Poor monsoon may have triggered off cold vibes between the NCP chief Sharad Pawar’s nodal agriculture ministry and earth sciences and technology minister Prithviraj Chavan’s domain. The developments are being seen as mirroring the covert tensions between the coalition partners in the key state, which is set to go to the polls later this year. While the India Meteorological Department(IMD), which updates the press on the progress of the rains — seminal to India’s economic growth and food security — is part of the latter, it is the former that has to bear the brunt, in consonance with state governments, of the ground-level work to minimise the adverse impact of a poor monsoon on agricultural output. That mismatch, infact, appear
s to be crux of the problem, with the farm ministry disapproving the latter’s decision to “rush” to update the media on the poor progress of the monsoons in end June. The second stage of monsoon forecasts, infact, confirmed what was becoming increasing apparent countrywide but was as yet to be acknowledged by the government: rainfall for the 2009 south-west monsoon season (June to September was likely to be “below normal” and not “near normal” at 96% of the Long Period Average (89 cms) as forecast in the first stage on April 17. Ironically, the second stage of monsoon forecasts have been made in end June ever since the two stage forecasts began in 2003. From 1988 to 2002, the IMD used the 16-parameter power regression and parametric models developed by noted scientist Vasant Gowariker, who hails from Maharashtra. However, the model failed to forecast the marked failure of the rains in 2002 as a result of which the gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate dipped from 5.8% in the previous year to 4%. Agriculture output fell by 8%. Following that, the IMD adopted (in 2003) a two-stage long-range forecast strategy, of eight and 10 parameters, respectively. The first forecast for the SW monsoon was issued in April, using the eight-group parameter power regression and probabilistic models. An updated forecast is issued by the end of June, using the 10-parameter models. Interestingly, however, while the first stage forecast was announced at a jam packed press conference each year, the second stage forecast was issued as a press statement, cmparatively quietly, a strategy that worked well for the government especially if there was a negative mismatch between the first stage and the second stage forecasts. What appears to have irked the farm ministry intensely is that this year, the earth sciences ministry announced the bleak second stage forecast — which would impact the country’s GDP negatively — at a jam packed press conference, heightening the “adverse publicity” from the media. The farm minister’s perception, sources hold, was that with that one move, the earth sciences ministry turned strobe lights on Mr Pawar and his ministry at an eminently awkward moment, even while heightening panic over a possible countrywide drought. That came to a head on Thursday when Mr Pawar was finally forced to admit to Rajya Sabha that there was indeed a bad monsoon situation in many parts of the country. But, he stressed, he was still “hopeful,” a deliberate pointer to the ministry’s continued insistence that the IMD’s July and August rainfall forecast would turnaround the bad monsoon story. Indeed, it was the farm minister who, in his very first press conference after he took office this time (and long before the negative second stage monsoon forecast), firmly announced his decision to not allow foodgrain exports until the new rice season began in September and stock-taking had been done. The commendably sober (in retrospect) decision came despite a massive 50 million tonnes in procurement that forced the FCI and state agencies to stock twice their storage capacity. Congress sources, though, dubbed the charge against the earth sciences ministry as “baseless”. “The second stage IMD forecast has been issued in end June since 2003. Unlike other years, a media conference could not be held at the time of the first stage forecast since the Election Commission’s model code of conduct had already gone into operation, so one was held at the second conference.”
s to be crux of the problem, with the farm ministry disapproving the latter’s decision to “rush” to update the media on the poor progress of the monsoons in end June. The second stage of monsoon forecasts, infact, confirmed what was becoming increasing apparent countrywide but was as yet to be acknowledged by the government: rainfall for the 2009 south-west monsoon season (June to September was likely to be “below normal” and not “near normal” at 96% of the Long Period Average (89 cms) as forecast in the first stage on April 17. Ironically, the second stage of monsoon forecasts have been made in end June ever since the two stage forecasts began in 2003. From 1988 to 2002, the IMD used the 16-parameter power regression and parametric models developed by noted scientist Vasant Gowariker, who hails from Maharashtra. However, the model failed to forecast the marked failure of the rains in 2002 as a result of which the gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate dipped from 5.8% in the previous year to 4%. Agriculture output fell by 8%. Following that, the IMD adopted (in 2003) a two-stage long-range forecast strategy, of eight and 10 parameters, respectively. The first forecast for the SW monsoon was issued in April, using the eight-group parameter power regression and probabilistic models. An updated forecast is issued by the end of June, using the 10-parameter models. Interestingly, however, while the first stage forecast was announced at a jam packed press conference each year, the second stage forecast was issued as a press statement, cmparatively quietly, a strategy that worked well for the government especially if there was a negative mismatch between the first stage and the second stage forecasts. What appears to have irked the farm ministry intensely is that this year, the earth sciences ministry announced the bleak second stage forecast — which would impact the country’s GDP negatively — at a jam packed press conference, heightening the “adverse publicity” from the media. The farm minister’s perception, sources hold, was that with that one move, the earth sciences ministry turned strobe lights on Mr Pawar and his ministry at an eminently awkward moment, even while heightening panic over a possible countrywide drought. That came to a head on Thursday when Mr Pawar was finally forced to admit to Rajya Sabha that there was indeed a bad monsoon situation in many parts of the country. But, he stressed, he was still “hopeful,” a deliberate pointer to the ministry’s continued insistence that the IMD’s July and August rainfall forecast would turnaround the bad monsoon story. Indeed, it was the farm minister who, in his very first press conference after he took office this time (and long before the negative second stage monsoon forecast), firmly announced his decision to not allow foodgrain exports until the new rice season began in September and stock-taking had been done. The commendably sober (in retrospect) decision came despite a massive 50 million tonnes in procurement that forced the FCI and state agencies to stock twice their storage capacity. Congress sources, though, dubbed the charge against the earth sciences ministry as “baseless”. “The second stage IMD forecast has been issued in end June since 2003. Unlike other years, a media conference could not be held at the time of the first stage forecast since the Election Commission’s model code of conduct had already gone into operation, so one was held at the second conference.”For Further Details Visit At:economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/PoliticsNation/IMD-rains-pains-for-Pawar/articleshow/4770671.cms
No comments:
Post a Comment