Reforming Fertiliser Subsidy in India

Syllabus: Issues related to farm subsidies and MSP

Context

  • Economists argue for urgent restructuring of India’s fertiliser subsidy amid broader economic reforms.
  • Rising fiscal burden and environmental stress have intensified reform debates.

What is Fertiliser Subsidy?

  • Government compensates manufacturers for the gap between production/import cost and retail prices.
  • Keeps fertilisers, especially urea, artificially cheap for farmers.
  • Intended to support food security, but has become highly distortionary.

Current Status and Trends

  • Fertiliser subsidy is the second-largest Union Budget subsidy, after food subsidy.
  • Expected to touch around ₹2 lakh crore in FY26.
  • Urea absorbs nearly two-thirds of total subsidy expenditure.
  • Urea sold at ₹242 per 45-kg bag, among the lowest globally.
  • High import dependence: 78% natural gas, 90% phosphatic fertilisers, almost 100% potash.
  • Nutrient imbalance worsened; N:P:K ratio at 10.9:4.4:1, far from recommended 4:2:1.

Why Subsidy is Needed

  • Food security: Enabled Green Revolution and rapid cereal output expansion.
  • Fertiliser–grain response ratio was 1:10 in the 1970s, ensuring self-sufficiency.
  • Small and marginal farmers dominate agriculture and need protection from price volatility.
  • Sudden deregulation would raise input costs and reduce fertiliser use.
  • Subsidy ensures affordable cultivation, especially in rain-fed regions.
  • Helps contain food inflation by moderating production costs.
  • Acts as risk buffer amid monsoon variability and climate uncertainty.

Key Challenges

  • Low nutrient use efficiency; only 35–40% nitrogen absorbed by crops.
  • Excess use leads to soil degradation and groundwater nitrate pollution.
  • Productivity gains have stagnated despite rising fertiliser consumption.
  • Fertiliser–grain response ratio declined to around 1:2.7 by 2015.
  • Leakages and diversion prevalent due to price-controlled urea.
  • Around 20–25% urea diverted to industries or smuggled.
  • Heavy imports create fiscal and geopolitical vulnerabilities.

Way Forward

  • Gradual price decontrol with income support, shifting towards direct transfers.
  • Bring urea under Nutrient-Based Subsidy (NBS) framework.
  • Correct nutrient imbalance without increasing total subsidy burden.
  • Use Agri Stack and digital databases for precise targeting.
  • Promote balanced and precision farming to improve efficiency.
  • Expand PoS-based delivery and e-vouchers to curb diversion.

Conclusion

  • Fertiliser subsidy reform must be smarter, greener, and equitable, not withdrawal-driven.
  • Correct pricing can save around ₹40,000 crore annually.
  • Current macroeconomic stability offers a timely window for reform.

This will close in 0 seconds

Scroll to Top