Published :
Updated :
For all latest news, follow The Financial Express Google News channel.
For decades, those who feed our nation have stood at the wrong end of the market. Cost of inputs rise relentlessly, yet when harvest season arrives, prices collapse under the weight of middlemen and fragile market systems. The result is familiar: farmers sink into debt while consumers face volatility. The system has become unfair to both ends and unsustainable to all.
Agriculture, like any industrial value chain, operates through two halves: upstream and downstream. The upstream covers everything up to the farm-gate selling point: seeds, fertiliser, irrigation, credit, and the production process itself, ending when the crop is sold. The downstream begins from that point onward - storage, transport, milling, processing, wholesale, and retail. The strength of agriculture depends on how efficiently these two halves connect. If the upstream falters, productivity suffers and farmers bear the agony of rising costs with no guarantee of recovery; if the downstream breaks, value evaporates before it reaches the consumer.
Most policy discussions stop at the upstream - focused on subsidies, procurement, or production targets - while the real inefficiencies lie further down. Weak logistics, limited processing capacity, inadequate storage, and fragmented transport systems mean that a large share of perishable produce never reaches consumers. On top of that, too many intermediaries stand between the farmer and the consumer, each adding a margin without enhancing real value. The outcome is a distorted price structure: in Bangladesh, the retail price of many crops can be four to five times higher than what farmers receive at the farm gate. In developed economies, that margin is typically around 40 to 50 per cent - a reflection of efficiency, not exploitation. The contrast reveals how waste, not wealth, defines our food economy.
In response, we often witness familiar rituals. Crackdowns on the lower end of the value chain -- on wholesalers and retailers -- have become routine responses to rising prices. In such a fragmented system, these trigger-happy measures may calm tempers briefly but rarely solve the underlying problem. In developed agricultural economies, retail channels are dominated by a handful of large operators, supermarket chains and integrated distributors, who control most consumer touch points and are therefore easier to regulate. In Bangladesh, retail is highly fragmented, with well over a million small outlets scattered across the country. Such dispersion makes governance and price discipline extraordinarily difficult. The real solution lies in structure, not punishment. Markets must be organised so that rent-seeking intermediaries become commercially unviable -- a far more effective way to maintain fair prices for consumers than reactive enforcement.
The upstream faces its own exhaustion. Input costs keep climbing while affordable credit remains scarce. Irrigation networks have deteriorated, and many farmers sell immediately after harvest just to repay loans. The cycle repeats: high cost, low return, and fading confidence in farming as a livelihood.
It is within this context that the idea of a "fair price to agriculture" -- now echoed in policy circles and reform pledges such as the BNP's -- becomes relevant. The phrase may sound like a political promise, but its moral and economic basis is deeper. Fairness cannot be legislated by political announcements alone. It requires structural coherence across the entire value chain - from the field to the consumer's basket. A fair price is not charity; it is the product of transparency, competition, and institutional design.
Rebuilding that design requires work on both ends of the chain. The downstream must modernise through investment in storage, logistics, and local agro-processing hubs that extend shelf life and add value. Digital trading platforms can connect farmers directly with buyers, cutting out layers of rent extraction. At the same time, the upstream must be strengthened through digital farmer registration, accessible finance, modern irrigation, and data-driven crop planning. Productivity gains on one side are futile if inefficiencies persist on the other.
Ironically, one harmful crop offers a useful lesson. The tobacco industry, though detrimental to public health and in need of strict regulation, operates through a disciplined and accountable model. Companies register farmers, plan production, supply inputs, and guarantee procurement at pre-agreed prices with timely digital payments. The model, not the product, demonstrates that coordination and accountability can make a value chain function. Food crops deserve a system equally structured and predictable.
However, the leap from concept to execution demands fiscal strength and administrative discipline. A nationwide system of procurement, digital payments, and crop insurance requires resources, governance capacity, and integrity. With subsidy pressures and public debt already high, interventions must be designed carefully to avoid distorting markets or crowding out private investment. The same bureaucratic inefficiency that plagues procurement in other sectors could easily infect agriculture. Corruption risks are real - politically connected groups could divert benefits away from both genuine farmers and consumers. Transparency is the essential safeguard: digital traceability for every transaction, clear audit trails, and time-bound support mechanism. Fiscal prudence and digital governance must move together. If these reforms are treated as structural investments rather than political handouts, they can pay back through productivity and tax revenues - not draining the budget.
The private sector's role in this transformation is crucial. In developed economies, corporate participation anchors the entire agricultural value chain - from logistics and processing to retail and market forecasting. In Bangladesh, many firms still behave as short-term traders rather than long-term investors. The issue is not capacity, several of these are billion-dollar enterprises, but a lack of strategic foresight and intent. Agriculture must be seen as a strategic ecosystem, not a seasonal trade. With the right incentives, private capital can build modern logistics, invest in data systems, and turn efficiency itself into profit. If done right, the same profit motive that drives commerce can drive fairness too.
A fair price for farmers does not mean higher prices for consumers. The current gap between the two is driven not by greed but by inefficiency. When storage improves, intermediaries shrink, and logistics function smoothly, everyone benefits. Farmers earn with dignity, consumers pay reasonably, and the economy gains stability.
Agricultural reform is not about charity or slogans. It is about rebuilding a system where the upstream produces efficiently, the downstream delivers effectively, and fairness is embedded in design. The call for a fair price will only become real when systems, not speeches, sustain it. If Bangladesh can align intent with execution, its rural economy can move from survival to strength, turning farming once again into a foundation of dignity and national resilience.