Lok Sabha Question No. 912 (UNSTARRED), answered on 2017-02-07
Subject: Mega Food Parks
Ministry: FOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRIES
Asked by: SHIVAJI ADHALRAO PATIL, SULTAN  AHMED, ANANDRAO  ADSUL, Shrirang Appa Barne, SHRIKANT EKNATH SHINDE, K. C. VENUGOPAL, MANSUKHBHAI DHANJIBHAI VASAVA, DUSHYANT CHAUTALA, MURALI MOHAN MAGANTI, DILIP PATEL, RAHUL KASWAN, ANURAG SINGH THAKUR

## 912.

## GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRIES

## LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 912

ANSWERED ON 7 TH  FEBRUARY, 2017

## MEGA FOOD PARKS

- SHRI ADHALRAO PATIL SHIVAJIRAO:

SHRI SULTAN AHMED: SHRI ANANDRAO ADSUL: SHRI SHRIRANG APPA BARNE: DR. SHRIKANT EKNATH SHINDE: SHRI K.C. VENUGOPAL: SHRI MANSUKHBHAI DHANJIBHAI VASAVA: SHRI DUSHYANT CHAUTALA: SHRI M. MURALI MOHAN: SHRI DILIP PATEL: SHRI RAHUL KASWAN: SHRI ANURAG SINGH THAKUR:

Will the Minister of FOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRIES be pleased to state:

- (a) whether  the  Government  is  implementing  a  number  of  centrally  sponsored  schemes  for  the promotion and development of food processing sector in the country since the 12th Five Year Plan and if so, the details thereof and the achievements made thereunder during the last three years and the current year, State/UT-wise;
- (b) whether a number of schemes out of them have been stopped and if so, the reasons therefor;
- (c) whether the Government has assessed the socio-economic impact of Mega Food Parks and Cold Chain  Projects  and  if  so,  the  details  thereof  along  with  the  employment  created  and  benefits accrued to the farmers therefrom;
- (d) whether the Government has taken any steps to  simplify the norms  for  approval  of  mega  food park, integrated cold chain and value addition infrastructure in the country and if so, the details thereof  and  the  action  taken  to  fill  up  the  vacant  slots  of  Mega  Food  Parks  and  Cold  Chain projects; and
- (e) whether  the  Government  has  formulated  a  new  Integrated  National  Food  Processing  Policy  to reduce large scale wastage of perishable fruits and vegetables in the country including Gujarat and if so, the details thereof?

## ANSWER

## THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR FOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRIES (SADHVI NIRANJAN JYOTI)

(a) & (b): Yes, Madam. During 12 th plan, the Ministry had launched a Centrally Sponsored Scheme National Mission on Food Processing ( NMFP) for implementation through States/UTs. The schemes for (i) Technology Up-gradation / Setting up / Modernization of Food Processing Industries (ii) Cold Chain, Value Addition and Preservation Infrastructure for Non-Horticulture Products (iii) Setting up/ Modernization/  Expansion  of  Abattoirs  (iv)  Human  Resource  Development  (v)  Promotional  Activities (vi) Creating Primary Processing Centres / Collection Centres in Rural Areas (vii) Modernization of Meat Shops (viii) Reefer Vehicles and (ix) Food Parks (old scheme) were incorporated in the NMFP.  The

NMFP has since been delinked from Central Government support with effect from 01.04.2015 (except for UTs, upto 31.03.2016) in view of the increased resources to States/ UTs  resulting from the recommendations of 14 th Finance Commission. The funds released to States/ UTs for implementation of NMFP are given in Annexure I.

- (c) & (d): Yes, Madam.  The socio-economic impacts of the Schemes of Mega Food Park and Cold Chain have been assessed through third party. Recommendations of the Socio Economic Impact study of the  schemes  of  Mega  Food  Park  and  Cold  Chain  Projects  are  annexed  at Annexure II and III .    It  is expected that, each Mega Food Park, on being fully operational, on an average, may lead to creation of direct/  indirect  employment of about 5000 persons and  will benefit about 25,000 farmers.  Each Cold Chain  Project  will  provide  employment  to  about  100  persons  and  link  about  500  farmers  in  the  F&V sector and 5000 farmers in dairy/ fishery/ marine sector. Based on the experience of implementation of the projects under the scheme of Mega Food Park and Cold Chain and consultations with stakeholders, the operational guidelines of both the Schemes have been modified to make them investor friendly. The criteria of appraisal of projects have been made transparent and objective. To fill up the vacant slots under the schemes of Mega Food Park Expressions of Interest (EOI) were invited on 31.07.2016 and 8 Mega Food Park projects have been given 'In-principle' approval against vacant slots. Expressions of Interest (EOI) were invited on 31.08.2016 seeking proposals for sanction of around 100 new Cold Chain projects against which, 308 proposals have been received.
- (e):    The  Ministry  is  conducting  the  consultations  with  stakeholders  and  domain  experts  for  Integrated Food Processing Policy to reduce large scale wastage of perishable fruits and vegetables in the country including Gujarat.

****

## STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PART (a) AND (b) OF LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 912 ANSWERED ON 07.02.2017 REGARDING MEGA FOOD PARKS

Statement showing funds released to State Governments by Govt. of India (GOI) for implementation of CSS-NMFP during 2012-13 to 2014-15 (31.03.2015)/ (for UT Governments up to 31.03.2016)

(Rs. in Crore)

| S. No.                | States                | 2012-13               | 2012-13               | 2013-14               | 2013-14               | 2014-15               | 2014-15               | 2015-16               | 2015-16               |
|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|
| S. No.                | States                | Allo- cation          | GOI share released    | Allo- cation          | GOI share released    | Allo- cation          | GOI share released    | Allo- cation          | GOI share released    |
| 1                     | Andhra Pradesh        | 14.24                 | 10.68                 | 11.58                 | 0.00                  | 14.60                 | 14.60                 | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 2                     | Bihar                 | 11.42                 | 8.565                 | 9.07                  | 2.29                  | 6.61                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 3                     | Chhattisgarh          | 7.88                  | 5.91                  | 5.91                  | 0.00                  | 5.94                  | 5.226                 | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 4                     | Goa                   | 3.66                  | 2.745                 | 2.15                  | 0.00                  | 1.56                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 5                     | Gujarat               | 11.15                 | 8.3625                | 8.83                  | 0.62                  | 8.89                  | 8.51                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 6                     | Haryana               | 5.92                  | 4.44                  | 4.16                  | 4.16                  | 12.00                 | 12.00                 | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 7                     | Himachal Pradesh      | 5.09                  | 3.8175                | 3.42                  | 0.00                  | 3.43                  | 1.69                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 8                     | Jammu &Kashmir        | 9.00                  | 6.75                  | 6.91                  | 0.00                  | 5.03                  | 0.7474                | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 9                     | Jharkhand             | 7.09                  | 5.3175                | 5.20                  | 0.00                  | 3.78                  | 1.5318                | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 10                    | Karnataka             | 11.11                 | 8.3325                | 8.79                  | 8.225                 | 8.84                  | 8.84                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 11                    | Kerala                | 6.23                  | 4.6725                | 4.44                  | 2.22                  | 3.23                  | 0.3613                | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 12                    | Madhya Pradesh        | 14.27                 | 10.7025               | 11.61                 | 0.00                  | 11.69                 | 7.89                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 13                    | Maharashtra           | 16.51                 | 12.3825               | 13.61                 | 3.53                  | 13.71                 | 13.71                 | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 14                    | Orissa                | 9.24                  | 6.93                  | 7.12                  | 0.00                  | 7.16                  | 5.8                   | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 15                    | Punjab                | 6.16                  | 4.62                  | 4.37                  | 0.00                  | 4.39                  | 1.94                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 16                    | Rajasthan             | 14.77                 | 11.0775               | 12.06                 | 0                     | 12.15                 | 11.82                 | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 17                    | Tamil Nadu            | 10.40                 | 7.80                  | 8.16                  | 0.00                  | 5.95                  | 0.4405                | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 18                    | Telangana             | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 4.88                  | 2.39                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 19                    | Uttar Pradesh         | 20.03                 | 15.0225               | 16.75                 | 0.00                  | 12.21                 | 5.51                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 20                    | Uttarakhand           | 5.23                  | 3.9225                | 3.54                  | 0.00                  | 2.57                  | 0.994                 | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 21                    | West Bengal           | 10.60                 | 10.82                 | 8.33                  | 3.945                 | 8.39                  | 5.58                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| North Eastern States: | North Eastern States: | North Eastern States: | North Eastern States: | North Eastern States: | North Eastern States: | North Eastern States: | North Eastern States: | North Eastern States: | North Eastern States: |
| 1.                    | Arunachal Pradesh     | 4.20                  | 3.15                  | 2.70                  | 1.35                  | 2.35                  | 0.5150                | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 2.                    | Assam                 | 5.47                  | 4.1025                | 3.97                  | 0.00                  | 2.98                  | 2.35                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 3.                    | Manipur               | 3.79                  | 2.8425                | 2.29                  | 0.00                  | 2.14                  | 3.8406                | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 4.                    | Meghalaya             | 3.80                  | 2.85                  | 2.30                  | 1.15                  | 2.15                  | 0.8208                | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 5.                    | Mizoram               | 3.71                  | 2.7825                | 2.21                  | 1.105                 | 2.11                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 6.                    | Nagaland              | 3.71                  | 2.7825                | 2.21                  | 0.00                  | 2.11                  | 6.11                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 7.                    | Sikkim                | 3.58                  | 3.06                  | 2.08                  | 0.00                  | 2.04                  | 0.62                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 8.                    | Tripura               | 3.74                  | 2.805                 | 2.24                  | 1.12                  | 2.12                  | 0.7392                | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| Union Territories:    | Union Territories:    | Union Territories:    | Union Territories:    | Union Territories:    | Union Territories:    | Union Territories:    | Union Territories:    | Union Territories:    | Union Territories:    |
| 1.                    | A &Nicobar Islands    | 2.64                  | 1.98                  | 1.77                  | 0.00                  | 1.41                  | 0.705                 | 2.24                  | 1.12                  |
| 2.                    | Chandigarh            | 2.28                  | 0.00                  | 1.06                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 3.                    | D &Nagar Haveli       | 2.28                  | 0.00                  | 1.06                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 4.                    | Daman and Diu         | 2.26                  | 0.00                  | 1.02                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  | 0.00                  |
| 5.                    | Delhi                 | 2.73                  | 2.0475                | 1.97                  | 0.00                  | 1.53                  | 0.00                  | 2.58                  | 0.00                  |
| 6.                    | Lakshadweep           | 2.25                  | 1.6875                | 1.01                  | 0.00                  | 1.00                  | 0.00                  | 1.01                  | 0.00                  |
| 7.                    | Pondicherry           | 2.30                  | 1.725                 | 1.11                  | 0.00                  | 1.06                  | 0.00                  | 1.17                  | 0.9742                |
|                       | Grand Total           | 248.74                | 184.69                | 185.00                | 29.72                 | 180.00                | 125.31                | 7.00                  | 2.0942                |

## Annexure-II

## STATEMENT  REFERRED  TO  IN  REPLY  TO  PART  (c)  &  (d)  OF  LOK  SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 912 ANSWERED ON 07.02.2017 REGARDING MEGA FOOD PARKS

Assessment of Socio-Economic Impact of  Mega Food Park Projects:

The Ministry awarded 'Evaluation of the Impact of the Scheme for Mega Food Park to M/s Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER). The report submitted by ICRIER has been accepted by the Ministry. The recommendations of ICRIER are summarized as below:

- i) While preparing the DPR, there is a need for a detailed diagnostic study that should have detailed inputs of the end users of the facilities;
2. ii) The Ministry should consider revising the time frame for completion of the project to five years as in case of cluster development scheme of the Ministry of MSME;
3. iii) The scheme should be made flexible in terms of land requirement, the amount of grant and  contribution  of  SPV.    It  is  also  suggested  that  to  ensure  that  the  scheme  is  not misused, the guidelines should be more generic rather than specifying 30-35 units to be set up in the park. A more generic requirement of the units like 'more than 10 units' may be provided in the scheme guidelines;
4. iv) Making  provision  for  forward  linkages  has  also  been  suggested  along  with  existing provision of backward linkages;
- v) The Ministry should design innovative incentives to attract the units to the Mega Food Parks.  These  can  be  in  the  form  of  support  for  machinery  purchasing,  use  of  green technology and R&D. The individual investor setting up unit in the park may be given priority in other schemes of the Ministry;
6. vi) The Ministry should select DPRs which have more realistic provisions rather than those which provide large numbers;
7. vii) To ensure collaboration with the State Governments in the project implementation, it has been suggested to have a tripartite agreement signed between the Ministry, State Government and the SPV. Such provisions reportedly exist in the MSE-CDP Scheme of Ministry of MSME and National Investment and Manufacturing Zones (NMZs);
8. viii) It  has  also  been  suggested  that  the  Ministry  can  explore  the  possibility  of  having  an empanelled set of public and private banks that pre-approve the scheme guidelines and spread information about it;
9. ix) It is also essential to take bank's feedback while redesigning the scheme guidelines;
- x) The Ministry should do a detailed study on the dovetailing of the Ministry's scheme with  other  central  and  state  government  schemes  and  this  should  be  published  in  its website;
11. xi) The State should be encouraged to promote Mega Food Parks in their agro-processing and industrial policies;
12. xii) It has been suggested that a bidding and selection procedures have to be made on-line. The  project  evaluation  documents  and  consultations  on  modification  of  the  scheme guidelines  should  also  be  made  available  on  the  website  for  comments  by  the stakeholders. Similarly, the decisions of the IMAC and TC should also be made online and regularly published in the website of the Ministry;
13. xiii) The Ministry's schemes should clearly mention the objective of the Mega Food Parks to link Indian farmers and processors with global value chains;
14. xiv) The Ministry should push for regulatory reforms focusing on Acts such as the APMC Act, which help the SPV and farmers to connect with each other.  The Ministry should work with the FSSAI to speed up the approval process;
15. xv) Ministry should have proper infrastructure mapping based on the mapping of fruits and vegetable availability  to  streamline  the  supply  chain  and  assist  the  SPV  to  plan  their infrastructure. There should be mapping of existing PPCs;
16. xv) The  SPV  should  be  allowed  to  select  their  consultants  and  if  they  need  help  of  the Ministry in that case they can be referred to empanelled PMCs;

It is important for the Ministry to have field visits to some of the global food parks and

- xvi) learn from their best practices;
- xvii) The  Ministry  should  reconsider  the  number  of  Mega  Food  Parks  which  it  wants  to create. Rather than having more food parks it should focus on few food parks and make them operational;
- xvii) The Ministry should work with the operational MFPs to help them to attract units in their parks and help SPVs to develop brands and market them;
- xix) The Ministry should focus on closing the projects which have received third installment of the grant but taking very long time in completion of the projects.  This has been also recommended that the Ministry should release the final amount of grant in advance and not before the completion of the project so that the bank can release the entire term loan to the SPV to complete the project.

*****

## Annexure-III

## STATEMENT  REFERRED  TO  IN  REPLY  TO  PART  (c)  &  (d)  OF  LOK  SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 912 ANSWERED ON 07.02.2017 REGARDING MEGA FOOD PARKS

## Assessment of Socio-Economic Impact of Cold Chain Projects

The Ministry has awarded an evaluation study for assessing the impact of scheme for Cold  Chain,  Value  Addition  and  Preservation  Infrastructure  to  M/s  NABARD  Consultancy Services  Pvt.  Ltd.  (NABCONS).    The  recommendations  of  NABCONS  are  summarized  as below:

- a. In order to avoid regional skewness, MoFPI may consider state-wise/ region-wise cap on grant or region specific/ state specific drives may be launched in those states where no or few projects have been approved.
- b. The subsidy may be provided more than one time for expansion of existing cold chain project/ setting up new cold chain project in other states to those units which has not availed full subsidy to the extent of maximum eligible subsidy.
- c. MoFPI  may  discontinue  the  practice  of  floating  EOI  and  do  away  with  close  end system of receiving application.  The applications may be received after the financial closure  and  all  the  mandatory  approvals  are  in  place.    Another  option  with  MoFPI could  be  that  the  scheme  is  made  partially  open-ended  and  the  opening  and  closing dates of EOI is spaced for period of minimum six months.  The proposals received on tap may be processed by PMA as and when received.
- d. MoFPI may introduce  an  online  submission  of  applications  and  application  tracking system on its portal to ensure smooth application processing.  The portal should have automated alert facilities to notify the applicants.
- e. Based  on  previous  experience  and  also  data  base  available  with  other  agencies  like NCCD  &  NHB,  MoFPI  may  standardize  normative  cost  for  all infrastructure components,  instead  of  considering  expenditure  on  technical  civil  work  and  cost  of plant and machinery.
- f. MoFPI may switch over to credit-linked-back-ended subsidy regime, which has been very  successful  and  tested  in  other  leading  GOI  schemes.    It  will  help  Ministry  to reduce its work load to a considerable extent and that time and energy can be directed for implementation in an effective manner.
- g. MoFPI may consider dividing the grant in two components capital subsidy and interest subsidy.  It will help in better spread of grant to the unit and reduced burden on MoFPI to release grant during implementation.
- h. The role of State Government may explicitly be defined and State Nodal Agencies may be  identified  who  can  provide  assistance  in  single  window  clearance  for  cold  chain units.
- i. The role of FIs/ Banks needs to be strengthened further to enhance the utilization of fund  in  effective  manner.    The  banks  may  be  made  major  channel  partners  in  the appraisal, implementation and monitoring process.
- j. MoFPI may introduce method of empanelment of PMC on the lines of Mega Food Park for effective appraisal and implementation of cold chain project.
- k. The implementing agencies may be advised to maintain separate books of accounts for utilization of grant assistance under the scheme.  A detailed accounting procedure may be prescribed wherein the treatment to be given to the assistance at different level may be prescribed.

****