For decades, Kashmir’s agriculture has been stuck in a loop: meetings, files, schemes and slogans—while the soil waits in silence. If there’s one truth that stares us in the face, it is this: you cannot manage farming from a swivel chair.
A few past directors have been visiting farms almost on a daily basis, which is very useful, however, it has to be a practice across the board. Policies fail not because of bad intent, but because those drafting them have zero boots-on-ground exposure. Here’s the proposition: make it mandatory for all top agricultural officers —Directors, CAOs, JDs — to spend at least 7 days a month on farms. Why? Here are nine compelling reasons, each backed by data, logic, and urgency.
1. Field Presence Directly Boosts Farmer Trust
In a 2024 Budgam farmer perception survey (N=312), 74% said they had never seen a senior agri officer in their village. In the same survey, 68% said they don’t trust department advice, believing it to be outdated or recycled. Visibility equals credibility. A senior officer in the field improves not only trust but also compliance with good agri-practices
2. Ground Realities Are Lost in File Filters
Agricultural policies often look good on paper but collapse in implementation. Why? Because the reports reaching the top are massaged, inflated, or incomplete. Field visits break the bureaucratic echo chamber. Officers see the actual bottlenecks: a defunct borewell, an absentee VLW, a failed vermicompost unit—all invisible in PDF reports.
3. More Field Days = Higher Farmer Satisfaction
A comparative study across five districts in 2023 found a positive correlation between officer field presence and farmer satisfaction. Kupwara, where officers reportedly spent the most time in the field (avg. 4 days/month), recorded 60% farmer satisfaction, while Pulwama with just 1 day had only 39% satisfaction. (See visual above.)
4. Real Feedback Improves Scheme Design
Take the example of the KCC loan scheme. In Anantnag, many farmers still believe it is only for orchardists, not cultivators. A direct field engagement would reveal such miscommunication. When officers listen to farmers, they design better, more accessible, and inclusive programs.
5. Curbing Corruption Starts from the Top
There are whispers—often justified—that fertilizers, subsidies, and machinery allocations get diverted. Field presence acts as preventive vigilance. A surprise visit to an input distribution camp is far more effective than a “review meeting.” It signals accountability and disrupts local nexus networks.
6. It Exposes Weak Links in the Chain
Officers sitting in directorates can’t know which AEA hasn’t visited his beat in 3 months, or which VLW has become a ghost employee. But visit a village unannounced, and you’ll see which link in the chain is broken. This information is invaluable for real reforms in extension delivery.
7. It Humanizes the Officer-Farmer Relationship
Right now, most farmers see agriculture officers as remote, inaccessible, and elitist. That gap must be bridged. A simple walk through mustard fields or a conversation under an apple tree changes perceptions both ways. It injects empathy into governance—something AI and dashboards can’t replicate.
8. It Improves Officer Performance Too
Studies in Rajasthan and Telangana show that officers who spend regular time in the field develop sharper policy instincts, respond faster to crises (like blight or unseasonal rains), and write better utilization reports. It’s not charity—it’s professional growth through soil-based intelligence.
9. It’s the Only Way to Future-Proof
Kashmir’s Agri Economy
With climate change, pest outbreaks, and input inflation hitting farmers hard, the future of agriculture demands real-time responsiveness. Field visits are no longer a courtesy—they are a necessity. Drones can map fields. Apps can record yields. But only a human can understand a farmer’s hesitation, hope or helplessness.
