Refine your search
Collections
Co-Authors
Journals
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z All
Pal, Suresh
- How do the Stakeholders Perceive Plant Variety Protection in Indian Seed Sector?
Abstract Views :234 |
PDF Views:81
Authors
Affiliations
1 Division of Agricultural Economics, ICAR–Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa Campus, New Delhi 110 012, IN
2 Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR–Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa Campus, New Delhi 110 012, IN
1 Division of Agricultural Economics, ICAR–Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa Campus, New Delhi 110 012, IN
2 Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR–Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa Campus, New Delhi 110 012, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 110, No 12 (2016), Pagination: 2239-2244Abstract
Creativity and innovation are important factors for sustainable agricultural growth. Intellectual property rights (IPR) is the key driver of innovation. However, many argue against this view, as it would benefit only a certain section in a country. The present study analyses the perception of stakeholders on Indian IPR system for plant varieties. A perception survey was conducted among various stakeholders of the seed industry across the country during 2011-12. Contrary to the view that IPR plays no role in innovation, this study finds a positive perception of majority of stakeholders on plant variety protection (PVP), while highlighting the hits and misses of Indian PVP.Keywords
Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation, Perception, Plant Varieties, Stakeholder.Full Text
- Assessment of watershed management ecosystem services in India: a meta-analysis
Abstract Views :131 |
PDF Views:61
Authors
Affiliations
1 ICAR-National Institute of Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, New Delhi 110 012, India, IN
1 ICAR-National Institute of Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, New Delhi 110 012, India, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 123, No 11 (2022), Pagination: 1352-1358Abstract
Besides increasing agricultural productivity, well-developed watersheds have immense potential to minimize land degradation, mitigating the adverse impact of climate change and generating several other ecosystem services (ES). Quantifying these services is quintessential in operationalizing the concept of management and decision-making relating to watershed management. The present study estimates the value of regulating (soil conservation and carbon sequestration) and supporting ES (groundwater recharge) generated by watersheds in India, and examines the factors that influence the flow of ES from watersheds. The study followed a meta-analysis approach using information from 221 watersheds in 5 major agro-climatic zones of the country. We found that the watershed generates ES to the tune of Rs 34,113 per ha, with water recharging alone accounting for 60% of it. It shows that people’s participation in the planning, implementation and management of watersheds significantly enhances ES. Macro-watersheds (³ 1000 ha) are more effective in generating ES, underscoring the need for investment in watersheds management in the semi-arid tropical regions, where problems of degradation of natural resources are more pronounced. This study suggests policies for land restoration and payment for ES to increase their flowKeywords
Carbon sequestration, ecosystem services, groundwater management, meta-analysis, participatory watershed, soil conservation.Full Text
References
- Wang, G., Mang, S., Cai, H., Liu, S., Zhang, Z., Wang, L. and Innes, J. L., Integrated watershed management: evolution, develop-ment and emerging trends. J. For. Res., 2016, 27, 967–994.
- Joshi, P. K., Jha, A. K., Wani, S. P., Sreedevi, T. K. and Shaheen, F. A., Impact of watershed program and conditions for success: a meta-analysis approach. In Global theme on agroecosystems (Report no. 46), International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAI), Hyderabad, and National Centre for Agricultural Eco-nomics and Policy Research, New Delhi, 2008.
- Wani, S. P., Anantha, K. H., Sreedevi, T, K., Sudi, R., Singh, S. N. and D’Souza, M., Assessing the environmental benefits of watershed development: evidence from the Indian semi-arid tropics. J. Sustain. Watershed Sci. Manage., 2011, 1(1), 10–20.
- IPBES, Preliminary guide regarding diverse conceptualization of multiple values of nature and its benefits, including biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services. Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany, 2015.
- Tezer, A. et al., Ecosystem services-based multi-criteria assessment for ecologically sensitive watershed management. Environ. Dev. Sustain., 2018, 22, 2431–2450.
- NAAS, Mitigating land degradation due to water erosion. Policy Paper 88, National Academy of Agricultural Sciences, New Delhi, 2017.
- De Groot, Alkemade, R. S., Braat, L. H. and Willemen, L., Chal-lenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management, and decision making. Ecol.Complex, 2010, 7(3), 260–272.
- Joshi, P. K., Jha, A. K., Wani, S. P., Joshi, L. and Shiyani, R. L., Meta-analysis to assess the impact of watershed program and peo-ple’s participation. In Comprehensive assessment of Watershed Management in Agriculture (Research Report No. 8), ICRISA and Asian Development Bank, Hyderabad, 2005.
- Ram Babu and Dhyani, B. L., Impact assessment of watershed technology in India (Chapter 15). In Impact of Agriculture: Post-Green Revolution Evidence from India, ICAR-National Institute of Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, New Delhi, India, 2005, pp. 175–186.
- Palsaniya, D. R., Singh, R., Tewari, R. K., Yadav, R. S. and Dhyani, S. K., Integrated watershed management for natural resource con-servation and livelihood security in semi-arid tropics of India. Indian J. Agric. Sci., 2012, 82(3), 241–247.
- Mondal, B. et al., Augmentation of water resources potential and cropping intensification through watershed programs. Water Environ.Res., 2018, 90(2), 101–109.
- Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G. and Grp, P., Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (reprinted from Annals of Internal Medicine). Phys. Ther., 2009, 89(9), 873–880.
- Jonsson, J. O. and Daviosdottir, B., Classification and valuation of soil ecosystem services. Agric. Syst., 2016, 145, 24–38.
- Hanson, C., Yonavjak, L., Clark, C., Minnemeyer, S., Leach, A. and Boisrobert, L., Southern Forests for the Future, World Resources Institute, Washington, DC, 2010.
- Ricke, K., Drouet, L., Caldeira, K. and Tavoni, M., Country-level social cost of carbon. Nature Climate Chang., 2018, 8, 895–900.
- Ecosystem accounts for India – report of the NCAVES project. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India, 2021, p. 76.
- Mekuria, W., Veldkamp, E., Tilahun, M. and Olschewski, R., Eco-nomic valuation of land restoration: the case of exclosures establi-shed on communal grazing lands in Tigray, Ethiopia. Land Degrad. Dev., 2011, 22, 334–344.
- MoA&FW, Plot level summary data under the cost of cultivation scheme. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Ministry of Agri-culture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India, 2018.
- CGWB, National compilation on dynamic groundwater resources of India. Central Groundwater Development Board, Ministry of Jal Shakti, GoI, 2019.
- Ziadat, F. M. and Taimeh, A. Y., Effect of rainfall intensity, slope, land use and antecedent soil moisture on soil erosion in an arid en-vironment. Land Degrad. Dev., 2013, 24, 582–590.
- Nolan, B. T., Healy, R. W., Taber, P. E., Perkins, K., Hit, K. J. and Wolock, D. M., Factors influencing groundwater recharge in the eastern United States. J. Hydrol., 2007, 332(1–2), 187–205.
- Zhang, X., Hu, M. G., Yang, H., Zhang, Z. and Zhang, K., Effects of topographic factors on runoff and soil loss in Southwest China. Catena, 2018, 160, 394–402.
- Floress, K., Akamani, K., Halvorsen, K. E., Kozich, A. T. and Daven-port, M., The role of social science in successfully implementing watershed management strategies. Contemp. Water Res. Educ., 2015, 154, 85–105.
- Selvarani, G., Maheswaran, G. and Elangovan, K., Identification of artificial recharge sites for Noyyal River Basin using GIS and re-mote sensing. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing, 2017, 45, 67–77.
- Wani, S. P., Sreedevi, T. K., Vamsidhar, T. S., Reddy, T. V. S., Venka-teshvarlu, B. and Prasad, C. S., Community watersheds for improved livelihoods through consortium approach in drought-prone rainfed areas. J. Hydrol. Res. Dev., 2008, 23, 55–77.
- Dynamic Groundwater Resources of India, Central Ground Water Board, Ministry of Water Resources, River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation, GoI, 2014.
- Das, B., Pal, S. C., Malik, S. and Chakrabortty, R., Modeling ground-water potential zones of Puruliya district, West Bengal, India using remote sensing and GIS techniques. Geol. Ecol. Landsc., 2018, 3(3), 223–237.
- Nagaraja, N., Pradhania, U., Chengappab, P. G., Basavaraja, G. and Kanwar, R., Cost effectiveness of rainwater harvesting for ground-water recharge in micro-watersheds of Kolar District of India: the case study of Thotli micro-watershed. Agric. Econ. Res. Rev., 2011, 24, 217–223.
- Burnett, K. and Wada, C. A., Optimal groundwater management when recharge is declining: a method for valuing the recharge benefitsof watershed conservation. Environ. Econ. Policy Stud., 2014, 16, 263–278.
- Farrington, Turton, J. C. and James, A. J. (eds), Participatory Water-shed Development Challenges for the Twenty–First Century, Oxford University Press, New Delhi and New York, 1999.
- Reddy, V. R., Saharawat, Y. S. and George, B., Watershed manage-ment in South Asia: a synoptic review. J. Hydrol., 2017, 551, 4–13.
- GoI, Common guidelines for watershed development projects – 2008, National Rainfed Area Authority, Planning Commission, Govern-ment of India, 2011.
- Salzman, J., Bennett, G., Carroll, N., Goldstein, A. and Jenkins, M., The global status and trends of payments for ecosystem services. Nature Sustain., 2018, 1, 136–144.
- Pirard, R., Market-based instruments for biodiversity and ecosystemservices: a lexicon. Environ. Sci. Policy, 2012, 19–20, 59–68.
- Wunder, S., Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services. Ecol. Econ., 2015, 117, 234–243.
- Kinzig, A. P., Perrings, C., Chapin, F. S., Polasky, S., Smith, V. K., Tilman, D. and Turner, B. L., Paying for ecosystem services–pro-mise and peril. Science, 2011, 334, 603–604.
- Nayak, A. K. et al., Assessment of ecosystem services of rice farms in eastern India. Ecol. Process., 2019, 8, 35.
- Gulati, A. and Rai, S. C., Cost estimation of soil erosion and nutrient loss from a watershed of the Chotanagpur Plateau, India. Curr.Sci., 2014, 107(4), 670–674.
- Sharda, V. N., Mandal, D. and Dogra, P., Assessment of cost of soil erosion and energy-saving value of soil conservation measures in India. Indian J. Soil Conserv., 2019, 47(1), 1–6.
- Wilson, M. A. and Carpenter, S. R., Economic valuation of freshwater services in the United States: 1971–1997. Ecol. Appl., 1999, 9(3), 772–783.
- Does conservation agriculture promote Sustainable intensification in the rice–wheat System of the Indo-Gangetic plains in India? Empirical evidences from on-farm studies
Abstract Views :96 |
PDF Views:66
Authors
Affiliations
1 ICAR-National Institute of Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, New Delhi 110 012, India., IN
1 ICAR-National Institute of Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, New Delhi 110 012, India., IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 124, No 10 (2023), Pagination: 1188-1193Abstract
The sustainability of rice–wheat (RW) production system in the Indo-Gangetic Plains (IGP) of India is being threatened by climate change, and land and water degradation. Conservation agriculture practices provide a nature-based solution by addressing these challenges without affecting food security. In this study, a meta-analysis framework was employed to assess the on-farm economic and environmental impacts of CA in the RW system of the Indian IGP. Results show a higher on-farm yield response of CA in wheat (+5.6%) and a slight reduction in rice yield (–0.4%) compared to conventional tillage (CT). Nevertheless, the Eastern IGP witnessed a positive rice yield (+4.3%) under CA. Carbon sequestration potential of the RW system was found to be significantly higher (+22.70%) in CA. Implementation of CA practices resulted in a substantial reduction of carbon dioxide (–18.80%) and global warming potential (–23.26%). A significant amount of water was saved following CA practices on farms (+19.78%). From an economic point of view, CA practices were found to be more cost-effective with higher net returns compared to conventional tillage in the study region. Outscaling CA represents a win-win strategy for mitigating climate change without affecting food and livelihood security in the region. Providing payment for ecosystem services and developing cost-effective technologies are critical for the outscaling of CA in the IGP.Keywords
Carbon sequestration, climate change, con-servation agriculture, food security, Rice–wheat system.Full Text
References
- Regmi, A. P. et al., Yield and soil fertility trends in a 20-year rice– rice–wheat experiment. Better Crops Int., 2003, 17(2), 30.
- Ladha, J. K. et al., How extensive are yield declines in long-term rice–wheat experiments in Asia? Field Crops Res., 2003, 81, 159– 180.
- Gupta, R. and Seth, A., A review of resource conserving technologies for sustainable management of the rice–wheat cropping systems of the Indo-Gangetic plains (IGP). Crop Prot., 2007, 26(3), 436–447.
- Samal, S. K. et al., Evaluation of long-term conservation agriculture and crop intensification in rice–wheat rotation of Indo-Gangetic Plains of South Asia: carbon dynamics and productivity. Eur. J. Agron., 2017, 90, 198–208.
- Pal, D. K., Bhattacharyya, T., Srivastava, P., Chandran, P. and Ray, S. K., Soils of the Indo-Gangetic Plains: their historical perspective and management. Curr. Sci., 2009, 96(9), 1193–1202.
- Sekar, I. and Pal, S., Rice and wheat crop productivity in the Indo-Gangetic Plains of India: changing pattern of growth and future strategies. Indian J. Agric. Econ., 2012, 67(2), 1–15.
- Gathala, M. K. et al., Optimizing intensive cereal-based cropping systems addressing current and future drivers of agricultural change in the northwestern Indo-Gangetic Plains of India. Agric., Ecosyst. Environ., 2013, 177, 85–97.
- Kumar, P. et al., Economic analysis of total factor productivity of crop sector in Indo-Gangetic Plain of India by district and region. Agricultural Economics Research Report, Indian Agricultural Re-search Institute, New Delhi, India, 2002, No. 2.
- Bhattacharyya, R., Tuti, M. D., Bisht, J. K., Bhatt, J. C. and Gupta, H. S., Conservation tillage and fertilization impact on soil aggrega-tion and carbon pools in the Indian Himalayas under an irrigated rice–wheat rotation. Soil Sci., 2012, 177(3), 218–228.
- Ghimire, R., Adhikari, K. R., Chen, Z. S., Shah, S. C. and Dahal, K. R., Soil organic carbon sequestration as affected by tillage, crop residue, and nitrogen application in rice–wheat rotation system. Paddy Water Environ., 2012, 10(2), 95–102.
- Erenstein, O. and Laxmi, V., Zero tillage impacts in India’s rice– wheat systems: a review. Soil Till. Res., 2008, 100(1–2), 1–14.
- Aryal, J. P., Sapkota, T. B., Jat, M. L. and Bishnoi, D. K., On-farm economic and environmental impact of zero-tillage wheat: a case of North-West India. Exp. Agric., 2015, 51(1), 1–16.
- Humphreys, E., Kukal, S. S., Christen, E. W., Hira, G. S. and Sharma, R. K., Halting the groundwater decline in north-west India – which crop technologies will be winners? Adv. Agron., 2010, 109, 155–217.
- Sapkota, T. B., Jat, M. L., Aryal, J. P., Jat, R. K. and Khatri-Chhetri, A., Climate change adaptation, greenhouse gas mitigation and eco-nomic profitability of conservation agriculture: some examples from cereal systems of Indo-Gangetic Plains. J. Integr. Agric., 2015, 14, 1524–1533.
- Godfray, H. C. J. and Garnett, T., Food security and sustainable intensi-fication. Philos. Trans. R. Soc., London, Ser. B, 2014, 369(1639), 1–10.
- FAO, What is conservation agriculture, Food and Agricultural Organization, Rome, Italy, 2014; http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/1a.html
- Hobbs, P. R., Sayre, K. and Gupta, R., The role of conservation ag-riculture in sustainable agriculture. Philos. Trans. R. Soc., London, Ser. B, 2008, 363(1491), 543–555.
- Kumara, K. T. M., Kandpal, A. and Pal, S., Determinants and im-pacts of conservation agriculture in South Asia: a meta-analysis of the evidences. Indian J. Agric. Econ., 2019, 74, 311–320.
- Kumara, T. K., Kandpal, A. and Pal, S., A meta-analysis of eco-nomic and environmental benefits of conservation agriculture in South Asia. J. Environ. Manage., 2020, 269, 110773.
- Erenstein, O., Conservation agriculture-based technologies and the political economy: lessons from South Asia. In Contested Agronomy, Routledge, London, 2012, pp. 59–75.
- Kumar, V., Saharawat, Y. S., Gathala, M. K., Jat, A. S., Singh, S. K., Chaudhary, N. and Jat, M. L., Effect of different tillage and seeding methods on energy use efficiency and productivity of wheat in the Indo-Gangetic Plains. Field Crops Res., 2013, 142, 1–8.
- Kassam, A., Friedrich, T. and Derpsch, R., Global spread of con-servation agriculture. Int. J. Environ. Stud., 2019, 76(1), 29–51.
- Pittelkow, C. M. et al., Productivity limits and potentials of the principles of conservation agriculture. Nature, 2015, 517(7534), 365–368.
- Hedges, L. V. and Gurevitch, J., The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology, 1999, 80, 1150–1156; https://doi. org/10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:TMAORR]2.0.CO;2
- Mehlka, R. S., Verma, J. K., Gupta, R. K. and Hobbs, P. R., Stagnation in the productivity of wheat in the Indo-Gangetic Plains: zero-till-seed-cum-fertilizer drill as an integrated soluction (No. CIMMYT), 2000.
- Jat, M. L., Gathala, M. K., Saharawat, Y. S., Ladha, J. K. and Singh, Y., Conservation agriculture in intensive rice–wheat rotation of western Indo-Gangetic Plains: effect on crop physiology, yield, water productivity and economic profitability, 2019.
- Sidhu, H. S., Humphreys, E., Dhillon, S. S., Blackwell, J. and Bector, V., The Happy Seeder enables direct drilling of wheat into rice stubble. Aust. J. Exp. Agric., 2007, 47(7), 844–854.
- Sidhu, H. S., Singh, M., Singh, Y., Blackwell, J., Singh, V. and Gupta, N., Machinery development for crop residue management under direct drilling. In Fifth World Congress on Conservation Agriculture, Brisbane, Australia, 2011.
- Devkota, M., Devkota, K. P., Acharya, S. and McDonald, A. J., In-creasing profitability, yields and yield stability through sustainable crop establishment practices in the rice–wheat systems of Nepal. Agric. Syst., 2019, 173, 414–423.
- Magar, S. T., Timsina, J., Devkota, K. P., Weili, L. and Rajbhan-dari, N., Conservation agriculture for increasing productivity, pro-fitability and water productivity in rice–wheat system of the East-ern Gangetic Plain. Environ. Challeng., 2022, 7, 100468.
- Al‐Kaisi, M. M. and Yin, X., Tillage and crop residue effects on soil carbon and carbon dioxide emission in corn–soybean rotations. J. Environ. Qual., 2005, 34(2), 437–445.
- Singh, Y., Crop residue management for improving soil and crop productivity. In Resource Conserving Techniques in Crop Produc-tion (eds Sharma, A. R. and Behera, U. K.), Scientific Publishers, India, 2011, pp. 166–189.
- West, T. O. and Marland, G., Net carbon flux from agricultural ecosystems: methodology for full carbon cycle analyses. Environ. Pollut., 2002, 116(3), 439–444.
- Lal, R., Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change. Geo-derma, 2004, 123(1–2), 1–22.
- La Scala Jr., N., Lopes, A., Spokas, K., Bolonhezi, D., Archer, D. W. and Reicosky, D. C., Short-term temporal changes of soil car-bon losses after tillage described by a first-order decay model. Soil Till. Res., 2008, 99(1), 108–118.
- Feng, J., Li, F., Zhou, X., Xu, C., Ji, L., Chen, Z. and Fang, F., Im-pact of agronomy practices on the effects of reduced tillage systems on CH4 and N2O emissions from agricultural fields: a global meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 2018, 13, 1–17.
- Mangalassery, S., Sjogersten, S., Sparkes, D. L., Sturrock, C. J., Craigon, J. and Mooney, S. J., To what extent can zero tillage lead to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from temperate soils? Sci. Rep., 2014, 4, 1–8.
- FAO, The State of the World’s Land and Water Resources for Food and Agriculture (SOLAW): Managing Systems at Risk. Food and Agri-culture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy and Earthscan, London, UK, 2011; http://www.fao.org/docrep/017/i1688e/i1688e. pdf
- Institute of Mechanical Engineers, Global Food Report: waste not, want not, 2013; https://www.imeche.org/docs/default-source/reports/ Global_Food_Report.pdf
- Parihar, C. M. et al., Conservation agriculture in irrigated intensive maize-based systems of north-western India: effects on crop yields, water productivity and economic profitability. Field Crops Res., 2016, 193, 104–116.
- Jat, M. L., Gathala, M. K., Saharawat, Y. S., Tetarwal, J. P. and Gupta, R., Double no-till and permanent raised beds in maize–wheat rotation of north-western Indo-Gangetic Plains of India: effects on crop yields, water productivity, profitability and soil physical prop-erties. Field Crops Res., 2013, 149, 291–299.
- Siddique, K. H. et al., Innovations in agronomy for food legumes. a review. Agron. Sustain. Dev., 2012, 32(1), 45–64.