are unlikely to have recovered very much since then, but the point is that that fall seems to have triggered, with a few months' lag, a sharp and sustained increase in the rate of price increases.

The price rise for pulses is even starker. Looking back over the past five years, from the beginning of 2003 until early 2005, wholesale prices of pulses were actually declining for the most part.

Around June 2005, there appeared to be a decisive shift towards steady price increases. In November 2005, the annual rate of increase crossed the 10 per cent mark to clock 13.4 per cent.

Over the 12 months of 2006, the average annual rate of increase was about 32 per cent, with the highest rate of month-on-month increase (October 2006) being almost 44 per cent.

The situation has moderated somewhat, but hardly enough to provide relief; the January and February 2007 rates of increase were 24 and 22 per cent, respectively.

Over this period, production displayed a pattern entirely consistent with the price movements for a commodity that cannot be stocked. Output rose in the first few years, during which prices were falling.

It peaked at almost 15 million tonnes during 2003-04, the year of the fabulous monsoon. It declined in subsequent years, though by apparently not as much as to trigger the extremely sharp price response. Demand-side factors are presumably also at work here.

However, the bottom line is that a widening supply-demand imbalance is putting enormous pressure on prices. Production will, no doubt, respond favourably in the next cropping cycles, but, significantly, less than 15 per cent of the area under cultivation for pulses is irrigated.

A positive supply response will depend heavily on the performance of the monsoons.

Could we have imported our way out of this situation? Possibly, as far as wheat is concerned, had we acted when stocks were showing signs of falling below the optimality benchmarks.

It may be too late now; as the RBI Governor's statement on January 31 pointed out, the global wheat market is particularly tight right now and likely to remain that way for some time.

Not really, as far as pulses go; we are by far the largest producer and consumer of pulses in the world and international markets are extremely thin.

The above analysis highlights the imperative for a variety of agricultural reforms that people have been talking about for years but never reach implementation. We can now expand the range of consideration to cross-border cultivation arrangements for pulses, like China is doing in some Latin American countries, to secure long-term food supplies and we are doing for oil.

But, as I said before, none of these is going to provide immediate relief. "Let them eat paneer" will invite the same political reaction as it did in France around the time of the French Revolution. One possible measure: cash relief to households that have been identified to be below the poverty line.

But, can we trust our governance mechanisms to target this effectively? The bottom line: even as the share of agriculture in GDP shrinks, it still has the ability to spoil the party.
 
The author is chief economist, Crisil. The views here are personal. Subir Gokarn in New Delhi
Source: source image