The rains came early this year. Before most of the forecasts, before the usual ceremonies of anticipation. The monsoon has made its timely descent, and the countryside is already responding. In a country so attuned to the rhythm of rain, a good monsoon is more than meteorological news—it is a national reassurance. For India, which has seen several consecutive years of strong agricultural performance, this year promises to continue the trend. Food grain production has crossed the 330 million tonne mark and continues on an upward trajectory. There is reason to feel hopeful.
But as we celebrate our good fortune in production, a quieter question arises: Are we doing enough to safeguard what we grow?
For a country that feeds over a billion people—and offers free or subsidised grain to a significant portion under various welfare schemes—this is not a philosophical query. It is a logistical and infrastructural imperative.
India’s food security depends not just on the act of cultivation, but equally on the chain that follows: procurement, storage, movement, and distribution. The Food Corporation of India (FCI), a critical institution in this ecosystem, shoulders the responsibility of managing grain reserves across the country. Over the decades, it has done this task with commitment, operating a vast network of warehouses and movement mechanisms. But many of these systems are rooted in legacy methods—designed for another time, another scale.
Grain continues to be stored in conventional godowns, packed in 50 kg jute bags, manually handled, and exposed to multiple points of loss—both quantitative and qualitative. Despite the best efforts of staff and policy designers, the system groans under the weight of its inefficiencies. As food production rises, these inefficiencies become more glaring. It is no longer a case of patchwork solutions. What is needed is structural reform—particularly in how we store.
Recognising the urgency, the Government of India initiated a modernisation plan centred around steel silos. The strategy was sound and long overdue. These silos, designed for bulk handling and scientifically managed storage, promised a cleaner, more secure alternative to bagged storage. A ‘Hub and Spoke’ model was proposed, with 249 locations identified across India to decentralise storage, link production zones with consumption centres, and make bulk logistics more viable. The implementation was to be routed through a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) framework, encouraging investment while maintaining oversight.
And yet, as of today, the numbers tell a different story.
Of the 209 locations tendered, only 21 silos have been commissioned and are operational. A staggering 102 tenders have been terminated—some after protracted delays—and over 70 others are still waiting for the most basic administrative clearance: the Letter of Commencement. In some cases, years have passed since the tender was awarded.
The delay is not simply procedural; it affects the core goal of food security. With limited progress in silo construction, grain continues to be stored the old way. Each passing season adds to the strain. The early promise of a countrywide silo network, one that could transform how we handle our harvest, has slowed to a crawl.
Several factors have contributed to this inertia. The bundling of tenders into large geographical clusters has made it difficult for mid-sized firms to participate. Many bids attracted only a single bidder, creating compliance issues and limited competitive tension. In other cases, delays in land approvals, state-level clearances, or procedural bottlenecks have impeded progress. Moreover, concerns about transparency and unpredictable bid timelines have dampened the appetite of serious infrastructure players.
All this results in a situation where even well-intentioned tenders get locked in a web of complexity. What was designed to be a seamless PPP model ends up becoming a frustrating maze—for both the bidders and the food system that depends on them.
This may be the right time to revisit an older, somewhat more successful model: the PEG (Private Entrepreneur Guarantee) Scheme. Under PEG, godowns were built on a Build-Own-Operate basis, with FCI offering assured rentals for a fixed period. The scheme succeeded in attracting investment and building capacity because it used rate-based contracts. Contractors were empanelled, rates were pre-approved, and storage was planned with both flexibility and accountability.
A similar system, if adapted for silos, could avoid the trap of slow, tender-by-tender execution. Imagine a nationwide rate contract, with standard silo designs approved, rates per tonne fixed based on location, and a list of empanelled players ready to start work. With clear milestones, time-bound approvals, and simplified financing terms, multiple sites could progress in parallel. It would eliminate the reliance on single bids, reduce delays, and most importantly, allow grain to be stored more safely, more swiftly.
So far, much of the attention has been on wheat silos. But India’s food system is incomplete without rice. Milled rice—the kind consumed across large parts of the country—is still stored and transported in traditional sacks. There is no established scientific model for rice silos in India. Movement is manual, pilferage is frequent, and the costs of loading and unloading are rising steadily, both in rupees and in human effort.
This is a major blind spot. A country that prides itself on being one of the world’s largest rice producers has not yet moved beyond the bag. If the goal is to modernise storage infrastructure holistically, rice must be brought into the fold. Standardised silo models, modified for rice storage conditions, must be designed, tested, and rolled out on priority. Otherwise, any gains made in wheat will remain isolated victories in a fragmented system.
There is another dimension we are only beginning to reckon with—climate. Rising temperatures, longer heat spells, and erratic rainfall patterns are now facts of Indian agriculture. Grain stored in conventional godowns, without insulation or climate adaptation, faces growing risks. Spoilage, heat-related deterioration, and increased reliance on chemical preservatives are becoming more common.
In contrast, many countries—from China and Australia to even Bangladesh—have moved towards passive cooling systems or climate-resilient storage designs. These systems reduce the need for fumigation and chemical treatment, protecting both the grain and the health of workers involved in handling it. For India, where environmental risks are growing by the year, these innovations are no longer optional.
We must plan for temperature-controlled silos, designed for future climates, not past norms. It is more than an engineering decision. It is a health, safety, and sustainability necessity.
Modern storage is only part of the solution. The movement of grain—from farm to store, store to railhead, railhead to depot—is still heavily dependent on manual processes and traditional packaging. There is an urgent need to invest in bulk transport systems—top-open multimodal containers, bulk wagons, and integrated grain handling terminals.
The COVID-19 pandemic and repeated monsoon disruptions have shown how vulnerable our logistics chains are. Without the right storage and transport pairing, even the most advanced silos will become isolated silos—efficient at one end but disconnected from the rest of the system.
Let us be clear. India does not lack food. Nor does it lack policies or institutions. What we risk is losing momentum in execution. The production numbers will continue to rise. The monsoons may remain generous for a while longer. But if our storage systems continue to lag, we will find ourselves in a paradox—abundance in harvest, scarcity in supply.
The economic cost of poor storage is significant. But the human cost is greater. Every tonne lost is food that won’t reach someone who needs it. Every delay in infrastructure is a day of risk added to the supply chain. The true measure of food security is not in the size of our stockpiles, but in our ability to protect and deliver them.
It is not too late. The vision is still valid. The silos can still be built. But we need to simplify. We need to decentralise. And above all, we need to act with urgency. A national rate-based construction model, led by credible players, with built-in climate resilience and aligned transport solutions—this is not a dream. It is entirely possible. But the first step must be to acknowledge that the current pace is not enough.
Let us not reduce this to a procurement exercise. Let us see it for what it truly is—a foundational element of national security, of economic prudence, and of respect for the Indian farmer.
The early rains this year remind us that nature often keeps its promise. Our farmers, too, have kept theirs. Now it is time for our institutions to do the same.
Let us secure the harvest. Not just with policies and plans, but with steel, science, and sincerity.
Business and Economy 
Education 
Food 
Government 
Lifestyle 
Politics 
Travel 
World 
