Council on Energy, Environment and Water Integrated | International | Independent
A recent Supreme Court ruling reaffirmed citizens’ right to live in a pollution-free environment under Article 21 of the Constitution. The ruling pushes Indian governments to act decisively against crop stubble burning. Each year, stubble burning shrouds North India in pollutants despite government incentives and penalties levied by local authorities to curb the practice. Between 15 September and 28 October, though the number of farm fire incidents has decreased in recent years, dropping from 4,186 cases in 2023 to 1,983 cases in 2024 for the same period, it still remains to be fully addressed. We find many farmers feeling compelled to burn stubble due to persistent affordability, logistical, and psychological barriers.
As part of the Cleaner Air and Better Health project, supported by USAID, researchers from the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) visited Punjab shortly after the sowing season in August 2024 to interact with farmers and evaluate their preparedness for crop residue management (CRM) this season. We interviewed farmers to understand their behavioural challenges when adopting CRM methods. We explored their preferences for in-situ and ex-situ practices, common misconceptions, information sources, and the impact of social factors on local practices.
Punjab is not a monolith. Different pinds (villages) speak different dialects, have varying preferences for machinery, cropping patterns, and regional politics, with social groups influenced by unique community factors. This diversity influences the complexity of agricultural decisions, such as opting for in-situ, ex-situ stubble management methods, or burning. Take, for instance, the social influence of a disappointed early adopter from Kapurthala who bought a baler with years of hard-earned savings only to face contracting issues with industrial buyers. Bales of crop residue are piled high on leased land, fostering mistrust in the community. A recent CEEW survey indicates that 20 per cent of in-situ users associated the decline in wheat yields and pest attacks with the CRM machines. Our visits revealed that many such opinions about CRM practices often stem from hearsay. Such influences can have far-reaching effects on crop residue management practices across villages.
Lush paddy fields in Baba Bakala Sahib and Talwandi Dogran villages, Amritsar district
A small farmer from Milkowaal village in Ludhiana struggles with high costs and equipment. Many CRM machines require high-horsepower tractors, which small farmers like him cannot afford. “I own a 45-horsepower tractor, so I cannot use in-situ machinery. I incur additional costs of INR 700 per acre for labour and diesel for ex-situ CRM, all from my pocket. The nearest Custom Hiring Centre (CHC) is about nine kilometres away, further complicating my access to subsidised equipment,” he said.
Another farmer we met in Baba Bakala Sahib, Amritsar, shared that these high costs extend beyond the machinery. Operating a Super Seeder costs an average of INR 2,000-2,500 per acre, including labour costs of INR 150, fuel expenses of INR ~1300, and INR ~1,000 for the machine and tractor. He explained, “Managing paddy residue, particularly through in-situ methods, demands additional costs from farmers. While CHCs offer machinery, finding labour to operate these on large plots remains challenging. Moreover, the cost of fuel is also quite high.”
These financial burdens underscore the economic constraints that many small farmers grapple with. Recognising these concerns, the Supreme Court has recently directed the Centre to provide funds for small farmers to access tractors, drivers, and fuel.
CEEW team in conversation with farmers regarding crop residue management (CRM) in Bal village, Amritsar district
Some farmers say that their concerns are often drowned out by the media spotlight on the harvest season and the Delhi-centric, urban narrative dominating the discourse around CRB. Our interaction with farmers revealed several intrinsic barriers driving such practices.
Uncertainty over machine availability, delivery timelines, and lengthy documentation processes – coupled with a short 15-18 day window between harvesting and sowing – often compels farmers to burn their crop residue. Time is a prime example of a scarce resource. For farmers, the perception that as time passes, they may lose out on opportunities to manage the residues on time significantly influences the decision to burn. Time scarcity and ambiguity aversion — the irrational tendency to prefer the known over the unknown — leads many farmers to burn stubble for its guaranteed clearance date over the uncertainty of waiting for CRM machines. This urgency often leads them to allocate resources toward fulfilling short-term needs, such as preparing fields, without considering long-term benefits like improving air quality and soil health.
Misinformation exacerbates this trend. Unfounded concerns over yield loss or pest infestations deter farmers from adopting CRM methods. Misinformation can lead to poor judgement and decision-making, and its influence can persist even after correction. For example, a farmer from Barnala with a Super Seeder reported partially burning stubble due to fears of fungal infestation and rodent invasion, underscoring the need for improved educational outreach to counter these fears. As highlighted in a recent CEEW study, implementing recommended changes in irrigation, fertilisers, and rodent control with in-situ machines can actually address productivity and pest concerns.
Such misconceptions, coupled with the convenience and immediate gains such as cost and time savings, often overshadow the long-term benefits of using CRM alternatives.
Despite challenges, some farmers have successfully adopted CRM and seen positive results. A CEEW survey of ~1,500 farmers across 11 districts of Punjab reveals that 58 per cent of farmers have adopted in-situ CRM methods. A farmer from Ludhiana reported improved water efficiency and reduced fertiliser use since discontinuing burning. Another farmer from Amritsar remains committed to returning nutrients to the soil through in-situ methods and helping protect the insects and birds that benefit his land.
Addressing CRB in Punjab requires solutions tailored to local contexts and small farmers’ needs. While many farmers are open to sustainable CRM practices, the barriers discussed above still require comprehensive resolution. To foster meaningful change, the government must take several critical steps:
Together, these actions can better equip farmers to transition away from stubble burning, supporting both agricultural resilience and environmental health.
Arvind Kumar is a Research Analyst at the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW). Send your comments to [email protected].
Add new comment