By; Fayaz Ahmad Lone
I am an apple grower from Khiram, Anantnag. Today, I write not merely as a grower, but as someone who shares the concerns, hardships and aspirations of thousands of fruit growers across Kashmir.
For an apple grower, the arrival of harvest season is not simply a commercial event. It is the culmination of an entire year of hard work, investment, uncertainty and hope. From blossom to fruit, a grower invests time, money and labour while constantly battling unpredictable weather, rising input costs, labour shortages and a host of other challenges.
When the fruit finally ripens, every grower naturally wants to harvest it at the right stage, secure a fair price and recover the investment made throughout the year. For many families, annual financial commitments, children’s education, debt repayments and future plans depend heavily on the income generated from this single crop.
But there is one reality that an individual grower simply cannot control: the total quantity of fruit arriving in the market and the demand available for that produce.
A grower sitting in a remote village cannot possibly know the exact volume of fruit reaching different markets, the stock position at various terminals, prevailing demand or the purchasing capacity of traders and consumers.
Yet, whenever market congestion occurs or prices fall, the grower is often among the first to be questioned. Why should a grower be held responsible for a problem that is beyond his individual control?
The scale of apple production in Kashmir has grown tremendously over the years. Such a vast horticulture economy requires equally strong systems for market intelligence, storage, transportation, demand management and price stabilisation. This is where government institutions and market-regulating mechanisms have an important role to play.
Institutions such as the National Horticulture Board (NHB) and APEDA have an important role in strengthening horticultural infrastructure, developing market linkages, improving post-harvest management and expanding export opportunities. Digital market systems and other agricultural interventions can also contribute to better coordination between production and demand.
There is also a need to significantly expand Controlled Atmosphere (CA) storage capacity and make modern storage facilities accessible to ordinary growers.
Storage should not become a mechanism that primarily benefits those with greater financial strength. Its purpose should be to give growers an opportunity to preserve quality produce and sell it when market conditions are more favourable.
A grower should not be forced to sell simply because he lacks the financial capacity or storage facility to hold his crop. In an age of technology, market information should reach a grower before his produce reaches the market.
There should be a reliable Market Information System (MIS) providing growers with timely and credible information about estimated crop arrivals in major markets, demand and supply conditions, prevailing prices, storage availability, export opportunities, transportation constraints, market congestion and domestic and international demand trends.
If growers are expected to make informed decisions, they must first have access to reliable information. A farmer should know where demand exists, what prices are prevailing, whether markets are already congested and whether storage or alternative markets are available before sending his produce out of the orchard. Without such information, the grower is effectively making decisions in the dark.
A disturbing pattern has emerged over the years. For quality, the grower is held responsible. For quantity, the grower is held responsible. For weather and climatic conditions, the grower bears the consequences. And when markets become congested, the grower is questioned again. But can an individual grower control all these factors?
A farmer cannot control the weather. He cannot control national production. He cannot determine how much fruit reaches a particular mandi. He cannot decide international demand. He cannot control transportation disruptions or the purchasing decisions of large market players.
Then why should the entire burden of a systemic market failure fall upon the grower?
If the problem is systemic, the response must also be systemic. Various agricultural and economic mechanisms—including e-NAM, fertilizer support mechanisms, market interventions, storage infrastructure and other government schemes—can contribute to building a more resilient agricultural economy.
e-NAM, for instance, seeks to digitally connect agricultural markets and improve market access. Such systems can become more meaningful for growers if reliable, timely demand and price information actually reaches producers at the village level.
Similarly, government policies relating to essential commodities, storage and market intervention should be examined whenever serious market disruptions occur. The objective should not merely be to react after prices collapse. The system must anticipate problems before thousands of growers are forced to sell their produce under distress.
For many growers, the journey from blossom to harvest represents months of investment, sacrifice and uncertainty. But when the produce finally reaches the market, a sudden fall in prices or severe market congestion can wipe out the returns they had expected from an entire year’s labour.
This is not merely an economic issue. It affects household incomes, children’s education, debt repayment, future orchard investment and the wider rural economy. If growers repeatedly suffer losses despite producing quality fruit, the long-term consequences can be serious. It can discourage investment in orchards, increase indebtedness and weaken an economic sector on which a large number of families depend.
The solution, therefore, cannot simply be to blame the grower. The solution must lie in better planning, better market intelligence, adequate storage, efficient logistics, stronger market linkages and timely institutional intervention.
I appeal to the concerned government agencies, horticulture authorities, NHB, APEDA, market institutions, policymakers and all other stakeholders to look at the issue from the perspective of the grower.
When market congestion occurs, the grower should not automatically become the accused. Instead, the entire supply chain should be examined—from production estimates and market arrivals to storage capacity, transportation, demand, exports and, ultimately, price realisation. A farmer who spends an entire year nurturing an orchard deserves more than blame.
He deserves information, infrastructure, market access and a fair opportunity to recover the value of his labour. Our growers are not the problem. They are an essential part of the solution. It is time to move from blame to planning, from uncertainty to market intelligence, and from distress selling to a properly managed horticulture economy.
I hope this submission serves as an eye-opener for officials, policymakers and all stakeholders associated with the horticulture sector. The grower has done his part—from blossom to harvest. It is now the system’s responsibility to ensure that his hard work does not end in bankruptcy.
(About the Author: Fayaz Ahmad Lone is an apple grower from Khiram, Anantnag, with firsthand experience of Kashmir’s horticulture sector.)
(NOTE: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of Kashmir Dot Com, its editorial staff, or its affiliates. KDC does not endorse or guarantee the accuracy of any claims made in this opinion piece.)
