SUBSIDIES to farmers have played a major role in the development of agriculture in Sarawak given the fact that farming is a capital intensive venture with a gestation period often fraught with uncertainties before the harvest.

While some may view subsidies as counter-productive because it could lead farmers to be too reliant on government aid we have to accept that it is a measure that has to be taken because that farmers would find it very difficult to succeed without any form of help from the government.

Malaysia is not the only nation subsidising farmers especially in food production.

The United States for example poured more than $143 billion into its agriculture industry between 1994 and 2004.

This is because agriculture is not only the cornerstone of the economy but it also holds the key to a nation’s stability as relying wholly on imported food is unhealthy for the economy of any country.

The state government has always placed the agriculture industry as one of the top priorities in its development plans and subsidy schemes for farmers is one of the measures it takes to develop the industry.

However, it is inevitable that some farmers abuse the subsidies by selling the fertilisers and pesticides they received for quick gains.

The actual extent of this abuse is difficult to gauge but the fact that it exists calls for closer scrutiny on the implementation of the subsidy scheme.

When Minister of Modernisation of Agriculture Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri Dr George Chan broached the idea of replacing subsidies with incentives for farmers last Sunday, he was taking a step in the right direction in addressing the problem.

The ministry should delve deeper into the reasons behind the problems bugging the present subsidy scheme and learn from its weaknesses and shortcomings of its implementation.

It is likely that the crux of the problem in the implementation of the subsidy scheme is monitoring the farmers’ utilisation of the fertilisers and pesticides they received through the subsidy scheme.

Dr Chan rightly pointed out that the incentive scheme is easier to monitor and leaves little room for abuse, making it a viable replacement for the present practice of handing out subsidies to farmers.

However, more studies need to be done on the incentive scheme before it could be implemented to replace the present subsidy scheme.

The suggestion by Dr Chan to look into the possibility of introducing incentives instead of giving subsidies to farmers is a reflection the government’s effort to improve the delivery of aid to the agricultural sector.

• 3rd Voice is a regular feature initiated by AZAM and Sarawak Development Institute. Feedback can be forwarded to diana@azam.org.my