The document discusses India's Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) system and the recent farm bills that were passed. It provides background on the APMC system and identifies issues like limited competition and high fees. The new bills aim to facilitate barrier-free trade outside APMC markets and promote contract farming. However, farmers are protesting lack of consultation and fears that the MSP system will be dismantled, leaving them vulnerable to corporate control with no price protections. While more market options may benefit some, many farmers lack assurances for their future livelihoods and India's food security.

1. APMC- Agricultural Produce
Market Committee Bill 2020
Presented by :- Harsh Kumar

2. What is APMC?
• Agricultural markets in India are mainly regulated by
state Agriculture Produce Marketing Committee
(APMC) laws. APMCs were set up with the objective of
ensuring fair trade between buyers and sellers for
effective price discovery of farmers’ produce.
• APMCs can:
• Regulate the trade of farmers’ produce by providing
licenses to buyers, commission agents, and private
markets,
• Levy market fees or any other charges on such trade,
and provide necessary infrastructure within their
markets to facilitate the trade.

3. Issues with the APMCs
• The Standing Committee on Agriculture
(2018-19) identified some issues includes: (i)
most APMCs have a limited number of
traders operating, which leads to
cartelization and reduces competition, and
(ii) undue deductions in the form of
commission charges and market fees.
• Traders, commission agents, and other
functionaries organise themselves into
associations, which do not allow easy entry
of new persons into market yards, stifling
competition.

4. Conti…….
• The Acts are highly restrictive in promotion of
multiple channels of marketing (such as more
buyers, private markets, direct sale to
businesses and retail consumers, and online
transactions) and competition in the system.
• During 2017-18, the central government
released the model APMC and contract
farming Acts to allow restriction-free trade of
farmers’ produce, promote competition
through multiple marketing channels, and
promote farming under pre-agreed contracts.

5. Why were the ordinances promulgated?
• The Ordinances collectively seek to-
• facilitate barrier-free trade of farmers’ produce
outside the markets notified under the various
state APMC laws
• define a framework for contract farming and
• impose stock limits on agricultural produce only
if there is a sharp increase in retail prices
• The three Ordinances together aim to increase
opportunities for farmers to enter long term sale
contracts, increase the availability of buyers, and
permits buyers to purchase farm produce in
bulk.

6. CAUSES OF NATIONWIDE DISSENT
• (1) NO CONSULTATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS
• The attempt to pass the Bills without proper
consultation adds to the mistrust among various
stakeholders including State governments.
• The ruling government could have waited for the
Parliament session, held discussions with all political
parties before arriving at a decision.
• Farmer organisations see these Bills as an attempt
to weaken the APMCs and eventual withdrawal of
the Minimum Support Prices (MSP).

7. (2) ISSUE OVER TRADE AND MSP GUARANTEE
• While farmers are protesting against all three ordinances,
their objections are mostly against the provisions of the
first.
• Their concerns are mainly about sections relating to
“trade area”, “trader”, “dispute resolution” and “market
fee” in the first ordinance.
• In effect, existing mandis established under APMC Acts
have been excluded from the definition of trade area
under the new legislation.
• According to the ordinance, any trader with a PAN card
can buy the farmers’ produce in the trade area.
• In the present mandi system, arhatiyas (commission
agents) have to get a licence to trade in a mandi.
• Critics view the dismantling of the monopoly of the
APMCs as a sign of ending the assured procurement of
food grains at minimum support prices (MSP). To the
Centre’s ‘one nation, one market’ call, critics have sought
‘one nation, one MSP’.

8. (3) LEGACY CONCERNS
• The Bills gives no assurance to the poor, small and
marginal farmers of India (constituting over 85 per
cent of India’s farmers) of protection of their
interests, their livelihoods, and their future.
• Critics argue that such legislation will let the farmers
falling into the clutches of the monopolistic big
corporates.
• Lofty recommendations have been made several
times in the past, including by the Swaminathan
Committee, which suggested the removal of the
mandi tax, creation of a single market and facilitating
contract farming
• However, no efforts have taken place for
implementing these basic reforms over the years.

9. (4) FEAR OF FOOD INSECURITY
• Punjab CM, on the easing of regulation of food
items, said, it would lead to exporters, processors
and traders hoarding farm produce during the
harvest season, when prices are generally lower,
and releasing it later when prices increase.This
could undermine food security since the States
would have no information about the availability of
stocks within the State

10. WHAT ARE THE PROMISING FEATURES OF
THESE BILLS?
• The new legislations would create an ecosystem
where farmers and traders would enjoy the freedom
of choice in the sale and purchase of agri-produce.
• It would also promote barrier-free interstate or
intrastate trade and commerce outside the physical
premises of markets notified under the state
agricultural produce marketing legislations.
• The bills would also open up more choices for
farmers, reduce marketing costs and help them in
getting better prices.
• At the same time, it would also help farmers of
regions with surplus produce to get better prices and
consumers of regions with shortages, lower prices.

11. Conti…..
• Interestingly, the bill aims for ‘one india , one
agriculture market’ and also creates additional
trading opportunities outside the APMC market
yards to help farmers get remunerative prices due
to the additional competition.
• The new laws are not shutting down APMC
mandis, nor are they implying that MSPS will not
be functional.
• This would supplement the existing minimum
support price (MSP) procurement system, which
also provides a stable income to farmers

12. STILL, WHY ARE THE FARMERS FUMING?
• There has been bipartisan consensus over the last
two decades or so—both the UPA and the NDA
governments have tried and failed to convince state
governments to reform APMC Acts, notwithstanding
periodic manifesto promises and model APMC Acts.
• They failed with all approaches, trying to link
financial support to agriculture based on reforms.
The present crisis created the perfect window to
usher in these transformative reforms.
• People on both sides of the divide are saturated with
such reformative measures and have arrived at the
commonsensical benefits that would be ushered in
as well as the risks.

13. THANK YOU…..
• References.
• https://frontline.thehindu.com/cover-
story/article31951413.ece
• https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/explainer-why-
are-the-agriculture-bills-being-
opposed/article32618641.ece
• https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/india-news-
the-farm-bills-and-quandary/360640
• https://www.prsindia.org/billtrack/farmers-produce-
trade-and-commerce-promotion-and-facilitation-bill-2020

14. • MY SLIDESHARE ACCOUNT:-
https://www.slideshare.net/HarshSah4