top of page

By:

Pearl Noronha

31 March 2025 at 3:13:45 pm

Selling Goa, Piece by Piece

What nature takes centuries to build can be destroyed in years and once lost, it is rarely recovered. If you think the battle for land belongs to history, think again. In ancient times, kingdoms and nations fought wars over territory because land meant power, survival, wealth and control. That struggle has not disappeared; it has simply changed form. In Goa, the fight for land continues without armies or swords. Today, paperwork, zoning changes, permissions, speculative deals and luxury...

Selling Goa, Piece by Piece

What nature takes centuries to build can be destroyed in years and once lost, it is rarely recovered. If you think the battle for land belongs to history, think again. In ancient times, kingdoms and nations fought wars over territory because land meant power, survival, wealth and control. That struggle has not disappeared; it has simply changed form. In Goa, the fight for land continues without armies or swords. Today, paperwork, zoning changes, permissions, speculative deals and luxury developments have become the new weapons. What was once seized by force is now often taken through approvals, conversions and concrete. Goa has long been both a magnet for conquerors and a refuge for those seeking peace. Across centuries, different cultures have called this land home, drawn not just by its strategic value but also by its seashores, green hills, rivers, flora and fauna. These are not empty stretches of land waiting to be turned into plots. They are part of what makes Goa what it is. At a time when climate stress is no longer a distant concern, such landscapes matter more than ever. Forests, fields, rivers and hills are not disposable spaces, but vital ecological assets that help protect against heat, flooding, erosion and environmental decline. Goa is not the holiday capital of India by accident. Its appeal lies in its small historic homes, low-rise residences, open spaces, green rolling hills and, above all, in the fact that it does not resemble the concrete-heavy urban landscapes many seek to escape. Goa’s charm lies in its difference. Yet that very difference is now under threat. In the name of development, the state is being pushed towards the same model of overbuilding that has diminished so many other places. This may be marketed as progress, but too often it looks more like destruction in slow motion. The real question is whether we are building for the needs of Goa’s people, or for a second-home market driven by wealth, prestige and speculation. Development in Goa should first serve the people who live there. But much of what is being built today seems aimed less at local housing needs and more at a second-home market driven by investment, prestige and short-term rental returns. Many of these homes stay shut for much of the year, existing more as assets than as part of a real community. The ecological cost, however, is constant: land is consumed, trees are cut, concrete spreads, and precious water is drawn into projects that add little to Goa’s daily life. A luxury home that remains locked for most of the year may flatter its owner, but it does not justify the burden it places on the land and resources around it. In recent years, Goa’s much-debated ‘16B conversions’ have come to represent a wider problem: land once valued for its ecological or agricultural role can be rapidly reclassified as real estate. For many residents of Goa, these are not abstract concerns but everyday realities: power cuts, water shortages and the steady inconvenience of weak civic planning. These are not rare disruptions but a routine part of life in far too many areas. Public transport remains sparse and unreliable, while pedestrian infrastructure is so neglected that pavements often feel like an afterthought. In many places, even a short walk can be unsafe, pushing households towards two-wheelers for the most basic errands. If the government is already struggling to provide essential services and safe mobility to existing residents, on what basis does it justify approving developments that place even greater strain on already stretched resources? The government should not treat Goa’s land as something to be sold off in the name of development. Its job is to protect what makes this state worth living in. We are only custodians of this land, not its permanent owners. What we erase in one generation may be impossible for the next to recover. Goa does need to grow and improve, but that growth must respect the limits of its water, its roads, its green spaces and the character that makes it unlike anywhere else. No one is asking for Goa to remain frozen in time. But it should not be turned into another overbuilt city that loses its soul in the process. Goa must become a better Goa, not a poorer version of the places people came here to escape.

Fertile Yet Fragmented

Despite ambitious reforms and record spending, India's farmers remain shackled by skewed incentives, outdated infrastructure and political inertia.

India’s green revolution once symbolised its triumph over hunger and foreign dependence. Today, while industrialisation powers cities and services dominate exports, agriculture still anchors the country’s economic resilience. Yet, the sector remains undermined by structural inefficiencies, over-politicisation, and an inability to modernise at pace with ambition.


Nowhere is this clearer than in fertilizer use, a fundamental input for boosting agricultural productivity. Every crop season, the ministries of agriculture and fertilizers jointly forecast requirements and allocate subsidies, ranging from 30 to 70 percentage. In 2025-26, Rs.1.67 trillion is earmarked to subsidise Urea and other nutrients. Despite the government’s best efforts, nearly a third of all fertilizers are still imported, as of 2023-24. The 2013 National Investment Policy aimed to reverse this dependence, spurring six new Urea plants by the end of 2024. Another is planned in Assam. But even as capacity expands, technology remains outdated—a point flagged by Parliament’s Standing Committee over a decade ago. Their recommendation to switch to a Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) model for subsidies remains stuck in bureaucratic limbo.


Fertilizer misuse, driven by distorted incentives, presents another challenge. Urea, heavily subsidised, is cheaper than other vital nutrients. The result: excessive usage, declining soil quality and diminishing long-term returns. The government responded by launching the PM-PRANAM scheme in June 2023, nudging states towards balanced fertilizer consumption. The Soil Health Card initiative, introduced a decade ago, furthers this mission by helping farmers match application to soil conditions. As of December 2024, over 2.36 million farmers had benefited from such initiatives.


Agricultural credit has grown by 14 percentage annually over the past decade, reaching Rs.23 trillion in 2023-24. Yet small landholdings and low productivity limit borrowing power. Nearly two-thirds of indebted households own under one hectare, with many still reliant on informal lenders. A 2020 survey found 31 percentage of small farmers used non-institutional credit, and 43 percentage of loans were spent on non-farm needs.


The Kisan Credit Card (KCC) scheme, launched in 1998, now covers the full cycle of farm and household needs. By late 2024, 73 million accounts held Rs.8.9 trillion in credit. Loans up to Rs.3 lakh attract 7 percentage annual interest, with a 3 percentage rebate for timely repayment. Meanwhile, the flagship crop insurance scheme, PMFBY, launched in 2016, covers 480.3 million hectares with Rs.19.5 trillion insured. But delayed state subsidies have hampered claim payouts, prompting a 2021 parliamentary call for fixed timelines. Awareness remains dismal as 39 percentage of farmers do not know the scheme exists, and a further 24 percentage do not see the need for it.


Woes deepen after harvest. A 2020-21 NABARD study pegged annual losses from post-harvest wastage at Rs.1.5 trillion, largely due to insufficient storage. India needs 61 million tonnes of cold storage capacity, but has just 39.4 million tonnes. Its 7,085 APMC markets fall far short of the 48,000 needed to ensure one every 5 km, as recommended by the Swaminathan Commission. Worse, most markets lack modern infrastructure. Middlemen thrive in this chaos, often paying farmers a fraction of the final price. The government’s three farm laws aimed to liberalise the sector but were rolled back after widespread protests. While the e-NAM platform, launched in 2016, offers a digital marketplace and marginally better returns, adoption remains uneven.


The Minimum Support Price (MSP) regime, meant to act as a safety net, has also come under scrutiny. Covering 22 crops, MSPs were set at 1.5 times production costs in 2018-19. Agencies like FCI and NAFED handle procurement. But generous MSPs for select crops have hurt crop diversity and soil health, especially in Punjab and Haryana. A 2023 Niti Aayog survey found that crops with higher MSP support showed lower output growth than unsupported crops, raising questions about effectiveness and long-term sustainability.


Digitisation has yielded modest gains. Jan Dhan Yojana expanded banking access for farmers, enhancing creditworthiness. Since 2019, PM-Kisan has transferred Rs.6,000 annually via DBT to landholding families, disbursing Rs.3.24 trillion to 120 million beneficiaries by August 2024. The scheme’s 2025-26 outlay is Rs.63,500 crore.


Political meddling has long thwarted attempts to empower India’s farmers, entrenching corruption and inefficiency. Yet the past decade has witnessed a push towards formalization, with digital tools and improved credit flows gradually empowering smallholders. To sustain this momentum, the government must back collaborative farming via FPOs and cooperatives, while inviting corporate investment to modernize agriculture. Replicating successes like Amul will be vital to realising the ambitions of Viksit Bharat.


(The author is a Chartered Accountant with a leading company in Mumbai. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page