India’s Natural Farming Mission is facing challenges just months after its certification guidelines were released. Regional councils (RCs), responsible for certifying natural farming practices, report being under immense pressure to register thousands of farmers rapidly. This pressure comes with expectations to absorb certification costs, raising concerns about the quality and credibility of the process.
Recently, a government circular mandated that RCs must register between 5,000 and 10,000 farmers under natural or organic farming within six months. These targets include farmers not part of any existing government scheme. The circular warned that failure to meet these numbers could lead to the RCs’ authorisation being reviewed or even cancelled. This directive followed shortly after the certification framework itself was finalised in August. Reports indicate that the National Centre of Organic and Natural Farming (NCONF) has been urging RCs to increase farmer registrations.
Regional councils play a crucial role in the government’s Participatory Guarantee System (PGS) India. This system relies on peer review and local verification rather than third-party audits. RCs are tasked with mobilising farmers, checking their practices, and issuing certification. They also provide training and help connect farmers to markets.
However, many RCs find the imposed targets unrealistic. They describe natural farming certification as a time-consuming process that builds trust and requires thorough fieldwork. “There was a whole frenzy about getting some 50,000 farmers onboarded a few months ago,” shared Vishalakshi Padmanabham of the Sixteen Doddi Trust RC. “We used to receive threatening messages on the RCs’ WhatsApp group saying that if councils did not contribute at least 5,000 farmers to the database, they would be removed as RCs.” Her organisation opted out of this drive, arguing that rushing the process would damage its integrity.
Certification involves training farmers, ensuring they understand the standards, conducting field inspections, and facilitating peer appraisals. This takes significant time and effort. Rahul Kachhad, director of the Akhil Gujarat Vikas Trust RC, highlighted this, stating, “To ask us to certify farmers takes a microsecond, but at the field level it requires a lot of work.”
Adding to the strain, many RCs report a lack of financial support. While the National Mission on Natural Farming (NMNF) has a significant budget, funds are not reaching the RCs as expected. The December directive specifically targets non-scheme farmers, meaning RCs must cover the costs of field verification, travel, and documentation themselves. These costs can be substantial, estimated at Rs 500 to Rs 700 per farmer annually. Without government financial backing, many smaller organisations struggle to sustain these expenses, especially when working with small and marginal farmers.
Francis Macwan, director of Shrushti Organics RC, noted that his organisation incurred a loss of Rs 4.5 lakh last year while continuing certification work. “Even a target of 5,000 is difficult for us,” he said, adding that non-profits cannot indefinitely cover these costs.
Experts and senior practitioners have also raised alarms. A letter signed by 16 prominent individuals, including Padma Shri awardees and scientists, warned that the current implementation risks undermining the integrity of the natural farming certification system. They expressed concern that certificates might be issued without adequate verification, potentially harming consumer trust and encouraging shortcuts.
The concerns highlight a disconnect between the programme’s ambitious targets and the practical realities of implementing a trust-based certification system on the ground. Ensuring the credibility of natural farming requires adequate time, resources, and a focus on genuine practice rather than just numbers.