Why is it in the News?

Capping consumption of urea and DAP to correct worsening plant nutrient imbalance is likely to be on the priority list of the government post the Lok Sabha polls.

What is Meant by the Term "Balanced Fertilization"?

• Fertilisers are basically food for crops, containing nutrients necessary for plant growth and grain yields.
• Balanced fertilisation means supplying these primary (N, phosphorus-P, and potassium-K), secondary (sulphur-S, calcium, magnesium), and micro (iron, zinc, copper, manganese, boron, molybdenum) nutrients in the right proportion, based on soil type and the crop’s own requirement at different growth stages.

What is a Nutrient-based Subsidy?

• Nutrient-based subsidy (NBS) is a system started in 2010 to help farmers use the right amount of nutrients in fertilizers.
• Instead of giving a subsidy for each type of fertilizer, the government decided to give subsidies based on nutrients like Nitrogen (N), Phosphorus (P), Potassium (K), and Sulfur (S) in the fertilizers.
• The idea was to encourage farmers to use fertilizers with a balanced mix of nutrients, instead of just focusing on certain types like urea, DAP, and MOP.
  • These balanced fertilizers contain a mix of N, P, K, S, and other nutrients in the right amounts.
• At first, this plan seemed to work. Between 2010 and 2012, farmers started using more balanced fertilizers and less of the ones with just one or two nutrients.
  • But there was a problem: urea, which is heavily used by farmers, was not included in this plan.
• Since the government controlled the price of urea and only went up a little bit after the NBS was introduced, farmers kept using it more and more.
• This means that even though the NBS helped with other fertilizers, it didn't do much to reduce the use of urea.

Challenges:

• The challenges arise from recent changes in fertilizer pricing and consumption patterns.
• Earlier, companies set prices for non-urea fertilizers, with the government providing subsidies based on their nutrient content.
  • However, in the past few years, even non-urea fertilizers have come under price control, especially since January 2024, possibly due to upcoming elections.
• This shift has led to imbalances in nutrient usage.
  • For example, the current price of DAP is lower than certain NPKS complex fertilizers, even though it contains less nitrogen and phosphorus.
• As a result, farmers tend to overuse DAP, similar to urea. On the other hand, the price of MOP does not incentivize its use, leading to its reduced incorporation into fertilizers, despite its importance for crop immunity and nitrogen uptake.
• To address these issues, it's crucial to establish a proper price hierarchy among non-urea fertilizers.
• DAP should be priced highest, followed by complexes, with MOP priced the lowest. Additionally, DAP usage should be limited to rice and wheat, while other crops can fulfil their phosphorus needs through complexes and SSP.
• Improving the acceptability of SSP, despite its lower price, can be achieved by marketing it in granular form, which is less prone to adulteration and ensures a slower release of phosphorus without drift during application.