Centre Broadens Crop Insurance: Now Covers Wild Animal Damage and Paddy Flooding

Introduction

The Indian government has announced a key update to its crop insurance scheme, the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY). From the Kharif 2026 season, farmers will get compensation under this scheme for losses caused by wild animal attacks and paddy inundation. These new provisions aim to help farmers who face repeated and unpredictable damage to their crops due to wildlife or flooding.

Why These Changes Matter

For many farmers, losses caused by wild animals or by waterlogging of paddy fields have long been a serious problem. These risks are very localised — they don’t affect a whole region in a uniform way, but when they do strike, the damage can be severe. Until now, such damages were either not covered or only partially covered under PMFBY. By including these perils, the government is responding to long-standing demands from several states.

What Exactly Is Being Covered

The updated scheme introduces wild animal attacks as an “add-on cover” under the Localised Risk category. This means farmers can make a claim when their crops are damaged by certain wild animals. The government has also reintroduced paddy inundation (submergence of paddy caused by floods or overflowing water) under its localised calamity cover. These changes mark a major expansion in risk protection for farmers.

How the Process Will Work

To implement this, each state will take two main steps. First, states will identify and notify which wild animals are responsible for crop damage in particular areas. They will also map out districts or insurance units that are especially prone to such animal attacks, basing decisions on historical loss data. Second, farmers must report any loss within 72 hours of damage. The report has to be made through the Crop Insurance App, and the farmer needs to upload geotagged photographs to support the claim.

Why Technology Is Central to Claims

The use of geotagged photos and app-based claims is a deliberate move. It lets the insurance system verify claims more accurately, and helps avoid fraud. It also speeds up the claim process — technology-based verification will be used to assess losses rather than relying purely on manual inspections. This should make compensation more timely and reliable.

Who Will Benefit Most

Farmers in states with frequent human-wildlife conflict are among the biggest beneficiaries of this change. These include places like Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, and the Himalayan and northeastern states. In these regions, animals such as elephants, wild boars, nilgai, deer and monkeys often damage crops.

Similarly, farmers in flood-prone or coastal states will benefit from the reintroduced paddy inundation cover. States like Odisha, Assam, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Uttarakhand, where paddy flooding is common, stand to gain substantially.

Reasons Behind Reintroduction of Paddy Inundation Cover

Paddy inundation was part of the PMFBY earlier, but it was removed in 2018. One reason was concern over “moral hazard” – paying out for every small flood might encourage risky farming behaviour. Another reason was the difficulty in evaluating losses when fields are submerged. Over time, this gap in coverage caused hardship, especially for farmers in flood-prone zones. The government says the new structure deals with those concerns and applies technology and clear norms to make the process fair and feasible.

Expert Committee and Scientific Basis

To shape these changes, the Ministry of Agriculture formed an expert committee. That committee studied both wild-animal damage and paddy flooding, and made recommendations on what should be covered and how. Their proposals were accepted by the Agriculture Minister. The updated framework is said to follow scientific and transparent guidelines consistent with the PMFBY’s operational rules.

Risks and Challenges Ahead

Introducing these new covers is not without risk. Accurately assessing damage from wild animals or floodwater remains challenging. Some farmers may struggle to report losses within 72 hours or use the app effectively, especially in remote regions. There is also the question of how insurance companies will manage the extra risk. States will need to build capacity to handle claims and work with local communities to identify problem areas and vulnerable zones.

Potential Impact on Farmer Income Security

If implemented well, this change could strengthen the safety net for farmers. It gives a formal way to recover losses they previously had to absorb themselves. Better compensation could make farming more resilient, especially for small and marginal farmers who often lack resources to cope with repeated damage. Over time, this might help reduce financial stress and prevent distress sales of land or assets after a bad season.

Broader Policy Implications

This decision shows how government policy is adapting to emerging and localised risks. It acknowledges that traditional crop insurance does not always capture every important threat. By using modern technology (like apps and geo-tagging) and involving states in risk mapping, the scheme becomes more flexible and responsive. It also reflects a trend in agricultural policy: to offer more targeted support rather than one-size-fits-all cover.

Looking Ahead

The rollout will begin in Kharif 2026, and much will depend on how smoothly the new system works. Farmers, states, and insurance firms will need to coordinate closely. Training farmers to use the app, educating local communities about loss reporting, and building systems for quick claim verification will all be crucial. If these steps are handled effectively, the expansion could significantly improve the protection farmers have against crop losses.

Conclusion

By extending PMFBY coverage to include wild animal attacks and paddy inundation, the Centre has taken a meaningful step toward strengthening support for farmers. The new provisions aim to bridge a protection gap, particularly in areas that face localised but serious risks. With proper implementation, this move could make crop insurance more relevant, fair, and useful for farmers who need it most.