Agriculture 2022 Paper I 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Discuss

Q5

Discuss the followings in about 150 words each: (a) Self Help Groups (SHGs) and Farmers Producers Organizations (FPOs) (10 marks) (b) Kisan Credit Card and Soil Health Card (10 marks) (c) Contour bunding and Graded bunding (10 marks) (d) Rain water harvesting and Watershed Management (10 marks) (e) Cooperative Societies and Non Government Organizations (NGOs) (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित प्रत्येक की लगभग 150 शब्दों में विवेचना कीजिए : (a) स्वयं सहायता समूह एवं कृषक उत्पादक संगठन (10 अंक) (b) किसान क्रेडिट कार्ड एवं मृदा स्वास्थ्य कार्ड (10 अंक) (c) समोच्च बंधन एवं वर्गीकृत बंधन (10 अंक) (d) वर्षा जल संग्रहण एवं जलसंभर (वाटर शेड) प्रबंधन (10 अंक) (e) सहकारी समितियां एवं गैर सरकारी संगठन (एन.जी.ओ.) (10 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 Agriculture questions

Directive word: Discuss

This question asks you to discuss. 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 'discuss' demands a balanced treatment covering definition, features, comparison and significance for each pair. Allocate approximately 30 words per sub-part (150 words ÷ 5 parts = 30 words each, but adjust to ~25-30 words for tighter concepts and ~35 for complex comparisons). Structure each part as: brief definition of both terms → 2-3 distinguishing/complementary features → one concrete Indian example or scheme → concluding significance statement. No separate introduction or conclusion needed; dive directly into sub-part (a).

Key points expected

  • (a) SHGs: NRLM/SGSY origin, 10-20 members, microfinance linkage; FPOs: SFAC/NAF support, POPI, collective marketing, equity grant; contrast: SHGs for social empowerment vs FPOs for economic aggregation
  • (b) KCC: 2012 revised model, ₹3 lakh collateral-free limit, interest subvention 3%, crop insurance linkage; Soil Health Card: 2015 scheme, 12 parameters, 3-year cycle, fertilizer recommendations; synergy: credit for inputs based on SHC recommendations
  • (c) Contour bunding: uniform grade, 0.2-0.3% slope, prevents runoff on gentle slopes; Graded bunding: 0.1-0.2% slope toward outlet, for medium lands; critical distinction: drainage provision in graded bunds
  • (d) RWH: farm ponds, percolation tanks, check dams; Watershed management: Ridge-to-valley approach, treatment of 500-5000 ha microwatersheds, community participation; integration: RWH as component within watershed framework
  • (e) Cooperatives: PACS, FPOs under Cooperative Societies Act, democratic control, limited liability; NGOs: civil society actors, innovation pilots, capacity building; complementarity: NGOs mobilize, cooperatives institutionalize

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness25%12.5Precise definitions across all five parts: for (a) distinguishes SHG's social intermediation from FPO's commercial aggregation; for (b) captures KCC's 2012 revision and SHC's 12-parameter testing; for (c) correctly identifies slope gradients (0.2-0.3% contour vs 0.1-0.2% graded); for (d) distinguishes structural (RWH) from systemic (watershed) approaches; for (e) clarifies legal status differences (cooperatives under state acts vs NGOs under Societies Registration Act)Broadly accurate definitions with minor errors: confuses FPO with cooperative legal structure, omits KCC interest subvention percentage, or treats RWH and watershed as synonymous rather than nested conceptsFundamental conceptual errors: describes SHGs as government departments, confuses contour with graded bunding purposes, or presents cooperatives and NGOs as mutually exclusive rather than complementary
Quantitative reasoning15%7.5Embeds relevant quantitative parameters: SHG's ₹10 lakh corpus for FPO equity grant under POPI; KCC's ₹3 lakh collateral-free threshold and 3% interest subvention; SHC's 3-year testing cycle and 12 soil parameters; bunding specifications (0.2-0.3% contour grade, 0.1-0.2% graded slope); watershed treatment area norms (500-5000 ha microwatersheds)Mentions some quantitative aspects but imprecisely: 'low interest' instead of 3% subvention, 'few years' instead of 3-year SHC cycle, or omits specific slope percentages for bunding typesNo quantitative data or incorrect figures: invents loan amounts, confuses hectare/acre units, or presents arbitrary slope percentages without basis
Indian context examples20%10Cites specific Indian schemes and institutional anchors: for (a) NRLM/SGSY for SHGs, SFAC/NAF and 'One District One Product' for FPOs; for (b) 2015 Soil Health Card Scheme launch, KCC's 1998-2012 evolution; for (c) ICAR-CRIDA bunding specifications, Sukhomajri or Ralegan Siddhi watershed precedents; for (d) PMKSY-Watershed Development Component, Neeranchal project; for (e) Amul/NDDB cooperative model, PRADAN or BAIF as NGO exemplarsGeneric references to 'government schemes' or 'some NGOs' without naming specific programs; mentions cooperatives without citing PACS, FPOs under Companies Act 2013, or landmark cases like AmulNo Indian examples or inappropriate foreign case studies; treats all concepts as universal without contextualizing to India's institutional framework (NABARD, SFAC, Ministry of Agriculture schemes)
Diagram / process15%7.5Describes visualizable processes: for (c) sketches bund cross-section showing berm, borrow pit, and outlet in graded bunds; for (d) outlines ridge-to-valley treatment sequence; for (b) flow of SHC sampling→testing→recommendation→input procurement via KCC; conceptual clarity that substitutes for actual diagrams in this short-answer formatMentions processes in passing without structural clarity: 'water flows' without specifying gradient direction, or 'soil is tested' without laboratory-to-farmer chainNo process description; treats all five parts as static definitions without temporal or spatial dimensions; fails to distinguish sequential (watershed phases) from simultaneous (KCC-SHC integration) processes
Policy / extension angle25%12.5Demonstrates policy integration: SHG-bank linkage → FPO formalization pathway; KCC-SHC convergence under PM-KISAN and input subsidy rationalization; bunding-watershed alignment with PMKSY and MGNREGA convergence; cooperative-NGO collaboration in Doubling Farmers' Income strategy; critiques where relevant (FPO viability concerns, SHC adoption gaps, cooperative politicization)Lists policies without showing integration: mentions PMKSY and NRLM separately without convergence logic; describes schemes as standalone rather than systemicNo policy context or outdated references (pre-2015 schemes); fails to connect institutional innovations to current flagship programs or extension system (ATMA, KVK) linkages

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 2022 Paper I