As Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman prepares to present the Union Budget 2026 on Sunday, February 1, expectations across the agritech ecosystem are converging around a common theme: the need for policy signals that go beyond announcements and translate into usable systems on the ground. Conversations with agritech stakeholders reveal a shared emphasis on enabling adoption, strengthening knowledge systems, and creating long term clarity rather than episodic support.
Funding innovation beyond the visible layers of agritech
For Madhukar Swayambhu, Co-founder and Research Head at Vaidic Srijan, the Union Government’s recent emphasis on innovation led growth provides a reference point for what agriculture focused policy could build upon. He points to initiatives such as Startup India, the Atal Innovation Mission, the Research, Development and Innovation Scheme, the Fund for Industrial Research Engagement, and the Anusandhan National Research Foundation as examples of how structured policy backing has supported innovation across sectors. He also notes that even mission mode programmes like AMRUT 2.0 and Mission Amrit Sarovar allocate 20 percent of their budgets to new research and innovation.
Against this backdrop, Madhukar Swayambhu argues that agritech requires a dedicated innovation fund that addresses not only post production activities such as grading, sorting, packaging, cold chains, and the use of AI and drones, but also more foundational agricultural methodologies. According to him, budget should support approaches that make agriculture, aquaculture, and animal husbandry resilient to diseases, pests, and weather variability, while reducing dependence on chemicals and antibiotics.
He further suggests that to move the agri sector away from long term reliance on subsidies and grants, the budget could introduce a production linked incentive style mechanism for farmers who adopt yield enhancing methods that do not rely on chemical inputs. Similar recognition, promotional support, and incentives, he adds, should be extended to farmer producer organisations that work toward restoring traditional agricultural methodologies.
Adoption, not just innovation, as the scaling constraint
Madhukar Swayambhu also draws attention to a structural gap between innovation and adoption. He notes that agritech companies often struggle to identify real time farmer problems, citing examples of innovation efforts that focus on issues like stubble burning without recognising that it is not perceived as a problem by farmers themselves. Even when relevant solutions exist, adoption remains difficult because farmers and FPOs fear losing existing subsidies and grants if they shift to new technologies.
In his view, the agriculture department must play a more active role in propagating new technologies so that adoption happens with institutional backing and real time field data can be collected. Drawing a parallel with government supported AI labs that provide high end computing infrastructure to innovators, he argues that similar field level infrastructure should be created for agritech startups to deploy solutions and collect data, enabling the sector to mature alongside advances seen in AI.
Digital public infrastructure and last-mile execution
From an operator’s perspective, Nikita Tiwari, Co-Founder at NEERX, which was acquired by DeHaat, sees digital agriculture infrastructure as the central expectation from this year’s Budget. She emphasises the need for reliable access to weather, soil, satellite, and farm level data, along with smoother integration across government platforms. According to her, such integration can unlock innovation directly at the farm level.
Nikita Tiwari believes sustainable scaling for agritech companies hinges on last mile adoption. She highlights the importance of incentives for precision advisory tools, AI driven crop monitoring, IoT deployment, and structured farmer training programmes. Easier collaboration between startups, FPOs, and government agencies, along with lower costs for pilots and experimentation, could help companies remain affordable for farmers while expanding their reach.
On the investment front, she stresses that long term policy clarity is essential. Clear roadmaps for agri digitisation, climate resilient farming, data sharing frameworks, and stable startup policies would allow founders to plan with greater certainty and attract patient capital instead of depending primarily on short term grants.
Soil health as a system, not a standalone intervention
Dhiraj Choudhary, Founder of Ekosight, narrows the budget conversation to soil health, an area he believes has been treated too narrowly in the past. While acknowledging the attention given to soil testing infrastructure, he argues that testing alone does not improve soil or crop outcomes. The unresolved questions, he says, revolve around interpretation, validation, and translation of soil test results into crop specific actions.
Dhiraj Choudhary calls for budgetary recognition that soil health improvement requires investment in knowledge systems, trained human resources, and continuous last mile advisory. He highlights the need to build capacity among soil advisors and agri practitioners who can guide farmers with credibility, as well as farmer awareness programmes that focus on understanding soil reports and nutrient balance over time rather than one time testing exercises.
He also underlines the role of private agritech companies, noting that they are often better positioned to deploy technology, train local entrepreneurs, and maintain sustained engagement with farmers. A well defined public private partnership framework, supported by budgetary allocations for training, technology deployment, and outcome based incentives, could help move soil health initiatives away from fragmented interventions toward a farmer facing ecosystem.
For Dhiraj Choudhary, policy clarity and continuity are particularly critical in this domain. Agriculture outcomes take time to materialise, and consistent signals around private participation, standardisation of soil data interpretation, and the continuation of soil health missions are necessary to sustain investment in both technology and people.
Also read: How AGRi360 Reflects Structural Challenges in Indian Farming
Structural reforms and long-term capital allocation
Independent agritech analyst and researcher Venky Ramachandran, who runs Krishi.System, situates budget expectations within broader structural constraints facing Indian agriculture. He points out that a large portion of ICAR and state agricultural university budgets is currently absorbed by salaries and pensions, leaving limited resources for actual research. To address this, he proposes allocating one percent of agricultural GDP, roughly INR 30,000 crore, to agricultural R&D, with a mandate that at least 40 percent be directed toward frontier technologies such as AI driven crop advisory systems, genomics for crop improvement, and bio-input development. As an alternative, he suggests a matching grant framework that aligns government funding with private investment in priority areas like climate-resilient seeds and precision tools.
Venky Ramachandran also highlights the potential of forest and tribal livelihood corridors, recommending a dedicated INR 2,000 crore fund to link traditional knowledge holders with formal AYUSH and nutraceutical value chains, supported by single window clearances. On the bio-input front, he argues that Bio-Resource Centres struggle because they function as government extensions rather than viable enterprises. Transforming them into Bio-Economy Hubs run by FPOs or rural entrepreneurs, aligned with Bureau of Indian Standards certification and integrated into the fertiliser subsidy ecosystem, could give bio-inputs the same visibility as chemical fertilisers.
Land access and scale remain another area of concern. Venky Ramachandran calls for the legalisation and formalisation of land leasing through a model law based on NITI Aayog’s 2016 recommendations, alongside fiscal incentives for FPO based collective farming models that achieve scale without altering ownership structures. He further proposes converting 25 percent of the urea subsidy, approximately INR 30,000 crore, into a Soil Health Improvement Grant accessible to states that demonstrate measurable improvements in balanced fertiliser use. Digital soil health cards integrated with fertiliser point-of-sale systems, or soil health wallets, could help translate recommendations into actual purchase behaviour.
Access to capital for assets, rather than just inputs, is another priority he identifies. A specialised credit guarantee fund for FPOs seeking to invest in drones, grading machines, cold storage infrastructure, and pack houses could address this gap.
A convergence around execution and clarity
Taken together, stakeholder expectations from the Union Budget 2026 reflect a shift away from isolated schemes toward integrated systems. Whether it is innovation funding that addresses core agricultural practices, digital infrastructure that supports last mile adoption, soil health frameworks that prioritise knowledge and continuity, or structural reforms that enable scale and investment, the common thread is execution backed by long-term policy intent. As the Budget approaches, the agritech ecosystem is looking for signals that align public spending with adoption, data, and confidence building measures that can sustain the sector over time.
2 comments
😊 Here’s the corrected text:
I think most importantly, the farmer’s product has to be sold on the spot after identification of its quality. We don’t have a yield problem; if their product gets marketed immediately and they get money on the spot, our agriculture system will work, and more people will be drawn into it, making farming more beneficial for the community. This will also lead to employment generation and more interest in this sector. We really need to change the narrative that Indian farmers are poor. So, let’s develop markets, not just fancy words, in this sector because agriculture has more potential than any other industry.
Agree! market access, quality based pricing, and instant payment are critical. Yield alone does not solve anything without monetisation. The point on chemical free yield was about production resilience, not ignoring markets. Both systems have to work together if farming is to be truly viable and aspirational.