In this blog, R M Prasad presents a critique of the skilling domain in India, with particular reference to the agricultural sector, and suggests how to overcome the current constraints.
CONTEXT
Skill development is one of the most challenging processes to manage within the entire spectrum of education and training. It is significantly harder to plan and deliver than other levels of education, as its demands are often unarticulated and constantly evolving. Ensuring quality in skill development requires three critical elements: standards, sufficient inputs, and measurement of outputs against these standards. Developing standards is the first requirement for quality skill training. Trainers and employers should play a major role in determining these standards, which should be expressed in terms of competencies (output requirements), not inputs. In India, though several agencies are involved in organizing skill training in agriculture (Box 1), overall, the sector faces several challenges.
| Box 1: Skill Training Programmes in Agriculture Student READY (Rural Enterprise Awareness Development Yojana) of ICAR is implemented in the fourth year of the undergraduate programme by State Agricultural Universities. It has five components: a. Experiential Learning on Business Models/Hands-on Training b. Experiential Learning on Skill Development c. Rural Agricultural Work Experience (RAWE) d. Internship/In-plant training/Industrial attachment Student projects. Attracting and Retaining Youth in Agriculture (ARYA), an ICAR programme, focuses on skill development and entrepreneurship for rural youth, aiming to generate employment and income. Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs) implement ARYA in one district per state, identifying 200–300 rural youth per district for skill development and micro-enterprise establishment. Skill Training of Rural Youth (STRY), by the Government of India, provides vocational training to rural youth in agriculture and allied sectors, promoting employment and skilled manpower in rural areas. The programme is implemented by KVKs, NYKs, and FTCs through SAMETIs at the state level and coordinated by ATMA at the district level. KVKs in each district offer skill training for farmers, farm women, and rural youth to enhance capacity in modern agricultural technologies, self-employment, and enterprise development. Rural Self-Employment Training Institutes (RSETIs), managed by commercial banks, offer short-duration skill development programmes in agriculture and allied sectors. Agricultural Skill Council of India (ASCI) provides skill training aligned with the National Skills Qualifications Framework (NSQF), aiming to bridge skill gaps and enhance employability in agriculture. |
WHAT IS WRONG WITH OUR SKILLING PROGRAMMES?
Quantity vs. Quality
A critical analysis reveals that despite ambitious targets and substantial public investment, India’s skill development landscape remains driven by quantity-based metrics and dubious success stories. The ecosystem is complex, vast, and diverse, offering varying levels of training to a highly heterogeneous population. This complexity presents numerous challenges.
As is well known, skills cannot be acquired in a short time; they require sustained effort and hands-on experience. Yet, many agricultural training programmes are delivered over one or two days under the guise of awareness or exposure training, with trainers claiming that farmers are now equipped to adopt new technologies. This superficial approach undermines true skill acquisition. A worrying trend is the decreasing duration of training courses, aiming to increase numbers but at the cost of quality.
Reports suggest India’s vocational education system has become a numbers game, with certificates issued without meaningful skill development. Over-reliance on short-term training, poor employment outcomes, and inflated placement statistics point to systemic failures. Mehrotra and Sharma (2025) question whether such programmes truly address skill gaps or merely serve to meet statistical goals.
At the village level, training is mostly offered by private players, often in partnership with each other or with the government. However, the training content often fails to align with NSQF standards, leading to varied acceptance of certification, including that issued by ICAR and SAUs. With NSQF implementation, it is imperative that all training be compliant and that centres be accredited accordingly.
Agricultural Extension vs. Skill Training
Since 2013, India has introduced standardized agricultural vocational training under the broader Skill India initiative. However, due to a lack of specialized vocational centres, agricultural extension institutions have been tasked with implementation. This has led to a conflation of extension and vocational training, which are fundamentally different. Extension has traditionally focused on informal, production-oriented knowledge transfer, not skill certification.
The Agriculture Skill Council of India (ASCI) oversees vocational agriculture training with three mandates:
- Identify sector skill needs and develop qualification packs.
- Accredit agencies capable of delivering such training.
- Oversee trainee assessment and certification.
Given the absence of dedicated vocational institutions, extension personnel assumed responsibility for ASCI training based on their agricultural expertise. However, vocational training requires both industry experience and pedagogical qualifications—an area that remains under-researched within SAUs.
Supply vs. Demand
Skill development challenges exist on both the supply and demand sides. India’s massive workforce growth each year creates enormous employment pressure. On the supply side, issues include poor education quality, inadequate training infrastructure, mismatches between skills and market needs, and the low social perception of vocational training.
Multiple actors—NSDC, MSDE, Sector Skill Councils—manage skilling programmes, creating a fragmented ecosystem with inconsistent quality. The target-driven orientation and focus on short-term, ‘top-up’ courses are criticized for not delivering marketable skills.
Technology vs. Skill Development
Technology is a double-edged sword—it creates new jobs while displacing others through automation. Indian startups and unicorns have created over 100,000 jobs annually since 2019, introducing roles such as data scientists and digital marketers. Yet, 69% of jobs in India are threatened by automation.
According to the World Economic Forum, technology will create 12 million more jobs than it eliminates, offering a long-term net gain. Still, a new operational model is emerging—the “skills-based organization”—where skills, rather than jobs, are central to workforce planning. This model emphasizes continuous reskilling to enhance employability.
CHALLENGES IN SKILLING
The most glaring shortfall is our inability to measure the employment impact of skilling programmes. A lack of longitudinal data and institutional mechanisms hampers our understanding of trainee outcomes.
Comparative studies identify two main issues:
- Provision of quality training.
- Integration of trainees into the job market.
Four major challenges further compound the issue:
- Technological disruption and AI-driven job displacement.
- A globally ageing workforce impacting economic growth.
- Environmental migration altering carbon patterns.
- Rapid AI development creating regulatory and job-related policy challenges.
Despite large investments, India’s skilling success will depend on innovative, scalable solutions involving all stakeholders.
A ROADMAP FOR THE FUTURE
To meet evolving skill demands, upskilling and reskilling should be key government priorities. As noted in the European Pillar of Social Rights, “Everyone has the right to quality and inclusive education, training and lifelong learning to maintain and acquire skills for full participation in society and the labour market.”
Recommendations:
- Integrate innovation, livelihoods, and entrepreneurship into all agricultural skill programmes—both vocational and formal.
- Expand skilling frontiers in agriculture and food sectors, enabling youth to become practitioners or technical advisors.
- Align curricula and assessments with industry needs through consultation with entrepreneurs and sector experts.
- Enhance trainer quality through joint ICAR-ASCI “training of trainers” programmes, in collaboration with MANAGE, NAARM, and ATARIs.
- Make programmes demand-driven, ensuring alignment with job opportunities and increasing accessibility.
- Empower States to design locally-relevant skill solutions—especially crucial for agriculture.
- Promote green skills to combat climate change and sustain natural resources.
Dr. R. M. Prasad is a retired Agricultural Extension expert from Kerala Agricultural University, with over 32 years of service, including as Associate Director of Extension. He contributed to European-funded projects like KHDP and KMIP, served as a National Facilitator for MANAGE, and held key roles at NIRDPR and the Government of Meghalaya. He was also a member of ICAR’s Research Advisory Committees for IIMR and DCR. His interests include technology transfer, climate change, and skill development. His recent book, Skilling Indian Agriculture, is available at: https://www.astralint.com/book/9789359194844/skilling-indian-agriculture. He can be contacted at drrmprasad@gmail.com
The observations by Dr R M Prasad are highly relevant. In alignment with the points mentioned, I would like to put forth the following suggestions: Undertake a sincere effort in skill mapping to accurately identify existing skill gaps across sectors and levels.
Establish clear protocols for the conduct of skill training programs—ensuring that, upon completion, every trainee is equipped to perform a defined set of minimum tasks effectively with reasonable effort.
Engage an external consultant to: Define minimum delivery standards for skill training programs conducted by any government organization.
Review and update outdated training content and methodologies to align with current industry needs and best practices.
Certificates Over Skills: A Systemic Challenge in Agricultural Education and Professional Growth
Reading this blog by Dr. Prasad brought up a few realities we often hesitate to acknowledge. Training programs such as ICAR’s summer/winter/short courses, while designed to build capacity, have increasingly become a checkbox exercise. The underlying motivation for many participants is often not learning but the need to secure a certificate—one that’s mandatory for career progression.This raises a deeper question: If the requirement of a certificate for promotion is removed, how many would still attend these programs purely for skill acquisition? Unfortunately, the likely answer is—very few. This reflects a wider malaise in the public-sector approach to professional development. Once inside the system, salary and promotions often hinge more on procedural formalities than on genuine skill enhancement or performance outcomes.
Contrast this with the private sector, where the absence of skills quickly translates into lack of results, and often, consequences. In the government setup, however, there is limited accountability when it comes to the practical application of knowledge—especially in fields like agriculture, where ground-level expertise is critical.
It’s disheartening to note that many agricultural graduates, especially those from urban backgrounds, struggle with identifying basic crops like lentil, pea, or chickpea in the field, despite scoring over 80% academically. What does that say about our education system? It signals a skewed emphasis on theory over practical skills. Grades have become a metric of memory and exam-taking ability, not competence or field-readiness.
On World Skills Day, the call to action should be loud and clear: Shift the focus from credentials to capability. Let the mantra be “Get skilled, be somebody”—not just on paper, but in practice. Skill should be the currency of progress, not just a certificate. Thanks to AESA for continued efforts to publish blogs coinciding with important days underscoring the importance of such days.
This is really very interesting topic for declamation and debate. In vocational trainings also, much emphasis is on creating awareness about a vocation because the participants who enroll themselves for a skill oriented vocation are totally ignorant. Moreover, being a govt. trainer, one does not want to exert more and just complete the prescribed syllabus. Similarly, a target is given to conduct so many vocational training courses to an institute without assessing the need of the courses. KVKs were established mainly for creating jobs for farmers, farm women and youth through vocational trainings and first KVK was established in 1974 whereas at present there are 731 KVKs working in the country but all KVKs in the country are struggling for their pay scales, salaries, allowances etc., Under such situation, ASCI who does not have technical staff with them and other required infra structure for imparting skills, the impact of skill training courses would be not be upto the desired level. Therefore, govt of India must strengthen the working of KVKs established in the country and managed by different host institutes. The major objective should be skill imparting rather than conductance of various other extension activities.
Very happy to see another interesting blog from Prof. R.M.Prasad, this time on issues related to skill development programmes in India with specific reference to agriculture. The animal husbandry sector is also facing similar challenges which need to be addressed with utmost sincerity.
Quality is always a challenge for any institution including academic institutions and there are no short cuts to produce quality output.
All our educational programmes are basically employment oriented. There is no doubt that we are producing substandard manpower which is attributed to poor or inadequate teachers/trainers, infrastructure and lack of focus on maintenance of standards. If we look at BVSc & AH programme, minimum standards are prescribed by the Veterinary Council of India (VCI) but most of the colleges in the country fail to meet the standards in terms of both faculty and or infrastructure. This problem is getting accentuated with the flare for establishment of several private colleges in North India ( For example Rajasthan has 8 private colleges in addition to 2 in govt sector) and Govt. colleges in South India (For example Tamil Nadu is contemplating to establish 3 more new colleges in addition to the 4 existing colleges). Added to this, student intake is increased without concomitant increase in faculty strength and infrastructure. In the existing scenario It is not possible to provide enough opportunities to the students to acquire the required skills with very few animals in the livestock farm and low attendance of cases in the veterinary clinical complex. Now most of our colleges are managing with flying faculty or contract faculty to teach the students. Everywhere the standards are compromised resulting in churning out poor quality veterinarians.
If this be the case with UG programme, one can imagine the fate of several employment-oriented training programmes focusing on producing skilled inseminators and para veterinarians to increase the coverage of AI and access to veterinary services. The Livestock Development Boards in many states are implementing these training programmes with inadequate trainers and infrastructure. Ultimately, the farmers have to face the brunt if we are not able to provide skilled manpower to give them quality services.
Suggestions for improving the quality of the output:
1. It is a must to enforce quality standards if we wish to provide quality services to the farmers.
2. Without culling quality can never be improved. Certificates must be issued only to those who have acquired the skills and not to all those who participated (not practiced) as is the practice now.
3. Proper monitoring of the performance of the service providers at regular intervals is a must which needs a mechanism to identify poor performers in the field to send them for further training.
Thanks to Prof. R.M. Prasad for coming out with a useful blog and to AESA for publishing it.