Q8
(a) Critically examine the major extension programmes of agricultural sector in India. Suggest different measures to improve technology dissemination and adoption at farmer's field. (20 marks) (b) Discuss the success and failure of agricultural price policy since its inception. Discuss the recent initiatives/changes in agricultural price policy. (20 marks) (c) Discuss the value addition of forest products. (10 marks)
हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें
(a) भारतवर्ष में कृषि क्षेत्र के मुख्य प्रसार कार्यक्रमों का आलोचनात्मक परीक्षण कीजिए। कृषक प्रक्षेत्र पर तकनीकी प्रसार एवं अभिग्रहण में सुधार हेतु विभिन्न उपायों का सुझाव दीजिए। (20 अंक) (b) कृषि मूल्य नीति की इसके प्रारंभ से सफलता एवं असफलता का वर्णन कीजिए। कृषि मूल्य नीति में अद्यतन प्रस्तावों/परिवर्तनों की विवेचना कीजिए। (20 अंक) (c) वन उत्पादों के मूल्य संवर्धन पर चर्चा कीजिए। (10 अंक)
Directive word: Critically examine
This question asks you to critically examine. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.
See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.
How this answer will be evaluated
Approach
The directive 'critically examine' for part (a) demands balanced analysis with judgment, while 'discuss' for parts (b) and (c) requires comprehensive coverage with multiple perspectives. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its analytical depth and 20 marks, 35% to part (b) for historical evolution and recent changes, and 25% to part (c) for value addition coverage. Structure with a brief integrated introduction, three distinct sections with clear sub-headings, and a conclusion synthesizing policy linkages across extension and price support.
Key points expected
- Part (a): Critical evaluation of T&V system, KVKs, ATMA, and privatized extension models (Kisan Call Centres, agri-clinics) with their limitations in reach and gender bias
- Part (a): Measures for technology dissemination including FPO-led extension, digital platforms (KisanSarathi, WhatsApp-based advisories), and participatory approaches like farmer field schools
- Part (b): Successes of price policy (food security, MSP as floor price, Green Revolution stimulus) and failures (regional bias, procurement gaps, fiscal burden, distortion of cropping patterns)
- Part (b): Recent initiatives including PM-AASHA (PDPS, PSS, PSSS), e-NAM, PM-KISAN income support, and shift from price support to direct income transfer
- Part (c): Value addition in NWFPs including bamboo processing, lac cultivation, medicinal plants (tribal value chains), and institutional support through Van Dhan Vikas Yojana and SFURTI clusters
Evaluation rubric
| Dimension | Weight | Max marks | Excellent | Average | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concept correctness | 20% | 10 | Precise definitions of extension approaches (T&V, participatory, privatized), accurate distinction between price policy instruments (MSP, buffer stock, trade controls), and correct classification of NWFP categories; for (a) distinguishes technology transfer from technology dissemination; for (b) correctly identifies CACP vs. government announcement gap; for (c) distinguishes primary, secondary, and tertiary processing of forest products | Basic understanding of extension systems and MSP mechanism with minor conceptual blurring; conflates price policy with trade policy; limited grasp of value addition stages in forest products | Confused understanding of extension models (e.g., calling KVKs part of T&V), treats MSP as universal procurement, or describes forest products without value addition framework |
| Quantitative reasoning | 15% | 7.5 | Uses relevant data for (a) extension worker-farmer ratios or KVK coverage; for (b) MSP coverage as percentage of production, fiscal cost of food subsidy, e-NAM trade volumes; for (c) share of NWFPs in forest economy or Van Dhan beneficiary numbers; interprets trends correctly | Mentions some figures without contextual interpretation or uses outdated data; vague references to 'increasing' or 'large' without magnitude | No quantitative data or grossly incorrect figures; makes unsupported claims about coverage or impact |
| Indian context examples | 25% | 12.5 | For (a): cites specific state variations (Rythu Bharosa Kendras in Andhra, Karnataka's Raitha Samparka Kendras) and digital innovations (IFFCO's WhatsApp advisory); for (b): regional MSP effectiveness (Punjab-Haryana vs. Eastern India), crop-specific distortions (paddy in Punjab, sugarcane arrears); for (c): bamboo mission in Northeast, tendu leaf cooperatives in Madhya Pradesh/Chhattisgarh, specific tribal value chains | Generic references to KVKs and MSP without state specificity; mentions Van Dhan Yojana without regional or product details; limited grounding in field realities | No Indian examples or inappropriate foreign comparisons; confuses Indian schemes with generic descriptions |
| Diagram / process | 15% | 7.5 | For (a): flow diagram of technology adoption process (awareness-interest-evaluation-adoption-confirmation) or institutional mapping of extension pyramid; for (b): schematic of price policy transmission mechanism or timeline of policy evolution; for (c): value chain diagram for specific NWFPs showing collection-processing-marketing stages | Describes processes in text without visual representation; attempts simple flowcharts with errors or omissions | No diagrams where clearly applicable; complete absence of process description for technology dissemination or value addition chains |
| Policy / extension angle | 25% | 12.5 | For (a): critical assessment of policy shifts from T&V to privatization to convergence (ATMA under NMAET) with evaluative judgment; for (b): balanced critique of Swaminathan Commission recommendations vs. implementation, analysis of recent shift from price support to income support; for (c): integration with forest rights, JFM, and sustainable harvesting policies; demonstrates interlinkages between extension and price policy in conclusion | Descriptive coverage of policies without critical evaluation; lists schemes without analyzing effectiveness or gaps; weak integration across parts | Merely enumerates schemes without critical examination; no policy analysis or recommendations; treats parts as isolated silos without connecting extension adoption to price incentives |
Practice this exact question
Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.
Evaluate my answer →More from Agriculture 2021 Paper I
- Q1 Describe the following in about 150 words each: (a) The major ways for sustainable management of natural resources (10 marks) (b) Improved…
- Q2 (a) What is greenhouse effect? Write in detail about various greenhouse gases and their impact on crop production. (20 marks) (b) What is t…
- Q3 (a) What do you understand by agroforestry? Discuss various types of agroforestry systems in India with the help of examples. (20 marks) (b…
- Q4 (a) What are the factors responsible for declining soil fertility? Discuss various measures adopted for improving soil productivity. (20 ma…
- Q5 Describe Q. Nos. 5(a), 5(c), 5(d), 5(e) and answer Q. No. 5(b) (in about 150 words each): (a) Technologies and policies for sustained crop…
- Q6 (a) Define soil erosion and its different forms. Explain agronomic and mechanical measures to reduce the adverse effects of soil erosion in…
- Q7 (a) Define ecology. Mention its basic concepts and relevance in crop production. (20 marks) (b) How to improve drainage of waterlogged area…
- Q8 (a) Critically examine the major extension programmes of agricultural sector in India. Suggest different measures to improve technology dis…