India Can See the Weather Coming. Can Help Arrive in Time?
India’s weak 2026 monsoon is testing whether climate science can become practical protection for farmers and vulnerable people.
For a farmer deciding when to sow, a weather forecast is not background information. It can determine whether seeds germinate, whether borrowed money is lost and whether a family has enough income for the months ahead.
For an older person or someone living with heart, lung, kidney or metabolic disease, the same weather may carry a different danger. A dry season can mean hotter surroundings, less reliable water, higher food prices and greater pressure on an already fragile body.
This year, the southwest monsoon has again shown how difficult it is to speak about one Indian climate. Some regions have faced damaging rain, while others have waited through long dry periods. By 19 September, national rainfall was about 15 per cent below normal, while around 43 per cent of India’s geographical area remained rainfall-deficient. The season developed against the backdrop of strengthening El Niño conditions, but the national figures still concealed sharp local differences. Paddy cultivation had declined, and concerns were growing about yields in Karnataka, Telangana and other affected regions.
The question is no longer whether climate irregularities affect ordinary life. They already do. The more useful question is what can be done before a forecast becomes a failed crop, a medical emergency or another family pushed into debt.
India is learning to see risk earlier
India has built one of the world’s most ambitious weather and climate-service systems. The government’s Mission Mausam was approved in September 2024 and formally launched by the Prime Minister on 14 January 2025, with an allocation of ₹2,000 crore over two years. It is intended to improve observation networks, forecasting, modelling and early-warning capacity. IMD services now provide local forecasts through digital platforms, while agricultural advisories can recommend when to sow, irrigate, fertilise or protect a crop.
Artificial intelligence is also moving from experimental research into practical use. In July 2026, the government reported that AI-based monsoon and weather advisories had reached approximately 5.28 crore farmers. In a March 2026 preprint, Colin Aitken and colleagues described a forecasting system that blends several AI weather models with a statistical model of farmers’ changing expectations. The researchers report that the system was deployed in 2025 through a government-led programme that delivered local monsoon-onset forecasts to approximately 38 million farmers and identified that year’s unusual early-summer dry period. A companion preprint explains how the models were benchmarked and selected for this large-scale effort.
This is important progress. A more accurate forecast can prevent a farmer from sowing just before a long dry spell. It can help someone delay irrigation before heavy rain or harvest before a storm. It can give health services time to prepare for heat, flooding or disease outbreaks. But information becomes protection only when people can act on it.
A forecast is not yet a solution
Imagine that a small farmer receives a message saying the rains will arrive late. What comes next? Can she obtain a shorter-duration crop variety? Does she have access to irrigation? Can she afford to wait, or has she already taken a loan? If she changes her planting decision on the basis of an advisory and the forecast proves imperfect, who shares that risk?
The same gap appears in public health. A heat warning may be scientifically correct, but it offers limited protection to an outdoor worker who cannot afford to stop working. Advice to remain cool is of little use in a poorly ventilated home during a power cut. A warning to stay hydrated cannot solve an unreliable water supply.
This is the point at which climate policy must move beyond prediction. People need a chain of support connecting scientific information with seed supplies, water management, agricultural extension, healthcare, income protection and fast disaster assistance.
That chain must also reach people who do not use a smartphone, cannot read a complex advisory or live far from the institutions expected to help them. A message may technically have been delivered to millions, but reach should not be measured only by the number of phones contacted. The real measure is whether the recipient understood the warning, trusted it and had a realistic choice available.
What practical protection could look like
India does not need to wait for one miraculous invention. Many of the useful measures already exist. What is often missing is the connection between them at the moment a decision has to be made.
A warning about delayed rain means far more when it arrives with clear information about suitable seed varieties, available water, local suppliers and financial support. Short, crop-specific advice in regional languages can be reinforced through people farmers already know: Krishi Vigyan Kendras, panchayats, cooperatives, women’s self-help groups and local agricultural workers.
The same principle applies to village and district contingency plans. They have value when they are activated before losses occur and linked to what is actually available nearby. Depending on local conditions, that may include shorter-duration or drought-tolerant crops, soil-moisture conservation, rainwater harvesting or a different irrigation schedule. Crop diversification can reduce risk, but it cannot succeed if farmers are left to carry the full cost of the transition. Markets, procurement and credit have to move with them.
If a crop is damaged despite those efforts, the support system must not go quiet. Farmers need to understand how losses will be assessed, what evidence is required and when help can be expected. Crop insurance and disaster relief matter only if payments arrive while families still need them, rather than months after the loss.
Health protection should be part of the same local climate planning. ASHA workers, primary health centres and community groups could maintain voluntary lists of people who may need additional support during heat, drought or flooding. Public drinking-water points, shaded rest areas, cooler community rooms, adjusted outdoor working hours and reflective roofs are not futuristic technologies. They are practical interventions that can reduce exposure now.
Agriculture and health are often managed as separate policy areas, yet climate risk connects them. A failed harvest affects nutrition and income. Water scarcity affects hygiene and disease. Heat affects both the person working in the field and the patient recovering at home. Local plans should reflect this reality.
Fifteen women who did not wait
One example from Karnataka shows that collective action is more than an encouraging phrase.
In 2018, fifteen women in Teertha village, in the drought-prone Dharwad district, formed the Bibifathima Swa Sahaya Sangha (Bibifathima Self Help Group). What began as a small savings group developed into a community-led model for climate-resilient agriculture. The women promoted millet-based mixed cropping on rainfed land, created a community seed bank and helped preserve more than 250 indigenous crop varieties, including varieties better suited to difficult local conditions.
Get Irina Pranji’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
They did not work in isolation. The group combined farmers’ traditional knowledge with support from agricultural organisations, researchers, renewable-energy specialists and a farmer-producer company. A solar-powered processing unit allowed women to turn millets into marketable foods instead of selling only the raw crop. This connected climate resilience with nutrition, employment and income.
According to the UNDP Equator Initiative, the group now supports more than 5,000 farmers across 30 villages. In 2025, it received the Equator Prize for its work in community-based climate adaptation, sustainable agriculture and women’s leadership.
Its achievement is important not because every village can simply copy the same model. Local conditions differ. The deeper lesson is that people can begin organising with the knowledge and resources already available to them, while building partnerships for what they cannot provide alone. The women of Teertha did not replace scientists, institutions or public policy. They created a bridge between them and the farmers whose daily decisions determine whether a solution works.
Their story also changes the meaning of resilience. It is not merely the ability to endure another difficult season. It is the ability to organise, preserve useful knowledge, gain access to better tools and create more choices before the next crisis arrives.
We should not wait silently
Governments and scientists carry responsibilities that individual citizens cannot replace. Governments must build infrastructure, fund research, protect livelihoods and ensure that assistance is fair. Scientists need access to reliable data and the freedom to test long-term solutions. Their findings must be communicated honestly, including uncertainty and limitations. But society also has a role. People do not have to wait quietly for every solution to come from above.
Farmers can organise to share local observations, water, equipment and knowledge. Residents can map households that may need help during extreme weather. Local organisations can record whether warnings arrived, whether recommended seeds were available and whether insurance payments were delayed. Journalists, educators and citizens can keep these experiences in public view instead of allowing climate risks to attract attention only after lives or harvests have been lost.
Public discussion is itself a form of climate action. When people treat the subject as urgent, ask informed questions and organise around practical needs, they create pressure for better decisions. They also create the social conditions in which scientists can search for real and lasting solutions, rather than moving from one short-funded pilot project to the next.
This does not mean transferring responsibility from institutions to vulnerable people. A farmer facing crop failure or a patient enduring extreme heat should not be told simply to become more resilient. Individual action cannot replace public water systems, healthcare, crop insurance or accountable government. But government programmes are also stronger when communities participate, report failures and help shape what protection should look like.
Climate resilience cannot be delivered by governments and scientists alone. It cannot be placed on individuals alone either. It grows when citizens, communities, researchers and decision-makers act together.
From prediction to protection
India’s expanding forecasting capacity is a real achievement. Better data, artificial intelligence and local weather services can save crops, money and lives. Yet the next important breakthrough may not be another improvement in a forecast model. It may be a better system for turning a forecast into action.
That means asking different questions. Did the warning reach the right person? Was it understood? Could the farmer obtain what the advisory recommended? Did the health worker know who was at risk? Was water available? Did financial help arrive in time?
Climate change is often discussed through global targets and distant dates. For millions of people, however, adaptation is a decision that must be made this week: whether to sow, irrigate, work outdoors, conserve water or check on a vulnerable neighbour.
Forecasts can tell a village what may happen next. They cannot ensure that suitable seeds, water, healthcare or financial support will be available when the warning arrives. That depends on decisions made long before a crisis begins.
The women of Teertha show what becomes possible when people organise around a shared risk and institutions meet them with knowledge, technology and practical support. Their work does not offer one solution for every village. It shows something equally important: collective action can create choices where people previously had very few.
Sources for fact-checking
Press Information Bureau, “Implementation of Mission Mausam,” 22 July 2026: https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleaseDetail.aspx?PRID=2287610&lang=1®=3
Prime Minister of India, “Cabinet approves Mission Mausam,” September 2024: https://www.pmindia.gov.in/en/news_updates/cabinet-approves-mission-mausam/
Press Information Bureau, “Promotion of AI Use in Agriculture and Impact Assessment,” 24 July 2026: https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2289031
Aitken et al., “Designing probabilistic AI monsoon forecasts to inform agricultural decision-making,” preprint, 2026: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.07893
Masiwal et al., “Decision-oriented benchmarking to transform AI weather forecast access: Application to the Indian monsoon,” preprint, 2026: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.03767
The Indian Express, “Monsoon retreat begins even as 43% of India remains rain deficit,” 19 September 2026: https://indianexpress.com/article/india/southwest-monsoon-withdrawal-commences-west-rajasthan-forty-three-percent-country-rain-deficient-imd-bay-of-bengal-depression-10885310/
Financial Express, “Monsoon Tracker: Kharif yield may be hit by skewed rain spread,” September 2026: https://www.financialexpress.com/policy/economy/kharif-yield-may-be-hit-by-skewed-rain-spread/4338407/
The Indian Express, “Amid weak monsoon, Karnataka CM warns of water, power shortage,” September 2026: https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/bangalore/karnataka-drought-water-power-shortage-dk-shivakumar-10877695/
Reuters, “India rice output faces biggest drop in two decades, stocks cushion exports,” 17 September 2026: https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-rice-output-faces-biggest-drop-two-decades-stocks-cushion-exports-2026-09-17/
UNDP Equator Initiative, “Bibifathima Swa Sahaya Sangha,” Equator Prize Winner 2025: https://www.equatorinitiative.org/2025/07/31/bibifathima-swa-sahaya-sangha-bibifathima-self-help-group/
