COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT

Concern among state legislators about rural development and rural land use is not new. In many states, agriculture remains an important feature of the economic, cultural, and political landscape. As rural incomes, populations, and prosperity have declined, states have adopted a variety of policies in response. Rural land and development policies in most states, however, are often more symbolic than influential, poorly integrated, and grossly misguided (Audirac, 1997). For rural areas, very few states mandate or facilitate rural comprehensive planning, often due to opposition from rural legislators. Farmlands (cropland and grazing land) constitute the largest share of land use by acreage in the country and have an even higher share in the rural areas. Although a relatively smaller and decreasing part of the overall economy, farmland uses employ 21 percent of the nation’s workforce (including processing, wholesale and retail trade of farming goods) and about 7 percent of nation’s workforce in production . Therefore, focusing planning on urban land use alone is unfortunate, because rural areas, perhaps even more than their urban counterparts, have much to gain from comprehensive planning. 

 In today’s decentralized economy, urban and rural economies are no longer dichotomous. Metropolitan regions are growing faster in land area than in their population and put immense pressure on exurban, mostly rural land for development . At the same time, remote rural areas face population loss due to more efficient, mechanized tools of farming and continued growth in urban areas as a result of agglomeration economies. Spatial variations in regional land use patterns are becoming more continuous. However, this article uses a broader urban-rural distinction characterized by different land uses and discusses policy alternatives for states to achieve a more sustainable approach to land use. . We also discuss the basic economic rationale for more focused land use policy in rural areas. The existing array of state programs that address rural land use and development is long and varied. Popular programs include tax relief (such as farm tax assessment programs), agricultural districts, right-tofarm laws, agricultural zoning, purchase and transfer of development rights, small town economic development programs, and urban growth management. In general, these programs have three primary objectives: farmland preservation, urban growth containment, and small town economic development. While each of these various programs has its technical merits, the objectives of each are also based on significant fallacies regarding conservation versus preservation, the threat of urban growth, and the most effective approaches to economic development.

FARMLANDS SHOULD BE CONSERVED NOT PRESERVED:

    Though farmland conservation and preservation are often used interchangeably, there is a subtle distinction. To preserve means to maintain in a given state; to conserve is to use parsimoniously. For several reasons, the latter is a better foundation for farmland policy. First, there is no compelling evidence of farmland shortage. Commodity prices are low and falling and farmland values are doing the same. The causes of these trends are obvious: food constitutes a falling share of rising incomes and farmland productivity continues to rise (Browne et. al., 1992). These trends suggest a need for less, not more, farmland. Second, the opportunity cost of farmland is high. Market signals suggest that farmland has considerably higher value in urban use, if such were demanded. The conservation argument is based on two caveats to the economic rationale.

 There are good reasons to believe that land price signals are distorted. Land may be overvalued in urban use because the federal government subsidizes home ownership and highway construction, while local governments under price urban infrastructure and provide tax concessions for commercial and industrial development . Additionally, these distortions in relative prices between farm and urban land are small compared to the distortions in relative prices between farmland and other competing uses that are either hard to quantify or provide little incentive to private uses. Farmland, for example, is the greatest consumer of wetlands that provide invaluable environmental services yet command almost nothing in the marketplace. Farmland also consumes vast acres of forests, prairies, floodplains, and other natural habitats that provide important environmental services but little return to land owners . Further, farmlands generate positive externalizes such as scenic views, biodiversity, cultural heritage and diversified local economies that are harder to quantify. Rising farmland productivity and opportunity costs suggests that we should preserve the option to farm while at the same time encouraging land owners to provide environmental services. 

Praadhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana (PMKSY).

Har Khet ko Pani "Prime Minister Krishi Sinchayee Yojana"

Government of India is committed to accord high priority to water conservation and its management. To this effect Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana (PMKSY) has been formulated with the vision of extending the coverage of irrigation 'Har Khet ko pani' and improving water use efficiency 'More crop per drop' in a focused manner with end to end solution on source creation, distribution, management, field application and extension activities.

Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana (PKVY).

The Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana (PKVY), an initiative to promote organic farming in the country, was launched by the NDA government in 2015.According to the scheme, farmers will be encouraged to form groups or clusters and take to organic farming methods over large areas in the country.

The aim is to form 10,000 clusters over the next three years and bring about five lakh acres of agricultural area under organic farming. The government also intends to cover the certification costs and promote organic farming through the use of traditional resources.

To avail the scheme, each cluster or group must have 50 farmers willing to take up organic farming under the PKVY and possess a total area of at least 50 acres. Each farmer enrolling in the scheme will be provided INR 20,000 per acre by the government spread over three years time.

Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY).

Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) is the government sponsored crop insurance scheme that integrates multiple stakeholders on a single platform.

Objectives

1. To provide insurance coverage and financial support to the farmers in the event of failure of any of the notified crop as a result of natural calamities, pests & diseases.

2. To stabilise the income of farmers to ensure their continuance in farming.

3. To encourage farmers to adopt innovative and modern agricultural practices.

4. To ensure flow of credit to the agriculture sector.

Gramin Bhandaran Yojna.

Objective of this Scheme:

• Create scientific storage capacity with allied facilities in rural areas.
• To meet the requirements of farmers for storing farm produce, processed farm produce and agricultural inputs.
• Promotion of grading, standardization and quality control of agricultural produce to improve their marketability.
• Prevent distress sale immediately after harvest by providing the facility of pledge financing and marketing credit by strengthening agricultural marketing infrastructure in the country.

Livestock insurance Scheme

This scheme aims to provide protection mechanism to the farmers and cattle rearers against any eventual loss of their animals due to death and to demonstrate the benefit of the insurance of livestock to the people and popularize it with the ultimate goal of attaining qualitative improvement in livestock and their products.

Gramin Bhandaran Yojna.

Objective of this Scheme:

• Create scientific storage capacity with allied facilities in rural areas.
• To meet the requirements of farmers for storing farm produce, processed farm produce and agricultural inputs.
• Promotion of grading, standardization and quality control of agricultural produce to improve their marketability.
• Prevent distress sale immediately after harvest by providing the facility of pledge financing and marketing credit by strengthening agricultural marketing infrastructure in the country.

Livestock insurance Scheme.

This scheme aims to provide protection mechanism to the farmers and cattle rearers against any eventual loss of their animals due to death and to demonstrate the benefit of the insurance of livestock to the people and popularize it with the ultimate goal of attaining qualitative improvement in livestock and their products.

EXTENSION OF NEW AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT.

Extension is more than it used to be. Its function and tasks are increasingly assumed by multiple public and private organizations. In developed countries, and in countries where extension reform has been pursued, pluralistic involvement of extension providers now exists - including non-profit non-governmental organizations (NGOs), for-profit private companies, rural producer organizations (RPOs), private advisers, as well as national, state and municipal extension services.

The complexity of sources and supply of extension also places greater demands on extension (FAO/World Bank 2001; Rivera et al. 2001; Alex et al. 2002; Qamar 2001; Berdegue 2002; Qamar 2002, World Bank 2002). In high-income as well as middle- and low-income countries, governments are being pressured to reform and reprioritize public sector agricultural productivity programmes and confront related issues, such as food security, the management of natural resources, rural development, the environment, and health. Institutions that provide extension are important players in efforts to respond to these critical issues. Integrating food security issues into agricultural research is also increasingly a concern (Earl et al. 2001). FAO is developing a Technology for Agriculture (TECA) data system, which seeks to promote information on appropriate technologies from a global platform and thereby advance technological change. This evolving Web-based system may be useful particularly in selecting appropriate technologies for smallscale and marginal farming units²².

National government's role will not be understood in the same way in every country and will differ even when countries employ similar strategies. Major differences exist in countries within the same geographic region, or even within the same social indicator range, viz. high-income, middle-income and low-income countries. Nonetheless, there are a number of roles that governments will likely be challenged to perform:(1) public policy formulation and implementation, (2) emerging concerns, both agriculturerelated and non-agricultural-including environment impact (Rivera and Alex 2003).

Agricultural extension reform requires policy vision and determination, and a nationwide strategy that can be implemented. Whether to decentralize and devolve, totally privatize or institute contractual arrangements with the private sector (including venture capital companies, non-governmental organizations, rural producer organizations, and extension advisery service firms), or promote end-user financing (or co-financing) of extension - these are country-specific questions requiring systematic analysis and preparation, gradual change, system coordination and system oversight.

In putting together a strategy for extension and information services, it will be useful to refer to the diversified strategies and the emerging consensus on lessons learned mentioned in section I of this paper, to the proposals regarding the design and implementation of communication for rural development cited in section II, and also to the considerations in section III regarding food security.

New vision of rural development.

A new vision of rural development must extend beyond agriculture, recognizing the income potential and economic importance of diversified interests such as on-farm non-agricultural activities, ecotourism, cottage industries and off-farm activities. Physical infrastructure and also social infrastructure such as recreational activities are needed.

A multisectoral extension network offers an inclusive approach to rural development. It brings together agricultural extension providers, promotes communication for rural development, and establishes rural extension activities for non-agricultural populations in rural areas as well as an agricultural extension/communication strategy. In all cases where nationally integrated food security systems are being advanced, multiple sectors are encouraged to work collaboratively to combat food insecurity and generate income²⁴.

An integrated food security network consists of a range of different sectors, including international organization projects, involving different agencies and organizations in the network. For example, in some countries along with the ministries of agriculture and science and technology, the ministries of transportation, public works, health and education may be involved. Each country will likely have a diverse set of national and transnational companies and third-sector organizations that may be part of a multisectoral network for public sector extension development.

An insidious problem is how to reverse the topdown attitude of extension agents and managers toward farmer groups in need of food security. Some of them hold the view that resource poor farmers are ignorant and incapable of managing production technologies and financial resources. These managers and extension agents think that as professionals they have the answers to all the farmers' problems. Experience and findings in the literature show neither perception to be true. New attitudes are required if development is to move forward on an equitable basis (Holding-Anyonge 2002).

A further challenge is to strengthen the human resource capacity of poor farmers' organizations, as well as the self-help group capacities that enable them to access useful extension services. There is often inexperienced governance and leadership in many of the resourcepoor farmer groups. Some resourcepoor farmer groups are led by people who perceive the group as an avenue for accessing financial resources from support organizations, while in some cases it is for political ambitions. These are the most troublesome in that they inhibit the farmers' ability to establish an institutional capacity for self development. Weak or inappropriate leadership in farmer groups also inhibits their capacities to address their needs, e.g., by failing to mobilize their resources to reasonable levels before seeking external support. Weak leadership tends to create dependency (McKone 1990; Wollenberg et al. 2002).

A related challenge is to help poor farmers gain access to capital either through savings or credit for agricultural production or through micro-enterprise development, whether agricultural (Steele 2003) or non-agricultural. This is especially true for women's organizations. New credit arrangements and financial mechanisms are needed to assist people who live below the poverty line. Farmers' groups and farmer organizations provide an important channel for dialogue with service providers. Non-farm community groups also deserve attention.

Actions to support food security and, where appropriate the SPFS, will require (a) strengthening the management and programme development skills of public sector agricultural extension staff; (b) developing both the ongoing services and collaboration with the private sector; (c) appraising the private sector's potential to contribute to agricultural extension delivery services for productivity purposes and to involve the various entities in that sector in calculated costbeneficial agricultural extension delivery services; and (d) training national, district and local agricultural extension staff in the skills required to assist in related projects, such as SPFS.

Review of institutional constraints will likely identify multiple reform needs: structural, fiscal, managerial and field operations. Sustainable, autonomous farmer group capacities, such as those developed in Mali (Bingen 1998) and being developed in Uganda (Abrew 2003), are needed to empower farmers to access government, non-government organizations (NGOs) and private sector services and to take innovative initiatives on their own.

New vision of food security

There is no single solution to what needs to be done to serve poor and food insecure populations. Some experts emphasize growth and greater production. Other experts fear overproduction and price slumps, and focus more on quality and marketing. Broadbased and sustained growth will be essential to reduce poverty, according to the World Bank (2003a). If action is not taken to ensure proper rural livelihoods, the cities will be further swamped with unprepared poor people seeking a better way of life.

Assisting rural populations to enhance agricultural productivity helps, but it is not sufficient. There is also the need to prepare farmers in non-farmrelated micro-enterprise development. Rural education and extension for health and nutrition require cooperation of various services. HIV/AIDS is a particularly troubling phenomenon (Qamar 2002). It should not be forgotten that in much of Africa but also elsewhere the HIV/AIDS epidemic and other diseases have affected large numbers of rural households. When they survive, the people in these households devote much of their time to just staying alive. What can be done that is not already being done?

Clearly agricultural enterprise represents only one pathway to rural development. Thus, rural extension activities are needed in addition to agricultural extension to serve non-agricultural clientele. The State of Food and Agriculture 2000 (FAO 2002) asserts:

"Reducing poverty and food insecurity involves enhancement of agricultural productivity and production, and income generation among producers as well as among those in rural areas who do not work the land. Institutions are the structuring features that command access of people to assets, to voice, and to power over their own lives, and that regulate competing claims to limited resources. Agricultural and rural extension (communication) programmes are needed to reach out to those in rural areas who often enough constitute the majority population. It is fundamental for government to address those institutional, governance and politico-economic factors that tend to exclude individuals and population groups from progress. "