On fertiliser, Centre and states must align policy

📌 Summary:

• Context: PM Modi has urged farmers to cut chemical-fertiliser use 25-50% to conserve forex and protect soil; but UP, MP and Maharashtra have moved in the opposite direction
• Trigger event: These states have barred manufacturers of subsidised fertilisers (urea, DAP) from selling non-subsidised nutrient products — bio-fertilisers, nano-fertilisers, water-soluble and liquid speciality fertilisers, micronutrients, bio-stimulants
• Core argument: Centre-state policy is at cross-purposes; the very products being promoted by the Centre (efficient, low-dose nutrients) are being banned at state level, hurting ease of doing business and incentive to innovate
• Causal chain — why bans are damaging: (1) Non-subsidised products are notified under the Fertiliser Control Order after ICAR field trials for bio-efficacy and toxicology (2) They are used in low doses for high-value crops (grapes, apple, pomegranate) (3) They deliver nutrients more efficiently — via drip irrigation or foliar application — bypassing urea/DAP losses to volatilisation, leaching and soil lock-in (4) Banning them removes private-sector incentive to innovate or introduce efficient products
• Key data: (a) India's fertiliser input/product imports in 2025-26: ~.2 billion (b) 2022-23 high (post Russia-Ukraine): .4 billion (c) West Asia conflict + Hormuz closure could push 2026-27 import bill past 2022-23 peak (d) Major brands affected: Iffco, Coromandel International, Yara Fertilisers
• India's vulnerability: India has enough land, water and sunshine — but is overwhelmingly import-dependent for fertiliser inputs (urea, DAP, MOP, raw materials)
• Solutions proposed: (1) Centre must crack down on states sending contrary signals to industry and farmers (2) Transform existing product-specific fertiliser subsidy regime into an expanded "PM-Kisan 2.0" Direct Income Support programme (3) Market-determined fertiliser prices will push farmers to use the right nutrients in right quantities for their crops (4) Provide a minimum guaranteed income per acre per crop to absorb the price-decontrol transition

🎯 UPSC Relevance: GS2 — Centre-state coordination, cooperative federalism; GS3 — Agriculture subsidies, fertiliser policy, soil health, import dependence, balance of payments, ease of doing business.

📝 Prelims Facts:

• Subsidised fertilisers: urea (under Urea Subsidy Scheme) and P&K fertilisers like DAP (under Nutrient Based Subsidy/NBS)
• Fertiliser Control Order (FCO), 1985 — under Essential Commodities Act; products must be notified before sale
• Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) conducts bio-efficacy and toxicology trials
• India is world's largest importer of urea and DAP
• PM-KISAN provides Rs 6,000/year DBT to eligible farmer families (since 2019)
• Estimated fertiliser-import bill 2025-26: ~$27.2 bn; 2022-23: $33.4 bn

🔑 Key Term: Nutrient Based Subsidy (NBS) — A regime under which the Centre fixes a fixed per-kg subsidy on each nutrient (N, P, K, S) of P&K fertilisers (excluding urea), with companies free to set MRP; introduced 2010 to encourage balanced nutrient use, though distortions remain because urea continues under a separate, deeper subsidy.