JALANDHAR: In a direct challenge to the notion that farmers burn stubble out of defiance, a new academic study argues that the practice is a direct result of systemic failures within India’s agricultural marketing structure. This comes as the Supreme Court suggested penalizing farmers to curb the air pollution menace linked to stubble burning.
The study, titled “Governmentality and Marketing System Failure: The Case of Stubble Burning and Climate Change in Neoliberal India,” was published in the US-based Journal of Macromarketing. Authored by Sujit Raghunathrao Jagadale, Professor of Rural Marketing at IIM-Amritsar, and former IIM post-doctoral researcher Javed M Shaikh, the research cautions against penalizing farmers without addressing the economic and social realities on the ground.
A System, Not a Choice
Based on in-depth interviews in Punjab, the study contends that stubble burning is not an ecological lapse or an act of defiance. Instead, it is the outcome of a distorted system where farmers feel they are “victims of exploitative exchange processes.” The authors highlight how government policies, specifically the Minimum Support Price (MSP) system, have locked farmers into a rigid wheat-rice cycle. While MSP offers security, it actively discourages crop diversification, leaving farmers with a very short window between harvests to clear their fields. In this context, burning becomes the “cheapest and fastest option.”
The Burden of Precarity
The study notes that sustainable alternatives, such as converting stubble into fodder or pellets, are often too costly and time-consuming for farmers. This is particularly true for small and marginal farmers, who operate in a state of “marginalized majority,” facing chronic debt and a lack of access to sustainable technologies. The role of arhtiyas (commission agents) as both crop mediators and informal moneylenders further deepens this precarity, leaving farmers with limited choices and little agency.
Recommendations for a Way Forward
The research offers a multi-pronged set of recommendations that shift the focus from punishment to structural reform. It calls for creating viable markets for stubble-based products (packaging, textiles, biofuel), providing assured prices for stubble, and incentivizing industries to use these products. Other suggestions include making subsidized machinery accessible, building apps to connect farmers with stubble buyers, and providing cash support for transport.
The authors conclude that stubble burning is “a reflection of how policies and markets corner farmers into decisions that harm both them and society.” The study argues that without addressing these systemic issues, criminalizing farmers will not solve the underlying problem.