Showing posts with label Indian technology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Indian technology. Show all posts

Thursday, July 10, 2008

Inefficient Funding and Agricultural Practices Prevent a Growing India From Feeding Itself

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/22/business/22indiafood.php

India's growth outstrips crops


By Somini Sengupta


International Herald Tribune


June 22, 2008

JALANDHAR, India: With the right technology and policies, India could help feed the world.

Instead, it can barely feed itself.


India's supply of arable land is second only to that of the United States, its economy is one of the fastest growing in the world, and its industrial innovation is legendary. But when it comes to agriculture, its output lags far behind potential. For some staples, India must turn to already stretched international markets, exacerbating a global food crisis.


It was not supposed to be this way.


Forty years ago, a giant development effort known as the Green Revolution drove hunger from an India synonymous with famine and want. Now, after a decade of neglect, this country is growing faster than its ability to produce more rice and wheat.


The problem has grown so dire that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has called for a Second Green Revolution "so that the specter of food shortages is banished from the horizon once again."


And while Singh worries about feeding the poor, India's growing affluent population demands not only more food but also a greater variety.


Today Indian agriculture is a double tragedy. "Both in rice and wheat, India has a large untapped reservoir. It can make a major contribution to the world food crisis," said S. Swaminathan, a plant geneticist who helped bring the Green Revolution to India.


India's own people are paying as well. Farmers, most subsisting on small, rain-fed plots, are disproportionately poor, and inflation has soared past 11 percent, the highest in 13 years.


Experts blame the agriculture slowdown on a variety of factors.


The Green Revolution introduced high-yielding varieties of rice and wheat, expanded the use of irrigation, pesticides and fertilizers, and transformed the northwestern plains into India's breadbasket. Between 1968 and 1998, the production of cereals in India more than doubled.


But since the 1980s, the government has not expanded irrigation and access to loans for farmers, or to advance agricultural research. Groundwater has been depleted at alarming rates.


The Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington says changes in temperature and rain patterns could diminish India's agricultural output by 30 percent by the 2080s.

[IS THIS A BACKHANDED ATTEMPT TO PLACE CLIMATE CHANGE AS THE CAUSE OF ALL OF INDIA'S FUTURE AGRICULTURAL PROBLEMS???]

Family farms have shrunk in size and quantity, and a few years ago mounting debt began to drive some farmers to suicide. Now many find it more profitable to sell their land to developers of industrial buildings.


Among farmers who stay on their land, many are experimenting with growing high-value fruits and vegetables that prosperous Indians are craving, but there are few refrigerated trucks to transport their produce to modern supermarkets.


A long and inefficient supply chain means that the average farmer receives less than a fifth of the price the consumer pays, a World Bank study found, far less than farmers in, say, Thailand or the United States.


Surinder Singh Chawla knows the system is broken. Chawla, 62, bore witness to the Green Revolution and its demise.


Once, his family grew wheat and potatoes on 20 acres. They looked to the sky for rains. They used cow manure for fertilizer. Then came the Mexican semi-dwarf wheat seedlings that the revolution helped introduce to India. Chawla's wheat yields soared. A few years later, the same happened with new high-yield rice seeds.


Increasingly prosperous, Chawla finally bought his first tractor in 1980.


But he has since witnessed with horror the ills the revolution wrought: in a common occurrence here, the water table under his land has sunk by 100 feet over three decades as he and other farmers irrigated their fields.


By the 1980s, government investment in canals fed by rivers had tapered off, and wells became the principal source of irrigation, helped by a shortsighted government policy of free electricity to pump water.


Here in Punjab, more than three-fourths of the districts extract more groundwater than is replenished by nature.


Between 1980 and 2002, the government continued to heavily subsidize fertilizers and food grains for the poor, but reduced its total investment in agriculture. Public spending on farming shrank by roughly a third, according to an analysis of government data by the Center for Policy Alternatives in New Delhi.


Today only 40 percent of Indian farms are irrigated. "When there is no water, there is nothing," Chawla said.


And he sees more trouble on the way. The summers are hotter than he remembers. The rains are more fickle. Last summer, he wanted to ease out of growing rice, a water-intensive crop.


The gains of the Green Revolution have begun to ebb in other countries, too, like Indonesia and the Philippines, agriculture experts say. But the implications in India are greater because of its sheer size.


India raised a red flag two years ago about how heavily the appetites of its 1.1 billion people would weigh on world food prices. For the first time in many years, India had to import wheat for its grain stockpile. In two years it bought about 7 million tons.


Today, two staples of the Indian diet are imported in ever-increasing quantities because farmers cannot keep up with growing demand pulses, like lentils and peas, and vegetable oils, the main sources of protein and calories, respectively, for most Indians.


"India could be a big actor in supplying food to the rest of the world if the existing agricultural productivity gap could be closed," said Adolfo Brizzi, manager of the South Asia agriculture program at the World Bank in Washington. "When it goes to the market to import, it typically puts pressure on international market prices, and every time India goes for export, it increases the supply and therefore mitigates the price levels."


In April, in a village called Udhopur, not far from here, Harmail Singh, 60, wondered aloud how farmers could possibly be expected to grow more grain.


"The cultivable land is shrinking and government policies are not farmer friendly," he said as he supervised his wheat harvest. "Our next generation is not willing to work in agriculture. They say it is a losing proposition."


The luckiest farmers make more money selling out to land-hungry mall developers.


Gurmeet Singh Bassi, 33, blessed with a farm on the edges of a booming Punjabi city called Ludhiana, sold off most of his ancestral land. Its value had grown more than fivefold in two years. He made enough to buy land in a more remote part of the state and hire laborers to till it.


Meanwhile, Chawla's neighbors migrated to North America. They were happy to lease their land to him, if he was foolish enough to stay and work it, he said. Today, he cultivates more than 100 acres.


Last year, on a small patch of that land, he planted what no one in his village could imagine putting on their plate: baby corn, which he learned was being lapped up by upscale urban Indian restaurants and even sold abroad.


At the time, baby corn brought a better profit than the government's price for his wheat crop.


This had been the Green Revolution's other pillar: a fixed government price for grain. A farmer could sell his crop to a private trader, but for many small tillers, it was far easier to approach the nearest government granary, and accept their rate.


For years, those prices remained miserably low, farmers and their advocates complained, and there was little incentive for farmers to invest in their crop. "For farmers," said Swaminathan, the plant geneticist, "a remunerative price is the best fertilizer."


Swaminathan's adage proved true this year. After two years of having to import wheat, the government offered farmers a substantially higher price for their grain: farmers not only planted slightly more wheat but also sold much more of their harvest to the state. As a result, by May, the country's buffer stocks were at record levels.


Nanda Kumar, India's most senior bureaucrat for food, said the country would not need to buy wheat on the world market this year. That is good news, for India and the world, but how long it will remain the case is unclear.


Will greater demand for food and higher market prices enrich farmers, eventually, encouraging them to stay on their land? There is potential, but other conditions, like India's inefficient transportation and supply chains, would have to improve too.


How to address these challenges is a matter of debate.


From one quarter comes pressure to introduce genetically modified crops with greater yields; from another come lawsuits to stop it. And from yet another come pleas to mount a greener Green Revolution.


Alexander Evans, author of a recent paper on food prices published by Chatham House, a British research institution, said: "This time around, it needs to be more efficient in its use of water, in its use of energy, in its use of fertilizer and land."


Swaminathan wants to dedicate villages to sowing lentils and oilseeds, to meet demand. The World Bank, meanwhile, favors high-value crops, like Chawla's baby corn, because they allow farmers to maximize their income from small holdings.


The market may yet help India. Chawla, for instance, has replaced baby corn with sunflowers, prompted by the high price of sunflower oil. For the same reason, he is also considering planting more wheat.

India Should Carefully Study Proposed Future Pharma Business & Technology Models

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Virtual-man-to-aid-pharma-R&D-says-PwC-report/325624/1

'Virtual man’ to aid pharma R&D, says PwC report


Financial Express


June 21, 2008


By 2020, the pharma R&D process may be shortened by two-thirds, success rates may dramatically increase and clinical trial costs could be cut substantially. And how? New computer based technologies will create a greater understanding of the biology of disease and the evolution of ‘virtual man’ to enable researchers to predict the effects of new drug candidates before they enter human beings.


According to a research launched by PricewaterhouseCoopers, entitled `Pharma 2020: Virtual R&D, which path will you take?’
(http://www.pwc.com/extweb/pwcpublications.nsf/docid/B3988A72D5A236BA8025747300343B17/$file/pharma_2020_rd.pdf ), the industry is at a pivotal point in its evolution, particularly in relation to R&D. The patents on many of the medicines launched in the 1990s will expire over the next few years, leaving it very exposed and only four out of the top 10 companies have enough products in their pipelines to fill the impending revenue gap.


Reduced productivity of effective novel treatments in the lab means that additional improvements to R&D are no longer enough. The resulting commercial deficit in pharma has enormous ramifications for industry, society and governments as a whole. In order to remain at the forefront of medical research, help patients live longer healthier lives and deliver the revenue returns that shareholders have come to expect, pharma needs a faster, more predictive way of testing molecules before they go into humans.


Says Sujay Shetty, associate director in PricewaterhouseCoopers for the pharmaceutical practice in India:

“Investments made by the pharmaceutical industry into R&D should not be allowed to suffer, and this issue should be at the forefront of the socio-political agenda in India. As a society we have to be conscious that any financial constraints in pharma leading to reduction in R&D will also lead to reduction in new and improved medication.”


‘Virtual man’ could ultimately evolve from the deployment of existing technologies that are connected in a new way. Models of the heart, organ, cells systems and musculoskeletal architecture are already being developed by academics around the world. Such technologies can be used to simulate the physiological effects of interacting with specific drugs and identify which drugs have a bearing on the course of a disease. Some companies using virtual technology have reduced clinical trial times by 40% and reduced the number of patients required by two thirds.


Of course, virtually-modelled molecules will still have to be tested in real human beings.


However as a complete picture is developed of human biology and reliable biomarkers for identifying and monitoring patients become widely available, pharma companies will be able to optimise their trial designs and minimise the number of patients on whom new medicines are tested. They will develop treatments which have value in the eyes of patients, healthcare payers and for the companies themselves.


“New technologies will help pharma move forward, and will augment its capability of producing treatments which have measurable improvements in safety, efficacy and ease of compliance.


“Such treatments are valuable not only to healthcare spenders but also to companies creating them. They will result in considerable savings, and could also halve development time and attrition rates, thereby reducing the costs per drug radically”, says Sujay.


The necessary in-depth knowledge about the human body and the pathophysiology of disease will be generated through a collaborative research network of pharmaceutical companies, academia, independent research houses, IT providers, industry regulators, payers and providers.


For the first time, pharma will have to consider sharing intellectual property (IP) with other research bodies and potentially new entrants such as IT providers.


Pharma industry across the globe is witnessing two significant trends: Stagnating R&D pipelines and Generic erosion on big pharma’s revenues. MNC pharma companies will see their business eroded due to generic competition by as much as 13% to 40% in the coming five years. Most exposed are Pfizer, Lilly, BMS and Astra Zeneca. The other area where MNC pharma will have to reform is R&D. These are future models which apply to drug development in the western world and which India pharma who have aspirations to become drug discovery companies may do well to study, he added.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS109708+20-Jun-2008+PNW20080620

Pharmaceutical Companies Will Use Virtual R&D to Increase Innovation and ReduceCommercial Deficit, According to New PricewaterhouseCoopers Report, Pharma 2020


NEW YORK, June 20, 2008 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- By 2020 the pharmaceutical researchand development (R&D) process may be shortened by two-thirds, success rates maydramatically increase and clinical trial costs could be cut substantially,according to a report issued today by PricewaterhouseCoopers entitled Pharma 2020: Virtual R&D, which path will you take?


The report forecasts that new computer-based technologies will create a greaterunderstanding of the biology of disease and the evolution of 'virtual man' toenable researchers to predict the effects of new drug candidates before they aretested in human beings. Along with changes underway in the regulatory and socio-political environment, this will enable the pharmaceutical industry toovercome one of the most fundamental issues it needs to resolve over the next decade: The lack of innovative new drugs being introduced into the market.


As outlined in PricewaterhouseCoopers' previous report Pharma 2020: The Vision, the pharmaceutical industry is at a pivotal point in its evolution, particularlyin relation to R&D. The patents on many medicines launched in the 1990s will expire over the next few years, leaving pharma very exposed. Only four out ofthe top 10 companies have enough products in their pipelines to fill the impending revenue gap.


"Plummeting productivity of effective novel treatments in the lab means incremental improvements to R&D are no longer enough," said Steve Arlington,PricewaterhouseCoopers' global pharmaceutical and life sciences industryadvisory leader. "The resulting commercial deficit in pharma has enormous implications for the industry, society and governments as a whole. To remain atthe forefront of medical research, help patients live longer, healthier livesand deliver the revenue returns shareholders have come to expect, pharma needs afaster, more predictive way of testing molecules before they go into humans."


"Equally, as a society we must acknowledge that we cannot afford to suffocate the investments made by the pharmaceutical industry in R&D; a concern that should be high on the socio-political agenda," added Arlington.


"We have to face the issue that if pharma is no longer financially capable of this, there is a question where the next new medicine will come from."


'Virtual man' could ultimately evolve from the deployment of existingtechnologies that are connected in a new way. Some companies using virtualtechnology have reduced clinical trial times by 40 percent and reduced thenumber of patients required by two-thirds. Models of the heart, organ, cellssystems and musculoskeletal architecture are already being developed byacademics around the world. Such technologies can be used to simulate thephysiological effects of interacting with specific drugs and identify whichdrugs have a bearing on the course of a disease.


Of course, virtually-modeled molecules will still have to be tested in realhuman beings. However, as a complete picture is developed of human biology andas reliable biomarkers for identifying and monitoring patients become widelyavailable, pharma companies will be able to optimize their trial designs andminimize the number of patients on whom new medicines are tested. They willdevelop treatments that have value in the eyes of patients, healthcare payersand for the companies themselves.


The necessary in-depth knowledge about the human body and the pathophysiology of disease will be generated through a collaborative research network ofpharmaceutical companies, academia, independent research houses, IT providers,industry regulators, payers and providers.


For the first time pharma will haveto consider sharing intellectual property (IP) with other research bodies andpotentially new entrants such as IT providers.


By 2020, decisions about reimbursement and licensing will fall under theauspices of regulatory bodies that are much more aligned with industry and otherstakeholders. By 2020, the cumbersome, all-or-nothing approach will be replaced by a cumulative process, based on the gradual accumulation of data.


Once there is sufficient evidence to show that a medicine genuinely works and is costeffective in the initial trial population, the regulator will be able to issue a"live license", allowing the sponsoring company to market the treatment on arestricted basis.


With each incremental increase in evidence of safety, efficacy and value, the regulator will extend the license to cover more patients, different indications or different formulations, the study predicts.


The pharmaceutical industry requires assistance in the form of better incentives to research and develop medicines that prevent or cure disease. Today the industry IP frameworks do not provide the incentives needed to alter the agenda from one of treatment to that of prevention and cure, note the authors.


"New technologies can play a major role in helping pharmaceutical companies moveforward -- enhancing its ability to produce treatments that deliver measurable improvements in safety, efficacy and ease of compliance - treatments that have value in the eyes of healthcare payers as well as those of the companies making them," said Anthony Farino, PricewaterhouseCoopers' U.S. pharmaceutical and lifesciences advisory leaders. "They will also deliver substantial savings -- they could collectively halve development times and attrition rates, thereby reducing costs per drug dramatically.


He added, "Technology is not the answer to all pharma's problems. Many companies as well as the infrastructure of regulators and vendors that support the industry will have to make significant strategic, organizational and behavioral changes.


Overhauling R&D requires a decision on whether the organization wants to produce mass-market medicines or specialty therapies[;]

where they want to be located geographically to have access to the best skills or cost base[;]


and whether they want to outsource most of their research and development or keep itin-house.


The choices they make will have a profound bearing on the business models and mix of skills they require as well as the skills of those who support them. Connectivity - technological, intellectual and social - will ultimately enable us to make sense of ourselves and the diseases from which we suffer."