Council on Energy, Environment and Water Integrated | International | Independent
Bio-inputs are defined as biological substances derived from biotic organisms used to improve soil fertility, support plant growth, and enhance crop health (FAO n.d.). They include biofertilisers1 , biostimulants2 , biopesticides3 , and natural farming inputs4 that can provide sustainable alternatives to chemical inputs.
India's per-hectare consumption of chemical fertilisers surged from 135.76 kg in FY 2015-16 to 141.2 kg in 2022-23 (Fertilizer Association of India 2023). This increase in chemical inputs has had indiscriminate effects on biodiversity and human health (Pathak et al. 2022). In response, the Government of India has advocated for the widespread adoption of organic and natural farming practices, exemplified by initiatives like the National Mission for Natural Farming. Additionally, under the GOBARdhan scheme5 , the Indian Government plans to establish 15,000 decentralised bio-input resource centres (BRCs)6 across the country (PIB 2023).
In Odisha, per-hectare fertiliser consumption is 68 kg, significantly lower than the national average (Department of Agriculture and Farmers' Empowerment, 2020). This lower usage results from fragmented land holdings, lack of irrigation facilities, and increased salinity due to frequent flooding, which limits the efficacy of fertilisers and makes farmers reluctant to invest in chemical fertilisers (Hoda et al. 2021; Cao et al. 2022). Additionally, Odisha's promotion of organic farming through policies like the Odisha organic farming policy7 favours organic inputs over chemical fertilisers. These factors uniquely position Odisha to scale up organic and natural farming practices effectively. By leveraging its existing low-input usage, and prioritising the production and use of bio-inputs, Odisha has the potential to become a 'champion state' in scaling sustainable agriculture for the entire country. The growing opportunities in organic and natural farming will increase the demand and scope for the production and marketing of bio-inputs, leading to more investment and job creation.
Jobs, market and investment opportunity:
● Assuming that, by 2030, Odisha will scale up organic and natural farming to 6.4 per cent and 5.1 per cent of its gross cropped area, respectively, producing the necessary bio-inputs will result in creation of ~2,000 jobs. The total investment and market opportunity for scaling required bio-input production would amount to USD 1.07 million and USD 11.77 million, respectively.
● Prime locations for establishing bio-input resource centres include Keonjhar, Koraput, Mayurbhanj, Rayagada, and Sundargarh. These areas are particularly suitable due to their alignment with Odisha's natural farming policy objectives and their significant tribal population.
Enhancing climate resilience: Adopting bio-inputs on a large scale can enhance Odisha's agricultural resilience to climate change by boosting biodiversity (Padma 2019; Protergium n.d.), improving soil fertility, and increasing water retention (Jiménez et al. 2023). These inputs reduce the need for chemical fertilisers, cutting CO2 emissions by 0.58 tonnes per tonne of chemical fertiliser produced, thereby aiding India's net zero goals (Patidar et al. 2024).
Monetary savings: Shifting to bio-inputs significantly lowers fertiliser subsidy expenses and health costs for the state (Gupta et al. 2020; Charyulu et al. 2011). Fertiliser subsidies have skyrocketed by nearly 158 times since 1980-81, reaching ₹795.30 billion in 2021-22, straining the nation’s finances (Ansari et al. 2022). The misuse of chemical inputs has also driven up health costs, due to physiological disorders such as cancer and congenital anomalies (Asghar et al. 2016; Pathak et al. 2022; Medina, Rotondo, and Rodríguez 2023).
Community empowerment: Making bio-inputs more accessible locally can boost farmers' adoption of sustainable agricultural practices. BRCs are especially valuable in remote areas with limited access to roads and chemical inputs. These centres provide information and distribute soil-friendly products, serving as a one-stop solution for farmers practising sustainable agriculture in these regions (Natividad 2022).
WASSAN has established six BRCs in Sathya Sai and Annamayya districts of Andhra Pradesh to support natural farming by producing bio-inputs. A major challenge in preparing these inputs is the collection of cow urine, a key ingredient, which is often lost through seepage. Therefore, these BRCs are essential for increasing the adoption of sustainable agriculture. Each centre employs 20-30 entrepreneurs who provide bio-inputs to 100 farmers, with each entrepreneur producing around 11 MT of bio-inputs annually. This initiative not only provides financial stability to farmers but also reduces reliance on chemical fertilisers, enhances soil health, and promotes biodiversity6 .
Who could support in scaling bio-inputs?
1. Role of departments:
Department of Agriculture and Farmers’ Empowerment: The Department of Agriculture and Farmers’ Empowerment plays a crucial role in scaling up bio-input production by offering incentives for producing and certifying biofertilisers and organic manures. They facilitate the formation and training of farmer producer organisations (FPOs)/self-help groups (SHGs) to produce natural farming inputs and promote bio-input adoption among farmers through awareness drives and training programmes that encourage farmers and SHGs to become BRC entrepreneurs. The department also promotes the use of bio-inputs in cultivating indigenous crop varieties in tribal areas, thereby enhancing the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices and generating demand for bio-inputs in these regions.
Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying: The Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying has a critical role to play in scaling up bio-input production by promoting the use of animal waste, such as dung and urine, which are key raw materials for natural farming inputs. The department could facilitate the collection and transportation of these materials from dairies and animal husbandry centres to BRCs through FPOs and SHGs. The department could also support the formation of cow urine collection centres at community level to ensure a reliable supply of cow urine for bio-input production, thereby enhancing the capacity to produce natural farming inputs.
SC & ST Department: The SC & ST Department can significantly scale up bio-input production by leveraging its oversight of the zero budget natural farming programme. Also, by mobilising existing women SHGs through Mission Shakti in tribal areas to produce and distribute bio-inputs, the department not only empowers women economically but also fosters collective action within communities. Additionally, the Odisha Tribal Development Society (OTDS) can enhance this effort by organising regular stakeholder review meetings at the block level, ensuring effective coordination and addressing any challenges that arise in scaling up bio-input production.
Industrial Development Corporation of Odisha (IDCO): The Industrial Development Corporation of Odisha (IDCO) plays a crucial role in scaling up bio-input production by providing essential infrastructure support for establishing biofertiliser, biopesticide, and biostimulant plants. IDCO could facilitate support in land allocation, developing industrial parks, and offering logistical support necessary for setting up centralised bio-input production centres.
Odisha Skill Development Authority (OSDA): OSDA could collaborate with the Department of Biotechnology to organise training programmes that ensure a skilled workforce for the efficient operation and maintenance of centralised biofertiliser and biopesticide production plants. OSDA could help in developing customised training modules, partner with industry experts to deliver high-quality content, and facilitate job placements for trainees.
State Agricultural Universities (SAUs): SAUs conduct research and development, identifying new strains and developing effective formulations through rigorous field testing. After successful testing, SAUs mass-produce and supply selected strains to local farmers, ensuring accessibility to high-quality bio-inputs. SAUs could also advocate for bio-input usage and provide extension support to farmers, guiding them on effective application methods.
Odisha Agro Industries Corporation Limited (OAIC): Odisha Agro Industries Corporation Limited (OAIC) plays a significant role in marketing and supplying both chemical and bio-inputs to enhance agricultural productivity in the state. To enhance the availability of bio-inputs in the state, the department could mandate or incentivise retailers to allocate a portion of their inventory to bio-inputs.
Odisha State Co-operative Marketing Federation Limited (MARKFED): Odisha State Co-operative Marketing Federation Limited (MARKFED) could warehouse and supply bio-inputs to primary agricultural cooperative societies (PACS). To enhance bio-input distribution, MARKFED can implement strategies that streamline logistics and ensure timely delivery to PACS, thereby improving access for local farmers.
Agricultural Promotion and Investment Corporation of Odisha Limited (APICOL): APICOL could promote investment in agricultural enterprises such as biofertiliser, organic fertilisers and biopesticides production units through the capital investment subsidy under the Mukhyamantri Krishi Udyog Yojana (MKUY). It could guide such enterprises by offering support in project formulation, counselling, enterprise development, and project implementation.
Investments across value chain: Private investors and financiers can supply the capital needed to establish and expand bio-input production facilities. They can invest in infrastructure development and technology upgrades to enhance the efficiency and scale of bio-input production. They can also invest in research and development initiatives to discover new formulations, improve production techniques, and enhance the efficacy of bio-inputs. Private companies can establish distribution networks and marketing channels to effectively reach farmers and promote the adoption of biofertilisers, biopesticides, and organic fertilisers. They can provide technical assistance, training, and extension services to help farmers understand the benefits and proper use of bio-inputs.
Collaboration: Industries, such as agriculture, food processing, and biotechnology, can collaborate with bio-input manufacturers to develop innovative products and solutions tailored to the specific needs of Odisha's agricultural sector. These industries can also serve as potential bio-input customers, further driving demand and market growth. By partnering with academic institutions and research organisations such as ICAR and OUAT, they can accelerate innovation and bring new bio-input products to market.
CSOs can play a significant role in motivating and providing technical and financial support to motivated farmers or SHGs to set up bio-input resource centres. CSOs could also provide other forms of hand-holding support such as creating business plans and establishing market linkages.
Overcoming challenges to scale bio inputs
1. Low awareness and adulteration issues: Farmers are unaware of the benefits of bio-based fertilisers. A general lack of trust is further exacerbated by the prevalence of adulterated bio-input products in the market. As producers resort to cost-cutting measures such as using lower-quality raw materials or reducing production time, the use of these cheap adulterated organic fertilisers disappoints farmers with their ineffectiveness, leading to a generalised mistrust of organic fertilisers among farmers and genuine bio-input producers (Khurana and Kumar 2020).
Way forward: Implementing targeted education programmes aimed at enhancing farmers' understanding of bio-based fertilisers can help them identify fake and adulterated products. There needs to be stricter implementation of quality assurance and regulatory frameworks to ensure that only safe and effective bio-based fertilisers are available. Facilitating rigorous testing of products and conducting frequent inspections of bio-input production units to check for substandard and fake products, with severe punishment for producers failing to meet the quality standards, could help address the issue of low-quality bio-inputs (Khurana and Kumar 2020).
2. Regulatory and licensing hurdles: The bio-input industry needs to work on a cumbersome regulatory landscape for biopesticides and biostimulants as the licensing authority rests with the central government, which results in extensive paperwork, the need for multiple certifications, and more expensive licensing processes than chemical inputs. Another challenge is non-inclusion of natural farming inputs in the fertiliser control order (FCO), despite continued government focus and attention on promoting natural farming.
Way forward: Establishing a single clearance window and developing streamlined process manuals outlining regulatory requirements can expedite the registration process by simplifying the licensing procedures for manufacturers. These measures could reduce the complexity and costs associated with licensing. Inclusion of natural farming inputs in the fertiliser control order can help establish product formulation specifications and provide the necessary support, such as access to the growth of the bio-input industry.
3. Raw material availability: Despite the promising growth of the biostimulant market in India, the industry faces challenges related to raw material availability. Seaweed, a crucial raw material for seaweed-based biostimulant, is not widely cultivated within the country, leading some traders to import water-soluble seaweed powder from other countries, dilute it, and sell it as a biostimulant at inflated prices, which negatively impacts domestic biostimulant producers. Furthermore, there is a shortage of essential raw materials like cow urine to make natural farming inputs, hindering the scale up of natural farming (CNI SBSS 2022).
Way forward: Government should provide incentives for the establishment of seaweed cultivation farms in India, ensuring a reliable and cost-effective supply of this critical raw material for the biostimulant industry. Establishment of cow urine collection centres in tribal areas can help in improving access to cow urine among farmers. These centres could collect and store urine from local farmers by making their cow sheds waterproof and providing appropriate slopes to ensure drainage of cow urine into village collection chambers, which would then serve as central storage tanks, facilitating distribution to natural farming practitioners in collaboration with local CSOs and government agencies (WASSAN 2022).
4. Limited demand for bio-inputs: Farmers practising sustainable agriculture may initially show great interest in purchasing bio-inputs, but this enthusiasm often wanes after one or two crop cycles due to the increased tendency of farmers to revert to conventional farming methods. Moreover, there is demand for only selected natural farming inputs, like Beejamrut, which often limits the market potential for a broader range of natural input products. This low and uncertain demand prevents the bio-input industry from maximising capacity utilisation and deters further investment in the sector (Khurana and Kumar 2020). Successful bio-input production is insufficient as it needs to be backed by a large sales team to generate demand among farmers. This demand generation should be backed by the availability of these biological products at input shops near farmers, a critical factor in increasing their utilisation and demand.
Way forward: One way to increase the availability of bio inputs is by mandating government-regulated input shops to stock bio-inputs as some percentage of their overall inventory. Another way is to leverage the existing supply chains of fertiliser cooperatives to distribute bio-inputs, ensuring their availability at every local input shop (Khurana and Kumar 2020).
5. Infrastructure-related challenges: Shelf life of natural farming inputs such as jeevemruthum is limited. This along with the lack of adequate storage facilities at the community level significantly impacts distribution of bio-inputs.
Way forward: Investing in decentralised storage facilities, leveraging existing distribution networks of public sector undertakings (PSUs) handling chemical fertilisers, and implementing robust inventory management systems can help minimise losses by ensuring timely delivery of bio-inputs.
6. Lack of systematic research: ICAR institutes and state agriculture universities need to refine the package of practices (PoP) and build credibility regarding the efficacy of natural farming inputs to increase farmers' uptake. Similarly, technology transfer for biofertilisers and biopesticides is extremely slow from laboratory to mass production (Khurana and Kumar 2020), and even then, the performance of biofertilisers and biopesticides under in situ conditions needs to be significantly improved.
Way forward: There is a need for systematic research to address the effects of dung and urine from various species on jeevamritha and beejamritha, optimal application quantities and frequencies, creating longer-lasting concentrates, and the impact of natural farming under different crop combinations and agro-climatic conditions (Kumar et al. 2020). There is a pressing need for multidisciplinary research to bridge the gap between laboratory findings and field applications (Yadav and Yadav 2024).
1. Risk to food security: Despite the promise of natural farming to enhance soil and human health while reducing the cost of cultivation, its adoption remains low. One of the major reasons for farmers' non-adoption is fear of production loss when switching to natural farming (Smith et al. 2020).
Mitigation: Farmers should adopt a phased transition to increase the chances of successful adoption of natural farming by prioritising rainfed areas in tribal regions where the usage of chemical fertilisers is already low (Abraham et al. 2022). Supportive policy initiatives, including financial incentives like subsidies or grants, can offset initial costs and reduce financial risks. These initiatives could include grants for training in natural farming methods or insurance schemes to protect against production loss during the transition period. More research by state agriculture universities is needed to assess the impacts of natural farming input on crop yields and soil health.
2. Risk of drudgery for women: The drudgery faced by women in agriculture is significant, particularly in the context of natural farming input production, which is labour-intensive and often relies heavily on female labour (Paliath 2022).
Mitigation: To alleviate this burden, it is essential to explore the integration of technological solutions, such as the solar-based drava jeevamrutham (DJ) unit developed by WASSAN (WASSAN 2023)8 . By mainstreaming such technologies, we can reduce the physical strain on women and enhance their efficiency in agricultural activities, ultimately promoting gender equity in farming practices.
3. Risk to biodiversity: Improper handling of biopesticides can accidentally release pathogens into the wild, potentially harming beneficial insects, wildlife, and even humans.
Mitigation: Researchers must conduct extensive screening to select strains targeting pests without affecting beneficial organisms. Before releasing any biopesticide into the market, rigorous laboratory studies and field trials that simulate real-world conditions must be carried out to observe any unintended effects on non-target species (Chakraborty et al. 2023; Yadav and Yadav 2024).
The bio-input value chain consists of the following sub-value chains: 1) biofertilisers and biopesticides, 2) biostimulants, 3) natural farming inputs, 4) organic fertilisers, and 4) indigenous seed value chain. Each sub-value chain consists of four phases: 1) business development, 2) design and pre-construction, 3) construction and commissioning, and 4) operations and maintenance. The scope of the bio-input value chain is limited to only biofertilisers and biopesticides, biostimulants, and natural farming inputs sub value chains. Within these sub-value chains, we have restricted the scope to only direct jobs from the operations and maintenance phase. Below are the additional considerations for scoping-
Our analysis captures only value chain-related activities that create additional employment. Therefore, we excluded the indigenous seed production value chain, which refers to producing seeds from locally adapted plant varieties, because it mirrors crop production, and existing seed processing units can process the additional indigenous seeds produced.
The rationale behind the exclusion of organic fertilisers from our scope of work is that the government already supports the production, marketing, and supply of organic fertilisers, such as FOM and PROM, through the market development assistance (MDA) programme. This programme specifically targets the production of FOM and PROM as a byproduct during CBG production (PIB 2023). Our calculations show that only ~1 per cent of the FOM/PROM generated during the production of CBG by 2030 is needed to meet Odisha's organic fertiliser requirements. Therefore, the creation of additional organic fertiliser production units is unnecessary.
Market sizing (in units):
Estimating the market sizing in units for respective bio inputs:
Biofertilisers and biopesticides: To determine the amount of biofertiliser and biopesticide required to scale up organic farming by 2030, we distributed the gross cropped area among 27 commonly grown crops based on their percentage of Odisha's total gross cropped area. We calculated each crop's biofertiliser and biopesticide needs according to the recommended package of practices (PoP). We assumed that 100 per cent of farmers practising organic farming would adopt these centrally produced bio-inputs following the recommended PoP for respective crops.
Jobs estimation:
1. Biofertilisers and biopesticides:
An average production facility produces biofertilisers for the first nine months and biopesticides for the remaining three months of the year. Industry consultations with five players producing biofertilisers and biopesticides provided data to calculate the FTE per MT of biofertilisers and biopesticides. This was done by dividing the total number of full-time employees at the production facility by its annual capacity. This information gathered from industry consultations aligns with the information in the detailed project report (DPR) on a 200-tonne production unit for biofertilisers and biopesticides.
Total number of jobs that can be created during operation and maintenance of biofertilizer and biopesticide production units in Odisha by 2030 is calculated using full-time equivalent (FTE) per MT of biofertiliser and biopesticide coefficient and potential market size.
Total FTE = FTE/MT of biofertilisers and biopesticides X Total MT biofertilisers and biopesticides required as per scenario considered
2. Biostimulants:
Industry consultations with two players producing seaweed-based biostimulants provided data to calculate the FTE per MT of biostimulant produced by dividing the total number of people employed full-time in the production facility by the facility's annual capacity.
We calculated the total jobs by multiplying the FTE required to produce the amount of biostimulant needed for one hectare of land by the total area in hectares considered in the ambitious scenario.
3. Natural farming inputs:
Natural farming inputs, such as beej amruthum, are primarily liquid-based, have a short shelf life, and require large quantities per hectare, making centralised production models impractical (Khurana and Kumar 2020). Therefore, the government has proposed a 50-hectare local radius within which BRC entrepreneurs will operate, supplying inputs to nearby villages (PIB 2023).
The production of natural farming inputs, such as jeevamrutham, is demand-driven and seasonal, with a shorter shelf life. Families or communities managing BRCs often perceive bio-input sales as a supplementary activity rather than a core business, with their primary motivation being personal use and surplus products distributed within limited social networks (Mohan et al. 2023).
A BRC operating within a 50-hectare radius can generate an average annual profit of approximately 2.8 lakh INR ($3,351)9 , sufficient to cover the average household expenditure in rural areas of Odisha10 . In the local village economy, these BRCs play a crucial role in helping farming households earn a decent wage. Therefore, evaluating the total number of entrepreneurs created, based on whether the average annual profit of a BRC exceeds the average rural household expenditure, is a more accurate measure of livelihood generation.
Consultations were held with nine BRCs (six from Andhra Pradesh, one from Odisha, and two from Madhya Pradesh) to capture data on the number of people employed, types of inputs produced, average capacity utilisation, and production capacity.
Note that the 50-hectare model currently relies on the net cropped area. To convert this into the gross cropped area, we multiply it by Odisha’s cropping intensity, which is 1.57. We then calculate the total number of 50-hectare models required to transition 5.1 per cent of Odisha's gross cropped area to natural farming (NF). This calculation assumes that 37.4 per cent of the farmers will produce their own inputs. We based the 37.4 per cent rate of NF input adoption on an analysis of primary data received from CEEW's large-scale longitudinal impact assessment of the community-managed natural farming programme in Andhra Pradesh, India.
Each local BRC entrepreneur will run a BRC model, leading to one job generation. We calculate the total number of 50-hectare BRC models required using the formula:
Total number of 50 hec BRC models required = (0.374*(5.1/100)*total gross cropped area in Odisha in hec)/(50*Odisha’s cropping intensity)
Table 1: The bio input wise FTE considered are as follows:
The maximum number of jobs are created in the production of natural farming units. These jobs are low-skilled, compared to jobs created during the operation and maintenance of biostimulants, biofertilisers and biopesticides.
Market opportunity (in value) estimation
Biofertiliser and biopesticides: To estimate the potential market opportunity for biofertilisers in Odisha, we multiplied the total amount required by 2030 by the sale rate of INR 230/kg from the OUAT biofertiliser production unit. For biopesticides, we used the price of Azadirachtin 1500 ppm, set at USD11 9.6 /litre. This price is based on the Meghalaya government's approved rate12 of USD16 0.48 for 50 ml of Azadirachtin 1500 ppm.
Biostimulant: To estimate the potential market opportunity for biostimulants in Odisha, the total amount of biostimulants required by 2030 for BAU and the ambitious scenario was multiplied by the sale rate of the biostimulant production unit, set at USD16 6.63/litre (CSMCRI n.d).
Natural farming inputs: To estimate the potential market opportunity for natural farming in Odisha, we multiplied the total amount of natural farming inputs required by 2030 for an ambitious scenario by the selling prices of the inputs. The selling prices in USD11 per litre are USD 0.18 for jeevamrutham7 , USD 0.30 for neemastra7 , and USD 0.30 for handi khata13 .
Investment opportunity estimation
1. To calculate total investment required to realise projected market opportunity, we only considered capital expenditure (CAPEX) costs. When the total number of units needed by 2030 resulted in decimal places, the number was rounded off to the nearest whole number
Total Investment Opportunity = (Total number of units required by 2030) x (CAPEX required to set up one unit)
2. The capital cost for setting up a bio-input production unit varies significantly depending on capacity, type of input, technology, raw materials used, and other factors. Tentative project costs for different bio-input types are provided below:
References
Amit Khurana and Vineet Kumar. 2020. State of Organic and Natural Farming: Challenges and Possibilities, Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi
Padma T. V. 2019. ‘What is preventing the widespread adoption of biopesticides in India?’ Mongabay
Cao, Andi, Lili Guo, and Houjian Li. 2022. "How does land renting-in affect chemical fertiliser use? The mediating role of land scale and land fragmentation." Journal of Cleaner Production 379 (2022): 134791.
Kurniawati, A., Toth, G., Ylivainio, K., & Toth, Z. 2023. Opportunities and challenges of bio-based fertilisers utilisation for improving soil health. Organic Agriculture, 13(3), 335-350.
Gupta, Niti, Saurabh Tripathi, and Hem Himanshu Dholakia. 2020. Can Zero Budget Natural Farming Save Input Costs and Fertiliser Subsidies? Evidence from Andhra Pradesh. New Delhi: Council on Energy, Environment and Water
Fertiliser association of India. 2023. Annual review of Fertiliser production and consumption 2022-23https://www.faidelhi.org/general/AR-Ex-Sum.pdf
Pathak, Vinay Mohan, Vijay K. Verma, Balwant Singh Rawat, Baljinder Kaur, Neelesh Babu, Akansha Sharma, Seeta Dewali et al. 2022. “Current status of pesticide effects on environment, human health and it’s eco-friendly management as bioremediation: A comprehensive review.” Frontiers in Microbiology, 13, 962619.
Smith, Jo, Jagadeesh Yeluripati, Pete Smith, and Dali Rani Nayak. 2020. "Potential yield challenges to scale-up of zero budget natural farming." Nature sustainability 3, no. 3: 247-252.
Jiménez, Oswalt R., Amalia C. Bornemann, Yelzen E. Medina, Kendipher Romero, and Juan R. Bravo. 2023. "Prospects of biological inputs as a measure for reducing crop losses caused by climate change effects." Journal of Agriculture and Food Research 14: 100689.
Pingali, Prabhu L. "Green revolution: impacts, limits, and the path ahead." Proceedings of the national academy of sciences 109, no. 31 (2012): 12302-12308.
Mishra, Jitendra, Venkatesh Dutta, and Naveen Kumar Arora. 2020. "Biopesticides in India: technology and sustainability linkages." 3 Biotech 10, no. 5: 210.
Kumar, R., Kumar, S., Yashavanth, B.S., Meena, P.C., Indoria, A.K., Kundu, S., Manjunath, M. 2020. Adoption of Natural Farming and its Effect on Crop Yield and Farmers' Livelihood in India. ICAR-National Academy of Agricultural Research Management, Hyderabad, India.
Chakraborty, Nilanjan, Rusha Mitra, Somrhita Pal, Retwika Ganguly, Krishnendu Acharya, Tatiana Minkina, Anik Sarkar, and Chetan Keswani. 2023. "Biopesticide consumption in India: Insights into the current trends." Agriculture 13, no. 3: 557.
Sagarika. n.d. “Sagarika Liquid.” Accessed December 20, 2023. https://sagarika.com/sagarika_liquid.html
Malkangiri. n.d “Expression of interest for selection of Cluster-level self help group for establishment of Bioinput production unit under the programme.” Accessed January 2024. https://malkangiri.odisha.gov.in/sites/default/files/2023-12/2023100439.pdf
CSMCRI. n.d. “Process for preparation of liquid seaweed plant bio-stimulant (LSPB) from brown algae-sargassum.” Accessed December 15, 2023. https://www.csmcri.res.in/node/8126
EAC international consulting. n.d. “FOM: Potential to transform India’s fertiliser landscape with a biogas byproduct.” Accessed December 29, 2023. https://eac-consulting.de/fom-potential-to-transform-indias-fertilizer-landscape-with-a-biogas-bypro duct/
Department of Agriculture and Farmers' Empowerment, Government of Odisha, 2020. SAMRUDHI: Agriculture Policy 2020. [pdf] Available at: https://agri.odisha.gov.in/sites/default/files/2021-05/SAMRUDHI%20-Agric... 20 June 2024].
Medina, Gabriel da Silva, Rosana Rotondo, and Gustavo Rubén Rodríguez. 2023. "Agricultural Bio-Inputs as an Innovative Area of Opportunity for Agro-Industrial Growth in Developing Countries: Lessons from Argentina." World 4, no. 4: 709-725.
Protergium. n.d. "Bio Inputs | An Alternative to Chemical Inputs in Agriculture." Accessed June 7, 2024. https://www.protergium.com/bio-inputs.
PIB. 2023. “Promotion of Natural Farming.” Press Information Bureau. March 14, 2023. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1906884
PIB. 2023. “The GOBARdhan initiative to get a boost as the new guidelines will turbocharge uptake of organic fertiliser produced from the plants.” September 25, 2023. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1960589#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20guidelines%2C%20MDA,plants%20under%20the%20GOBARdhan%20initiative.
NCNF. 2020. “Bio-input Resource Centre: Natural farming Technical Process Manual.”National Coalition for Natural Farming.
WASSAN. 2022. “Collective Efforts for Supplying Inputs for Zero Budget Natural Farming in Tribal Regions.” Watershed Support Services and Activities Network. https://www.wassan.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Collective-Efforts-for...
Kumar, Vineet. 2023. “Union Budget 2023-24: India’s farmers can take to organic agriculture with proper support.” Down-to-earth. February 23, 2023.
Yadav, Anurag, and Kusum Yadav. 2024. "Challenges and Opportunities in Biofertilizer Commercialization." SVOA Microbiology 5, no. 1: 01-14.\
Hoda, Anwarul, Ashok Gulati, Harsh Wardhan, and Pallavi Rajkhowa. 2021. "Drivers of agricultural growth in Odisha." Revitalising Indian agriculture and boosting farmer incomes: 247-278.
Mohan, Aneesh, Abhishek Saxena, Asmita Chaudhari and C Shambu Prasad. 2023. “The promise and potential of Bio-input Resource Centres (BRCs): Scaling-Up Grassroot Innovations.” Small farm incomes, July 26, 2023.
CNI SBSS. 2022. “Challenges in Natural farming.” CNI SBSS, June 23, 2022.
Paliath, Shreehari. 2022. “In Andhra Pradesh, women are taking a lead role in the transition to natural, sustainable farming.” Scroll, October 9,2022.
Charyulu, D. Kumara, and Subho Biswas. 2011. “Organic input production and marketing in India: Efficiency, issues and policies.” Allied Publishers.
Lou, X. F., and J. Nair. 2009."The impact of landfilling and composting on greenhouse gas emissions–a review." Bioresource technology 100, no. 16: 3792-3798.
Ansari, Arbiya Naseem, and Zeba Sheereen. 2022. "An Analysis of Fertiliser Subsidies in India." Saudi J Econ Fin 6, no. 12 : 406-412.
Patidar, Rishabh, Kartheek Nitturu, Deepak Yadav, and Hemant Mallya, 2024. Evaluating Net-zero Trajectories for the Indian Fertiliser Industry: Marginal Abatement Cost Curves of Carbon Mitigation Technologies. New Delhi: Council on Energy, Environment and Water.
Natividad. 2022. “Promoting bio-resource centres as a model to improve soil health and fertility.” Accessed March 3, 2024.
https://aidenvironment.org/promoting-bio-resource-centers-as-a-model-to-...
FAO. n.d. “Regional Seminar. Bioinputs: Investment Opportunities to Promote the Development of Sustainable Agri-Food Systems in Latin America.” Accessed February 20, 2024.
https://www.fao.org/americas/events/event-detail/Regional-Seminar-Bioinp...
WASSAN. 2023 Linkedin,
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/wassanindia_solar-based-drava-jeevamrutha...
Abraham, Sijo, Shanal Pradhan, and Apoorve Khandelwal. 2022. CMRETAC-CEEW. Policy Study on Sustainable Agriculture. Jaipur: Chief Minister's Rajasthan Economic Transformation Council.