Natural Farming Is Expanding Fast, But Can Farmers Make the Shift Without Losing Money?

Natural farming is gaining greater policy attention in India, with the government reviewing the progress of the National Mission on Natural Farming this week. The review focused on farmer registration, certification, soil health, training, research, market links and the economic impact of natural farming.

The expansion raises an important question for farmers. Can a farmer shift to natural farming without creating new financial risks? Lower dependence on purchased inputs may reduce costs, but farmers still need suitable knowledge, local support, reliable production and buyers willing to purchase their produce.

The National Mission on Natural Farming was approved as a centrally sponsored scheme to promote chemical-free farming based on livestock-linked practices, on-farm natural inputs and diversified crop systems. The mission aims to improve soil health, reduce input dependence and strengthen climate resilience.

Government data released in August said that more than 20.93 lakh farmers had been involved through clusters during 2025-26. It also reported that more than 22.47 lakh farmers had registered under the Natural Farming Certification System, with over 14.43 lakh receiving certification.

A farmer does not always need to convert the entire farm immediately. Starting with a smaller plot can help test natural farming practices under local soil, climate and crop conditions.

A trial can also reduce financial risk.

Farmers can compare production costs, labour needs, crop growth and yields before expanding the practice. This provides farm-level evidence instead of depending only on experiences reported from another district or state.

Purchased fertilisers and crop protection products can form a significant part of farming costs. Natural farming aims to reduce dependence on externally purchased chemical inputs by increasing the use of inputs prepared from available farm resources.

Government evaluations have reported lower input costs among many farmers adopting natural farming practices. But the actual savings can vary between farms depending on livestock availability, labour requirements, crop choice and the cost of preparing or obtaining natural inputs locally.

Livestock can become more important

Natural farming systems often use livestock-linked inputs. This can include preparations made from locally available animal-based and biological materials, depending on the recommended practices followed in each region.

Farmers without livestock should assess this carefully.

Buying materials from outside may change the economics of the system. A farmer should calculate whether locally available resources can meet input requirements before deciding to reduce existing fertiliser purchases.

Natural farming is often linked with improving biological activity and organic matter management in soil. But soil conditions differ greatly across farms. A degraded field may not respond in the same way as a field already receiving regular organic matter.

Farmers should therefore begin by understanding their soil condition and previous input history. They can use soil testing and field observations to monitor changes over time rather than expecting immediate results. Farmers should record crop yields before and after changing their farming practices. The government says research is underway through ICAR centres to evaluate natural farming across major cropping systems and develop crop-specific packages of practices.

This research matters because yield responses can differ between crops and locations. A practice that performs well in one farming system may not produce identical results elsewhere. Farmers should follow locally tested recommendations and avoid assuming that every natural input will work equally well.

Some farmers may shift production methods and expect to receive a higher market price immediately. This may not happen unless buyers recognise the product and the farmer can meet required certification or verification conditions.

The Natural Farming Certification System is being expanded as part of the mission. Certification may help establish market credibility, but farmers should first understand local buyer demand before spending money on packaging or branding.

A premium price should not be assumed

Natural or organic production does not automatically guarantee a premium price. Farmers need buyers who specifically value and purchase such produce.

Transport and marketing costs can also reduce returns.

A farmer should identify potential buyers before expanding production. Local consumers, farmer groups, retailers and institutional buyers may offer different opportunities. The business plan should include marketing rather than focusing only on production practices. Farmer Producer Organisations can help natural farmers aggregate produce, access markets and share some costs. Groups may also support collective certification, training, processing and marketing where local systems allow.

Collective action can become important for small farmers.

A single farmer may struggle to supply enough produce for a specialised buyer. Several farmers producing under similar standards may be able to create a larger and more consistent marketable quantity.

Natural farming requires knowledge about soil management, crop diversity and the preparation of suitable inputs. Farmers should seek training from recognised agricultural institutions and extension agencies before making major changes.

ICAR outreach programmes have recently included practices such as green manuring, organic amendments, crop residue recycling and natural input preparation. These programmes also stress soil management and local field demonstrations.

Replacing a purchased input with a farm-made input does not automatically guarantee better crop performance. Preparation quality, application timing and crop requirements can all affect results.

Farmers should avoid applying large quantities simply because an input is natural.

They should follow locally recommended methods and observe crop responses. Good nutrient management remains important regardless of whether the source is purchased fertiliser, organic material or a biological preparation.

Crop diversity can reduce some risks

Growing more than one crop can reduce dependence on a single harvest for farm income. Diversified systems can also support different approaches to nutrient management and biological activity. But diversification must match local markets.

A farmer should not grow several crops without knowing how they will be sold. Crop diversity can spread production risk, while poor marketing can create a different financial problem after harvest. Yield is important, but it is not the only measure of farm performance. A farmer can compare total production costs with the income earned from the crop. Natural farming may reduce some purchased input costs. Labour requirements may also change.

The most useful comparison is the final net return. Farmers should record expenses and income for each plot before deciding whether to expand natural farming.

A practical approach is to divide a farm into comparison plots where possible. One plot can continue under the existing system while another follows locally recommended natural farming practices. Farmers can record input costs, labour, water use, crop growth and yields.

After one or more seasons, the comparison can provide stronger evidence. Decisions based on farm records are usually more useful than decisions based only on promotional claims.

The current government review of natural farming included market links, FPOs and economic impacts, showing that production alone cannot determine whether the transition works for farmers.

Farmers need to know where they will obtain inputs, how much labour they need and who will buy the final produce. A farming system can only remain viable when the economics work alongside soil and environmental goals.

The best question is not whether to switch

Farmers should ask whether natural farming practices suit their own farm. The answer can depend on soil, livestock, crops, labour, water and market access.

A gradual transition may provide more information with less financial risk.

The strongest approach is to test, measure and compare. Natural farming may offer opportunities for reducing some input costs, but farmers should base expansion on results from their own fields and reliable local guidance.