India is entering a pivotal phase in its agricultural journey. Several long-standing structural challenges, from groundwater depletion to fragmented markets, are now intersecting with newer pressures: climate volatility, rising input costs, shifting dietary demand, and global trade pressures. Into this crucibsle comes the Viksit Krishi Sankalp Abhiyan (VKSA), a large-scale effort to integrate science, policy responsiveness and farmer voice into the agricultural policy landscape.
VKSA is promising in many respects, but it also highlights where gaps remain. What follows is a detailed report on its design, progress, impact, and what must change if VKSA is not to become another ‘campaign’ but rather a driver of sustained reform.
Launch and Objectives
Scale, Reach, Mechanism
Notable Components
Governance / Feedback / Bottom-Up Elements
VKSA has already started delivering visible gains, in ways that suggest it is more than yet another awareness drive.
Farmers across many states report exposure to scientific innovations they had little access to before- better seeds, modern tools, natural farming options. The exposure effect itself seems to generate demand for these services. For instance, in states like Gujarat, large numbers of farmers have committed to natural farming.
Scientists have been on the ground, not only giving lectures but seeing actual farm plots, soil types, water availability, pest problems. This provides real time, “on the soil” feedback to research institutions. When research is responsive rather than top-down, adaptation tends to improve. VKSA’s “Lab-to-Land” model holds potential.
After VKSA’s formal conclusion (12 June 2025), the Ministry has already begun review meetings. Nodal officers have presented field findings. Plans are underway for “Crop Wars” (targeted drives) for key crops, more state- and crop-specific strategies, integrating biofortified crops, etc.
Even high-altitude villages (for example, Komic, Lahaul-Spiti) have been part of the campaign, pointing at an attempt at inclusivity. Place-specific challenges (altitude, soils, connectivity) have been recognized at least as part of VKSA rollout.
However, VKSA also throws up several gaps- some expected in an initiative of this scale, others more structural and demanding of urgent policy correction. Unless these are addressed, much of VKSA’s promise may dissipate.
A 15-day campaign is intense but transient. Farmer exposure to new techniques or seeds is insufficient without follow-up: access to inputs, credit, extension support over seasons. There is risk that once VKSA ends, many farmers will revert to older practices due to cost constraints or lack of supply chains.
With tens of thousands of teams and millions of farmers being reached, ensuring depth of engagement (soil tests, diagnostic advice, local adaptation) is hard. Some reports point to generic advice being given; variable quality of demonstrations or lack of consistent follow-through.
Promoting natural farming, disease‐free seedlings, precision tools, new seed varieties is only useful if inputs are accessible locally. Many remote areas lack quality nurseries, cold storage, seed supply or access to financing for purchasing tools or adopting micro-irrigation.
Farmers in certain zones (water stress, soils with low fertility, remote topographies) cannot adopt some promoted technologies easily. For example, drone-spraying may not be cost effective or feasible in fragmented holdings or terrain with access constraints. Also, water scarcity and soil health problems may require longer-term interventions (restoration, recharge) more than short-term adoption.
Push for productivity and yield remains strong. But less visible: soil degradation, overuse of inputs, threats to biodiversity. Natural farming promises more eco-friendly approaches but scaling it to large hectarage requires careful policy support (not just exhortation). Also, what quality of evaluation is in place to measure environmental impact and long-term soil health?
VKSA includes the collection of feedback from farmers. But converting that feedback into actionable, well-resourced policies is non-trivial. State governments will need both capacity and political will. Research institutions must reorient priorities (e.g. seed breeding, crop diversification) based on farmer problems, which may be slow.
Large campaigns risk over-reporting, or token compliance; there is need for rigorous monitoring (independent, transparent), data on impact (beyond outreach numbers): yield increases, income changes, reduction in input costs, environmental metrics.
Who is reached and who benefits matters. There seems to be promise in the remote areas, but the capacity of poor farmers, women farmers, resource-poor landholders to act on advice, given constraints of land, water, capital, must be explicitly addressed.
VKSA is not operating in isolation. Its launch and implementation interact with other programs, and many existing gaps in Indian agriculture are under-served. Below are how VKSA aligns with, and where India still lacks coherence.
Domain |
Existing Challenge |
What VKSA Helps With |
What VKSA Cannot Fully Address Yet |
Soil and nutrient management |
Imbalanced fertilizer use; low soil fertility in many states |
Promotion of soil-based advisory, disease-free plants, natural farming helps awareness |
Need for subsidised balanced fertilizers, soil testing infrastructure, regulation of input quality; long-term soil health requires multi-season investment |
Water use / Groundwater depletion |
Over extraction; low water use efficiency; climate variability |
VKSA promotes micro-irrigation and efficient practices; in some places encourages water-sensitive cropping choices |
Groundwater regulation, recharge, basin planning, infrastructure for storage, support for drought/heat resilient cropping cycles need stronger policy linkages |
Market linkages, price realization |
Small farmers are price takers; post-harvest losses; poor cold chain |
VKSA includes some outreach on value addition, allied sectors, disease-free nurseries, centers of excellence for storage/processing in some states like Gujarat |
Does not yet seem to ensure that offtaker contracts, price discovery or infrastructure investments are built in to guarantee farmers get better margins; also equity issues among geographies |
Inclusion, equity |
Marginalised farmers, tribal/far away regions often left out; women’s participation is often informal |
VKSA efforts in remote high-altitude areas, coverage in many districts suggests reach; awareness may be raising aspirations; some states reporting participation from women farmers |
Ensuring women and landless/marginal farmers have access to credit, input subsidies, decision-making; and benefit not just in awareness but in income and assets |
Scientific research & policy alignment |
Research often disconnected from field realities; slow translation of ICAR outputs; weak feedback loops |
VKSA provides one large channel for “field feedback” and exposure of scientists to field constraints; “crop war” proposals etc suggest more targeted research planning |
Institutional inertia, budget cycles, limited capacity in state agricultural universities and extension services may constrain how rapidly research agendas shift; also resources to scale successful pilots are often lacking |
For VKSA to truly serve as a lasting pillar in India’s agricultural governance, then the following must be systematised.
Shift to a year-round model with multi-season presence of scientist–extension teams, including follow-ups after initial advice. Consider implementing a periodic (quarterly or seasonal) ‘Field Pulse’ exercise to revisit sites and monitor adoption, performance, and emerging constraints.
Create formal mechanisms in ICAR / state agricultural universities where farmer feedback collected during VKSA is reviewed and translated into research funding calls, breeding priorities, seed multiplication programmes. Ensure these changes are tracked, with public transparency.
Awareness without affordable, quality inputs (seeds, tools, fertilizers), access to micro irrigation, storage, etc., is half‐measure. Strengthen supply chains: nurseries, seed distribution, cold chain, local agro-dealers’ capacity; ensure subsidies/incentives reflect this.
Incorporate soil health and water quality metrics into VKSA follow-ups; measure environmental impacts (soil organic carbon, biodiversity where relevant, input run-off, nitrates etc.). Build natural farming and chemical input reduction into subsidy/credit incentives.
Move beyond outreach counts: gather data on yield, income, cost of cultivation, input usage before and after, preferably with control (non-VKSA) sites. Engage third-party evaluators; make data open. Develop dashboards state-wise/district-wise.
Ensure that marginal, small, tribal, and women farmers are not just present but enabled: easier access to credit, learning in local languages, market linkages. Have special camps in tribal/hilly areas, with gendered extension approaches.
For example, subsidy reform (fertilizer, power), input regulation, land use policies, market reforms (mandi, contract farming), risk mitigation (insurance), trade policies. VKSA feedback should feed into the design and calibration of these policies.
As flagged in the VKSA review meeting, focused plans on pulses, oilseeds, soybean, cotton, sugarcane etc. are being considered. These must be tailored: what works in Punjab for cotton may not work in Bundelkhand for pulses. Use agro-ecology, water availability, soil types, risk profiles etc.
Why should VKSA get attention among policymakers and industry leaders? Because it signals a possible shift in how agriculture is governed in India.
Here are some concrete field-insights emerging from the VKSA that might be under-appreciated yet deserve policy attention.
Beyond the Headlines: What Often Gets Missed
Coverage of initiatives like the Viksit Krishi Sankalp Abhiyan tends to emphasize scale - the number of farmers reached or districts covered - but less on whether advice is actionable, whether inputs are available, or if constraints are addressed. Follow-up on outcomes such as yield, income, or soil health is rare, while perspectives from women farmers, tribal communities, and remote regions often remain unheard.
Promises of ‘feedback’ or ‘new schemes’ are noted, but links to budgets, procurement reforms, or long-term sustainability receive little scrutiny. The real challenge lies in tracking not just announcements, but actual delivery and impact.
Drawing from VKSA and the broader sector realities (from earlier in this article), here are priority actions for ministers, bureaucrats, research leadership, and industry:
Institutionalise field scientist teams with budgeted mandates for each season; ensure extension officers remain engaged between campaigns.
For example: subsidies or cost-sharing for inputs needed (e.g. natural farming inputs, disease-free seedlings), support for seed supply chain, seed certification; improving local infrastructure (cold storage, nurseries, micro-irrigation).
Use VKSA feedback data to revise ICAR / State Agricultural University research themes: pest pressures, input efficacy, climate-harsh zones, remote geographies. Prioritize breed improvements for locally relevant traits (drought, salinity, altitude) rather than only generic high yield.
Beyond yield or area under cultivation, measure cost savings, net income changes, reductions in input misuse, water saving, women’s participation.
Krishi Vigyan Kendras must be well-staffed, funded, and linked to both research and local departments. Extension workers need training in participatory methods, digital tools, soil/water diagnostics. State governments must partner actively.
Align VKSA-derived insights with other schemes: PM Kisan, crop insurance, input subsidy reforms, market reforms. Example: if VKSA shows pest incidence, state pesticide control, certification and subsidy policies should respond. If natural farming uptake is high, patterns of subsidy (fertilizer subsidies) may need recalibration.
Regular audits or evaluations by independent agencies; transparency in input quality regulation (fertilizers, pesticides); monitoring environmental impacts (soil, groundwater).
Mandate metrics for inclusion of marginalized groups; ensure campaign materials are in local languages; women farmers are given leadership roles in local farmer groups or knowledge dissemination.
Viksit Krishi Sankalp Abhiyan is among the most ambitious recent attempts to re-orient Indian agriculture’s trajectory: to make it more scientific, responsive, inclusive and sustainable. As a campaign, it has many strengths: scale, visibility, ambitious natural farming targets, engagement of science with farmers, political commitment.
Yet its long-run impact will depend on closing the many gaps: matching inputs, tackling environmental constraints, improving inclusion, converting feedback into policy, building persistent extension systems, and ensuring that farmers truly gain in income, not just knowledge.
For policymakers, bureaucrats, and agricultural leaders: VKSA should not be viewed as an end in itself, but as a lens through which many of Indian agriculture’s silent problems become visible- and an opportunity to craft reforms that endure. The decent statistics of reach must give way to transformative ones: rising farmer incomes, healthier soils and water, more equitable access, resilient and diversified cropping, trusted and efficient markets.
If India is able to build on the foundation laid by VKSA, strengthen the connections between science, policy, and farmers, and invest in sustainability and inclusion, then the vision of a ‘Viksit Bharat’ rooted in ‘Viksit Krishi’ could move closer to reality.