The devastating floods that swept across Punjab this year have reignited an urgent debate over the inadequacy of existing relief measures and the pressing need for a robust crop insurance policy. Farmers, already reeling from repeated climate-induced losses, argue that piecemeal compensation announcements cannot address the scale of devastation they face. With erratic rainfall, unseasonal heat waves, and floods becoming annual occurrences, Punjab’s agricultural economy is being systematically destabilised, leaving farmers with mounting debts and little hope of recovery.
The lived experience of the farming community underscores just how fragile the current system is. In 2022, an untimely rise in temperature just ahead of the wheat harvest slashed yields across vast swathes of farmland. In 2023, heavy rainfall disrupted sowing patterns, while this year’s floods submerged acres of paddy and destroyed not just crops but also homes, livestock, and agricultural infrastructure. Although the Punjab government announced compensation of ₹20,000 per acre, farmers report that their actual losses average between ₹60,000 and ₹70,000 per acre. The gap between relief and real damage has left thousands trapped in cycles of loss and indebtedness.
Farmer leaders argue that crop insurance—subsidised fully by the government—is the only meaningful solution. They point out that natural disasters do not just wipe out standing crops but also delay replanting, erode soil fertility, and destroy irrigation and storage systems. Without a guarantee of protection, each calamity pushes farmers deeper into distress. Leaders like Harinder Singh Lakhowal and Lakhbir Singh insist that unless the Centre and the state bear the full premium burden, farmers cannot access insurance. They stress that insurance must be calculated per acre to reflect actual ground realities rather than arbitrary block-level assessments that often exclude deserving farmers.
The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), led by Harjinder Singh Dhami, has also pressed for urgent reforms. Dhami criticised the government for failing to establish a special committee to evaluate long-term solutions. He warned that farmers remain perpetually vulnerable under the current framework, with token compensations that neither restore livelihoods nor build resilience against future disasters. Dhami demanded that crop insurance be made mandatory and comprehensive, ensuring that farmers do not bear the financial strain of paying premiums or litigating over eligibility during times of crisis.
Political voices have further amplified the demand for reform. AAP MP Malvinder Kang acknowledged the flaws in the Centre’s Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY), pointing out how its structure often benefits insurance companies more than farmers. He called for restructuring the scheme so that claims are linked to per-acre damages rather than the arbitrary threshold of village-wide losses. For Kang, true insurance must guarantee relief during calamities, not abandon farmers to bureaucratic hurdles or selective coverage.
The demand for crop insurance in Punjab is not simply about financial support; it is about securing the state’s agrarian backbone in the face of escalating climate risks. Without systemic change, floods, heat waves, and fires will continue to hollow out farming livelihoods. Farmers and their representatives are therefore united in one message: compensation after calamities is no substitute for comprehensive protection before disaster strikes.
