Skip to main content

Slow erosion of farm sovereignty: The hidden cost of India’s free trade agreements

By Prof. Hemantkumar Shah* 
India’s ongoing pursuit of free trade agreements is being celebrated by the Union government as a marker of economic maturity and global ambition. Yet for millions of small and marginal farmers, these deals are fast becoming instruments of economic insecurity and creeping dispossession. This warning was voiced sharply at the Kisan Swaraj Sammelan held near Palanpur, where farmers and activists from a dozen states gathered to reflect on policies reshaping Indian agriculture. The core anxiety expressed was simple: free trade agreements are being negotiated quietly and aggressively, and their burden is falling disproportionately on India’s poorest cultivators.
In 2019 the government trumpeted its decision to walk away from the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, saying it would not jeopardise Indian farmers’ livelihoods. Many believed this signaled a new commitment to safeguarding domestic agriculture. But what has unfolded instead is a backdoor embrace of multiple bilateral and bloc-based pacts—from Japan and South Korea to the UAE, Mauritius, Australia, the UK and New Zealand—as well as groups such as ASEAN and EFTA. These agreements open Indian markets to cheap imports, particularly agricultural goods. When duties are dropped to zero on as much as ninety per cent of incoming products, as seen in last July’s pact with the United Kingdom, it becomes naïve to call this path self-reliance.
Under such agreements, India often relinquishes control over the volume of imports allowed, meaning that foreign commodities can flood Indian markets at will. This problem is compounded by deep global inequalities. Wealthy countries continue to give massive subsidies to their own farmers—averaging the equivalent of forty-six lakh rupees per farmer annually in the United States. Indian cultivators receive barely twenty thousand rupees a year, and this already meagre support is routinely dismissed as “freebies” by the Prime Minister. It is insulting to expect farmers with less land, fewer resources and far smaller safety nets to compete with highly capitalised agribusinesses shielded by lavish state support.
The comparison is absurd on every metric. In the United States, a typical farm spans over 440 acres. Ninety-two per cent of Indian farmers till less than five acres. To call this a competition is like pairing wrestler Dara Singh against an ordinary person and declaring the contest fair simply because both are in the same ring. Yet the rhetoric from policy circles insists that market competition will magically uplift all players. The reality is predictable: small Indian farmers lose before the match even begins.
What is even more worrying is the erosion of India’s autonomy in shaping its agricultural system. The framers of the Constitution declared India a sovereign nation, able to decide its economic priorities free from external pressure. But successive trade agreements suggest that sovereignty is now negotiable. Under pressure from rich nations, the government has avoided challenging their subsidies while cutting support to its own farming communities. Domestic farm policy is being moulded not by the needs of the rural majority but by the demands of global capital and large multinational corporations that already dominate the seed, fertilizer and agrochemical markets.
This contradiction extends to the government’s talk of organic and sustainable farming. While political leaders endorse natural agriculture in speeches, budget allocations are microscopic—less than a fraction of a percent of what is needed. Meanwhile, corporate farming inputs continue to flood the countryside with official blessing. The direction of policy is unmistakable: agriculture is being steered toward corporate dependency and farmer vulnerability.
India stands at a crossroads. It can protect its food producers—the people who feed the nation and sustain the countryside—or it can sacrifice them at the altar of trade liberalisation, hoping that trickle-down economics will somehow fill empty stomachs and stalled futures. Farmers gathered in Palanpur issued a caution grounded in lived experience: free trade agreements, as currently structured, are pushing India’s agriculture toward dependency, foreign control and economic ruin. Unless the government recalibrates its priorities, the promise of Atmanirbhar Bharat will ring hollow in the very fields where it should mean the most.
---
*Senior Gujarat-based economst

Comments

TRENDING

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

CFA flags ‘welfare retreat’ in Union Budget 2026–27, alleges corporate bias

By Jag Jivan  The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has sharply criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 , calling it a “budget sans kartavya” that weakens public welfare while favouring private corporations, even as inequality, climate risks and social distress deepen across the country.

From water scarcity to sustainable livelihoods: The turnaround of Salaiya Maaf

By Bharat Dogra   We were sitting at a central place in Salaiya Maaf village, located in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh, for a group discussion when an elderly woman said in an emotional voice, “It is so good that you people came. Land on which nothing grew can now produce good crops.”

When free trade meets unequal fields: The India–US agriculture question

By Vikas Meshram   The proposed trade agreement between India and the United States has triggered intense debate across the country. This agreement is not merely an attempt to expand bilateral trade; it is directly linked to Indian agriculture, the rural economy, democratic processes, and global geopolitics. Free trade agreements (FTAs) may appear attractive on the surface, but the political economy and social consequences behind them are often unequal and controversial. Once again, a fundamental question has surfaced: who will benefit from this agreement, and who will pay its price?

Why Russian oil has emerged as the flashpoint in India–US trade talks

By N.S. Venkataraman*  In recent years, India has entered into trade agreements with several countries, the latest being agreements with the European Union and the United States. While the India–EU trade agreement has been widely viewed in India as mutually beneficial and balanced, the trade agreement with the United States has generated comparatively greater debate and scrutiny.

'Big blow to crores of farmers’: Opposition mounts against US–India trade deal

By A Representative   Farmers’ organisations and political groups have sharply criticised the emerging contours of the US–India trade agreement, warning that it could severely undermine Indian agriculture, depress farm incomes and open the doors to genetically modified (GM) food imports in violation of domestic regulatory safeguards.

Penpa Tsering’s leadership and record under scrutiny amidst Tibetan exile elections

By Tseten Lhundup*  Within the Tibetan exile community, Penpa Tsering is often described as having risen through grassroots engagement. Born in 1967, he comes from an ordinary Tibetan family, pursued higher education at Delhi University in India, and went on to serve as Speaker of the Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile from 2008 to 2016. In 2021, he was elected Sikyong of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), becoming the second democratically elected political leader of the administration after Lobsang Sangay. 

From Puri to the State: How Odisha turned the dream of drinkable tap water into policy

By Hans Harelimana Hirwa, Mansee Bal Bhargava   Drinking water directly from the tap is generally associated with developed countries where it is considered safe and potable. Only about 50 countries around the world offer drinkable tap water, with the majority located in Europe and North America, and a few in Asia and Oceania. Iceland, Switzerland, Finland, Germany, and Singapore have the highest-quality tap water, followed by Canada, New Zealand, Japan, the USA, Australia, the UK, Costa Rica, and Chile.

Territorial greed of Trump, Xi Jinping, and Putin could make 2026 toxic

By N.S. Venkataraman*  The year 2025 closed with bloody conflicts across nations and groups, while the United Nations continued to appear ineffective—reduced to a debate forum with little impact on global peace and harmony.