Context:

• The Union Cabinet approved the Mission for Cotton Productivity with an outlay of ₹5,659 crore for 2026–31.
• The mission aims to raise cotton lint productivity from 441 kg/hectare (ha) (in triennium ending (TE) 2025-26) to 755 kg/ha by 2031.
• There is a need to evaluate whether this target is achievable amid declining productivity, technological stagnation, and policy constraints.

India's Bt Cotton Success Story:

• A major turning point came in 2002, when the government approved the commercial cultivation of Bt cotton as cleared by the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), marking India's entry into the biotechnology revolution in agriculture.
• Impact of Bt cotton (2002–2014):
  • Introduction of Bollgard (Cry1Ac gene) and later Bollgard II (stacked genes) helped control bollworm infestation.
  • Cotton production increased from 13.6 million bales (2002-03) to 39.8 million bales (2013-14).
  • Cotton acreage expanded by 56%, from 7.6 million ha to 11.9 million ha. Productivity rose by 88%, from 302 kg/ha to 566 kg/ha.
  • India emerged as the world's largest cotton producer and the 2nd-largest
• This period demonstrated how technological innovation can transform agricultural productivity and farmer incomes.

Policy Reversal and Innovation Slowdown:

• After Bollgard II, newer technologies such as Bollgard II with roundup ready flex (RRF) and Bollgard III (three stacked genes with herbicide tolerance), were developed (by MMB (Mahyco-Monsanto Biotech) India) but never commercialised in India.
• Role of price controls:
  • A series of government interventions reduced returns on innovation.
  • For example,
    • 2006: Andhra Pradesh capped seed prices at ₹750 per packet, significantly below market prices. Maharashtra and Gujarat adopted similar measures.
    • 2015: Cotton Seed Price Control Order reduced trait fees by 74%.
    • 2018: National seed price further reduced.
    • 2020: Trait fees were eliminated entirely.
  • As a result, private biotechnology firms withdrew advanced cotton technologies from regulatory consideration, making further innovation commercially unattractive.

Global Competitors Moved Ahead:

• While India halted technological progress, other cotton-producing countries continued adopting advanced biotechnology and precision agriculture.
• Cotton productivity (TE 2025-26 - lint yield (kg/ha)): Australia (2,340); China (2,311); Brazil (1,943); US (976); and India (441) [reported by the International Cotton Advisory Committee].
• The productivity gap reflects differences in technology adoption, R&D investment, regulatory support, and seed innovation ecosystems.
• Brazil, for instance, has leveraged advanced seed technologies and efficient agronomic practices despite having predominantly rainfed cotton cultivation.

Emerging Cotton Crisis:

• India's cotton sector has entered a phase of stagnation and decline.
• Key trends:
  • Cotton production has been declining by around 2% annually since 2014-15.
  • If the earlier growth trajectory had continued, output could have reached 65.3 million bales by 2026.
  • Actual production in 2025-26 stands at only 29 million bales.
  • India has shifted from being a net exporter to importing approximately 4 million bales of cotton.
• This reversal raises concerns about the competitiveness of India's textile value chain and long-term cotton self-sufficiency.

Evaluating the Cotton Productivity Mission:

• The mission's objective of increasing productivity to 755 kg/ha by 2031 is ambitious and welcome.
• However, significant concerns remain:
  • Lack of access to cutting-edge biotechnology available globally.
  • Absence of next-generation genetically modified cotton varieties.
  • Weak incentives for private-sector innovation.
  • Long and uncertain regulatory approval processes.
  • Inadequate public-sector agricultural R&D funding.
• Even if the target is achieved, India's productivity would remain well below current levels in Brazil, China, and Australia.

The Policy Dilemma:

• The cotton productivity cannot be sustainably improved without addressing the innovation ecosystem.
• Two possible pathways:
  • Revive private innovation: Reconsider the Cotton Seed Price Control Order. Strengthen intellectual property protection. Ensure innovators can recover R&D investments.
  • Expand public sector R&D:
    • Substantially increase government funding for biotechnology research.
    • Develop indigenous seed technologies and advanced cotton traits.
    • Strengthen agricultural research institutions and extension services.

Conclusion:

• The Mission for Cotton Productivity acknowledges the seriousness of India's cotton crisis, but productivity gains alone may be difficult without technological renewal.
• The long-term revival of the cotton sector requires a balanced framework that promotes innovation, biotechnology adoption, robust R&D investment, and farmer access to advanced seed technologies.
• Without addressing these structural issues, the mission risks treating the symptoms rather than the underlying causes of declining cotton competitiveness.