Introduction
Since Independence a lot of changes have taken place in the rural economic scene. In this section we shall focus on land reforms, the green revolution and rural development programmes and impact of new economic policy on rural economy.
Economy and Polity: Land Reforms
After Independence of India from the British rule various land reform measures were introduced to change the agrarian structure for establishment of a prosperous and egalitarian society. Here we will first look at the changes and then discuss their impact on rural economy.
A) Changes in the Agrarian Structure
i) First step was the abolition of the Zamindari system. Its objective was to bring the cultivators into direct relationship with the state through eliminating the intermediary interests of the zamindars and the chain of subinfeudation. The intermediaries were allowed to retain their khudkasht i.e. land for personal cultivation. The rest of their land had to be with the tenants for which the zamindars were compensated by the revenue. This measure led to eviction of tenants on a large scale by the zamindars who claimed major portion of their land as khudkasht.
ii) Secondly, the tenancy reform measure taken by the state aimed at providing security of tenure, reduction of rent and facilitating acquisition of ownership rights by tenant cultivators. Usually when tenants were found to be cultivating the land for a continuous period of five years they were declared permanent or ‘protected’ tenants who could not be easily evicted by the landowner. Land rent was reduced. It was one-fourth or one-sixth of the value of the gross produce. The tenants got the right to acquire ownership of land they cultivated by paying rent for a limited number of years, say, eight years or ten years. A substantial number of tenants acquired security of tenure and ownership of land. But this measure also led to the eviction of tenants. Subtle and concealed tenancy arrangements were made. The phenomenon of share-cropping became more common. Landlords continued to exploit tenants.
iii) Thirdly, ceilings were imposed on present family landholdings as well as on future acquisitions. The state had to acquire surplus land from the big landowners with due compensation and distribute the same among the marginal peasants, small peasants and landless agricultural labourers. However, delay in enactment and implementation of the law enabled the landlords either to sell off their surplus land or to partition the land and transfer the same in the name of relatives and friends and thereby evading the law to a great extent.
iv) Another land legislation concerned consolidation of fragmented landholdings of landholders. Once implemented this measure would promote adequate investment of capital and inputs in land and boost efficiency and economy in agriculture.
B) Impact of Land Reforms
The overall impact of land reforms was far from satisfactory. Smaller tenants were evicted from land in large number and forced into highly exploitative system of share-cropping. They received much less protection and suffered more than the bigger ones. Continued dominance of landlords was maintained. It was found that in spite of the land reforms the land concentration did not change much. For example Chattopadhyay (1989: 123-124) showed that in 1954-55, about 47 per cent of households in the size-class of 0.00 to 0.99 acres owned 1.38 per cent of land. Even in 1971-72, this size-class consisting of about 45 per cent of households owned only 2.07 per cent of land. But in 1954-55, about 1.5 per cent of households in the size-class of 40 acres and above, owned about 20 per cent of land. Further in 1971-72 about 2 per cent of households in size-class 25 acres and above owned about 23 per cent of land.
Since Independence a lot of changes have taken place in the rural economic scene. In this section we shall focus on land reforms, the green revolution and rural development programmes and impact of new economic policy on rural economy.
Economy and Polity: Land Reforms
After Independence of India from the British rule various land reform measures were introduced to change the agrarian structure for establishment of a prosperous and egalitarian society. Here we will first look at the changes and then discuss their impact on rural economy.
A) Changes in the Agrarian Structure
i) First step was the abolition of the Zamindari system. Its objective was to bring the cultivators into direct relationship with the state through eliminating the intermediary interests of the zamindars and the chain of subinfeudation. The intermediaries were allowed to retain their khudkasht i.e. land for personal cultivation. The rest of their land had to be with the tenants for which the zamindars were compensated by the revenue. This measure led to eviction of tenants on a large scale by the zamindars who claimed major portion of their land as khudkasht.
ii) Secondly, the tenancy reform measure taken by the state aimed at providing security of tenure, reduction of rent and facilitating acquisition of ownership rights by tenant cultivators. Usually when tenants were found to be cultivating the land for a continuous period of five years they were declared permanent or ‘protected’ tenants who could not be easily evicted by the landowner. Land rent was reduced. It was one-fourth or one-sixth of the value of the gross produce. The tenants got the right to acquire ownership of land they cultivated by paying rent for a limited number of years, say, eight years or ten years. A substantial number of tenants acquired security of tenure and ownership of land. But this measure also led to the eviction of tenants. Subtle and concealed tenancy arrangements were made. The phenomenon of share-cropping became more common. Landlords continued to exploit tenants.
iii) Thirdly, ceilings were imposed on present family landholdings as well as on future acquisitions. The state had to acquire surplus land from the big landowners with due compensation and distribute the same among the marginal peasants, small peasants and landless agricultural labourers. However, delay in enactment and implementation of the law enabled the landlords either to sell off their surplus land or to partition the land and transfer the same in the name of relatives and friends and thereby evading the law to a great extent.
iv) Another land legislation concerned consolidation of fragmented landholdings of landholders. Once implemented this measure would promote adequate investment of capital and inputs in land and boost efficiency and economy in agriculture.
B) Impact of Land Reforms
The overall impact of land reforms was far from satisfactory. Smaller tenants were evicted from land in large number and forced into highly exploitative system of share-cropping. They received much less protection and suffered more than the bigger ones. Continued dominance of landlords was maintained. It was found that in spite of the land reforms the land concentration did not change much. For example Chattopadhyay (1989: 123-124) showed that in 1954-55, about 47 per cent of households in the size-class of 0.00 to 0.99 acres owned 1.38 per cent of land. Even in 1971-72, this size-class consisting of about 45 per cent of households owned only 2.07 per cent of land. But in 1954-55, about 1.5 per cent of households in the size-class of 40 acres and above, owned about 20 per cent of land. Further in 1971-72 about 2 per cent of households in size-class 25 acres and above owned about 23 per cent of land.
However, the intermediate classes of peasants have benefited replacing the older zamindars in politico-economic matters to some extent in the country side. The power of the feudal families is on the wane throughout the country.
Since Independence the National government amended the constitution thirteen times to incorporate 277 land laws in the Ninth Schedule in favour of the land reforms. The latest was in 1995, the Seventy-eighth amendment of the Constitution to incorporate 27 land laws in the Ninth Schedule. According to the Government reports, since the inception of the ceiling laws, the total quantum of land declared surplus in the entire country till 2001 is 73.66 lakh acres. Out of this about 64.95 lakh acres have been taken possession of and a total area of 53.79 lakh acres have been distributed to 55.84 lakh beneficiaries, of whom about 36 per cent belong to scheduled castes and around 15 per cent belong to scheduled tribes.
The Green Revolution
A process of very important biological and mechanical innovations in agriculture begun since the mid-sixties is known as the Green Revolution. In the beginning, it covered the states of Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh. Gradually, it has penetrated into certain areas of some other states. In these areas, cultivators use high yielding variety of seeds, high doses of chemical fertilisers, abundant supply of water for irrigation, and modern agricultural implements like tractors, powered threshers, tubewells, pumpsets, etc. The total area under the high-yielding-varieties programme was a negligible 1.9 million hectares in the financial year of 1960. Since then the growth has been spectacular, increasing the same to nearly 15.4 million hectares by the financial year of 1970, 43.1 million hectares by the financial year of 1980, and 63.9 million hectares by financial year 1990. The rate of growth decreased significantly in the late 1980s, as additional suitable land was not available.
This important change in agriculture has increased the cropping intensity, total output and productivity of agriculture. Demand of agricultural labourers has increased. Employment of hired labourers in agriculture has become more prevalent. Gap in supply of labour in states like Punjab has been filled by migrant labourers from other states, e.g., Bihar and eastern Uttar Pradesh. Further, the progressive farmers cultivate their land under personal supervision rather than leasing out to tenants. In addition, they lease-in land from poor peasants who cannot afford costly inputs required for cultivation. According to Andre Beteille (1986: 89) the most striking features of these farms is that they are organised in a manner which resembles more a business enterprise than a feudal estate.
Economy and Polity The major benefits of the Green Revolution in India were experienced mainly in northern and north western India between 1965 and early 1980s; the programme resulted in a substantial increase in the production of food grains, mainly wheat and rice. Food-grain yields continued to increase throughout
1980s, but the dramatic changes in the years between 1965 and 1980 were not duplicated. In the 1980s, the area under high yielding varieties continued to increase, but the rate of growth overall was slower. The Eighth Five Year Plan aimed at making high-yielding varieties available to the whole country and more productive strains of other crops.
Let us now look at some other aspects of the impact of Green Revolution on rural society.
i) Causes of Disparity in Agricultural Production
The Indian Green Revolution created wide regional and interstate disparities. The plan was implemented only in areas with assured supplies of water and the means to control it, large inputs of fertilizers, and adequate farm credit. These inputs were easily available in some parts of the states of Punjab, Haryana, and western Uttar Pradesh; thus, yields increased most in these states. In other states, such as Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, in areas where these inputs were not assured, the results were limited or negligible, leading to considerable variation in crop yields within these states. As discussed by Bhalla (1974: 109) the Green Revolution has led to accentuation of inter-region and inter-district disparities in agricultural productivity and income. However, gains of this progress have been unevenly distributed among various agrarian classes. The benefits have largely gone to large landowners. Marginal and small cultivators are unable to obtain higher output because of their small landholdings. In addition it has been pointed out that marginal and small cultivators are highly indebted to cooperative and other financial institutions for financing the high cost-inputs for agriculture (Johar and Khanna 1983: 424). Bhalla (1974: 109) found that the gap between the non-progressive and progressive cultivators had also widened.
ii) Class Differentiation
The Green Revolution has also resulted in differentiation within the peasant class, which is a sign of capitalist growth in agriculture. In her study of Haryana agricultural holdings operating 15 acres or less, Utsa Patnaik (1987: 199-208) found two peasant classes. The first one were the rural well-to-do and the labour hiring classes of the rich and middle peasants. The second one were the rural poor, the remaining classes of the peasantry, e.g. small and poor peasants. The former possessed large household assets, virtually monopolised modern agricultural equipments and sold nearly three-fifth and over two-fifths of their output in the market. But the latter owned meagre household assets, traditional livestock and implements and sold merely one-third of output in market. The new technology therefore, favoured the large landholders and small landholders did not derive much benefit out of the new technology.
The benefits of the Green Revolution and rural development programmes have been mainly cornered by the big landowners and rich peasants. The small peasants and agricultural labourer are steeped in poverty, unemployment and underemployment even at the beginning of twenty-first century. The gap between the rural rich and the rural poor has in fact widened.
Growth of a capitalist trend in agriculture has been noted in a study done on the Punjab economy with regard to land relations, capital accumulation and existence and increase of wage labour. Regarding land relations Utsa Patnaik’s study noted that 10 per cent of farmers owning more than 20 acres of land, own more than 37 per cent of land. Capital accumulation was observed in that the top 10 per cent of the farmers accounted for 68.75 per cent of tractors, 24.72 per cent of the tube wells/pumping sets, 20.40 per cent of the threshers and 42.86 per cent of the land purchased in Punjab. Further, the proportion of pure tenants had fallen and the proportion of agricultural labourer to the total agricultural workforce had increased from 17.3 per cent to 32.1 per cent between 1961 and 1971. In the year 1991 a majority of 66.8 per cent of the main workers were employed in agricultural and allied industrial sectors. Out of the total agricultural workforce 40 per cent were agricultural labourers. As per 2001 census 26.7 per cent of the total workforce are agricultural labourers and about 70 per cent of the population depend on agriculture for their livelihood. Cash wages of agricultural labourers have increased but a more than proportionate increase in prices has eroded their real wages. The relative share of the labourers in agricultural income has declined in comparison with other classes (Johar and Khanna1983).
Since Independence the National government amended the constitution thirteen times to incorporate 277 land laws in the Ninth Schedule in favour of the land reforms. The latest was in 1995, the Seventy-eighth amendment of the Constitution to incorporate 27 land laws in the Ninth Schedule. According to the Government reports, since the inception of the ceiling laws, the total quantum of land declared surplus in the entire country till 2001 is 73.66 lakh acres. Out of this about 64.95 lakh acres have been taken possession of and a total area of 53.79 lakh acres have been distributed to 55.84 lakh beneficiaries, of whom about 36 per cent belong to scheduled castes and around 15 per cent belong to scheduled tribes.
The Green Revolution
A process of very important biological and mechanical innovations in agriculture begun since the mid-sixties is known as the Green Revolution. In the beginning, it covered the states of Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh. Gradually, it has penetrated into certain areas of some other states. In these areas, cultivators use high yielding variety of seeds, high doses of chemical fertilisers, abundant supply of water for irrigation, and modern agricultural implements like tractors, powered threshers, tubewells, pumpsets, etc. The total area under the high-yielding-varieties programme was a negligible 1.9 million hectares in the financial year of 1960. Since then the growth has been spectacular, increasing the same to nearly 15.4 million hectares by the financial year of 1970, 43.1 million hectares by the financial year of 1980, and 63.9 million hectares by financial year 1990. The rate of growth decreased significantly in the late 1980s, as additional suitable land was not available.
This important change in agriculture has increased the cropping intensity, total output and productivity of agriculture. Demand of agricultural labourers has increased. Employment of hired labourers in agriculture has become more prevalent. Gap in supply of labour in states like Punjab has been filled by migrant labourers from other states, e.g., Bihar and eastern Uttar Pradesh. Further, the progressive farmers cultivate their land under personal supervision rather than leasing out to tenants. In addition, they lease-in land from poor peasants who cannot afford costly inputs required for cultivation. According to Andre Beteille (1986: 89) the most striking features of these farms is that they are organised in a manner which resembles more a business enterprise than a feudal estate.
Economy and Polity The major benefits of the Green Revolution in India were experienced mainly in northern and north western India between 1965 and early 1980s; the programme resulted in a substantial increase in the production of food grains, mainly wheat and rice. Food-grain yields continued to increase throughout
1980s, but the dramatic changes in the years between 1965 and 1980 were not duplicated. In the 1980s, the area under high yielding varieties continued to increase, but the rate of growth overall was slower. The Eighth Five Year Plan aimed at making high-yielding varieties available to the whole country and more productive strains of other crops.
Let us now look at some other aspects of the impact of Green Revolution on rural society.
i) Causes of Disparity in Agricultural Production
The Indian Green Revolution created wide regional and interstate disparities. The plan was implemented only in areas with assured supplies of water and the means to control it, large inputs of fertilizers, and adequate farm credit. These inputs were easily available in some parts of the states of Punjab, Haryana, and western Uttar Pradesh; thus, yields increased most in these states. In other states, such as Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, in areas where these inputs were not assured, the results were limited or negligible, leading to considerable variation in crop yields within these states. As discussed by Bhalla (1974: 109) the Green Revolution has led to accentuation of inter-region and inter-district disparities in agricultural productivity and income. However, gains of this progress have been unevenly distributed among various agrarian classes. The benefits have largely gone to large landowners. Marginal and small cultivators are unable to obtain higher output because of their small landholdings. In addition it has been pointed out that marginal and small cultivators are highly indebted to cooperative and other financial institutions for financing the high cost-inputs for agriculture (Johar and Khanna 1983: 424). Bhalla (1974: 109) found that the gap between the non-progressive and progressive cultivators had also widened.
ii) Class Differentiation
The Green Revolution has also resulted in differentiation within the peasant class, which is a sign of capitalist growth in agriculture. In her study of Haryana agricultural holdings operating 15 acres or less, Utsa Patnaik (1987: 199-208) found two peasant classes. The first one were the rural well-to-do and the labour hiring classes of the rich and middle peasants. The second one were the rural poor, the remaining classes of the peasantry, e.g. small and poor peasants. The former possessed large household assets, virtually monopolised modern agricultural equipments and sold nearly three-fifth and over two-fifths of their output in the market. But the latter owned meagre household assets, traditional livestock and implements and sold merely one-third of output in market. The new technology therefore, favoured the large landholders and small landholders did not derive much benefit out of the new technology.
The benefits of the Green Revolution and rural development programmes have been mainly cornered by the big landowners and rich peasants. The small peasants and agricultural labourer are steeped in poverty, unemployment and underemployment even at the beginning of twenty-first century. The gap between the rural rich and the rural poor has in fact widened.
Growth of a capitalist trend in agriculture has been noted in a study done on the Punjab economy with regard to land relations, capital accumulation and existence and increase of wage labour. Regarding land relations Utsa Patnaik’s study noted that 10 per cent of farmers owning more than 20 acres of land, own more than 37 per cent of land. Capital accumulation was observed in that the top 10 per cent of the farmers accounted for 68.75 per cent of tractors, 24.72 per cent of the tube wells/pumping sets, 20.40 per cent of the threshers and 42.86 per cent of the land purchased in Punjab. Further, the proportion of pure tenants had fallen and the proportion of agricultural labourer to the total agricultural workforce had increased from 17.3 per cent to 32.1 per cent between 1961 and 1971. In the year 1991 a majority of 66.8 per cent of the main workers were employed in agricultural and allied industrial sectors. Out of the total agricultural workforce 40 per cent were agricultural labourers. As per 2001 census 26.7 per cent of the total workforce are agricultural labourers and about 70 per cent of the population depend on agriculture for their livelihood. Cash wages of agricultural labourers have increased but a more than proportionate increase in prices has eroded their real wages. The relative share of the labourers in agricultural income has declined in comparison with other classes (Johar and Khanna1983).
No comments:
Post a Comment