caused
because of the build-up of debt after a crop failure and the pressure of the bank attempting
to seize the collateral from the initial loan. By offering a microloan provided from western
backers, the large negative impact of failing to repay a loan can be removed by selling the
loans as charity investments to the western backers, with the potential of the loan being
completely lost. However, it will be difficult to obtain large charity investments and the
loans will have to be limited in size.
5.1.3. Viability
Benefits
Drawbacks
Low Risk
Need to continually get charity investment
Provides a little financial security to the Loan amounts are limited, wont be enough
farmers
for many agricultural needs

Doesnt address crop failure or improve
farmer adaptability

5.2.
Solution Set 2 Water Storage
5.2.1. Overview
The aim of this solution set is to continuously supply farms with water by storing rainwater.
By storing the large amounts of rainwater that fall during the monsoon season, a steadier
supply of water can be supplied. Our solution to do this is to build a communal water
storage tank splitting the costs of construction between the villagers and with a social
business off-shooting from the needs of transporting the water to the farms and keeping
track of the water usage per farmer. This water storage tank will be underground,
completely covered to the elements on all sides to reduce evaporation and contamination.
As lack of water is an issue for the majority of farmers, supplying water to farmers who
don't have water or are in high need (because of particular times of the farming process e.g.
planting) could have a massive impact in reducing crop failure in the region. Leading on from
this, more crop stability will reduce the inability of farmers to repay their loans and
removing the financial burden on the farmers.
5.2.3. Viability

Benefits
Community wide solution could also open
up communication between the villagers,
encouraging further co operation
Government already implementing a similar
scheme in Channapatna could get
government on board

Drawbacks
Large initial investment cost will be hard to
source from the farmers or a NGO will need
to be found
Water problems are linked to power issues
farmers wont have electricity to pump water
around their farms
Problems with having a large enough storage
facility to store rainwater for the village for
the dry season

5.3.
Solution Set 3 Extension Worker (Farmer-trains-Farmer)
5.3.1. Overview
This solution is to train a member of the community in a variety of farm related techniques
(e.g. drip irrigation, water usage, mulching, composting), educate them to provide them
with knowledge of government subsidy schemes and knowledge of contacts for useful
private businesses (e.g. fertilizers, pumps, pesticides). They will then act as an educator and
mentor within the village; as a farmer who can train other farmers in new techniques, who
can get available government subsidies for farmers (complete all the processing and
applications), and as someone who can organize other services (arranging for geologists to
help locate optimal bore well location and arranging for drillers). Something that needs to
be done is a cost-benefit analysis - to see how much a farmer will pay for the services
(potentially a monthly or yearly subscription) and an analysis to see if there is enough
work for someone to be an extension worker on a full-time basis. Furthermore, a
knowledgeable and respected member of the community must be found to fill the role.
The project's impact will be slow to be seen by the village but the project will be sustainable
and produce a long-term business. Furthermore, after a while of running in the village, the
farming practices should hopefully improve greatly, increasing the productivity of the farms
in the village. This solution will work towards alleviating the farmer's problems in all three
major areas power, water and finance.
5.3.3. Viability
Benefits
Provides benefits to farmers in all areas
Extension worker can communicate better
with farmers who dont trust the
government or are illiterate
Improves adaptability and sustainability for
farms for the future helps farmers take
advantage of their small holder position
Opens up communication between farmers
Could be a viable small business for a
farmer (or more) depending on amount of
work

5.4.
Drawbacks
Need to convince farmers to pay for services
Need to find a farmer willing to commit to
working and continuing the project (e.g.
continue training)
farmer adaptability

Solution Set 4 Farmers Meeting/Farm Walk
5.4.1. Overview
Organize a farmers meeting run by a respected member of the community discussing local
farming issues and general community issues to open up communication between the
villagers. This has already been attempted by the government, but didn't work well because
the farmers have a mistrust of the government and won't attend the meeting. This meeting
can also serve as a support group for struggling farmers, giving them an opportunity to
learn what other successful farmers are doing and what is making them successful. The
Jangriculture team already held an initial farmers' meeting and our team held another
farmers' meeting. The challenge is to continue these meetings independently of 40K Globe
and ensure that the meeting is conducted in a way in which communication is as open as
possible. This could also be done in conjunction with a larger farmers' fair either annually or
biannually, where farmers are invited to show their crops (with other entertainment as well)
to surrounding villagers and people from Ramanagara etc, raising interest in the farming
community and adding to the local economy.
The impact of this solution set won't be immediately visible, but should have an impact in a
similar way to the extension worker solution set albeit in a different scale. However, it is
extremely simple to set up and comes with little to no inherent risk. The scale of the impact
will depend on how successful the meetings turn out to be. If an open meeting is conducted,
the impact on the village could potentially be massive, with the prosperity of the village
increasing communally.
5.4.3. Viability
Benefits
Opens up communication between the
farmers
No risk to the farmers in partaking in the
meeting
No funds need to be raised by 40K and
limited funds need to be raised by villagers
(only need flyers and chai)
Can make other solution sets easier to
implement

5.5.
Drawbacks
Hard to get farmers to communicate
between themselves (pride)
Needs to be organized and running
independently without Globers

Solution Set 5 NGO Mediation
5.5.1. Overview
Finally, because of the large scale and large financial burden of many of the issues in
question, it is possible that the best way forward for 40K Globe is to get a local NGO in
contact with the farmers in the area and organize for them to introduce new farming
practices that could benefit them (e.g. Drip Irrigation, Organic Schemes, Communal
Greenhouse). 40K Globe would only act as a mediator between the farmers and the NGO,
ensuring that the project is genuinely useful to the village, with the rest of the project taken
over by an NGO. Local NGOs (such as Green Foundation, Alya, I.C.C.R.A.) are already in the
area implementing organic farming schemes, so they could be contacted to help implement
similar schemes in the Bannikuppe area. Other NGOs could be contacted to help implement
drip irrigation systems in the local farms (reducing water usage), or set up a communal
greenhouse which is run by the village with the profits spread evenly (guaranteed income
for the village).
This solution set is the one that has the potential to have the largest impact combined with
the quickest time between implementation and results. The improvements in farming
practices or implementation of a large scale farming scheme (e.g. organic farms or
communal greenhouse) will improve the future of farming in the village with little risk to the
farmers if done correctly.
5.5.3. Viability
Benefits
Drawbacks
Potential to have a massive impact on the Not a social project
village
Sustainable for the future if set up correctly Risk of negative image given to 40K Globe by
association if NGO implements a
substandard project
Will have (hopefully) trustworthy NGO Doesnt help the farmers sustain themselves
stakeholders who will be around year-long in the future, simply improves their situation
to ensure project continuation
short term
Little financial risk to the farmers and no Is a quick fix, will it continue to work longneed to have large initial fund to implement term?
the project

6. Recommendations
6.1.
Recommended Future Direction
6.2.
Tips and Tricks
6.3.
General Observations
7. Contact Details
7.1.

Government Contacts

Assistant Director of Agriculture (Monitoring and Evaluation) RAMANAGARA
Details:
L. G. Karibasavaian
Office of Joint Director of Agriculture
Ramanagara
Ph: +91 876230720, +91 70222626678
Technical Office of Agriculture RAMANAGARA

Details:
Mr. Nedakarlonah (Technical Officer)
Ramanagara
Vijaya Savanur (Assistant Technical Officer)
Ramanagara
Ph: +91 7259005967
Assistant Director of Horticulture RAMANAGARA

Details:
H. R. Vivek
Office of Joint Director of Horticulture
Ramangara
Ph: +91 9036824137
Zillat Panchayat Member

Details:
Dr. Akashak
Horticulture Assistant
Ph: +91 9449239770
Government Official (Helped taking us around Government Building)

Details:
Ms. Pavithra D
Subject Matter Specialist (SMS)
Ph: +91 7411732757
Sericulture Scientist
Details:
Dr Y. V. Ramanjaneyulu
M. Sc., Ph.D., PGDS, PGDHE, DIJ
Government Cocoon Market
Ramanagara
Deputy Director of Sericulture (Operations Manager)

Details:
V. M. Srini Vasalie
Ramanagara
Ph: +91 9740853349
Mysore Geological Department

Details:
K. Thimmappa, Deputy Director
Uttara Extension, B. M. Road
Near Police Station
Ramanagara 571511
Ph: +91 81177274099 (O)
Dr. Ambedhar Veedhi, Senior Geologist (Bangalore)
13th Floor, Vishweswaraiah Centre,
Nagabhushan,
Bangarlore 560001
Ph: +91 8022862108 (O)
7.2.
General Contacts

Water Literacy Foundation
Details:
347 Pavathi Nilaya. Kallappa Layout, Amruthahalli,
Byatarayanapura, Sahakarnagar Post
Bangalore 560092
Ph: 080 2333 9498, 9448379497
Email: waterliteracyfoundation@yahoo.com
Website: http://waterliteracy.tk/
Deep Dive
Agriculture Report

BANNIKUPPE BIG
FEBRUARY 2016

Jordan White
Alexander Murphy
Casey Blake
Ellen Ryan
Madeleine Wickens-Robinson
Tim Norris

Contents
Contents ............................................................................................................................ 2
1. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 4
2. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 4
2.1.
Background ................................................................................................................... 4
2.2.
Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 6
3. Method ............................................................................................................................. 7
3.1.
Farmers Surveys ............................................................................................................ 7
3.2.
Government Interviews ................................................................................................. 7
4. Research Findings ............................................................................................................. 7

4.1.
Farmers Survey Findings .................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.2.
Government Interview Findings ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.
Secondary Research ......................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
5. Research Results ............................................................................................................. 15

5.1.
Solution Set 1 Financial Security ............................................................................... 15
5.1.1.
Overview .................................................................................................................. 15
5.1.2.
5.1.3.
Viability .................................................................................................................... 15
5.2.
Solution Set 2 Water Storage ................................................................................... 16
5.2.1.
Overview .................................................................................................................. 16
5.2.2.
5.2.3.
Viability .................................................................................................................... 16
5.3.
Solution Set 3 Extension Worker (Farmer-trains-Farmer) ......................................... 16
5.3.1.
Overview .................................................................................................................. 16
5.3.2.
5.3.3.
Viability .................................................................................................................... 17
5.4.
Solution Set 4 Farmers Meeting/Farm Walk ........................................................... 17
5.4.1.
Overview .................................................................................................................. 17
5.4.2.
5.4.3.
Viability .................................................................................................................... 18
5.5.
5.5.1.
Solution Set 5 NGO Mediation .................................................................................. 18

Overview .................................................................................................................. 18
5.5.2.
5.5.3.
Viability .................................................................................................................... 19
6. Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 19
6.1.
Recommended Future Direction .................................................................................. 19
6.2.
Tips and Tricks ............................................................................................................. 19
6.3.
General Observations .................................................................................................. 19
7. Contact Details ................................................................................................................ 19

7.1.
Government Contacts .................................................................................................. 19
7.2.
General Contacts ......................................................................................................... 21
1. Executive Summary
2. Introduction
2.1. Background
The majority of this background information is taken from the Jangriculture Team's research
report, with slight modifications to reflect the additional knowledge gained by our team's
research. Detailed information into the commodities produced in the local area is also
provided in the initial January report under the commodities section, but left out of this
report for conciseness.

Agriculture
Indian Agriculture is unique with its weather where the monsoon season falls during June to
July, whereby early showers occur late May. The soil described around Bannikuppe,
Ankanahalli, Anjanapura are red clayey soils which are good to grow a wide variety of crops.
From our observations, good/simple farming practices are in place in these villages. It was
also noted that any farm > 5 acres are considered by locals as a commercially viable farm.
Examples of crops grown in these villages include: ragi, silk (leaves and cocoon), mangoes
and coconuts. Smaller products mainly for home-use include tomatoes, banana and papaya.
The leasing of land, whereby mango trees are leased to other growers is another form of
income for the landowner.

From the surveys conducted from these villages, it was found that soil ranged from dry to
wet/damp. These soils tend to have good water holding capacity as clay particles are able to
bind with the water but when it does dry, leaching becomes an issue due to large pore
space, enabling water to seep through easily down the soil profile. Factors contributing to
the dryness of the soil have resulted to limited and inefficient use of water around the
region. It was found that bore wells were being dug when a new water source is needed. It
was reported that farms receive Government subsidies (loans) to dig the bore well. It then
becomes the growers own expense and loss if that bore well is found to have failed (not
able to provide water). As a result, farmers continue to dig down (> 20 feet = > 6.2 m) so
that they are able to reach more water. This has consequences because as you move further
down the water table, contamination with heavy metals makes it unsafe for human
consumption and for plants as well. Farmers continue to use this water because this is the
only resource they have. It is costly for water storage systems because they currently cost
approximately 5 lakhs (equivalent 10,600 AUD). Their other resource is rain and they heavily
rely on it. When there are insufficient volumes, there is the high risk of the crop failing,
equating to loss of productivity and income/profit. Hence, farmers have expressed interest
from our surveys for a water storage solution.

Class-System
Surveys show that there is an imbalance between rich and poor farmers. Poorer farmers
receive less or no help at all from the government and/or cooperative bodies. On the other
hand, well-off farmers are able to receive funding because they are seen as more successful.
Further group discussions resulted in a potential solution to develop productivity so they are
able to produce more food (variety) over a small area of land. This allows land-use, as a
whole, to be more efficient

It was also found that salary differences occurred between men and women. From our
surveys, men received between 300-500 rupees (all rounded workload) and women 120-200
rupees (cutting and harvesting).

Caste-System
Ramifications of the caste-system is evident in modern India.
After Independance, programs were put in place to remove
the Caste system and to boost the lower Castes into
mainstream socio-economic sufficiency. However, in 2016,
these programs were debated by many as unfair.
Eg. If there are two identical farming families with the
same socio-economic background but from two
different castes, the family from the lower caste will receive more benefits from the
government.

Generational Farming
Education has become the first priority when it comes to their children's future. Farming is
now a discouraged occupation because it provides little income/return, farmers stated they
do not want their children to go through what they have gone through. Hence, there is less
incentive for children to return to their parent's farm as they now have the opportunity to
earn high earning jobs. This is also an area we would like to tackle through the Impact
Process because what is the future of farming without farmers? This places a large
responsibility on the younger generation.

Findings from the Government
There is some help offered by the Indian Government for certain subsidies given to some
farmers. Some of these include: food rations such as 1 kg ragi and rice per week; subsidies
for every litre of milk produced; and subsidies for better productive produce such as mango
and silk.

Correspondence/Connection
From the surveys and interviews we conducted, it was found that scientists, government
officials and farmers do not communicate their findings to each other. Higher class workers
such as university scientists and government officials are under the assumption that they
are not inclined to share new information/technology/farming techniques to growers in the
field. This, we found, suppresses development to the farmer, but also to the village as a
whole.

From all the surveys conducted in the January period (around 50), only one man talked
about suicide. It is widely known in India that suicide is a large contributing factor of death
in these families.

2.2. Limitations
The major limitation that the group found was the local elections (at the Zillat Panchayat
and Thaluk Panchayat level), with voting conducted on the 13th February and results being
announced on the 20th February. This impacted the project in multiple ways, both directly
and indirectly. Difficulties were encountered in contacting all government levels from Zillat
Panchayat downwards, due to staff members working on the campaign and being too busy
to speak with us. Many farmers would also be busy campaigning or attending rallies, with
rallies made up of villagers bribed to walk behind local candidates passing through the
village multiple times in the lead up to the vote. Furthermore, villagers were self-restricted
in who they would talk to before the vote, refusing to communicate with villagers in
different castes to themselves. This made organizing a farmers' meeting difficult, requiring
us to organize the meeting on the 23rd February, rather than earlier in the program as was
hoped for greatest benefit.
The project was also limited by the length of time between the next group arriving in the
village, with the inability to continue running farmers' meetings and a lowered ability to
maintain relationships between important villagers being a problem faced by the team.
However, having a different group being in the village so soon before our group also came
with its problems, with some villagers getting frustrating at answering questions that they
felt were repeated from the previous group. Future groups should take care to minimize
repeating questions asked already as much as possible to avoid increasing villagers'
frustrations.
Furthermore, after reading the initial report from Jangriculture, the group felt that we had a
few clear directions to pursue. However, after talking with our intern and talking to farmers
at the local dairy, it became clear that the project had a greater scope than we anticipated
and required further effort in the deep dive stage. From this further research it became
clear that the problem with cow mastitis (disease affecting milk quality) discovered in
January wasn't as large an issue as first thought, with tests already conducted on a daily
basis and system in place to address the problem. Secondly, the issue with farmers
agriculture license turned out to be misunderstood, with no license required for farmers to
sell their produce to the markets the farmers hire agent due to time constraints and
convenience. This lead to the group decided to continue the deep dive stage of the project
to gain a further understanding of the local situation.
3. Method
In this stage of the project, the bulk of time was spent doing primary research directly
speaking with farmers and other stakeholders with supplementary findings provided from
further secondary research. Gaining information was initially done in an unstructured way,
before a survey was drawn up focusing on 3 mains areas that were found to be the major
problems for the farmers in the area power, water and finance. Speaking to government
officials, private businesses and NGOs working in the region also provided further
perspective into the local situation. Finally, secondary research into areas in which local
knowledge was limited (or we needed further background knowledge on) was conducted to
gain a more rounded understanding of the findings from the primary research.
3.1.
Farmers Surveys
3.2.
Government Interviews
4. Research Findings
4.1. Water Issues
Water was repeatedly raised as a major issue for the farmers in the Bannikuppe area, due to
the lack of a perennial water source and a change in the rainy season's make up.
Traditionally, farmers would rely solely on the rains in the monsoon season in Karnataka.
With the introduction of bore wells, water could be used on crops during the dry season.
However, the monsoon season is shortening in duration and increasing in intensity. Due to
the characteristics of clay, this means that the clay is absorbing less water, with increased
soil run off. This also affects the bore water, with the lower soil absorption leading to the
water table not being topped up and the bore wells decreasing in effectiveness.
Bore Wells
Bore wells are commonly used in the Bannikuppe area, with the majority of farmers in the
area telling us that they have a bore. However, digging a bore well and finding water is a
matter of luck, with many farmers spending a large amount of money to find that their bore
hasn't hit the water table or soon dries up (either due to using up the water in the ground or
the bore breaking). Farmers also use extremely basic techniques in locating the optimal
location to dig a bore well, with a farmer (Reajanna) describing two techniques commonly
used by the farmers in the area. The first involved using a coconut and a mug of water, with
the second involved using two divining rods. Employing a geologist is costly, with the
average cost found to be between 6,000 and 7,000 rupees for a consultation. However,
balanced against the risk taken in drilling a bore well, this expense is easily justifiable in our
opinion.
A working bore well provides many farmers with sufficient water for their farm during the
dry season. However, many farmers dig bore wells and find that there is no 'aquifers' traced
underground in the chosen location, or choose to not dig a bore and solely rely on rain
water. In this case, farmers generally purchase water from other farmers who have
sufficient water coming from their bore or rely on farming only during the rainy season. In
the case of farmers purchasing water, the water costs differed depending on which farmer
we talked to. In the case of (Mango Farmer), we were told that he purchased around 400
litres of water for 600 rupees. Another farmer, Prathima, told us that he purchased water
for 500 rupees for a tank of water (which varied between 500 and 1000 litres of water).
Both of these farmers used the additional water on their mangoes during the initial growth
stage during the dry season and the storage and selling of agricultural water is a definite
avenue with a possibility to pursue.
Rain Water
As mentioned before, the change in the character of the monsoon season has added to the
water issues that the farmers were already finding. Although the amount of rain falling is
still of the same quantity, a lower amount of water is absorbed by the soil. This is due to
clay's absorption rate being low, but retention rate being high. A possible avenue to look
into is farm ponds, with the additional water falling in the monsoon season being stored in
these ponds for use later on. From our research, we discovered a farm pond being built on a
farm nearby to Ramanagara. The pond was 80x80x10ft in size and was dug in 1 week.
However, due to the large size of this farm (12 acres), the stored water would be used on
the farmland in one day after filling up (50% on crops and 50% on his 1 acre greenhouse).
The government also informed us that they subsidized farm ponds are a rate of 50%, with a
20x20x3m farm pond costing approximately 1.5-2 lakh rupees. The large size of farm pond
required to be of any use with regards to water storage provides the greatest barrier to
implementation on the farms in the Bannikuppe area. Firstly, the farms don't have the
required additional land to be able to justify using land on a water storage facility. Secondly,
the farms don't have the required capital to be able to pay for a farm pond.
The farmer we visited also was in the process of constructing a farm pond. It was 80x80x10ft
deep, and took approximately 1 week of digging. A full pond of water will last one day of
watering is farm. Half will be used for sprinkler and drip irrigation in the greenhouse, and
the other half will be used to water the other crops on his land, such as coconuts.
Furthermore, this farmer had an underground water storage system, which was filled from
his bore. This water storage was 35x45x12ft deep.
Conclusion
Lack of water is a problem in Bannikuppe, but not due to scarcity. The issue with water in
this area is that farmer's use water inefficiently and that the intensity of the monsoon
season now has reduced the amount of water that infiltrates into the soil. This causes the
soil to not absorb enough water as it needs, not providing the crops with enough money
and not increasing the water level. We have also been in conversation with a NGO, called
the Water Literacy Foundation (contact details in appendix), who confirmed this problem.
From our conversations, they seemed interested in organizing a training session run in the
Bannikuppe village to teach the farmers better farming practices to conserve water. If
possible, this is an avenue that the February team should pursue, with the training session
being of additional benefit to the farmers on top of anything else done.
4.2. Power Issues
Power issues also play a part in the water issues that the Bannikuppe area face, being
majorly interconnected. However, power is an extremely complex issue, multi-faceted by
limitations due to the government supply and also by the large financial burden needed to
alleviate the issue in any way. A different team in the Southern area looked into attempting
to find a solution to the power problem, but could find no solution due to the large financial
expense of anything they looked into.
Electricity in Bannikuppe
The Bannikuppe area gets general electricity from 6pm-6am (time variable), however only
received 3 phase power for 3 hours a day at either 3pm-6pm or 4pm-7pm. This 3 phase
power is needed for pump operation, limiting the length of time that farmers are able to use
their pumps to draw water from the bore well. The timing of the 3 phase power also causes
issues with the farmers, with the timing of the power being outside of the optimal time for
watering crops. Ideally, the power would be best to have in the morning or night, when the
soil is moist and absorbs the maximum amount of water without evaporation.
Conclusion
The power issue is a major one, but one that we feel shouldn't be focused on due to the
limited viability of any solution that focuses on this problem. Some time was spent in the
initial stages of our month asking farmers about pumps and electricity in the area, with our
research concluding that the issue is out of our depth. It is the responsibility of the
government to provide the farmers with electricity for as many hours as possible and at the
right time, with the issue unable to be solved by 40K Globe apart from mediation. If 40K is
to address the problem in any way, it should be finding ways in which to use the available
electricity more effectively, rather than increasing the availability of the electricity.
4.3. Financial Issues

Similarly to the power issues, the financial issues that the farmers face are somewhat out of
the depth of 40K. Financial issues are a problem for the majority of farmers.
Finance in Bannikuppe
Details of bank loans and an in depth look into the financial situation in the area can be
found in the Jangriculture report. Lack of finance is one of the most direct causes of suicide
in the area, with the majority of the suicides in the area stemming from a failure to pay back
a loan to the bank. If a farmer takes out a loan from the bank and the crops fail, the bank
will seek to seize the collateral that the farmer used to get the loan. Furthermore, the
farmer will be unable to take out another loan to buy crops for the next season, further
worsening their situation. The pressure on a farmer builds up as the bank becomes more
forceful in attempting to seize the collateral, with some farmers deciding that suicide is the
best way out. After a suicide, the debt is wiped and the government provides a substantial
sympathy payment to the surviving family.
Self Help Groups
Maddi write some stuff here
Conclusion
To focus only on alleviating the financial problems that the farmers have would be
extremely difficult due to the large amount of capital required for any solution. The
Jangriculture team had micro financing from western backers as a possible solution set, but
this team believes that the solution isn't viable due to the difficulty in raising the amounts of
money required by the farmers from a micro financial institute.
4.4. Agricultural Practices
One of the main problems with the farming situation in this area is the continued use of
primitive techniques, with little appetite for change. Although the farmer's generally know
their land reasonably well, the unwillingness to adopt new techniques leaves the farmers
vulnerable to changing conditions due to climate change and increased competition.
Irrigation Techniques
One of the most noticeable examples of this is the continued and widespread use of flood
irrigation in the village. Although flood irrigation is a simple technique, it requires a lot of
manpower and uses a lot more water than other irrigation techniques, such as drip
irrigation (in which the water is fed directly to the roots of the crops. From our surveys, we
found that all of the farmers in our village still employed flood irrigation, apart from one
farmer (the ex-Gram Panchayat). The most common reason for not using drip irrigation was
found to be the financial burden need to initially set up the irrigation system, with farmers
unwilling to take the risk of changing their irrigation technique when it meant also taking a
financial risk that they couldn't afford. However, from our meetings with government
officials in the Joint Office of Agriculture in Ramanagara, we found that substantial
government subsidies are provided towards the installation of drip irrigation, with the
government paying for 80% of the total cost of the system for farms between 2 and 5 acres.
Furthermore, some farmers didn't see the benefit of drip irrigation, with one farmer
surveyed (the ex-Gram Panchayat), who had drip irrigation installed, stating that he didn't
like his new system as he saw it as being not as effective as flood irrigation. This is despite
numerous secondary sources stating the benefits of drip irrigation with respect to water
usage. This also compared with another village we visited, Ankanahalli (not the one near
Bannikuppe), where farmers had enthusiastically taken to drip irrigation and all saw benefits
in both lower manpower and lower water usage. Another farmer (Reajanna) told us that
drip irrigation wouldn't work on his land because it was too flat. This however also
conflicted with secondary sources which agreed that flat land was optimal for drip irrigation
as the water could be evenly spread along the crops and wouldn't build up at any
topographical locations (e.g. the top of a hill).
Flood Irrigation
Cost
Benefits
Issues
Free
Free to install
Farmers are already using this technique and know it
works
Requires a lot more water than the crops need
Man power needed to dig trenches and close
floodgates

Drip Irrigation
Cost
Benefits
Issues
2.5 lakhs for 5 acres of land for installation, with 2

lakhs subsidised by Govt (cost of 0.5 lakhs to
farmers)
Sprinkler system (less efficient version of drip
irrigation) costs 21,000 rupees for 2.5 acres, with
17,000 subsidies by the Govt
Uses much less water
Uses much less manpower
Crops can be evenly watered
Spacing between holes in drip irrigation was roughly
30cm apart, while crops were spaced closer together
Needs to be maintained to keep particles from
clogging up pores
General Practices
The use of other primitive agricultural techniques is also limiting the productivity of farming
in this area, with many farmers not educated on what works best for their land and crops
sticking to traditional techniques that are outdated. Numerous crops were randomly
spaced, with the farmers choosing the distances between seeds based on estimation rather
than having a fixed distance between the crops for optimal growth. This was highlighted by
a farmer who told us that she planted her banana trees far enough apart to avoid collisions
between the tops of the trees. However, this distance changed tree to tree, even though the
trees grew to the same relative height and width. We also found that crop choice was
sometimes also done on a random basis, with the same farmer stating that she chose to
plant bananas because she likes the fruit. However, many farmers did choose their crops
well, changing their crop to a different crop after a failed season (as suggested to be best
practice).
Another agricultural issue to note is the limited land size of the farms in the Bannikuppe
area. Our surveys found that the vast majority of farms were 1 or 2 acres in size. This issue
will also develop further with time, with the inheritance policy of splitting the farm between
children further reducing the land size of farms in the Bannikuppe area. The problem with
limited land sizes is that the profit margins are small, leaving farmers unable to purchase
new technologies to increase their productivity and increase their profit. The small land size
also reduced the loan amount possible due to limited collateral. Finally, smaller farms have
limited durability against crisis events, such as crop failure, because of the limited mix of
crops and inability to rotate crops.
Fertilizers are used by the vast majority of farmers, with farmers generally using either
natural fertilizers (using either cow or goat manure) or chemical fertilizers (urea). Farmers
generally don't produce their own natural fertilizer, buying it from Ramanagara at 1000
rupees at a time (for an unknown quantity). Farmers told us that this was very expensive
and chemical urea can be bought at 500 rupees per 50kg. It would be beneficial to the
farmers to produce their own organic fertilizer. However, organic fertilizer is hard to
produce in bulk quantity, taking 3-4 months for a farmer to produce. There is little use of
insecticides or pesticides in the area, with farmers generally confusing fertilizer and
pesticides. This was found out to be due to cultural reasons, with farmers not willing to kill
the insects that infect their crops.
Advanced Farming Techniques
A beneficial practice for the farmers to do would be to fully convert to organic farming, with
the benefit of being able to sell the produce at a premium price to the organic markets in
Bangalore. There is a growing demand for organic farming in India, with a need for a growth
in organic farming to match the increased demand. The conversion to organic farming
should be fairly simple due to the limited changes needed to have a completely organic
farm, with the biggest issue being the sourcing of a large enough quantity of organic
fertilizer. From our meeting with the Joint Office of Agriculture in Ramanagara, we were told
of a few NGOs (Green Foundation) who were currently working on organic farming in the
South Karnataka area, with the government giving the organizations 250 acres to turn into
organic farms. The success of this program, Savayava Bhagya Yojane, was so great that the
program has been extended to 1381 acres in size, with 543 farmers involved in the program
and the government telling us that the farmers have seen prosperity from participating in
the scheme.
We also investigated the use of Greenhouses in the area. A Greenhouse requires an
extremely large initial investment, but provided a high profit margin and is self-sufficient
water-wise. From our discussions with a farmer (who was located just outside of
Ramanagara), we discovered that a 1 acre greenhouse cost the farmer 1.2 crore rupees. This
required an initial deposit of 100 lakh rupees, with an initial deposit of 100 lakh rupees
required (with only 30% of this subsidized by the government). New innovative farming
techniques, such as the greenhouse, provide farmers with protection from the climate and a
steady income stream. However, the large cost of installment required provides a barrier to
entry for the farmers, which makes the installation of greenhouses unrealistic without the
support of an NGO or large government subsidies.
The farm visit was incredibly informative in understanding estimated costs of innovative and
new farming techniques and the support the government provided through subsidies. In an
idealistic world, these practices would undoubtedly aid farmers in Bannikuppe, however the
cost of installment and ample water supply still remain the main challenges. Due to this,
these farming practices would be unrealistic to implement in Bannikuppe due to the farmers
financial difficulties.
The use of other advanced agricultural techniques is also limited in the Bannikuppe area.
Farmers are risk adverse and aren't educated to see the benefits of using new techniques.
This was evidenced by the government officials telling us about new soil infiltration
techniques such as mulching, which were unknown to the farmers who we surveyed.
Conclusion
From our research into agricultural practices, we have discovered a few areas in which we
can see potential improvement in. These areas focus on helping farmers use power and
water more efficiently, but require some financial input;
Implementation of Drip Irrigation to reduce water usage

Need to provide capital for initial instillation
Need to educate farmers on the benefit of drip irrigation
Education of Farmers on Basic Agricultural Practices e.g. Mixed Cropping,
Intercropping, Crop Rotation
Education of Farmers on Advanced Farming Techniques e.g. Mulching, Organic

Farming
Finding a way to implement Organic Farming in the area and obtain the correct
licensing
Improve availability of Natural Fertilizer
Educate farmers on changes needed to be made to sell on the Organic Market
Contact NGOs to potentially implement their scheme in Bannikuppe area
4.5. Smallholder Farming

In conjunction with the issues detailed in the previous sections, it is important to focus on
the differences between the situation in which the Bannikuppe farmers are in and other
farmers. The farmers in the Bannikuppe area are smallholder farms, with small land sizes
and labour provided by a single family. This comes with advantages and disadvantages when
compared to large scale farms and future groups should focus on finding ways for the
farmers to take advantage of their situation to create a sustainable future for the village and
smallholder farms in the surrounding areas.
Disadvantages
The problems faced by smallholder farmers are generally the same worldwide, with the
limited size of the land and limited financial capital available causing the farms to be
vulnerable to climatic or economic shocks (Creating a fertile future for smallholder farmers
in Africa, guardian.co.uk). Limited access to new technologies and training schemes also
causes many smallholder farms to be poorly managed and have a limited take up of
improved technology or techniques (A future for smallholder farming?, rural21.com).
Furthermore, smallholder farmers have limited access to commercial marketing channels,
with the majority of farmers selling their produce to smaller markets (Smallholder
Agriculture in Africa: An Overview and Implications for Policy, pubs.iied.org).
Advantages
However, smallholder farming also has its advantages over large-scale farming. Research
has shown that the yield per hectare on a small farm is greater than on a larger farm (Is
there really a future for Africa's smallholder farmers, mgaafrica.com). Smallholder farmers
also have the advantage of easily being able to integrate farming approaches such as;
combining plant crops with animal farming, crop rotation, and recycling schemes
(Smallholder agriculture: what is its future and how will it affect ecology,
researchgate.com). Finally, the labour is more flexible due to the labour generally being
done by the family. The time on the farm can be easily increased when required by the
farmer, and decreased when not needed (e.g. dry season vs wet season), This flexibility
provides an advantage over large-scale scale farms which have difficulties in finding the
required labour at the times in which they need it.
Conclusion
There are many suggested ways to create a sustainable future for smallholder farmers and
the aim of the next stages of this Agriculture project should be to focus on implementing
one of the suggested options or something similar. The same Guardian article mentioned
previously suggested that training is currently ineffective due to being run by the
government, with the low quality and mistrust of the government making the training
schemes unpopular. It is suggested that training schemes be run by farmers, with the local
knowledge and respect making the training sessions a lot more useful. It is also suggested
that by multiple secondary sources that a farmers' group is formed, with the focus on
pooling resources together to optimize production (e.g. a community food storage facility)
and sharing of information to improve the farming practices in the area.
5. Research Results
5.1.
Solution Set 1 Financial Security
5.1.1. Overview
The first solution is the creation of a local financial instrument to mitigate the farmers
credit risk and provide a steady income. This would be done either by starting a business to
act as a middle man between the farmers and a B-corporation financial institute providing
microloans, or by starting a local farmer run bank giving smaller loans than possible from
large financial institutions but at a much lower interest rate.
Finance is a large problem for the local farmers, with suicides generally directly caused
because of the build-up of debt after a crop failure and the pressure of the bank attempting
to seize the collateral from the initial loan. By offering a microloan provided from western
backers, the large negative impact of failing to repay a loan can be removed by selling the
loans as charity investments to the western backers, with the potential of the loan being
completely lost. However, it will be difficult to obtain large charity investments and the
loans will have to be limited in size.
5.1.3. Viability
Benefits
Drawbacks
Low Risk
Need to continually get charity investment
Provides a little financial security to the Loan amounts are limited, wont be enough
farmers
for many agricultural needs

farmer adaptability

5.2.
Solution Set 2 Water Storage
5.2.1. Overview
The aim of this solution set is to continuously supply farms with water by storing rainwater.
By storing the large amounts of rainwater that fall during the monsoon season, a steadier
supply of water can be supplied. Our solution to do this is to build a communal water
storage tank splitting the costs of construction between the villagers and with a social
business off-shooting from the needs of transporting the water to the farms and keeping
track of the water usage per farmer. This water storage tank will be underground,
completely covered to the elements on all sides to reduce evaporation and contamination.
As lack of water is an issue for the majority of farmers, supplying water to farmers who
don't have water or are in high need (because of particular times of the farming process e.g.
planting) could have a massive impact in reducing crop failure in the region. Leading on from
this, more crop stability will reduce the inability of farmers to repay their loans and
removing the financial burden on the farmers.
5.2.3. Viability

Benefits
Community wide solution could also open
up communication between the villagers,
encouraging further co operation
Government already implementing a similar
scheme in Channapatna could get
government on board

Drawbacks
Large initial investment cost will be hard to
source from the farmers or a NGO will need
to be found
Water problems are linked to power issues
farmers wont have electricity to pump water
around their farms
Problems with having a large enough storage
facility to store rainwater for the village for
the dry season

5.3.
Solution Set 3 Extension Worker (Farmer-trains-Farmer)
5.3.1. Overview
This solution is to train a member of the community in a variety of farm related techniques
(e.g. drip irrigation, water usage, mulching, composting), educate them to provide them
with knowledge of government subsidy schemes and knowledge of contacts for useful
private businesses (e.g. fertilizers, pumps, pesticides). They will then act as an educator and
mentor within the village; as a farmer who can train other farmers in new techniques, who
can get available government subsidies for farmers (complete all the processing and
applications), and as someone who can organize other services (arranging for geologists to
help locate optimal bore well location and arranging for drillers). Something that needs to
be done is a cost-benefit analysis - to see how much a farmer will pay for the services
(potentially a monthly or yearly subscription) and an analysis to see if there is enough
work for someone to be an extension worker on a full-time basis. Furthermore, a
knowledgeable and respected member of the community must be found to fill the role.
The project's impact will be slow to be seen by the village but the project will be sustainable
and produce a long-term business. Furthermore, after a while of running in the village, the
farming practices should hopefully improve greatly, increasing the productivity of the farms
in the village. This solution will work towards alleviating the farmer's problems in all three
major areas power, water and finance.
5.3.3. Viability
Benefits
Provides benefits to farmers in all areas
Extension worker can communicate better
with farmers who dont trust the
government or are illiterate
Improves adaptability and sustainability for
farms for the future helps farmers take
advantage of their small holder position
Opens up communication between farmers
Could be a viable small business for a
farmer (or more) depending on amount of
work

5.4.
Drawbacks
Need to convince farmers to pay for services
Need to find a farmer willing to commit to
working and continuing the project (e.g.
continue training)
farmer adaptability

Solution Set 4 Farmers Meeting/Farm Walk
5.4.1. Overview
Organize a farmers meeting run by a respected member of the community discussing local
farming issues and general community issues to open up communication between the
villagers. This has already been attempted by the government, but didn't work well because
the farmers have a mistrust of the government and won't attend the meeting. This meeting
can also serve as a support group for struggling farmers, giving them an opportunity to
learn what other successful farmers are doing and what is making them successful. The
Jangriculture team already held an initial farmers' meeting and our team held another
farmers' meeting. The challenge is to continue these meetings independently of 40K Globe
and ensure that the meeting is conducted in a way in which communication is as open as
possible. This could also be done in conjunction with a larger farmers' fair either annually or
biannually, where farmers are invited to show their crops (with other entertainment as well)
to surrounding villagers and people from Ramanagara etc, raising interest in the farming
community and adding to the local economy.
The impact of this solution set won't be immediately visible, but should have an impact in a
similar way to the extension worker solution set albeit in a different scale. However, it is
extremely simple to set up and comes with little to no inherent risk. The scale of the impact
will depend on how successful the meetings turn out to be. If an open meeting is conducted,
the impact on the village could potentially be massive, with the prosperity of the village
increasing communally.
5.4.3. Viability
Benefits
Opens up communication between the
farmers
No risk to the farmers in partaking in the
meeting
No funds need to be raised by 40K and
limited funds need to be raised by villagers
(only need flyers and chai)
Can make other solution sets easier to
implement

5.5.
Drawbacks
Hard to get farmers to communicate
between themselves (pride)
Needs to be organized and running
independently without Globers

Solution Set 5 NGO Mediation
5.5.1. Overview
Finally, because of the large scale and large financial burden of many of the issues in
question, it is possible that the best way forward for 40K Globe is to get a local NGO in
contact with the farmers in the area and organize for them to introduce new farming
practices that could benefit them (e.g. Drip Irrigation, Organic Schemes, Communal
Greenhouse). 40K Globe would only act as a mediator between the farmers and the NGO,
ensuring that the project is genuinely useful to the village, with the rest of the project taken
over by an NGO. Local NGOs (such as Green Foundation, Alya, I.C.C.R.A.) are already in the
area implementing organic farming schemes, so they could be contacted to help implement
similar schemes in the Bannikuppe area. Other NGOs could be contacted to help implement
drip irrigation systems in the local farms (reducing water usage), or set up a communal
greenhouse which is run by the village with the profits spread evenly (guaranteed income
for the village).
This solution set is the one that has the potential to have the largest impact combined with
the quickest time between implementation and results. The improvements in farming
practices or implementation of a large scale farming scheme (e.g. organic farms or
communal greenhouse) will improve the future of farming in the village with little risk to the
farmers if done correctly.
5.5.3. Viability
Benefits
Drawbacks
Potential to have a massive impact on the Not a social project
village
Sustainable for the future if set up correctly Risk of negative image given to 40K Globe by
association if NGO implements a
substandard project
Will have (hopefully) trustworthy NGO Doesnt help the farmers sustain themselves
stakeholders who will be around year-long in the future, simply improves their situation
to ensure project continuation
short term
Little financial risk to the farmers and no Is a quick fix, will it continue to work longneed to have large initial fund to implement term?
the project

6. Recommendations
6.1.
Recommended Future Direction
6.2.
Tips and Tricks
6.3.
General Observations
7. Contact Details
7.1.

Government Contacts

Assistant Director of Agriculture (Monitoring and Evaluation) RAMANAGARA
Details:
L. G. Karibasavaian
Ramanagara
Ph: +91 876230720, +91 70222626678
Technical Office of Agriculture RAMANAGARA

Details:
Mr. Nedakarlonah (Technical Officer)
Ramanagara
Vijaya Savanur (Assistant Technical Officer)
Ramanagara
Ph: +91 7259005967
Assistant Director of Horticulture RAMANAGARA

Details:
H. R. Vivek
Office of Joint Director of Horticulture
Ramangara
Ph: +91 9036824137
Zillat Panchayat Member

Details:
Dr. Akashak
Horticulture Assistant
Ph: +91 9449239770
Government Official (Helped taking us around Government Building)

Details:
Ms. Pavithra D
Subject Matter Specialist (SMS)
Ph: +91 7411732757
Sericulture Scientist
Details:
Dr Y. V. Ramanjaneyulu
M. Sc., Ph.D., PGDS, PGDHE, DIJ
Ramanagara
Deputy Director of Sericulture (Operations Manager)

Details:
V. M. Srini Vasalie
Ramanagara
Ph: +91 9740853349
Mysore Geological Department

Details:
K. Thimmappa, Deputy Director
Uttara Extension, B. M. Road
Near Police Station
Ramanagara 571511
Ph: +91 81177274099 (O)
Dr. Ambedhar Veedhi, Senior Geologist (Bangalore)
13th Floor, Vishweswaraiah Centre,
Nagabhushan,
Bangarlore 560001
Ph: +91 8022862108 (O)
7.2.
General Contacts

Water Literacy Foundation
Details:
347 Pavathi Nilaya. Kallappa Layout, Amruthahalli,
Byatarayanapura, Sahakarnagar Post
Bangalore 560092
Ph: 080 2333 9498, 9448379497
Email: waterliteracyfoundation@yahoo.com
Website: http://waterliteracy.tk/

40K Globe - Deep Dive Project

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

40K Globe - Deep Dive Project

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

FEBRUARY2016

Farmers Surveys ............................................................................................................ 7

Government Interviews ................................................................................................. 7

4. Research Findings ............................................................................................................. 7

Farmers Survey Findings .................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Government Interview Findings ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Secondary Research ......................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

5. Research Results ............................................................................................................. 15

Solution Set 1 Financial Security ............................................................................... 15

Potential Impact ...................................................................................................... 15

Solution Set 2 Water Storage ................................................................................... 16

Potential Impact ...................................................................................................... 16

Solution Set 3 Extension Worker (Farmer-trains-Farmer) ......................................... 16

Potential Impact ...................................................................................................... 17

Solution Set 4 Farmers Meeting/Farm Walk ........................................................... 17

Potential Impact ...................................................................................................... 18

Solution Set 5 NGO Mediation .................................................................................. 18

Potential Impact ...................................................................................................... 19

Recommended Future Direction .................................................................................. 19

Tips and Tricks ............................................................................................................. 19

General Observations .................................................................................................. 19

7. Contact Details ................................................................................................................ 19

Government Contacts .................................................................................................. 19

General Contacts ......................................................................................................... 21

4.3. Financial Issues

2.5 lakhs for 5 acres of land for installation, with 2

Implementation of Drip Irrigation to reduce water usage

Education of Farmers on Advanced Farming Techniques e.g. Mulching, Organic

4.5. Smallholder Farming

Solution Set 1 Financial Security

Solution Set 2 Water Storage

Solution Set 3 Extension Worker (Farmer-trains-Farmer)

Solution Set 4 Farmers Meeting/Farm Walk

Solution Set 5 NGO Mediation

Recommended Future Direction

Tips and Tricks

Office of Joint Director of Agriculture

Ph: +91 876230720, +91 70222626678

Technical Office of Agriculture RAMANAGARA

Mr. Nedakarlonah (Technical Officer)

Office of Joint Director of Agriculture

Vijaya Savanur (Assistant Technical Officer)

Office of Joint Director of Agriculture

Ph: +91 7259005967

Assistant Director of Horticulture RAMANAGARA

Office of Joint Director of Horticulture

Ph: +91 9036824137

Zillat Panchayat Member

Ph: +91 9449239770

Government Official (Helped taking us around Government Building)

Subject Matter Specialist (SMS)

Ph: +91 7411732757

M. Sc., Ph.D., PGDS, PGDHE, DIJ

Government Cocoon Market

Deputy Director of Sericulture (Operations Manager)

Government Cocoon Market

Ph: +91 9740853349

Mysore Geological Department

K. Thimmappa, Deputy Director

Uttara Extension, B. M. Road

Near Police Station

Ph: +91 81177274099 (O)

Dr. Ambedhar Veedhi, Senior Geologist (Bangalore)

13th Floor, Vishweswaraiah Centre,