India’s cotton sector stands at a critical juncture. Despite cultivating the world’s largest cotton acreage, the country continues to grapple with low productivity, quality inconsistencies and rising import dependence. Chandandeep Singh, Principal Consultant, Gherzi Textil Organisation, in this interview with Divya Shetty, shares the structural challenges constraining India’s cotton ecosystem and the interventions needed to reverse the trend. From seed technology and pest management to sustainability, mechanisation and value-chain reforms, Singh shares insights from a recent CITI study and outlines a roadmap for building a globally competitive, high-quality and resilient cotton industry.
What structural factors have held back cotton productivity in India despite its large cultivation base?
India has the largest area under cotton cultivation globally, yet its productivity remains significantly lower than that of other major cotton-producing countries. This gap is not a result of temporary fluctuations but is rooted in structural constraints, as emphasised in a recent CITI study on cotton with ICAC and Gherzi as knowledge partners. The persistent mismatch between domestic cotton production and consumption reflects these structural inefficiencies rather than a few weak agricultural seasons.
Several interrelated factors contribute to this challenge. One of the most important is the small and fragmented nature of Indian farms, with an average size of around 1.7 hectares, compared to large-scale farming systems in countries such as the United States, Brazil, and Australia. This fragmentation restricts economies of scale and limits the adoption of advanced technologies, particularly mechanisation in harvesting and precision agriculture.
According to the industry experts, among the major impediments that need to be addressed is the constraints in the seed systems, especially inadequate adoption of technology in development, have stifled the growth of cotton. When India initially approved Bt Cotton in 2002, its yield was 302 Kg/ha, and it improved to 566 Kg/ha by 2013-14, an improvement by 88%. However, since 2014 the yield has consistently fallen to a current level of 441 Kg/ha as price control measures were introduced and seed developers and suppliers moved away as they were not able to charge trait fee. As a result, India has become a net importer of cotton. By contrast China and Brazil, two leading cotton producers significantly improved their yields in the same period.
In addition, a large share of India’s cotton cultivation is rainfed, which increases vulnerability to climatic variability and reduces yield predictability. However, global comparisons indicate that reliance on rainfed systems alone does not fully explain the productivity gap, as other countries achieve significantly higher yields through better agronomic practices and input management.
Frequent pest attacks, especially pink bollworm infestations, continue to erode productivity.
These challenges have created a vicious circle leading to a cycle of low productivity and limited investment capacity.
Which interventions can deliver the fastest improvement: better seeds, mechanisation, irrigation, pest management, ginning modernisation or quality-linked pricing?
When examining interventions that can deliver the fastest improvements in productivity, it becomes clear that not all levers operate on the same timeline. In the short term, meaningful gains can be achieved within two to three cropping seasons through better seed management and improved pest management practices. Better seed management includes reviewing price control system, introduction of Bt cotton with seeds with restoring of intellectual trait fee. This factor alongwith pest control measures are relatively scalable, making them particularly attractive for quick results. In contrast, structural improvements such as mechanisation, irrigation expansion, and ginning modernisation require more time and capital investment. Mechanisation, especially in harvesting, is constrained by small landholdings and may require aggregation models to become viable. Similarly, irrigation improvements such as micro-irrigation systems require infrastructure development and financial support. Ginning modernisation is essential for enhancing fiber quality but involves upgrading processing infrastructure.
Quality-linked pricing plays a dual role by incentivising farmers to adopt better practices, although its full impact depends on broader market reforms such as standardised grading systems. Recognising these challenges, the Government of India’s Mission for Cotton Productivity provides a comprehensive framework that focuses on yield enhancement, quality improvement, climate resilience, and technological adoption, thereby addressing both short-term and long-term constraints.
How can India balance productivity improvement with sustainability, water efficiency and climate resilience?
Balancing productivity improvements with sustainability, water efficiency, and climate resilience requires a shift in focus from maximising land productivity to maximising resource productivity. This implies increasing output per unit of water, fertilizer, and capital invested. Data from the CITI study illustrates that although India’s cost of production per hectare, at approximately $971, is lower than that of countries like the United States, Australia, and Brazil, its lower yields result in a higher cost per unit of output. India’s cost per pound of cotton stands at around $0.98, compared to roughly $0.69–0.73 in competing countries, highlighting the inefficiency arising from low productivity. Improving productivity can therefore reduce unit costs while simultaneously enhancing resource efficiency.
Climate-resilient seeds, efficient irrigation systems such as micro-irrigation, and better agronomic practices can contribute to more sustainable production. At the same time, emerging opportunities in regenerative agriculture and carbon markets offer additional income streams for farmers. Initiatives by ICAC to explore carbon market participation for cotton producers could incentivise practices such as soil carbon enhancement and sustainable land management. However, such sustainability-linked revenues cannot substitute initiatives on productivity improvements.
Importantly, global experience shows that while some countries also operate under rainfed conditions, their superior outcomes are driven by better farm scale, mechanisation, varietal systems, and agronomic practices, underscoring that productivity enhancement and sustainability can be mutually reinforcing objectives.
What global best practices can India adopt to improve cotton quality and value-chain efficiency?
India’s challenges in cotton quality and value chain efficiency are closely linked to issues of contamination and inconsistent fiber characteristics, which result in lower yarn realisation compared to global benchmarks. In most cases, Indian cotton yields 3–5 per cent less yarn than cotton from other major producers. A key differentiator in leading cotton-producing countries is the adoption of scientific, instrument-based quality assessment systems. In countries such as the United States and Australia, cotton is graded using High Volume Instrument (HVI) systems, thereby ensuring objectivity and consistency. India’s continued partial reliance on visual inspection limits transparency and weakens price transparency. Expanding HVI-based testing and linking pricing directly to quality grades could significantly improve farmer incentives.
China’s approach provides another useful model, combining area-based, yield-based, and quality-based subsidies within a target price framework, which has supported both productivity and quality enhancement. These examples highlight the importance of aligning incentives, technology, and institutional systems to improve value chain efficiency.
Mechanised harvesting in other countries also helps reduce contamination, as manual picking in India often introduces foreign matter. Greater integration between agricultural research and the textile industry will be necessary to align raw material production with end-use requirements. Ultimately, the objective should be to maximise domestic value addition, thereby strengthening the entire cotton-textile value chain and positioning India as a reliable global supplier of high-quality, sustainable cotton based finished products.
What should be the long-term roadmap to make Indian cotton globally competitive in both volume and quality?
India’s long-term roadmap must focus on transforming the cotton sector from a large-scale but moderate-yield producer into a high-productivity, high-quality, and globally competitive supplier. The importance of productivity gains becomes evident when considering future demand projections. If productivity increases by 50 per cent to around 650 kg per hectare, which is still lower than half of Brazil and Australia, total production will reach approximately 7 million tonnes against an expected consumption of 7.4 million tonnes (3 per cent CAGR on current consumption over 10 years), implying continued import dependence. Therefore, productivity growth must exceed this threshold to achieve self-reliance and export competitiveness. The first phase of this transformation should focus on strengthening the fundamentals of productivity and quality through better seeds, improved pest management, soil health restoration, and expansion of micro-irrigation. Revisiting price controls system for technology-driven seeds would be an important step. Quality improvements must be supported by the adoption of scientific grading systems and strict adherence to contamination control protocols through better harvesting, storage, and transportation practices, along with incentives linked to both yield and quality.
In the second phase, efforts should shift towards value chain integration, including farmer aggregation through farmer producer organisations, development of traceability systems, and expansion of initiatives such as Kasturi Cotton. This would help build credibility in international markets, where traceability and sustainability are increasingly important.
The final phase should focus on adoption of cutting-edge technology to improve production, yield and environment sustainability. Use of AI including digital advisory platforms for pest forecasting, weather analytics, and water optimisation. Diversification into different fibre types, including long-staple and extra-long-staple cotton, is essential to meet evolving industry demands. For instance, continued expansion of open-end spinning demands short staple fibre. Due to lack of its availability at times, spinners must use cotton with higher staple lengths. There is need to foster collaboration between farmers, R&D institutes, academia, industry, supply chain partners and international development organisations such as ICAC, FAO, GIZ and IAEA to restore the shine of India’s white gold.