Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 37776,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Financial Express, 13 November, 2018, https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4685907,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 37776,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayi Yojana (PMKSY),Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana,Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-Financial Express

While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot; title=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 37776,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Financial Express, 13 November, 2018, https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4685907,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 37776
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayi Yojana (PMKSY),Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana,Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-Financial Express

While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot; title=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-Financial Express

While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-Financial Express<br /><br />While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.<br /><br />The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&mdash;34% in Saurashtra&mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?<br /><br />Please <a href="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/" title="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/">click here</a> to read more. <br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 37776,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Financial Express, 13 November, 2018, https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4685907,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 37776,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayi Yojana (PMKSY),Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana,Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-Financial Express

While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot; title=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 37776,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Financial Express, 13 November, 2018, https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4685907,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 37776
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayi Yojana (PMKSY),Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana,Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-Financial Express

While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot; title=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-Financial Express

While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-Financial Express<br /><br />While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.<br /><br />The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&mdash;34% in Saurashtra&mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?<br /><br />Please <a href="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/" title="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/">click here</a> to read more. <br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67fdf645af6d8-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 37776,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Financial Express, 13 November, 2018, https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4685907,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 37776,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayi Yojana (PMKSY),Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana,Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-Financial Express

While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot; title=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 37776,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Financial Express, 13 November, 2018, https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4685907,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 37776
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayi Yojana (PMKSY),Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana,Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-Financial Express

While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Financial Express&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&amp;nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&amp;mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&amp;mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&amp;rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&amp;mdash;34% in Saurashtra&amp;mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot; title=&quot;https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-Financial Express

While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-Financial Express<br /><br />While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.<br /><br />The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&mdash;34% in Saurashtra&mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?<br /><br />Please <a href="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/" title="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/">click here</a> to read more. <br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 37776,
		'title' => 'Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<div align="justify">
-Financial Express<br />
<br />
While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.<br />
<br />
The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&mdash;34% in Saurashtra&mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?<br />
<br />
Please <a href="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/">click here</a> to read more. <br />
</div>',
		'credit_writer' => 'Financial Express, 13 November, 2018, https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 4685907,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 37776,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them',
	'metaKeywords' => 'Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayi Yojana (PMKSY),Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana,Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)',
	'metaDesc' => '
-Financial Express

While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared...',
	'disp' => '<div align="justify">-Financial Express<br /><br />While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.<br /><br />The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&mdash;34% in Saurashtra&mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?<br /><br />Please <a href="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/" title="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/">click here</a> to read more. <br /></div>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 37776,
	'title' => 'Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<div align="justify">
-Financial Express<br />
<br />
While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.<br />
<br />
The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&mdash;34% in Saurashtra&mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?<br />
<br />
Please <a href="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/">click here</a> to read more. <br />
</div>',
	'credit_writer' => 'Financial Express, 13 November, 2018, https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them-4685907',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 4685907,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 37776
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them'
$metaKeywords = 'Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayi Yojana (PMKSY),Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana,Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)'
$metaDesc = '
-Financial Express

While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared...'
$disp = '<div align="justify">-Financial Express<br /><br />While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs&nbsp; 19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio&mdash;claims as a share of the total premium paid&mdash;also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily.<br /><br />The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra&rsquo;s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat&mdash;34% in Saurashtra&mdash; and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation?<br /><br />Please <a href="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/" title="https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/agriculture-needs-govt-boost-both-pmfby-and-pmksy-are-flagging-revive-them/1380001/">click here</a> to read more. <br /></div>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

Agriculture needs govt boost: Both PMFBY and PMKSY are flagging, revive them

-Financial Express While the government has reason to be pleased about the fact that the claims paid to farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) have risen by around 50%, to Rs 15,181 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 10,425 crore in Kharif 2016, what is worrying is the dip in both the number of farmers as well as land area covered by the scheme. More so since, in this scheme, farmers pay just around a fifth of the insurance costs while the Centre and the state governments pay the rest in equal amounts. Since, during this period, the premium paid rose to Rs  19,258 crore in Kharif 2017 as compared to Rs 16,276 crore, this means the claims ratio—claims as a share of the total premium paid—also rose quite significantly, to around 79% in Kharif 2017 versus 64% in Kharif 2016. And yet, the number of farmers covered fell to 3.5 crore in Kharif 2017 versus 4 crore in Kharif 2016, and the area covered dropped to 3.4 crore hectares from 3.8 crore hectares in the same period. Given the farmers pay so little of the premium and the fact that the claims ratio has risen as it has, it is not clear why the scheme is not attracting more farmers; the fall in the coverage is even more curious. One possibility is that the claims are being processed very late, so the farmers are less interested in taking up the scheme voluntarily. The other, more likely, is that the insurance cover is still linked to the number of farmers taking loans from banks and, with more and more farm loan waivers, the number of farmers taking bank loans is falling. In Uttar Pradesh, which had large farm loan waivers, for instance, 2.5 million farmers were covered under PMFBY in Kharif 2017 versus 3.7 million in Kharif 2016; in Maharashtra, the number fell to 8.7 million from 11 million in the same period. Which is why, with Maharashtra asking for `7,000 crore in drought relief, Icrier professor Ashok Gulati argues that this should not be given since, had the state increased its PMFBY coverage, the crop loss would have been paid for by the insurance companies. Also, as he argues, central Maharashtra’s rainfall was just 9% below normal and it was 22% for Marathwada as compared to 24% in Gujarat—34% in Saurashtra— and 23% in Rajasthan. Surely these states should then get a larger compensation? Please click here to read more.