The preliminary estimate for wheat shows a decline in output to 66.5 million tonnes in 1997-98 from 69.3 million tonnes in 1996-97. Will this pull down the GDP growth for 1997-98? The reported decline in volume may not have correspondingly depressed the value addition, not in these times of procurement bonus prices. Indeed, in a bad year it is likely that a rise in prices will prevent an erosion in the contribution of wheat to GDP. But there are conundrums. The output of coarse cereals took a beating, apparently because of a shift in area to oilseeds. But oilseeds output too declined in 1997-98. Curiously, despite lower output, edible oil prices are weak. So, are output declines exaggerated by statistical defaults? It is difficult to reconcile the reported wheat output decline of 1997-98 with the current rush by farmers to sell wheat to the procurement authorities. One estimate is that procurement in the current year so far has been close to 50 per cent more than in thecorresponding period of last year.

Inadequate agricultural statistics suit the politicians; they use them to lobby for price incentives and subsidies. But the policy maker finds himself at bay: why are there area shifts to crops that fetch low prices? How to push for high growth in agriculture -- which requires a boost to commercial production of fruits and vegetables -- if basic commodities like cotton, oilseeds, sugarcane and cereals are under pressure?