AIRLINK 178.80 Increased By ▲ 4.52 (2.59%)
BOP 12.49 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.16%)
CNERGY 7.45 Increased By ▲ 0.10 (1.36%)
FCCL 39.97 Increased By ▲ 0.20 (0.5%)
FFL 14.64 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.21%)
FLYNG 28.25 Increased By ▲ 0.85 (3.1%)
HUBC 134.20 Increased By ▲ 2.41 (1.83%)
HUMNL 13.20 Increased By ▲ 0.23 (1.77%)
KEL 4.45 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.68%)
KOSM 6.01 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.17%)
MLCF 52.81 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.09%)
OGDC 213.40 Increased By ▲ 1.64 (0.77%)
PACE 6.00 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.17%)
PAEL 41.90 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (0.34%)
PIAHCLA 15.60 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.45%)
PIBTL 9.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.31 (-3.29%)
POWER 11.21 Increased By ▲ 0.20 (1.82%)
PPL 173.00 Increased By ▲ 2.13 (1.25%)
PRL 34.05 Increased By ▲ 0.89 (2.68%)
PTC 23.93 Increased By ▲ 0.70 (3.01%)
SEARL 93.25 Increased By ▲ 8.48 (10%)
SILK 1.11 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.91%)
SSGC 32.83 Increased By ▲ 0.88 (2.75%)
SYM 16.15 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.25%)
TELE 7.95 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.38%)
TPLP 11.02 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (2.23%)
TRG 58.62 Decreased By ▼ -0.24 (-0.41%)
WAVESAPP 11.11 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.09%)
WTL 1.40 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.71%)
YOUW 3.82 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
AIRLINK 178.80 Increased By ▲ 4.52 (2.59%)
BOP 12.49 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.16%)
CNERGY 7.45 Increased By ▲ 0.10 (1.36%)
FCCL 39.97 Increased By ▲ 0.20 (0.5%)
FFL 14.64 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.21%)
FLYNG 28.25 Increased By ▲ 0.85 (3.1%)
HUBC 134.20 Increased By ▲ 2.41 (1.83%)
HUMNL 13.20 Increased By ▲ 0.23 (1.77%)
KEL 4.45 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.68%)
KOSM 6.01 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.17%)
MLCF 52.81 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.09%)
OGDC 213.40 Increased By ▲ 1.64 (0.77%)
PACE 6.00 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.17%)
PAEL 41.90 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (0.34%)
PIAHCLA 15.60 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.45%)
PIBTL 9.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.31 (-3.29%)
POWER 11.21 Increased By ▲ 0.20 (1.82%)
PPL 173.00 Increased By ▲ 2.13 (1.25%)
PRL 34.05 Increased By ▲ 0.89 (2.68%)
PTC 23.93 Increased By ▲ 0.70 (3.01%)
SEARL 93.25 Increased By ▲ 8.48 (10%)
SILK 1.11 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.91%)
SSGC 32.83 Increased By ▲ 0.88 (2.75%)
SYM 16.15 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.25%)
TELE 7.95 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.38%)
TPLP 11.02 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (2.23%)
TRG 58.62 Decreased By ▼ -0.24 (-0.41%)
WAVESAPP 11.11 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.09%)
WTL 1.40 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.71%)
YOUW 3.82 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
BR100 11,895 Increased By 130.3 (1.11%)
BR30 35,695 Increased By 450 (1.28%)
KSE100 112,744 Increased By 756.9 (0.68%)
KSE30 34,968 Increased By 291.6 (0.84%)

EDITORIAL: The recent steps towards corporatising agriculture in the country, with the government leasing unused state land to corporates and individuals for irrigation and cultivation, have been met with much opposition and apprehension.

As highlighted by a recent report in media concerns exist that corporate farms may undermine the interests of smaller farmers, and concentrate agricultural power in the hands of a few large players that engage in predatory practices.

Despite these fears, the fact remains that the advent of corporate farming could, in fact, potentially represent a step towards revitalising an agricultural sector long stuck in a rut.

Even with agriculture playing a critical role in Pakistan’s economy, as it directly and indirectly supports a significant portion of the population — approximately 70 percent of the populace is connected to agriculture in some capacity, with 37.4 percent of the workforce directly employed in the sector — it has long struggled with challenges such as unequal land distribution, outdated farming practices, water scarcity and resistance to modern technology.

This has considerably hindered its full potential for growth, resulting in significant inefficiencies, low yields, food insecurity and reduced competitiveness in global markets, making it imperative for Pakistan to embrace the path of modernisation.

The outright dismissal of the shift towards corporate farming overlooks the sorry history of the agriculture sector, where a lack of meaningful land reforms has resulted in the concentration of landholdings in the hands of large feudal lords, exploiting smaller farmers and farm labourers.

Additionally, the sector remains under-mechanised, with outdated practices like hand-picking for harvesting leading to contaminated crop yields, compounded by the use of low-quality seeds and reliance on inefficient flood irrigation that wastes water and fails to meet farmers’ requirements, ultimately resulting in persistently low agricultural output and compromised export potential.

A study of agricultural practices in the country reveals that around 27 million acres of land is cultivated on landholdings of six acres or less by small farmers, resulting in inefficient land use and making it difficult to adopt modern farming techniques, advanced machinery and technology, thus hampering productivity.

The case for corporate farming is, therefore, compelling: with larger landholdings and financial resources corporate farms can lower per-unit production costs, increase yields and augment profits through investing in modern machinery, bulk purchasing and specialised labour, leading to significant economies of scale.

The increased investments in infrastructure, advanced technology, modern irrigation practices like drip irrigation, and research and development will likely result in positive spillover effects, benefiting non-corporate farms as well, as they transform their practices to stay competitive. This could put the country on the path to becoming a net exporter of agricultural products and enhance food security.

Most importantly, with provincial governments now required to tax agricultural incomes under IMF stipulations and corporate income tax rates being applied to commercial farming, the expansion of the sector is likely to lead to significant growth in tax revenues.

Despite foot-dragging by provincial governments to introduce legislation taxing agricultural incomes, pressure from the IMF and the potential benefits of expanded tax revenues from corporate farming could eventually compel them to bring in the necessary changes in tax laws.

To allay fears regarding corporate farming, the government must ensure proper safeguards, including transparent land allocation, protection of small farmers’ rights, and ensuring that the benefits of increased agricultural productivity are accrued by local communities through job creation, improved infrastructure and access to modern farming techniques.

Cautionary examples from countries like India show how large corporate farming ventures led to land-grabs displacing many small farmers. Rather than outright rejection of corporate farming, a more considered approach would involve enacting well-crafted regulations that prevent exploitative practices, balance the interests of corporate and small-scale farmers, and protect local communities, fostering sustainable agricultural growth.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025

Comments

200 characters
Mangrove Feb 01, 2025 08:23am
They will become like sugar cartel one day. Need is to have laws and protections against any and all mafias.
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply
Re=== Feb 01, 2025 11:12am
Corporate farming is done by corporations. IN Pakistan it is more like establishment farming.
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply
KU Feb 01, 2025 12:38pm
We seek lofty course to food security but ignore the corrupt nature of subsidies n high costs of fertilizer/fuel due to tax to pay back loans that are plundered but not used for development.
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply
KU Feb 01, 2025 12:40pm
Agri demise is due to low-price farm produce, while same is exported worth billion dollars. It has now entered phase of subsistence farming due to infeasibility. Ignoring tax on middlemen is surreal.
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply
KU Feb 01, 2025 12:48pm
Focused corporate farming in Cholistan is wasteful, area is perfect example of climate change phenomenon of 12k years ago. Just read, 2011 Cholistan Plantation Pvt. Ltd report on soil analysis.
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply
KU Feb 01, 2025 12:54pm
Mother of all questions is, how long will we allow deceit n corrupt habits to persist when food insecurity n hunger is a real possibility in current drought n visible climate affect on scarce water?
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply
Aam Aadmi Feb 02, 2025 08:22am
I am not against corporate farming provided clear framework is there to operate within. However, I am deadly against the involvement of establishment-related elements in corporate farming. I mean it.
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply
Nested Feb 02, 2025 10:43am
Speaking of same Corporates who turned millions of Hactere of Agri Land in Housing Societies. Land already made fertile by Punjabi Farmers, allocate them in Balochistan & border where baren land exist
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply
Nadeem Dogar Feb 02, 2025 12:01pm
Pointless old rant. No research, no credible statistics, no line of thought, rudderless article. Unsubstantiated and substance less. Regrets.
thumb_up Recommended (1) reply Reply
Mushtaq Mirani Feb 02, 2025 01:17pm
Diagree with your arguments. The unused land of Sindh should be allotment to the landless farmers. It will reduce poverty and unemployment in the rural areas.
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply
Tariq Qurashi Feb 03, 2025 04:39pm
You need large tracts of land for corporate farming. This means that the only option is to use drip irrigation or sprinkler irrigation to bring unused and dry lands under the plough.
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply