X hits on this document





16 / 26

company stated that that since the season had come to an end, they would consolidate the follow up visits data for the entire season and this would be shared with CCP members.

In the December meeting a sub-committee consisting of the CCP deputy director, representatives of Bayer and Monsanto, Naandi and this researcher was constituted. This sub-committee was asked to go through the CCP field visit data to finalise the findings and make recommendations for the 2007-08 season. In order to avoid individual interpretations of CCP data by different members, it was mutually agreed that only the sub-committee findings would be used by all the members if they wanted to state anything about CCP data findings. This sub-committee was asked to finalise the CCP report for 2006-07 by the end of February. In the third week of January 2007 Bayer shared all the follow up visits data for AP, but for Karnataka it again requested more time. After sharing the AP follow up visits data the researcher requested a meeting of the

CCP sub-committee to finalise at least response to this request. In the first week of meeting was held. Bayer was absent from

the AP data findings first. There was no February a regular state level CCP steering this meeting. A special meeting was called

again in the second week of February from which again Bayer the concerned person was on leave till March 9th and

was absent. It stated that it could only send its

representative to the meeting was called on sharing the Karnataka

meeting after the 9th of March. Another regular monthly CCP 12th March. Bayer participated in this meeting. When asked about follow up visits data, the company person requested one week’s

time. It was also decided that Bayer would committee to finalise the findings of the CCP Meanwhile the sub-committee in the absence for Monsanto and finalised the findings.

convene a special meeting of the sub- field visits data. This did not take place. of Bayer met and analysed the CCP data

All these developments clearly indicate that there is great reluctance on the part of Bayer to share their complete data with the CCP state committee and finalise the mutually agreed findings.

The finalisation of CCP data findings by the state steering committee is very crucial because it is the basis for the implementation of the companies’ incentives and disincentives schemes. The list of farmers eligible for incentives, the list of farmers on whom penalties have to be imposed, the identification of villages for incentives supporting school infrastructure, the list of farmers who will be black listed for future production, etc. have to be finalised based on CCP data findings. This was supposed to be finalised in the month of December or January immediately after the completion of field visits so that companies could implement their commitments (incentives and disincentives) and make advance plans for next season.

Despite this issue of sharing and reviewing the information with Bayer, the various activities undertaken both by Bayer and Monsanto during 2006-07 crop season have


Document info
Document views84
Page views84
Page last viewedFri Jan 20 02:41:46 UTC 2017