Andhra Pradesh's farming community is disappointment, largely because of unfulfilled promises and ineffective implementation of schemes that were meant to benefit farmers.
Published Jun 24, 2025 | 8:00 AM ⚊ Updated Jun 24, 2025 | 8:00 AM
No input subsidies have been provided for crops damaged during the Kharif and Rabi seasons due to droughts and cyclones. Pictured, a paddy polder at Ravulapalem in Dr. BR Ambedkar Konaseema district. (South First)
Synopsis: The TDP-led coalition government in Andhra Pradesh must prioritise agricultural issues or risk alienating the very backbone of the state. Promises cannot remain in manifestos; they must translate into action.
As the Andhra Pradesh coalition government marks one year in office, the voices from the state’s vast agricultural heartland present a starkly different picture from the one painted in official claims.
The People’s Pulse Research Organisation conducted a month-long on-ground survey across districts to assess the government’s performance from the perspective of the farming community. The findings reveal a widespread sense of disappointment, largely stemming from unfulfilled promises and ineffective implementation of schemes that were meant to benefit farmers.
Among the coalition’s “Super Six” election promises, a flagship commitment was to provide an annual assistance of ₹20,000 to each farmer under the ‘‘Annadata Sukhibhava’’ scheme. One year later, this promise remains unfulfilled.
Farmers across regions, irrespective of geography or community, expressed unanimous discontent over this unkept promise. Despite the government claiming to have implemented 143 election promises, the farming community questions how many of these pertain to agriculture.
During field visits, farmers consistently demanded that the promised ₹20,000 assistance be credited to their accounts immediately. The expectation built around this scheme has turned into resentment, especially as it was seen as a critical support mechanism for small and marginal farmers.
In contrast, the government’s performance in paddy procurement has been relatively satisfactory. After taking office, the coalition procured 55.57 lakh metric tonnes of paddy and credited ₹13,584 crores to 8.5 lakh farmers, including ₹1,674 crores in pending dues left by the previous regime. This has led to broad satisfaction among paddy growers, with minimal complaints regarding delays or inefficiencies.
However, beyond procurement, most of the promises related to agriculture remain unaddressed. Farmers were particularly vocal about the absence of implementation of schemes like 90 percent subsidy on drip irrigation equipment and ₹2 lakh subsidy for cattle sheds. Despite official claims, none of the farmers reported receiving these benefits, indicating a wide gap between announcements and ground reality.
In Rayalaseema, farmers expressed disillusionment with the government’s promise to turn the region into a seed and horticulture hub. Instead, they report that their lands are being handed over to solar and green energy companies. The prices of horticulture produce have crashed.
For instance, Totapuri mangoes are being sold at ₹4-5 per kilo. Even though processing units had promised ₹12 per kilo, farmers like Koteshwar Rao from Nuzvid said these assurances were never honoured.
The plight of tenant farmers was a recurring theme throughout the study. Despite forming a significant portion of the agricultural workforce, tenant farmers have seen little to no progress in promised reforms. The coalition had committed to enacting a new tenancy law and issuing recognition cards.
Yet, not even one lakh of the estimated 40 lakh tenant farmers have received these cards. Without them, tenant farmers are unable to access crop insurance or secure bank loans.
Srinivas, a tenant farmer from Sattenapalli, voiced frustration over Jana Sena chief Pawan Kalyan’s silence post-election. Despite strong pre-election rhetoric, farmers say he has done little to address their issues after assuming power.
Several farmers reported that the promised subsidies and insurance schemes had not materialised. No input subsidies were provided for crops damaged during the Kharif and Rabi seasons due to droughts and cyclones. Moreover, the government scrapped the free crop insurance scheme, leaving farmers vulnerable to losses.
Despite announcements of minimum support prices (MSP) for various crops, ground reports reveal that traders and middlemen are purchasing produce well below MSP. The declared MSP for moong (₹8,682), green gram (₹7,400), and red gram (₹5,440) is not being honoured. In many areas, produces are being sold for ₹1,500 less than MSP.
A chilli farmer in Guntur lamented trusting the government’s promise of ₹11,700 per quintal, only to face steep losses. Ravi, an aqua farmer, highlighted how promised power subsidies and transformer cost reductions were never implemented. Companies are purchasing fish for ₹500, far below the ₹1,050 international price, leaving farmers at the mercy of exploitative practices.
Another startling revelation from the survey was that over 80 percent of farmers were unaware that Kinjarapu Atchannaidu is the current Agriculture Minister. Even in his own Tekkali constituency, his presence is barely felt. This lack of visibility is in sharp contrast to the nostalgia farmers express for former Agriculture Minister Dr. N. Raghuveera Reddy (2004–09), who they remember as being active and farmer-focused.
Subbareddy, a farmer from Rayalaseema, questioned the priorities of the government. “Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu spent a month reviewing Yogandhra, but how many reviews were held for farmer issues?” he asked.
Across the board, farmers felt let down by both the current and previous regimes. While Dr. YS Rajasekhara Reddy continues to be remembered fondly for his farmer-friendly initiatives like free electricity and loan waivers, his successors have not inspired the same trust. Farmers say that YS Jagan Mohan Reddy did little for agriculture during his five-year term.
Chief Minister Naidu continues to be seen as more focused on urban development and technology than agriculture. Trinatha Rao, a farmer from North Andhra, summed up the sentiment: “Today’s leaders wear suits and stay in farmhouses, but none are willing to get their hands dirty in the field.”
The opposition has also failed to fill the vacuum. While YSRCP leaders made brief visits to affected areas like Guntur and Podili, their engagements were seen as superficial. Communist-affiliated farmer unions continue to raise concerns, but their efforts are often ignored. Jamalayya, a farmers’ union leader, described it as shouting into the void.
As People’s Pulse Research Organisation’s report concludes, the message from the ground is clear: the coalition must prioritise agricultural issues or risk alienating the very backbone of the state. Promises cannot remain in manifestos; they must translate into action.
Farmers still remember NTR for ₹50 electricity per HP and Dr. YSR for decisive pro-farmer reforms. If Naidu seeks a lasting legacy, he must act now. Governance, after all, is not judged by urban skylines alone—but by the hands that till the land. Neglecting the farmer is not just a political risk—it is a structural threat to the state’s future!
(The author is Director, People’s Pulse Research Organisation. Views are personal. Edited by Majnu Babu).
