India’s food-security debate has long focused on a familiar set of questions: How much food are we producing? Are our foodgrain stocks sufficient? Will the monsoon support the next harvest? But there is another question that deserves far greater attention: who will grow India’s food in the future? India is one of the world’s youngest major economies, with a median age of around 29 years. Yet the people engaged in agriculture are considerably older. Various studies have placed the average age of Indian farmers at around 50-55 years. This creates a striking demographic paradox. A young country is increasingly dependent on an ageing agricultural workforce. While this may not immediately threaten food production, it raises an uncomfortable question about the long-term sustainability of India’s food system.

For generations, farming was passed from parents to children as both an occupation and a way of life. That intergenerational transfer is now weakening. Rural youth are increasingly looking towards cities, formal employment and non-farm occupations. The reasons are not difficult to understand. Farming is exposed to weather uncertainty, fluctuating market prices, rising input costs, fragmented landholdings and uncertain returns. For a young person standing at the beginning of a career, agriculture can appear less like an opportunity and more like a gamble. The aspiration gap among rural youth is particularly revealing. A study cited in Down To Earth discussing India’s agrarian distress found that only 1.2 per cent of surveyed rural youth aspired to become farmers. Such a low aspiration towards farming should concern a country whose food security still depends heavily on millions of cultivators. It is not that young people do not value agriculture. Rather, many do not see traditional farming as a viable pathway to a secure and aspirational future.

Youth migration, therefore, should not simply be viewed as a rural social problem. In many cases, it is a rational economic decision. When agriculture offers uncertain earnings and urban employment offers the possibility of a regular wage, migration becomes an understandable choice. Research on rural youth migration has identified low profitability, stagnant productivity and inadequate remuneration as important factors pushing young people away from agriculture. In one study, 67.43 per cent of youth identified the lack of remunerative prices arising from unorganised markets as a major push factor behind migration.

The structural characteristics of Indian agriculture make this problem even more complicated. According to the National Statistical Office’s Situation Assessment Survey of Agricultural Households, 70.4 per cent of agricultural households operate less than one hectare of land. Small holdings can make it difficult to achieve economies of scale, invest in modern technology or withstand production and price shocks. For a young person, inheriting a small and fragmented holding may not necessarily represent an attractive economic opportunity.

Farm household incomes have increased over time, but the absolute level remains modest. The average monthly income of an agricultural household increased from Rs 6,426 in 2012-13 to Rs 10,218 in 2018-19. The increase is important, but so is the context in which it must be understood. Agriculture competes with a rapidly expanding non-farm economy, and young people increasingly compare the uncertain returns from cultivation with the more predictable earnings available elsewhere. The problem, therefore, is not simply that Indian farmers are getting older. An older farmer can possess decades of knowledge about soil, weather, crops, livestock and local farming systems. Such knowledge is invaluable. The deeper concern is what happens when there is no younger generation willing to inherit, adapt and build upon that knowledge.

An ageing agricultural workforce could have consequences beyond the farm household. Agriculture may face increasing labour shortages, greater dependence on mechanisation and changes in cropping patterns. Marginal holdings could be increasingly leased out, consolidated or even left uncultivated where farming becomes economically unviable. Labour-intensive sectors such as horticulture and livestock could be particularly affected. Over time, these changes could influence not only rural livelihoods but also the availability and affordability of food. This is where the issue becomes a food-security concern. Food security is usually understood in terms of food availability, access and affordability. But behind every tonne of grain, every litre of milk and every kilogram of vegetables lies a farmer and a workforce. India can invest in irrigation, seeds, fertilisers, agricultural research and digital technologies, but none of these can substitute for the people who ultimately produce food.

India’s demographic dividend makes this contradiction even more striking. The country has a large young population, but agriculture is struggling to attract that very generation. The question should not be whether young people are leaving villages. Migration can be a pathway to better opportunities and higher household incomes, and it should not be treated as something that must simply be stopped. The more important question is whether agriculture offers enough economic opportunity for young people to choose it voluntarily.

Farmers of the future
This requires changing the way we think about the future farmer. The answer is not to persuade every young person to return to traditional cultivation. Instead, agriculture must become an ecosystem of modern and profitable opportunities. A young person may not want to cultivate a small plot using conventional methods, but that same person may be willing to run a precision-farming enterprise, a farm machinery service, a dairy unit, a food-processing business, a storage facility, an agri-logistics enterprise or a digital agricultural service.

This is where initiatives such as the Indian Council of Agricultural Research’s Attracting and Retaining Youth in Agriculture programme assume importance. By encouraging rural youth to develop enterprises in agriculture and allied sectors, such initiatives recognise that the future of rural employment cannot depend solely on traditional crop cultivation. But such interventions need to go beyond isolated projects. Young agricultural entrepreneurs need access to finance, markets, technology, infrastructure, skills and reliable value chains.

Most importantly, young people need to see agriculture as a profession with dignity and upward mobility. A farmer should not have to choose between farming and prosperity. If agriculture is to retain its next generation, it must offer opportunities to earn, innovate and grow. India’s agricultural policy has historically concentrated on increasing production, protecting farmers from price risks and ensuring food availability. Those priorities remain essential. But the country’s food-security strategy now needs another dimension: generational sustainability.

The Green Revolution answered one of India’s most pressing questions of the twentieth century—how to produce enough food for a growing population. The agricultural challenge of the twenty-first century may be more complicated. India must produce enough food while dealing with climate change, shrinking natural resources, fragmented holdings and changing consumer demand. And behind all these challenges lies a fundamental human question: will there be enough young people willing to farm?

India does not need to romanticise farming to retain its youth. It needs to make farming economically rational. The future of Indian agriculture will ultimately depend not only on better seeds, smarter machines or more resilient crops, but also on whether a young Indian can look at agriculture and see a future worth choosing.

Because when we talk about India’s food security in the decades ahead, perhaps the most important question is not how much food will India produce? It is simply this: Who will grow it?

The central government has urged states to ensure timely fund release and recruitment for vacant posts as it prepares to upgrade 300 priority Krishi Vigyan Kendras by March 2027. The government has also emphasised the role of states in contributing to the National Pension System and retirement benefits for Krishi Vigyan Kendra employees. A review meeting chaired by Union Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan on September 7, 026 discussed strengthening infrastructure and logistics at Krishi Vigyan Kendras, or KVKs, and ensuring regular financial support and adequate human resources. The government also said issues relating to fund-flow mapping and delays in fund release had emerged in some states.

The issue is significant because the Indian Council of Agricultural Research’s (ICAR) High Power Committee on Management of Krishi Vigyan Kendras had pointed to the need to strengthen human resources and financial management about 13 years ago.

Vacant posts flagged earlier
The ICAR committee’s 2013 report made clear recommendations on recruitment at KVKs. It said host institutions should ensure recruitment to all sanctioned posts. It also recommended that KVKs should not be approved or given annual grants unless the respective state government agreed to fill all sanctioned positions.

The committee had also recommended that employees appointed to KVKs should not be transferred for at least five years. It called for strengthening promotion systems and post-retirement benefits, including gratuity and a contributory provident fund. This means several institutional issues flagged by the ICAR committee in 2013 — vacant posts, financial benefits and staff stability — have again come to the fore in the 2026 review meeting.

731 centres, 638 districts
According to ICAR, India currently has 731 Krishi Vigyan Kendras covering 638 rural districts. KVKs are key hubs for training farmers, demonstrating new agricultural techniques in the field and carrying technical information between agricultural scientists and farmers. Previous government impact assessments have also shown the reach and utility of these centres. According to an assessment by the National Institute of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, cited by ICAR, an average KVK reached 43 villages and about 4,300 farmers.

The assessment found that technologies adopted from KVKs led to increased productivity in 42 per cent of cases and higher crop income in 33 per cent of cases. About 20 per cent of respondents also reported a reduction in farming labour or effort. These figures, however, should not be read as evidence of a nationwide increase in farmers’ incomes. They refer to results reported by farmers who adopted technologies through KVKs.

Performance gaps
A government assessment categorised KVKs by performance, placing 43 per cent of centres in category A, 48 per cent in category B, 8 per cent in category C and 1 per cent in category D. The assessment noted problems such as vacant staff positions and new or incomplete infrastructure in category C and D centres. This raises an important question: as KVKs expand in number and responsibility, do they have the staff and resources needed to fulfil their growing mandate?

Timely funds matter
At the recent review meeting, the government set a target to upgrade the infrastructure and logistics of 300 priority KVKs by March 2027. Detailed project reports have been received from Maharashtra, Gujarat, Goa and Chhattisgarh. Other states are at different stages of preparation and implementation.

But states have also been asked to ensure smooth and timely fund flow to Agricultural Technology Application Research Institutes and KVKs. This is particularly important for seasonal agricultural programmes. If field demonstrations or training on new technologies take place after the relevant cropping season, their practical benefits may be limited.

The Pulses and Oilseeds Programme gives a wider picture. In 2026-27, the programme aims to cover 12,349 hectares through 353 KVKs and districts across 24 states. According to the government, work has been completed on 9,750 hectares. The meeting also discussed delays in fund release in some states.

Entrepreneurship centres planned
The government is also working on a plan to establish entrepreneurship and skill development centres in all KVKs by December 2028. These centres are expected to be linked to agriculture-based enterprises, technical institutions and the agricultural potential of each district. KVKs are also being given a role in district-specific activities under the Pradhan Mantri Dhan-Dhanya Krishi Yojana. States have been asked to provide adequate financial support for this. This means KVKs are likely to carry greater responsibility in the coming years — not only for farmer training, but also for agricultural entrepreneurship, skill development and district-specific schemes.

India’s average annual per-capita protein consumption is set to more than triple by 2070, rising from 9.5 kilogrammes in 2025 to 30 kg, as rising incomes, urbanisation, population growth and changing dietary preferences reshape the country’s food system, according to a new report.

But India’s protein transition is unlikely to resemble the meat-reduction debates playing out in Europe and the United States, as the country is starting from a fundamentally different point: its animal agriculture is still largely smallholder-run rather than industrial, and its future protein demand is expected to remain anchored in dairy and pulses, alongside significant growth in eggs, poultry and seafood, while red meat plays only a minor role.

The report, Charting India’s Protein Transition, was released on September 8, 2026 by Asia Research & Engagement (ARE), a Singapore-based organisation working on energy and protein transition, in partnership with the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI).  Yet that lower-intensity starting point does not mean India’s protein system is without climate risk.

Climate math
The report models what this tripling of demand could mean for emissions if current production and consumption patterns continue largely unchanged, and finds that the scale of the increase, even from a modest base, carries significant consequences for India’s climate trajectory. Drawing on parameters from the Science Based Targets Initiative’s (SBTi) Food, Land and Agriculture Guidance (2022), the analysis explores how different pathways affect emissions, resilience and protein security.

India’s food system is both increasingly exposed to climate-related pressures and a significant driver of them. The report pointed out that agriculture already accounts for around 14 per cent of India’s greenhouse gas emissions, with livestock responsible for more than half of that share. If demand rises unabated, the report projects annual emissions from India’s protein system would reach 1.92 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent by 2070 under a business-as-usual pathway (BAU) — more than seven times the report’s estimated climate-safe threshold of 0.25 gigatonnes, and equivalent to nearly two-thirds of India’s current total annual energy-related emissions.

The climate-safe threshold itself is defined in the report as the annual emissions level India’s food system would need to stay within to remain compatible with a 1.5°C-aligned global carbon budget.  Through 2070, this pathway would generate approximately 44.55 gigatonnes of cumulative excess emissions above that threshold, equivalent to about 16 years of India’s energy-related CO2 emissions (at 2023 levels), the authors of the report noted. “This underscores the scale of the long-term climate risk embedded in current consumption and production trends,” they said.

Dairy biggest driver 
Much of this projected emissions growth is driven by the continued dominance of dairy, the report finds. While consumption of low-emitting pulses is also expected to rise sharply, those gains would be outweighed by the scale of growth in emissions-intensive dairy production, which the report identifies as the single largest driver of India’s protein footprint through 2070.

Dairy is already India’s biggest source of animal protein and is projected to account for the largest share of future protein growth: protein consumption from milk alone is expected to rise from under 5 million tonnes in 2025 to 13.3 million tonnes by 2070, far outpacing poultry, eggs or seafood.  On a per-capita basis, milk protein consumption is projected to climb from 1.63 kg in 1990 to 13.1 kg by 2070 — pushing well past the moderate dairy intake benchmarks recommended under the EAT-Lancet Commission’s Planetary Health Diet.

While pulses will become the second-largest protein category, increasing substantially from 2.61 kg to 9.12 kg per capita, the report said India’s future protein system is likely to remain heavily shaped by dairy regardless.

That poses a distinct challenge, because unlike many highly industrialised dairy systems, India’s dairy remains predominantly smallholder-supplied.  India produces approximately 248 million tonnes of milk annually — more than any other country — but most of it comes from households that own just two to three animals, the report said.

The sector’s central challenges, it notes, are therefore not only emissions and methane intensity but also low productivity, feed deficits, animal health and welfare constraints, and fragmented aggregation systems.  India’s dairy sector has already expanded output significantly without relying solely on herd growth: Milk production rose 63.6 per cent over the decade to 2024, from 146.3 million tonnes in 2014-15 to 239.3 million tonnes in 2023-24, while bovine productivity increased 27.4 per cent between 2014 and 2022 — among the fastest such gains globally. “The challenge ahead is not simply producing more milk; it is improving productivity, resilience, water, and emissions efficiency without undermining rural livelihoods,” the report said.

Seafood, eggs, poultry growing fast
Beyond dairy, the report projects seafood-derived protein consumption to grow nearly five-fold, from 0.6 million tonnes of protein equivalent in 2025 to 2.9 million tonnes by 2070 — modest in absolute terms but one of the faster growth rates among India’s protein categories.

The sector spans inland aquaculture, marine fisheries, shrimp exports and local fish markets, each shaped by different economic and environmental pressures.  India’s total fish production has more than doubled over the past decade, from 9.6 million tonnes in 2013-14 to 19.5 million tonnes in 2024-25, while seafood exports — driven largely by shrimp — reached roughly $7.3 billion in 2024-25.  Further, the report finds eggs and poultry represent some of India’s fastest-growing protein categories, though from a much smaller base. Egg consumption is projected to rise to 25.7 million tonnes by 2070 and poultry to 16.2 million tonnes, pushing per-capita protein from these sources to 1.85 kg and 1.79 kg respectively — figures the report said remain broadly within the moderate intake ranges recommended by the EAT-Lancet Commission’s Planetary Health Diet. Unlike dairy, however, egg and poultry production is already far more commercially concentrated and vertically integrated, while backyard systems contribute a far smaller share.

Just transition
The report’s strongest results come from what it calls an integrated pathway, where efficiency gains across dairy, poultry and seafood systems occur alongside greater uptake of pulses, traditional plant proteins and emerging alternatives.  Under this scenario, annual emissions fall to 0.30 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent by 2070 — still above the estimated climate-safe threshold of 0.25 gigatonnes, but it narrows the gap, reducing cumulative excess emissions through 2070 to 8.37 gigatonnes. But the report cautions that this transition must also be just. Dairy remains smallholder-led, while poultry and fisheries rely on contracted or fragmented producer networks, meaning many transition costs could be pushed upstream onto farmers, contract growers and small and medium enterprises.

“Without financing targeted at smallholders, procurement reform, and stronger producer support systems, sustainability requirements risk becoming another cost pushed upstream onto farmers and MSMEs. A resilient protein transition will therefore require not only technological improvements but mechanisms that ensure the process is just: consultation, costs, re-skilling, incentives, access and benefits distributed equitably across the value chain,” it said.

Pulses: India’s underleveraged advantage
To close the gap left by production efficiency alone, the report also calls for a demand diversification pathway, in which alternative proteins substitute a rising share of conventional animal protein — roughly 10 per cent by 2035, growing to 35 per cent by 2070 — while traditional plant proteins continue growing along their existing trajectory.  That combination, building on the production-mitigation scenario, brings annual emissions down further to 0.50 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent by 2070, with cumulative excess emissions falling to 12.90 gigatonnes. Pulses do much of the work in this scenario, the report said, describing them as “India’s underleveraged advantage”, as they have relevance beyond direct household consumption.

“Protein-rich crops such as chickpea, pea, and lentil can be processed into concentrates, isolates, and other functional ingredients used in plant-based meat and dairy and egg alternatives,” it said, adding that this is a trajectory built on a food source already deeply embedded in Indian diets, unlike the newer plant-based and cultivated proteins many Western transition plans depend on. Currently India imports around 90 per cent of its plant-protein isolates and concentrates, according to Ministry of Food Processing Industries data cited in the report, because domestic extraction and processing capacity has not kept pace with raw production.

The drought-prone Bundelkhand region of Uttar Pradesh has received plentiful rains this year. And while farmers’ kharif crops have suffered, there is hope for the winter (rabi) crop. According to the India Meteorological Department (IMD), Mahoba received 948 mm of rainfall, which is 76 per cent more than the normal rainfall, till September 8, 2026, against the normal of 537 mm. Mahoba is tied with Chitrakoot in Bundelkhand for the highest rainfall in the whole of Uttar Pradesh after Sambhal (89 per cent). Chitrakoot also recorded 76 per cent more rainfall, receiving 1,202 mm of rainfall against the normal of 684 mm.

Of the five districts in Uttar Pradesh that received more than 1,000 mm of rainfall, three are from the Bundelkhand region. These include Banda, Chitrakoot and Hamirpur. Banda received 1,114 mm of rainfall, Chitrakoot 1,202 mm and Hamirpur 1,026 mm of rainfall. Of the other districts of the Bundelkhand region that fall in Uttar Pradesh (it straddles Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh), Lalitpur received 24 per cent and Jalaun 21 per cent excess rainfall. However, the situation is different in Jhansi. It has recorded 14 per cent less rainfall than normal. The plentiful rain caused most of Bundelkhand’s ponds, for which the region is famous, to be completely filled, and many are beginning to overflow.

In Mahoba district, all the Chandel-era ponds, built nearly 1,000 years ago, are now brimming. For the past several days, the main pond, Kirat Sagar, has been overflowing, flooding its lower reaches. Prem Singh, a progressive farmer in Banda district, told Down To Earth that the monsoon has become extremely unpredictable. Farmers are having a difficult time deciding which crops to sow. He explained that there were indications of less rainfall at the beginning of the monsoon this year. Due to this uncertainity, at least 50 per cent of farmers did not sow paddy.
Bundelkhand is known for its oilseed and pulse crops. During the monsoon, sesame, peanuts, sorghum, black gram, and in some areas, cotton are cultivated. According to Singh, all these crops have been completely destroyed. Only rice has survived, and if rains occur in September, when the rice is fully grown, it will also suffer significant losses.

However, Rajkumar Chaurasia, a betel farmer in Mahoba and vice-president of the Chaurasia Samaj Seva Samiti, considers this monsoon rain to be good for the rabi crop and says that it will definitely result in a better harvest.
According to Chaurasia, it is after a decade that he has seen so much rain in Mahoba; so much that the ponds of the Chandel period have been filled to the brim and are overflowing. He explained that these ponds were built in such a way that when one pond was filled, the excess water would go to the other pond. Kirat Sagar is the last pond in this chain which is now completely filled. Its water kept overflowing and flowing onto the roads for several days.

According to Ashok Nigam, a senior journalist living in Banda, excessive rainfall flooded village roads and blocked drainage channels, causing a large number of mud houses to collapse. He noted that this excessive rainfall is what caused the historic flood in Chitrakoot. The Mandakini river was flowing 9 metres above the danger mark. This had never happened before. The river has flooded before, but it was typically 3 to 3.5 metres above the danger mark.

A narrow strip of zinnias blooms along the middle of a vegetable field in Rayalaseema region in Andhra Pradesh. Bees move from flower to flower before disappearing among the vegetable plants. Hoverflies pause in the morning light, while a ladybird beetle searches beneath a leaf where aphids have gathered. Between two chilli plants, a spider waits in a web that becomes visible only when sunlight catches its threads. A few steps away, an old cotton saree covers a raised bed. Beneath it, the soil is cool, dark and moist. Outside the cloth, the exposed soil has begun to harden under the summer heat. None of these would appear in a farmer’s harvest record. The bee will not be weighed; the spider will not be sold and the fungi living beneath the soil will never feature in a production report.

Yet they are part of the harvest
Across the dry landscapes of Rayalaseema, farmers are experimenting with ways to bring some of these ecological relationships back into their fields. Flower borders, companion crops, farm ponds, trees, staggered planting and even discarded cotton sarees are being used alongside vegetable cultivation. These practices may appear unrelated. Together, however, they address a larger question: how can a farm create the ecological conditions that allow crops to thrive?

What a farm leaves out
Modern agriculture has become highly skilled at designing production. Seeds are selected for specific conditions, and irrigation is calculated according to crop requirements. Similarly, nutrients are applied based on recommendations and expected yields are estimated before harvest.

But a farm is more than its crop
Where will pollinators find food before the vegetables begin flowering? Where will beneficial insects survive after the crop is harvested? Where will birds perch? How will soil organisms survive months of intense heat? Where will rainwater slow down instead of running off?

Such questions are rarely part of a conventional farm plan
As agricultural landscapes have become increasingly simplified, trees have disappeared from field boundaries, flowering plants have been removed, and bare soil has become common. Habitats have become fragmented. Some of the ecological functions lost in the process have been replaced with external inputs such as fertilisers for nutrients, pesticides for pest control and plastic sheets for ground cover. These interventions can address immediate problems. But rebuilding ecological relationships can make farms less dependent on replacing every function of nature with an external input.

A flowering border, for instance, can provide food and shelter for pollinators and beneficial insects. A tree can offer shade, organic matter and habitat. Ground cover can reduce soil temperature and conserve moisture. A pond can provide irrigation while creating a refuge for birds, insects and other organisms. The crop remains at the centre of the farm. But it no longer stands alone.

Two landscapes, one lesson
The idea is not new.
Years earlier, organic vegetable farms in France used ponds, fruit trees, companion crops, flowering herbs and staggered planting to create diverse farm landscapes. In Rayalaseema, farmers are adapting some of the same principles to a very different climate and farming system. The similarity lies less in the techniques than in what they are trying to achieve: keeping different forms of life connected within the farm.

Farmers working with WASSAN have been experimenting with such approaches in vegetable fields. Flowering plants are grown along field edges, crops are combined to create greater diversity, planting is staggered so that different plants flower at different times, and organic materials are used to protect soil from heat and moisture loss. For farmers in a dry region, these are practical concerns. Soil that retains moisture can reduce stress on crops. Flowering plants can attract pollinators. Habitat for spiders and other predators can help regulate insect populations. Ecological diversity therefore becomes more than a conservation goal. It becomes part of the farming system.

There were trees on every bund
One summer afternoon, beneath the shade of a tamarind tree, a group of elderly farmers recalled how farming had changed during their lifetime. Venkataramana, 79, looked across the fields and said, “When I was young, there were trees on every bund.” He remembered birds nesting in those trees and feeding on insects in the fields. Flood irrigation created small pools where birds drank and bees gathered. Fruit trees, vegetables and wildflowers meant that something was often in bloom.

Families also grew a range of vegetables, pulses and oilseeds. The purpose was not to increase biodiversity as a measurable outcome. It was simply how farming and household food needs were organised. His recollections point to something that has increasingly become a subject of scientific and agricultural interest: farms function best when different elements support one another. Trees provide habitat. Flowers provide food for pollinators. Birds and predatory insects can help regulate pests. Plant residues feed soil organisms. Water bodies support life beyond irrigation. The farmer may manage these elements separately, but their functions are interconnected.

Designing for life
This changes the way a farm can be planned. A pond can be designed not merely as an irrigation reservoir but as habitat. A fruit tree can be retained for more than its produce. Flowering borders can be planned to ensure that pollinators have food beyond the crop’s flowering period. Companion crops can provide shade, habitat or barriers to pests. Even an old cotton saree spread across a vegetable bed can have an ecological role. By shielding the soil from direct sunlight, it helps retain moisture and moderate soil temperature, creating better conditions for organisms living beneath the surface. None of these interventions is a substitute for good farming. Nor can ecological design eliminate drought, pests or market uncertainty. It creates a farm that is better able to respond to those uncertainties. The principle is simple. The farmer does not have to replace every ecological function with a purchased input if the farm itself can support some of those functions.

The harvest before the harvest
The vegetables harvested from a field are the most visible outcome of farming. The less visible processes that make them possible begin much earlier. Pollinators need food before the crop flowers. Predatory insects need habitat before pests appear. Soil organisms need moisture and organic matter before roots begin drawing nutrients. Birds need trees and other places to shelter throughout the year. These relationships rarely appear in calculations of yield. Yet they determine how a field performs over time. For farmers in Rayalaseema, restoring them does not necessarily mean returning to an earlier form of agriculture. It means adapting ecological principles to present-day conditions such as using whatever resources and knowledge to create more diverse and resilient farms. A productive farm, therefore, is not simply one that produces vegetables. It is one that keeps the conditions for future harvests alive.

The vegetables may leave the field after harvest. The bees, spiders, birds, fungi, earthworms and soil organisms remain. And long after one crop has been harvested, they continue preparing the ground for the next. That is the harvest before the harvest.

Views expressed are the author’s own and don’t necessarily reflect those of Eco Matrix Intelligence