Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Economy & business fact checks

Explore claims publishers have checked about economy & business. Read their original ratings and follow the evidence.

7,104 published reviews in this topic

FACTLYEconomy & business

Develop existing 22,000 rural haats into Gramin Agricultural Markets (GrAMs)

Publisher’s rating: TRUE

FACTLY examined a claim that the existing 22,000 rural haats were being developed into Gramin Agricultural Markets (GrAMs). The review distinguished this development claim from an additional assertion that the initiative would help 86% of small farmers, treating the two parts separately. For the number of markets, the review cited a Lok Sabha response stating that there were 22,711 rural haats in the country. FACTLY therefore found the stated figure of 22,000 to be broadly consistent with the reported total. The article also noted that most of these haats were under state Panchayati Raj institutions. The review’s conclusion was qualified: it found the development of existing haats into GrAMs supported, but said public information was unavailable on how many small farmers would benefit. That limitation concerns the separate benefit claim; it does not negate the review’s finding about upgrading the haats.

FACTLYEconomy & business

Budget allocation doubled to push food processing industry.

Publisher’s rating: UNVERIFIED

FACTLY’s review examines the assertion that the budget allocation doubled to promote India’s food-processing industry. It notes that the assertion does not specify which years should be compared, making the claim difficult to verify as stated. The review then discusses actual expenditure under the Ministry of Food Processing Industries, rather than presenting a like-for-like comparison of stated budget allocations. The review says that this expenditure did not follow a consistent upward path: it increased in some years and decreased in others under both the UPA and NDA governments. For a specific comparison, it uses actual expenditure in 2014–15 as the base and the revised estimate for 2018–19 as the endpoint. On that basis, the later figure was about 70% higher—not double. That comparison challenges the idea of a doubling for those selected figures, but it does not establish a definitive result for every possible period: the claim itself supplies no years, and the article does not identify a comparison period that the claim intended. FACTLY therefore treats the claim as unverified rather than confirming that the allocation doubled.

FACTLYEconomy & business

GrAMs, electronically linked to e-NAM, to make direct sale to consumers and bulk purchasers.

Publisher’s rating: TRUE

The claim concerns the proposed Gramin Agriculture Markets (GrAMs), which were to be formed by upgrading existing village haats, linking them electronically to e-NAM, and enabling farmers to sell directly to consumers and bulk purchasers. The review examined a Lok Sabha response from February 2019 about the government’s plan for these markets. That response said that 22,000 village haats were to be upgraded to GrAMs through the convergence of government schemes. It also said the markets were to be exempt from Agricultural Produce Market Committee regulations and linked to e-NAM, with the stated purpose of helping farmers sell directly to buyers. The review’s finding therefore supports the central point that GrAMs were intended to connect farmers with direct buyers through e-NAM. The excerpt does not separately establish the specific buyer categories “consumers” and “bulk purchasers”; it describes buyers more generally. The review also distinguishes the proposed upgrade from the existence of the markets themselves: village haats predated the initiative, while their planned upgrading and electronic linkage were the new elements. Its conclusion was based on the Lok Sabha response described in the article, rather than on evidence that every planned market had already been upgraded or linked.

FACTLYEconomy & business

PMKSY launched to modernize supply chain infrastructure.

Publisher’s rating: TRUE

FACTLY examined the specific assertion that PMKSY was launched to modernize supply-chain infrastructure. Its review identifies PMKSY as the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Sampada Yojana and reports that the Government of India approved it in May 2017 as a new Central Sector Scheme, implemented by the Ministry of Food Processing Industries. The scheme’s stated purpose and structure include a range of food-processing and supply-chain components.

FACTLYEconomy & business

Farm credit target raised to 11 lakh crore rupees for 2018-19.

Publisher’s rating: TRUE

FACTLY checked a claim in a government infographic about agriculture-sector budget allocations and outcomes: that the farm-credit target had been raised to Rs. 11 lakh crore for 2018-19. The review compared budget announcements across years and cited the Finance Minister’s 2018-19 budget speech, which set the institutional agricultural-credit target at Rs. 11 lakh crore, up from Rs. 10 lakh crore in 2017-18 and Rs. 8.5 lakh crore in 2014-15. The review also cited the RBI’s 2017-18 annual report, which records an agricultural-credit target of Rs. 11,000 billion for 2018-19. That report put the previous year’s target at Rs. 10,000 billion and reported that actual lending reached Rs. 11,685 billion in 2017-18. Thus, the figure in the claim matches the announced target, though it was below the previous year’s reported achievement. FACTLY’s historical comparison adds context: it says the target rose from Rs. 8 lakh crore in 2014-15 to Rs. 11 lakh crore in 2018-19, while successive governments had also raised the target in earlier years. The review therefore supports the specific increase claimed while noting that it continued a pattern of annual increases.

FACTLYEconomy & business

e-trading platforms, 585 regulated markets to fetch the best prices for farmers.

Publisher’s rating: TRUE

FACTLY examined a government infographic claim that e-NAM had e-trading platforms in 585 regulated markets “to fetch the best prices for farmers.” Its review checked the e-NAM portal’s listed mandis and found that it listed 585. On that count, the review marked the claim TRUE: the figure referred to APMC mandis on the platform, not necessarily markets conducting online trades. The review’s qualification is important: it said “it is not clear as to how many of these mandis are actively using the system for online trade.” Thus, the evidence it describes establishes the number of mandis listed on e-NAM, but does not establish that all 585 were actively trading online or that farmers in each market actually obtained the best prices. For context on the scale of the figure, FACTLY compared the 585 listed mandis with a total of 6,615 APMC wholesale markets, citing volume 4 of the Dalwai committee report on doubling farmers’ income. The review described the listed e-NAM markets as about 9% of that total. This comparison gives scale; it does not independently demonstrate the price outcome implied by “best prices.”