Policy Update
Gowri Kodali
Introduction
India’s agricultural policy has long faced a fundamental information challenge. While the government may determine the types of assistance to provide, identifying who is engaged in farming, the locations of agricultural activity, the crops cultivated, and the specific support required has necessitated reliance on multiple, disconnected records. Land records, crop surveys, beneficiary databases, weather data, and scheme records have historically operated within separate administrative systems.(Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, 2022).
The Digital Agriculture Mission (DAM), 2024, seeks to address these gaps by establishing Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) for agriculture. “Approved by the Union Cabinet on 2 September 2024 with an outlay of ₹2,817 crore, including a Central government contribution of ₹1,940 crore, the Mission aims to integrate farmer identity, land, crop, and geospatial information into a unified, interoperable digital system, with key implementation milestones extending through 2026–27, including the target of creating 11 crore Farmer IDs.”(Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, 2024).
The initiative is significant as it promises faster access to credit, more efficient crop insurance administration, targeted advisories, streamlined procurement, and expedited disaster compensation. However, the ultimate measure of DAM’s success will be whether enhanced data translates into improved and more inclusive outcomes for farmers.
Background
Millions of Indian farmers interact with multiple organisations to access income support, agricultural credit, crop insurance, procurement, disaster relief, and extension services. The requirement for repeated verification and the maintenance of separate databases increases administrative burden and transaction costs for farmers.
DAM was developed to address the absence of an integrated digital framework that could reliably connect a farmer’s identity with land records, crops sown and other agricultural information across government systems. It seeks to bridge this gap through interoperable Digital Public Infrastructure, while recognising the dynamic nature of agriculture, where farmers, land parcels and crops may change across seasons. It recognises the unique challenges in agriculture, including seasonal changes in farmers, land parcels, crops, and cultivation methods.
The programme encompasses AgriStack, the Krishi Decision Support System (KDSS), comprehensive Soil Fertility and Profile Maps, the Digital General Crop Estimation Survey (DGCES), and several other digital initiatives implemented by central and state governments.
Figure 1: Digital Agriculture Mission – Technology for Transforming Farmers’ Lives
*Source: Press Information Bureau, Government of India
The government targets creating 11 crore Farmer IDs by 2026–27 and plans to expand the Digital Crop Survey nationwide.
Functioning
At the heart of DAM is AgriStack, a federated Digital Public Infrastructure designed to create an integrated digital ecosystem for agriculture. It consists of three foundational registries: the Farmer Registry, Geo-Referenced Village Maps and the Crop Sown Registry. Together, they digitally connect the farmer with the agricultural land and the crop being cultivated, creating a verified information layer that can be used across government schemes and agricultural services. The registries are created and maintained by States and Union Territories, while common standards enable interoperability across the system.
Figure 2: Key Components of AgriStack
Source: Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India.
The Farmer Registry assigns a unique Farmer ID that links individual details with land records, enabling integration with multiple agricultural services. This verified digital profile allows farmers to access PM-KISAN, Kisan Credit Card loans, crop insurance, MSP procurement, and other services without repeated identity and eligibility verification.
The Digital Crop Survey (DCS) utilises photographs and geo-tags to document crops on individual farmland parcels. By linking farmers, land parcels, and crops, the system enhances production estimation, procurement planning, input supply, crop insurance, and disaster assessment.
The Krishi Decision Support System integrates satellite imagery with weather, soil, water resource, and crop data to provide advanced functionality. It generates crop and soil maps, estimates yields, and assesses droughts or floods, thereby enabling a transition from record-keeping to evidence-based agricultural governance.
Importantly, this federated architecture allows States and Union Territories to retain ownership of their Farmer Registry data rather than consolidating it into a single central database.
Performance
The extent of DAM’s early expansion was considerable.
In February 2025, the Digital Crop Survey had already included 461 districts for the Kharif 2024 season, exceeding the original target of 400 districts (Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, 2025).
As of 27 November 2025, over 7.63 crore Farmer IDs had been generated, including 1.93 crore IDs for women farmers (Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, 2025). The Digital Crop Survey for the Rabi 2024–25 season included 492 districts and more than 23.5 crore plots (Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, 2025).
In the Kharif season of 2025, the DCS was extended to 604 districts and over 28.5 crore plots. By 6 August 2026, more than 10.33 crore Farmer IDs had been issued, approaching the overall target of 11 crore for the 2026–27 period (Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, 2026).
The absolute scale of the rollout has varied considerably across states..As of 20 July 2026, Uttar Pradesh had generated about 2.44 crore Farmer IDs, followed by Maharashtra with 1.35 crore, Madhya Pradesh with 1.14 crore and Rajasthan with 87.23 lakh. At the other end, Punjab had generated about 3.52 lakh IDs, Uttarakhand 3.23 lakh and Tripura 81,433. These figures show substantial variation in the absolute number of Farmer IDs generated across states. However, absolute numbers alone do not indicate the proportion of eligible farmers covered; a comparable state-wise coverage rate would be required to assess relative implementation performance. (Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, 2026).
| State | Farmer IDs generated |
| Uttar Pradesh | 2.44 crore |
| Maharashtra | 1.35 crore |
| Madhya Pradesh | 1.14 crore |
| Rajasthan | 87.23 lakh |
| Karnataka | 64.44 lakh |
| Gujarat | 62.25 lakh |
| Punjab | 3.52 lakh |
| Uttarakhand | 3.23 lakh |
| Tripura | 0.81 lakh |
*As of 20 July 2026. Source: Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare
The programme demonstrates the impact of digital infrastructure on service delivery, as Farmer IDs are now integrated into PM-KISAN, Kisan Credit Card lending, and MSP-based procurement systems.
While the rapid expansion is notable, it highlights a critical distinction:
The Farmer ID goes beyond administrative identification by creating a verified digital profile that can support targeted delivery of benefits, improve monitoring and planning of agricultural schemes, and, when linked with land and crop records, enable more timely information on cultivation. At the farmer level, it can also reduce repeated verification and lower the time and transaction costs involved in accessing agricultural services.
Future performance reporting should include, in addition to the number of IDs and surveyed plots, metrics such as processing times for credit and insurance applications, procurement efficiency, database error-correction timelines, exclusion rates, and the number of farmers successfully receiving services through the infrastructure.
Impact
‘When Better Data Becomes Better Governance’
DAM’s transformative potential lies in how information about farmers, the land they farm, and the crops they grow can be used to improve the assessment of crop losses, procurement planning, and agricultural statistics. Satellite-based systems can help with estimating yields and monitoring disasters, and verified farmer profiles can cut down on the need for repeated documentation.
The European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy includes a mandatory Area Monitoring System (AMS) which systematically monitors agricultural land and activities by means of satellite data. Moreover, while the system is intended to identify cases of non-compliance, its administration also involves conducting a quality review and taking corrective action when deficiencies are found. This is directly relevant to DAM’s satellite-enabled crop monitoring because it shows that large-scale digital monitoring should be accompanied by systematic quality checks and mechanisms to correct inaccurate observations before they affect farmers.
The England Rural Payments Agency provides another example of merging agricultural administration with geospatial infrastructure; its Land Management System includes 2.7 million land parcels totalling about 9.6 million hectares, and around 1 million of these parcels are actively assessed each year using up-to-date aerial photography. The agency has also used remote sensing to detect standing water and assist in flood-recovery efforts. For DAM, the experience demonstrates how regularly updated geospatial records can support both routine agricultural administration and rapid responses to events such as floods, provided that land information is continuously verified and updated.
Zambia provides another example of how digital infrastructure can enhance the choice available to farmers. The agricultural input e-voucher scheme expanded from serving about 220,000 farmers in 17 districts during 2023–24 to around 740,000 farmers in 74 districts in 2024–25 by replacing the earlier, more rigid system of distributing inputs with one that gives farmers greater choice when selecting among the participating agro-dealers. Although Zambia’s e-voucher system differs institutionally from DAM, its relevance lies in demonstrating how digital infrastructure can move beyond beneficiary identification to expand farmers’ effective choice and access to services.
Taken together, these experiences suggest that India’s key lesson extends beyond digitisation: agricultural DPI should combine accurate and correctable geospatial information with systems that translate digital records into timely, accessible and farmer-oriented services.
Emerging Issues
Land ownership does not necessarily imply cultivation; although Farmer IDs are closely connected to land records, the person listed as the owner does not have to be the one farming the land. This situation raises special concerns for tenants, lessees and sharecroppers. Moreover, the Farmer Registry application currently includes provision for onboarding tenant and lessee farmers. The challenge from a policy perspective is to ensure that this provision results in real inclusion on the ground.
Regarding women farmers and digital visibility, 1.93 crore Farmer IDs had been issued to women by November 2025. While this demonstrates substantial enrolment, the figure alone does not establish whether women who cultivate land without holding formal land titles are being adequately captured by the registry. Since women’s participation in agriculture can extend beyond formal land ownership, DAM should therefore distinguish between recognising landholders and recognising actual cultivators.
Digital exclusion remains a challenge for farmers with limited connectivity, low digital literacy, or difficulty navigating administrative procedures. Ongoing support for access should be an integral component of agricultural DPI, extending beyond the enrollment phase.
Although interoperability is a strength of DAM, it can spread errors. If the boundary of the land, the type of crop, or the identity record is inaccurate, it might affect a number of related services at the same time. Since databases are becoming part of the infrastructure used to deliver welfare, the right to have data corrected in a timely manner becomes almost as important as the right to enrol.
Regarding privacy and the limitation of purpose: agricultural data can include information about land ownership, crop types, assets, and economic activity. The government says that AgriStack operates in accordance with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and the DPDP Rules, 2025, by collecting data with consent, sharing it for specific purposes, and storing it in an encrypted form. The following issue is to make sure that the consent given remains meaningful and easy for farmers to understand rather than being just a routine procedure.
The responsibility for the foundational registry data lies with the states, thereby safeguarding the federal structure of India; at the same time, this means that variations in the quality of land records, administrative capability, and the process of digitisation will result in inconsistent outcomes. The national DPI can only be as inclusive as its execution at the final administrative level.
Way Forward
DAM’s performance criteria should shift from digital enrolment to digital entitlement. Public dashboards should report not only on Farmer IDs and surveyed plots, but also on the successful delivery of credit, insurance, procurement payments, compensation, advisories, and reductions in processing time.
Second, India should have a robust right-to-correction system. Farmers must be able to see, question, and correct incorrect details about their identity, land, and crops via both digital and supported offline methods, with clear timeframes for resolving any issues.
Third, the system should take into account the diversity among cultivators; tenant farmers, lessees, sharecroppers, and women cultivators should not be overlooked just because agricultural databases start with land ownership.
Fourth, India can learn an important lesson from European agricultural monitoring: it should use technology to identify inconsistencies and provide opportunities to rectify them before the data is used as a basis for exclusion or punishment.
Fifth, interoperability should be coupled with purpose limitation. The fact that databases are connected should not imply free data circulation. Farmers should be made aware of the information being shared, with whom it is being shared, and for what purpose.
Finally, independent evaluations should address a fundamental question: Has DAM simplified farmers’ interactions with agricultural governance? Metrics such as transaction costs, grievance-resolution time, inclusion errors, credit turnaround time, insurance settlement time, and disaster-response speed are essential for assessment.
Ultimately, the success of the Digital Agriculture Mission will depend not on the scale of digitisation alone, but on whether it makes agricultural governance simpler, faster and more inclusive for farmers. Its real value will lie in converting better data into better outcomes on the ground.
References
Approves the Digital Agriculture Mission with an Outlay of ₹2,817 Crore, Including Central Share of ₹1,940 Crore – Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India.
PIB – Cabinet Approval of Digital Agriculture Mission
Press Information Bureau, 2024. Digital Agriculture Mission. Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India.
PIB – Digital Agriculture Mission, December 2024
Press Information Bureau, 2025. Digital Agriculture Mission. Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India.
PIB – Digital Agriculture Mission, February 2025
Press Information Bureau, 2025. Digital Identities to Farmers. Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India.
PIB – Farmer ID Target and AgriStack Architecture
Press Information Bureau, 2025. Digital Identities to Farmers. Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India.
PIB – Tenant and Lessee Provision and Digital Crop Survey
Press Information Bureau, 2026. Implementation of AgriStack and Digital Agriculture Mission. Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India.
PIB – AgriStack Implementation and Data Governance
Press Information Bureau, 2026. Farmer Registry and Digital Crop Survey. Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India.
PIB – 10.33 Crore Farmer IDs and DCS Progress
European Commission. CAP Paying Agencies and Area Monitoring System. Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development.
European Commission – Area Monitoring System
Rural Payments Agency, 2025. Annual Report and Accounts 2024–25. Government of the United Kingdom.
UK Government — Rural Payments Agency Annual Report 2024–25
World Bank, 2026. A Smarter Way to Support Farmers in Zambia. World Bank.
World Bank — Zambia Agricultural E-Voucher System
About the Author
Gowri Kodali is pursuing a Master’s in Economics and currently works as a Research and Editorial Intern at the Impact and Policy Research Institute (IMPRI). She is also actively preparing for the UPSC Civil Services Examination, with a keen interest in public policy, governance and socio-economic development.
Acknowledgement
I sincerely thank the IMPRI team for providing the opportunity to research and write this Policy Update. I am grateful for the guidance and feedback that helped strengthen the analysis and presentation of this article.
Reviewers : Amrutha and Kushi
Disclaimer
All views expressed in the article belong solely to the author and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the organisation.
Read more at IMPRI:
