The Smoke and Mirrors of Punjab Stubble Crisis, Fewer Fires, But a Larger Problem Goes Up in Flames

The Smoke and Mirrors of Punjab Stubble Crisis, Fewer Fires, But a Larger Problem Goes Up in Flames

Every autumn, a familiar, ominous haze descends upon the vast Indo-Gangetic Plain. As temperatures drop and winds change direction, the air quality in India’s northern states, particularly the capital region of Delhi, plummets to hazardous levels. For years, the political and public discourse has pinpointed a primary culprit: stubble burning in the neighbouring state of Punjab. In recent times, governments at the state and central levels have pointed to data suggesting a significant victory in this battle, claiming a dramatic decline in farm fires. However, a closer examination of the evidence reveals a more complex and concerning picture. While the number of recorded fires may be falling, the total area of farmland being set ablaze is, paradoxically, on the rise. This discrepancy uncovers a story of technological limitations, persistent economic pressures on farmers, and a potential environmental crisis that is evolving, not disappearing.

The Story So Far: An Annual Ritual and Its Consequences

Punjab, the nation’s breadbasket, plays a pivotal role in India’s food security. Following the monsoon, the state’s agricultural landscape turns a golden hue as the paddy crop ripens for harvest. The widespread use of combine harvester machines has streamlined the harvesting process, but it leaves behind a critical problem: a stubble of stalks, standing several inches tall, rooted firmly in the soil.

For the farmers of Punjab, this stubble is a formidable obstacle. They operate within an incredibly tight schedule, with a window of roughly just three weeks between harvesting the paddy and sowing the next crucial winter crop, wheat. Manually removing the stubble is prohibitively expensive and labour-intensive. The most expedient, cost-effective, and tragically, the most “effective” method from their perspective, is to set the fields ablaze. This practice, while clearing the land rapidly, releases a torrent of pollutants—particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, and carcinogenic hydrocarbons—into the atmosphere. Prevailing north-westerly winds then carry this toxic plume across Haryana, Delhi, and beyond, contributing significantly to the region’s infamous winter smog.

This year, however, presented an anomaly. Punjab experienced one of its worst floods in decades, which left vast stretches of farmland inundated and delayed agricultural activity. This natural disruption initially led to a relative reduction in stubble-burning incidents. Yet, as the waters receded and harvesting picked up momentum, the fires began to ignite, continuing the annual cycle of pollution.

The Official Narrative: A Tale of Declining Fire Counts

The governments, both in Punjab and at the Centre, have been actively promoting a narrative of success. They point to a range of measures implemented to curb the practice, including stricter enforcement through fines, the creation of awareness campaigns, and, most notably, the provision of subsidised machinery for in-situ crop residue management. These machines, such as Happy Seeders, Super Seeders, and Paddy Straw Choppers, are designed to manage the stubble without burning, by cutting, mulching, and incorporating it back into the soil.

The data supporting this success story appears compelling at first glance. According to Punjab government data, which aggregates information from satellite imagery, the state witnessed a dramatic 70% decline in farm fire incidents in 2024, with only 10,909 cases reported compared to 36,663 in 2023. This continues a trend of declining fire counts since a peak in 2021. This decline is frequently cited as evidence that policy interventions are working and that the corner has been turned in the fight against stubble burning.

The Hidden Reality: A Growing Scorched Earth

Beneath the surface of these encouraging numbers lies a more troubling and counterintuitive reality. While the number of individual fire incidents has fallen, the total area of land scorched by these fires has not followed suit; in fact, it has expanded. Data from the Punjab Remote Sensing Centre and the Punjab Pollution Control Board provides this crucial, and often overlooked, metric.

In 2024, the area under ‘residue burning for paddy’ stood at approximately 19.17 lakh hectares. Astonishingly, this is slightly higher than the 19.14 lakh hectares recorded in 2023. To provide further context, the burnt area was nearly 15.40 lakh hectares in 2022 and approximately 15.60 lakh hectares in 2021. This reveals a clear and disturbing trend: a 22-23% increase in the total burnt area since 2021-22, even as the number of fire counts has plummeted.

The metric of “burnt area” gives a far stronger and more accurate sense of the actual environmental menace. A larger burnt area directly translates to a greater volume of crop residue being combusted, which in turn means a significantly larger quantity of pollutants being injected into the atmosphere. This divergence between fire counts and burnt area suggests that the scale of the problem may not be shrinking, but is instead being reconfigured in a way that current reporting methods are failing to capture accurately.

Why the Data Diverge: The Limitations of Satellite Surveillance

The critical question, then, is why this paradox exists. How can there be fewer fires but more land on fire? The answer lies in the limitations of the technology used to monitor the phenomenon and the adaptive behaviours of the farmers.

Farm fire incidents in Punjab are primarily detected by satellites such as NASA’s MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) and Suomi NPP’s VIIRS (Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite). These satellites use thermal bands to identify active fires based on temperature anomalies on the Earth’s surface. However, a recent landmark study by the Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER) Mohali, published in the journal Science of the Total Environment, highlights several critical shortcomings of this system:

1. Limited Overpass Frequency: The satellites pass over a specific region, like Punjab, only a few times a day. Since farmers predominantly light fires in the late afternoon or evening—after the day’s harvest is complete—many burning events occur in the temporal gaps between satellite passes. A fire that ignites after an evening pass and burns out before the next morning’s pass may never be detected.

2. Atmospheric Obstruction: The autumn season in North India often features haze, cloud cover, and, ironically, the existing smog from previous fires. These atmospheric conditions can obstruct the satellite’s view, preventing it from detecting the thermal signature of active fires on the ground, leading to underreporting.

3. Sensitivity to Fire Intensity: The algorithms used by these satellites are tuned to detect high-intensity fires. They often miss smaller, low-intensity, or smouldering burns. A farmer might be conducting a controlled, slower burn, or only partially burning a field, which may not generate enough thermal energy to trigger a detection.

4. The Challenge of Small Landholdings: Punjab’s agricultural landscape is characterised by a vast number of small and marginal landholdings. When a farmer on a small plot burns their field, the fire may be too limited in spatial extent for the satellite’s resolution to distinguish it as a separate fire event, especially if the pixel is mixed with unburned land.

These technological blind spots mean that the official “fire count” is almost certainly a significant undercount. Furthermore, the increase in total burnt area suggests a change in burning patterns. It is possible that farmers, perhaps under pressure from enforcement agencies, are consolidating their burning. Instead of multiple small fires on a single large field, they might be setting fewer, but much larger and more intense fires, which are easier to manage but release a more concentrated pulse of pollution. Alternatively, the data could indicate that burning is becoming more widespread across the state’s farmland, even if individual incidents are being reported as fewer.

The Human Element: Why Do Farmers Still Burn?

Beyond the satellites and data spreadsheets lies the human reality of the farmer. The economic pressures they face are immense. The short window for sowing wheat is non-negotiable; any delay can directly impact the yield and their annual income. While subsidised machinery is available, its accessibility and efficacy are not universal.

The rental cost of these machines, even with subsidies, can be prohibitive for smallholders. The operational cost, including diesel for running the heavy machinery, adds another financial burden. Moreover, the process of in-situ management, while agronomically beneficial for soil health in the long term, can be perceived as slower than the instant clearance provided by a matchstick. When faced with the choice between a certain, quick, and cheap solution (burning) and an expensive, slower, and less familiar alternative, the economic calculus for a debt-ridden farmer often leans tragically towards the former.

The Path Forward: A Multi-Dimensional Solution

The revelation that the burnt area is increasing, even as fire counts fall, demands a fundamental rethink of strategy. Relying solely on satellite-derived fire counts as a metric of success is a flawed and dangerous approach. Policy must evolve to address the core issues:

1. Refining Monitoring: Authorities must integrate the “burnt area” as a primary Key Performance Indicator (KPI), alongside fire counts. This provides a more holistic view of the actual environmental impact. Supplementing satellite data with ground-level monitoring, perhaps using drone technology and local reporting, could fill the critical detection gaps.

2. Economic Incentivization: The solution must make not burning more economically attractive than burning. This goes beyond subsidising machinery. It includes exploring direct cash incentives for farmers who adopt sustainable practices, developing a robust market for paddy straw (for use in bio-energy, paper pulp, or packaging), and providing comprehensive crop insurance that de-risks any yield loss from a slightly delayed sowing.

3. Regional Crop Diversification: The root of the problem lies in the Punjab-Haryana agricultural model’s heavy reliance on the water-intensive paddy-wheat cycle. A long-term, sustainable solution requires a concerted, policy-driven effort to promote crop diversification, encouraging farmers to shift to less water-intensive and residue-heavy crops like maize, pulses, and oilseeds, which would break the stubble cycle entirely.

Conclusion

The declining number of stubble fires in Punjab is a convenient statistic, but it tells only a fraction of the story. The simultaneous expansion of the scorched earth reveals a more persistent and potentially growing environmental threat. The limitations of satellite technology are creating a dangerous illusion of progress, masking the true scale of the pollution being generated. To truly solve the annual airpocalypse, policymakers must look beyond the simplistic metric of fire counts and confront the complex, intertwined realities of technological oversight, deep-seated economic distress, and the urgent need for agricultural transformation. The smoke may be rising from fewer points, but the fire is, quite literally, spreading.

Q&A: Unpacking the Complexities of Punjab’s Stubble Burning

Q1: The government reports a 70% decline in farm fires in 2024. Why is this not seen as an unqualified success?

A1: While a decline in fire counts is a positive indicator, it is not an unqualified success because it hides a more critical metric: the total burnt area. Data shows that in 2024, even with fewer reported fires, the area of land scorched actually increased to 19.17 lakh hectares from 19.14 lakh hectares in 2023. This means that while there may be fewer individual ignition points, the overall scale of the burning—and consequently, the volume of pollutants released—remains alarmingly high and is potentially growing. This paradox suggests the problem is evolving, not necessarily resolving.

Q2: What are the main limitations of satellites in accurately detecting stubble burning?

A2: Satellites like MODIS and VIIRS have several key limitations:

• Infrequent Passovers: They fly over a specific region only a few times a day, missing fires that start and extinguish between passes, especially those lit in the evening.

• Atmospheric Interference: Haze, clouds, and existing smog can block the thermal signature of fires, leading to underreporting.

• Low Sensitivity: They are best at detecting large, high-intensity fires and often miss smaller, low-intensity, or smouldering burns.

• Small Landholdings: The small size of individual farms in Punjab means that fires can be too limited in scale for the satellite’s resolution to detect them reliably.

Q3: Why is the “burnt area” a more significant metric than the “fire count”?

A3: The “burnt area” is a more significant metric because it provides a direct correlation to the environmental impact. A larger burnt area means a greater mass of crop residue is being combusted, which directly translates to higher emissions of particulate matter (PM2.5), greenhouse gases, and toxic chemicals. A decline in fire counts alongside an increase in burnt area indicates that the pollution load may not be decreasing as claimed, and could even be worsening, making it a more reliable indicator of the actual menace.

Q4: What fundamental economic pressure forces Punjab’s farmers to resort to stubble burning?

A4: The primary economic pressure is the extremely short window of roughly three weeks between harvesting the paddy crop and sowing the next winter wheat crop. This schedule is agronomically critical for maximizing wheat yield. Manual removal of stubble is slow and expensive, while machinery for sustainable management (like Happy Seeders) can be costly to access and operate. For farmers operating on thin margins, burning is the fastest, cheapest, and most reliable method to clear the field in time for the next sowing, making it a rational economic choice within their constrained circumstances.

Q5: What are some long-term solutions beyond just providing subsidised machinery?

A5: Long-term, sustainable solutions require a multi-pronged approach:

• Market Creation: Developing a viable supply chain for paddy straw, where it is treated as a resource for bio-energy plants, paper manufacturing, or packaging material, can create an income stream for farmers and an incentive not to burn.

• Crop Diversification: Fundamentally shifting the agricultural policy away from the water-intensive paddy-wheat cycle towards less residue-heavy crops like maize, pulses, and oilseeds would address the problem at its source.

• Stronger Economic Incentives: Implementing direct cash transfers or “green bonuses” for farmers who can verify they have not burned residue could make sustainable practices more financially attractive.

• Improved Monitoring: Integrating burnt area data and ground-level reporting into policy assessments to get a true picture of the problem’s scale.