Submit your Article

The detrimental impact of conventional agricultural systems on ecosystems has prompted the search for more sustainable farming practices. The question of producing more diverse food without causing harm to nature has become a pressing concern. And for the past few years, agricultural scientists around the world have been working to find answers to this question. Climate Smart Agriculture, Regenerative Agriculture, Natural Farming, Permaculture, and many other “alternative agricultural systems” are trying to establish them as mainstream. There is a movement or effort to transition from conventional farming methods to these more sustainable and environmentally friendly alternatives. Whichever the system has been proposed, their main theme is to start from soil.

The conventional agriculture system portraits soil only as a means of production. This perspective has led to treating soil just as a tool or resource to grow crops through exploitation. Heavy use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, uses of heavy equipment, uncontrolled irrigation, heavy tillage, monoculture, etc., have caused the soil to suffer badly. 

According to the customs department of Nepal, 2024/25, the government of Nepal has imported chemical fertilizer worth Rs 36.44bn which was just Rs 14.33bn in 2013/14. The average use of pesticide in Nepal is 396 grams per ha, which has grown abruptly from past few years. By this rate, there might not be good fertile soil to produce our daily food items. The focus of gaining short term benefits tends to deplete the resources to produce food for the upcoming generation. According to PQPMC, Nepal has imported 1,183,741.24 ai kg of pesticide in 2022/23. 

Almost 10 years back in 2013/14 this import was only 454,595.98 ai kg. This result shows that use of pesticide has almost tripled in Nepal. The impact of use of these pesticides directly hampers soil living conditions. As soil health deteriorates, so does its ability to produce food. Degraded soil demands more inputs to sustain productivity, which raises agricultural costs and diminishes farmers’ profits. If this trend persists, the long-term sustainability of food production will be at risk, particularly in areas where soil degradation is most pronounced. 

As soil health degrades, its ability to produce food also decreases. Almost 87 percent of Nepal’s top soil is being washed away due to floods and landslides every year. In the recent flood and landslide of Mid Asoj 2081, the agricultural land has been washed away in Sindhuli and Ramechaap districts. The sand brought by the flood has been deposited on the arable land. This devastating situation will cause farmers around Sindhuli and Ramechaap to suffer badly in coming years. It is pretty certain that those farmers whose arable soil has been affected by flood must change their profession. This trend is seen every year in Nepal. Every year huge amounts of fertile soil is lost due to floods and landslides and farmers are forced to leave the farming profession. As a result, the population of farmers was 81.2 percent in the census of 1991, which was reduced to 57.3 percent in the latest census of 2021. And the number will keep on decreasing in the coming years too!

Soil, rather than means of production, is a living, sacred entity. It must be seen as a dynamic system full of life. There is a whole ecosystem of bacteria, fungus, protozoa and millions of invisible living organisms pursuing their own life cycle. These microbes work day and night to maintain the foundation for the entire life cycle on earth. Soil, like other natural systems, contains living microbes that work collectively to maintain its health and fertility. Because of all this, it should be nurtured and cared for as a foundation of all living organisms. The need of preserving soil has become an important topic not just for immediate benefit but for long term sustainable future. And the best way of preserving soil is by preserving life present in it—the microbes.

But how do we preserve or multiply soil microbes? In the pursuit of preserving and multiplying microbes, flawed practices have become predominant. Every time humans have intervened, there have been problems in the ecosystem. A similar situation has occurred for soil microbes too. In the name of preservation, humans have tried to mold for their own ease and benefits. Microbial culture or inoculants, including bacteria, fungi, nematodes and other microorganisms, are marketed for their potential benefit in agricultural sectors like productivity, enhancing growth, nutrient uptake and maintaining sustainability. The primary motivation of promoting these products has become profit generating assets for big agriculture companies. Commercialization of these inoculants has more financial motivation rather than soil conservation. It fails to answer the basic question of what consequences may arise on ecology, economy and agronomy by emphasizing only use of limited beneficial microbes in soil.

Some new practices like using Jeevamrit in soil are rising all around Nepal. In simple terms Jeevamrit is a microbial solution. But understanding it only as a microbial solution might be unfair about its dynamic use. It enriches the soil as a dynamic, living ecosystem. Jeevamrit fosters a symbiotic relationship with soil, balancing it as a natural, living system and enhancing its fertility without reliance on synthetic fertilizers. Some of the local government offices in Nepal distribute EM (Effective Microorganisms) solutions to farmers. While EM selectively promotes specific beneficial microbes, Jeevamrit creates a diverse microbial community, reflecting the complexity found in forest soil.

A philosophical question

Human intervention has created and will always create problems in the ecosystem. The ethical responsibility of selecting only a few beneficial microbes for their own benefits lies in the recognition that it can disrupt the balance of the soil ecosystem, and reduce biodiversity. Our relation with nature lies in its holistic approach. The use of limited microbes breaks the wholeness of nature. This can cause damage in resiliency and sustainability of the whole natural system. The need for a long sustainable future cannot be compromised for short term trivial benefits,

The resiliency of an ecosystem lies in its complexity. Selection leads to more simplified models, resulting in rupture of interconnectedness and complex ecological interactions. For centuries, farmers have come up with the solution of preserving soil without intervening in the way of nature. Easy, fast and flawed solutions of bottle packaged commercial products can result in the disappearance of traditional valuable agricultural practices of nature conservation. 

Prioritizing only beneficial microbes can lead to a reductionist view of nature. As Rachel Carson says- In nature, nothing exists alone. Humans in the present context have forgotten the broader societal views on nature. People for momentary benefits see nature as a source of exploitation without addressing the needs of future generations in both terms of agronomical productivity and ecological health. This short-sighted approach ultimately degrades nature, leaving depleted and compromised resources for future generations.

The use of technology to understand and manipulate microbial activity has potential risks, too. Technology has given humans to intervene in precision for optimum benefits. The commercialization of such microbial culture will not be possible without technological advancement. But use of technology has caused us to overlook the complexity of microbial communities and their working process. As Masanobu Fukuoka quotes “In nature, there is no such thing as waste. Everything serves a purpose. Technology has removed us from the natural process and has made us blind to this truth.” This statement suggests that there has been unintended imbalance in soil microbial activities and over dependencies on commercial products for short term financial gain. All these practices can cause the loss of traditional knowledge of seeing nature in holistic form and conserving it not only for human benefit but also for entire living creatures.

A practical question

Despite gaining technological advancement, scientists have not figured out the complete knowledge about soil microbial activity. For specific bacteria, there may be more than one strain and each strain may have different functions. Some strains can have a positive impact on soil whereas others may have negative. Using only beneficial strain can lead to significant reduction in soil microbial diversity. These introduced strains can dominate over native microbial species by competing with them for food, nutrients and other essential elements. The native microbes can perform a wide range of functions for smooth ecosystem functioning. The use of specific strains, say nutrient solubilizing bacteria, can only perform a single function of providing nutrients to plants. The dominance of this strain can cause reduction in performance of other native bacteria which leads to disruption in soil microbial harmony. Tiedje et al. (2001) found that using only a single bacterial strain for nitrogen fixation can boost nitrogen levels, but this results in suppression of other native beneficial soil bacteria. This reduction in microbial diversity can compromise soil resilience, making it less capable of adapting to environmental stresses like drought or diseases. When only a single strain becomes dominant it creates microbial monoculture, causing reduced soil resiliency and sustainability.

The survival of introduced strain depends highly on favorable environmental conditions. Unlike native strains, they cannot survive in stress conditions. Due to which those strains whose population is higher in some seasons might completely disappear in another. This can cause more harmful effects on soil health. During favorable seasons, the population of introduced strains increase rapidly suppressing the native ones. But sudden disappearance of those strains can create hollow in soil ecological functioning. The experiment conducted by Allen et al. (2003) found that inoculating crops with mycorrhizal fungi has initial benefit but during environmental fluctuation it fails to compete with native microbial population. This risk of potential failure needs more regular and careful monitoring. So, regular maintenance of such introduced beneficial strains comes up with more monetary investment. This ultimately puts an economic burden on small scale farmers around the world. A case study in the Journal of Agricultural Economics revealed that some farmers saw initial benefits from microbial inoculants but many did not experience long-term yield or soil health improvements that justified the high costs. So, more need for thorough economic evaluations before adoption is required for farmers.

Various microbial populations in soil coexist and interact with each other to maintain synergy for proper ecological functioning. This synergy is required for maintaining balance to perform agricultural activities. The breakdown of synergy can cause decrease in soil nutrient holding capacity, organic matter decomposition rate, nutrient cycling, soil compaction, reduced cation exchange capacity, increased soil borne diseases, and many other detrimental agricultural impacts. This results in complete failure of the agricultural system.

In the name of maintaining sustainability, use of bottle packed beneficial microbial culture/inoculants has been marketed widely. There might be certain short term benefits of using such products but the cost of it in the coming future must not be ignored. This temporary solution results in a cycle of continuous inoculation without sustainable improvements. The only way of preserving soil microbial harmony is to conserve the traditional knowledge and practices that farmers have been performing from centuries and transfer them to the upcoming generation for their sustainable future. It’s that simple.

The author holds a degree in Agriculture with experience in sustainable agriculture practices, agro-ecology, and permaculture design

Migration has long been a defining feature of Nepal’s socio-economic landscape, with rural populations moving to cities in search of better opportunities. Urban areas offering better infrastructure, education, healthcare, and other amenities, have always attracted individuals from villages. However, migration trends in recent years indicate a growing number of people being compelled to leave their homes due to increasingly challenging circumstances, primarily driven by natural disasters. The devastating impacts of climate change, including frequent floods and landslides, are forcing rural families to seek refuge elsewhere.

Nepal’s agriculture sector employs about 60 percent of the population, yet most farmers struggle with poverty, unable to earn enough to sustain a decent standard of living. Their dependence on subsistence farming makes them vulnerable to even minor disruptions. Agriculture in Nepal heavily relies on weather patterns, which can either boost or destroy harvests. While this year’s timely monsoon allowed farmers to sow paddy in time, inconsistent weather patterns over the years have left them uncertain about future harvests. Although Nepal ranks 128th in global carbon emissions, it is alarmingly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, placing fourth in global rankings of climate risk. This disproportionality has placed the livelihoods of millions of farmers at risk, as erratic weather patterns disrupt agricultural yields.

Floods and landslides, exacerbated by climate change, inflict significant damage on Nepal’s economy and agricultural sector every year. In October 2024, heavy rains caused catastrophic floods, with two days of rainfall exceeding annual averages. This deluge submerged paddy fields across the country, resulting in losses exceeding Rs 6bn in agricultural commodities. Landslides compounded the devastation, blocking roads and leaving perishable goods to rot. Farmers now face uncertainty about whether the affected fields will be cultivable in the future. The October floods, like many other disasters, have pushed countless families closer to displacement.

In August 2024, a flash flood triggered by the rupture of the Chomuche glacier devastated the village of Thame in Solukhumbu district. All 55 households were affected, with homes, livestock, and agricultural land swept away. The villagers were forced to relocate, illustrating the stark challenges posed by Nepal’s 21 “potentially dangerous” glaciers. A single glacial outburst can trigger widespread floods and landslides, destroying crops, washing away nutrient-rich topsoil, and compromising irrigation. As glacial melts accelerate, the loss of fertile soil—a critical resource for agriculture—leaves farmers unable to sustain their livelihoods, forcing them to abandon farming altogether and seek alternative occupations.

The Tarai region, often referred to as Nepal’s agricultural basket, is particularly affected by climate change. This fertile plain produces over a third of Nepal’s food, but prolonged droughts and erratic monsoons are reducing its productivity. Over 80 percent of the region’s rainfall occurs during the monsoon season, but recent years have seen more intense rains and extended dry spells. According to a 2019 study published in the Global Scientific Journal, winter rainfall in districts like Chitwan, Rautahat, and Kailali has decreased by 51 percent. This has forced communities to drill deeper for water, further depleting the water table. Prolonged droughts have also intensified social conflicts over natural resources, as reported by the Overseas Development Institute in 2017.

The escalating frequency of natural disasters has led to a sharp increase in internal displacement. According to the Global Report on Internal Displacement (2021), 48,000 people were displaced in Nepal between June and September 2020. By 2023, this number had more than doubled to 110,000. Most displaced individuals are farmers and daily wage laborers who are disproportionately affected by climate-induced disasters. Unlike other professions, farming is acutely sensitive to environmental changes, leaving those dependent on it highly vulnerable. Limited financial resources and the high costs of rehabilitation often make it impossible for displaced farmers to return to their previous livelihoods.

Globally, climate change has displaced millions, with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reporting 21.5m climate-related displacements annually since 2010. In 2022 alone, climate disasters displaced 36.2m people, a number projected to double by 2050 according to the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). The ongoing crisis in Syria serves as a cautionary tale. Once a fertile agricultural hub, Syria now faces severe droughts and resource depletion. Farmers there must now drill over 700 meters to find water, compared to just 60–70 meters previously. This environmental degradation displaced over 2m farmers by 2013 and continues to fuel conflicts, creating conditions where refugees are reluctant to return even if the war ends.

In Nepal, the drying of water resources has reached alarming levels. Studies conducted by RWSSP-WN (2004–2014) revealed that 50% of water sources in Tanahun district dried up during this period. Similarly, a 2017 study in Melamchi reported a 30 percent decline in local spring water volume over the previous decade. This trend is observed nationwide, raising concerns about water availability for both drinking and irrigation. In 2024, residents of Sarlahi district walked for 23 days to Kathmandu to protest the severe water crisis. Their plight underscores the growing urgency of addressing water scarcity before it becomes unmanageable.

Nepal’s farmers are already grappling with climate-induced challenges such as floods, landslides, and droughts, but the situation is likely to worsen with the emergence of new threats like pest outbreaks and crop diseases. Rising global temperatures alter growing conditions, potentially leading to widespread crop failures in regions that were once highly productive. With their economic resilience already stretched thin, Nepali farmers are ill-equipped to adapt to these mounting challenges. Consequently, many will be forced to abandon their homes and livelihoods, seeking work in urban areas or abroad.

The effects of climate change are not just environmental—they have profound social and economic implications. As Nepal faces increasing displacement, resource conflicts, and food insecurity, urgent action is needed to mitigate the impact of climate change. Comprehensive policies that address both immediate and long-term needs are essential to protect vulnerable communities. Strengthening agricultural infrastructure, diversifying livelihoods, and improving disaster preparedness can help build resilience. Without these measures, the cycle of displacement and economic hardship will only deepen, threatening the stability and sustainability of Nepal’s rural communities.