Green Revolution
The term green revolution has been used in the context of a significant break through in the production of foodgrains especially the wheat which showed a significant improvement in productivity since the mid-sixties. Such a break through could be possible due to the adoption of the new agricultural strategy. The new agricultural strategy emphasised the importance of high-yielding varieties of seeds, proper irrigation facilities, extensive use of fertilizers, pesticides and insecticides. Since these inputs were to be used together in a package form, the new strategy was termed as High-yielding Varieties Programme (HYVP). This programme was initially introduced in the kharif season of 1966 in the areas which had the requisite infrastructural facilities. The result was very encouraging. The production of food grains especially of wheat increased sharply. HYVP was restricted to only five crops—wheat, rice, bajra, jowar and maize. On account of this it is said that green revolution in India is largely wheat revolution.
The same degree of success, however was not achieved in the case of rice as well as in coarse grain like jowar, bajra and maize. Efforts are now being made to extend research in to improvement in agricultural productivity in other agricultural products. The success so far has been limited as is evidenced by a slow rate of change in general productivity in other crops. Not only this, the productivity of wheat has also started tapering off and there is a feeling that the impact of green revolution which was felt quite conspicuously during the 60’s and 70’s appeared to have signs of decline. It is in this context there is now talk about the need for second green revolution in the case of wheat and the extension of the green revolution to other food and non-foodgrain crops.
There has however been some break-through in other areas which also have been characterised revolutionary in their impact althogh this has not yet been felt adequately in all areas. For example, there has been considerable success in the production of milk which has been characterised as White Revolution. Similarly, efforts are being made to increase the production of fodder which has been characterised as ‘Grey Revolution’. Similarly, more recently there is talk about Blue Revolution by increasing the production of fish and other marine products.
The impact of green revolution has not spread to commercial crops as much to foodgrains. The productivity of cotton and groundnut has not shown significant improvement although there has been some success in the case of sugarcane and jute. The productivity of gram has not responded a good deal.
It is also felt that green revolution has benefited only large and affluent farmers while the majority of farmers who have small pieces of land have not benefited because they do not have the resources to employ the package of inputs which is necessary for bringing gone to those farmers who have the facility of irrigation water and, therefore, the benefits have accoured to the farmers of Punjab and Haryana more than those of UP, Bihar and Orissa.
On the issue of employment generation through green revolution opinions are divided. The experience of some people indicates that the high-yielding varieties have opportunities for employment. As against this, the experience of some farmers is that the use of modern inputs goes along with mechanisation which leads to displacement of labour and, therefore, employment generation is restricted. May be both the viewpoints are correct depending upon the cropping pattern and the degree of mechanisation. If as a result of green revolution short duration crops are raised which enable raising of more than 2 crops there are less chances of displacement of labour. Also, there is greater need of labour both in the farming operation and in the handling of the product right up to the state it reaches the final consumer. In any case employment opportunities have to be generated in the ultimate analysis and modernisation of agriculture cannot be deferred only because it displaces labour.
Land Reforms
The agrarian structure in pre-independence period was woven around the vested interest of intermediaries. These intermediaries created a parasitic class which did not work on land but snatched away whatever sruplus over and above the minimum subsistence the cultivators produced. The latter were forced to lead to lead a wretched life of slavery and deprivation. It was basically to stop the exploitation of the actual tillers of the soil and pass on the ownersip of land to them that land reform were introduced in the post-in-dependence period in India. The government has defined the objectives of land reforms as follows:
1 To remove such impedimets to increase the agricultural production as arise from the agrarian structure inherited from the past.
2 To eliminate all forms of exploitation and social security for the tiller of soil and assure equality of status and opportunity to all section of the rural population.
Abolition of Intermediaries
Before Independece, there were three types of land tenure systems prevailing in the country—the zamindari system, the mahalwari system and the ryotwari system. Under Zamindari system, the ownership of land vested with landlords (Zamindars). These landlords were entrusted with the task of collecting rent from the cultivators (tenants) and passing it on to the government. A big portion of the rent was kept by the zamindars as their remuneration.
Under Mahalwari system, the whole village was treated as one unit. The responsibility of collecting the land revenue and depositing it with the government rested with the village hadman.
Under Ryotwari system, the responsibility of paying land revenue to the government was of the cultivator himself and there was no intermediary between him and the state.
Under Zamindari system farmers were exploited in the hands of intermediaries. Under the ryotwari and mahalwari systems also, the practice of cultivation by tenants became widely prevalent. Also, the existence of intermediaries was the most important imepdiment to agricultural development in the latter half of 19th and the first half of 20th century. It was on account of these reasons that legislation were passed to abolish all types of intermediaries and to pass the land to the actual tiller of land.
The general pattern of abolition of intermediaries was as follows:
1 Common lands such as waste lands, forests, etc. which belonged to the intermediaries were vested in the State Governmnet for purposes of management and development.
2 Home farms and lands under personal cultivation of the intermediateries were left with them and lesses of home farmslands continued as tenants of them in some states and brought in direct contact with Government in other states.
The abolition of statutory landlordism covering a variety of intermediary tenures has now more or less been accomplished bringing nearly 2 crore cultivators into direct contact with the state. It has been estimated that in all 173 million acres of land was acquired from the intermediaries and distributed among landless agriculturists.
Agricultural Marketing
Marketing refers to the economic process by which goods and services are exchaged and their values determined in terms of money prices. It is the process through which goods produced are transmitted to the consumers. The various activities involved in the process include transportation, storage, financing, risk bearing, standardisation and the like.
Agricultural marketing is the process through which the farm produce is marketed and delivered to the final consumers. It has certain peculiarties which are stated briefly hereunder:
1 Agriculture products are bulky involving higher storage and transportations cost.
2 Most of the agricultural products are relatively perishable in nature and cannot be retained for a long time without suffering a loss a deterioration in quality.
3 The farmers in general have a low holding capacity and therefore, a poor bargaining power.
4 Both the demand and the supply of agricultural products is limited and inelastic. As a result a bumper crop does not benefit the producer because despite low prices, the demand does not increase. A poor harvest does harm the consumer because rise dispropor-tionately to the shortfall in the supply.
5 There is problem of standardisation and grading compared with indultrial products.
6 A farmer has to maximise his profit by producing more and not by holding back the supplies.
7 Farming is more a way of life specially in developing countries; it is not treated as commercial proposition.
Defects of agricultural marketing
There are several defects of agricultural marekting in India some of which flow from the vastness of the region and some from the nature of the product, and lack of infrastructure facilities. Some major defects of agricultural marketing in India are outlined hereunder:
Lack of organisation among cultivators: The Indian farmer has not realised the importance of marketing his produce by forming a co-operative marketing society with the result that he does not realise a fair price for his produce. As against an isolated farmer, the purchasers are mostly either organsied of have resources and means of information with the result that they can strike a bargain to their advantage and to the disadvantage of the producer.
Multiplicity of agencies: There are several agenceis engaged in the purchase of agricultural produce. There are private agencies as well as government and quasi government agencies and co-operatives which of late, have come to occupy an important place. There are merchants who deal on their own behalf. Some of them are itinerant who visit villages to collect produce from scattered rural markets at the harvest time. There are commission agents of various types who deal on behalf of others but in the process make their own gain. The bane of marketing through these multiple agencies is that lot of confusion prevails in local marketes and small farmer is a loser in the bargain.
Wide price spread: As stated above, because of a long chain of middlemen there is a big difference between the price realised by the farmer and final price paid to the consumer. This clearly speaks of a lack of development of agricultural marketing. In some of the products like grapes the middlemen’s share is reproted to be nearly three-fourths. In potatoes and vegetables the middlemen’s share is reproted to be around 50 per cent. Such a high spread between what the producer gets and consumer pays clearly point out to exploitative marketing in the country.
Forced sale: Due to pecuilar conditions in which a poor farmer is placed he is forced to sell his prodce at a place and at a time which is most disadvantageous to him. Because of his indebtedness partly for his personal and social obligations and partly on account of borrowings for seeds etc., his produce is often sold long before it is ripe. Even otherwise because of the pressure of money lenders and traders, he has to sell his produce as soon as it is ready for packing. Also because of lack of means to carry produce to suitable markets, he is forced to sell his produce at the nearest market on terms generally disadvantageous to him.
Low marketable surplus: There is very limited marketable surplus. This is because of a preponderance of small land holdings which lead to subsistence farming. The marketable surplus varies from prodce to produce; it is reported to be around 25 per cent in case of rice and 35 per cent in case of wheat; surely, it would be higher in case of commercial crops like sugarcane, oilseeds, cotton etc. But in the total produce of the country only 25 to 30 per cent is the marketable surplus. As a result of this even a 10 per cent fall in overall produce in the country there is nearly 30 per cent fall in the marketable surplus which has a tendency to bring about wide fluctuations in the prices of agricultural produce. But in the absence of adequate market intelligence when produce is less the farmer loses because of low marketable surplus and when the produce is high the farmer loses because of significant fall in prices.
Malpractices in unorganised markets: It is reproted that there are several malpractices indulged by traders specially in unorganised markets. These include manipulations in weighment of produce and the levy of a number of taxes and fees—some authorised and some unauthorised. The practices of settlement of price under cover which is in contrast to the open settlement where everybody knows the price has dealt a severe blow to the farmer.
Absence of grading and standardisation: In the absence of any organised body of the farmers to collect the produce and classify into different grades of products it is not possible to fix a price after through consideration of the quality differences. There is often a mixture of inferior quality including a mixture of other material. This leaves lot of scope for malpratices because in this case it is not possible to relate price to a given standard product which also works against the farmer.
Lack of market intelligence: The average farmer is not adequately informed about the general market conditions including price prevailing at various centres which could have enabled him to make a proper decision as to whether to sell or not to sell and where to sell. The traders and money lenders take advantage of ignorance of the producer which also works against the interest of the producer.
Lack of storage and transport facilities: The storage facilities with the individual farmer are normally of very primitive type in the form of dug-holes and pits which are also limited and are exposed to various types of damages from ants, rats, account of lack of proper storage facilities. Surely of late storage facilities have been raised by various co-operatives and government agencies like the Food Corporation of India but an individual farmer still does not have adequate storage facilities barring of course big farmers. As regards transporation, India is a vast country with over five lakh villages which are not properly linked with transport facilities. This automatically forces a farmer to unload his produce at the nearest market. He would realise a better price if taken to a district market; lack of transport facility forces him into a bargain which is most disadvantageous to him. The poor holding capacity and the pressure of moneylenders also forces him to dispose of his produce at the nearest available local market.
Role of government
If marketing it is, therefore, necessary that besides provision for various infrastructure facilities the farmer must have a retention power which can only come through a better financial status or by an organised effort through co-operative marketing. In this regard, the Government has provided some facilities which can contribute to improved marketing. These are:
1 The government conducts marketing surveys and publishes these results for the benefit of the farmers.
2 There are facilities for standardisation and grading of agricultural produce under Agricultural Produce (Grading and Marketing) Act. There are grading stamps for commodities like ghee, flour, eggs, etc. and the products are provided the stamp of AGMARK.
3 The government has provided warehousing facilities in the form of three-tier system.
4 The government has provided for setting up of regulated markets.
The market information is collected and disseminated through various channels of mass media like All India Radio and newspapers for the benefits of the farmers.
Regulated Markets
The main purpose of setting up of regulated markets is to eliminate unhealthy market practices which include unauthorised marketing charges, improper weighing of the produce etc. For this purpose, the Government of India passed Agricultural Produce Markets Act under which all the State Gvoernments have set up regulated markets. The number of markets which was 1000 in 1961 has gone up to more than 7050 by 1999-2000 end. The main features of the regulated markets are as follows:
1 These markets are administered by a Market committee which consists for representatives of the State Government, local bodies such as the Zilla Parishad, traders, commission agents and the farmers of the region. Thus, a Market Committee represents all interests. In some special circumstances, the committee can be constituted by the government for a specific period can be entrusted with the management of the market.
2 The market committee fixes the various market charges including the commission to be charged by the commission agents. It does not allow unauthorised deduction and ensure correct weights and measures. The committee also hears complaints and settles them. It also provides against fraudulent practices.
3 As a result of the regualted markets the farmers have been able to get a fair remuneration for their produce. This has also benefited the consumer by narrowing down the spread between the price paid by the consumer and the one realised by the producer.
4 The development of regulated markets has helped commercialisation of farming and has helped production of commercial crops like cotton, jute, tobacco etc.
5 Along with the regulated market other infrastrcture has also grown such as banking and weighment facilities as also transportation and market intelligence services and these have contributed to a fair deal to the farmer.
Agricultural price policy
Need For Price Policy: Rapid and violent fluctuations in agricultural prices have many harmful consequences. For example, bumper production of any particular crop may result in steep decline in price of that crop and if it continues for a few years it may inflict heavy losses on the growers of that crop. This will reduce their income substantially and also dampen their spirits to cultivate the same crop next year. If this happens to be a staple food items of the masses, supply next year will remian considerably below the demand forcing the government to fill the gap by resorting to imports. On the other hand, if prices of a particular crop soar very high in a particular year, the consumers are likely to suffer. Because of considerations such as these, it becomes necessary to evolve an agricultural prices policy to safeguard the interest of both producers and consumers.
Objectives
Agricultural price policy has the following objective:
1 To protect or insure the producer through guaranteed minimum support price, which as a stablisation measure reduces the variability in product prices and therefore price risk of the farmers. The impact of the risk reduction is expected to induce farmers to undertake investments and to adopt improved production technology.
2 To induce the desired outputs of different crops according to growth targets.
3 To induce an increase in aggregate agricultural output through large input use and adoption of high-yielding seed, fertilizer and water responsive technology.
4 To induce farmers to part with a larger proportion of foodgrains production as a marketed surplus.
5 To protect the consumer against an excessive rise in prices, especially to protect the low income consumers in periods when supplies lag behind demand and market prices rise continually.
Agricultural Price Policy for India
Before 1964, agricultural price policy moved from control to decontrol and from decontrol to control depending upon the requirements of the circumstances. It was only in 1964, that a comprehensive policy to safeguard the interests of both consumers and producers was suggested by Food grains Price Committee. After that there have been several committees suggesting various changes in the policy. In general, following are the main aspects of agricultural price policy in India:
Organisation of food zones: In 1964, the country was divided into wheat zones and rice zones. On the failure of this experiment, each state was made a separate zone. Movement from one zone to another was restricted and controlled by government. Later on this was also stopped.
Fixation of minimum support prices, procurement prices and issue prices: Agricultural price commission has been set up for annoucing minimum support prices, procurement prices and issue prices for a number of agricultural commodities. The government has been announcing these prices are in the nature of a long-term guarantee to these announced minimum (support) prices. Procuremnt prices are fixed at a higher level than support prices and are essentially meant for the purchase of quantities needed by the government for maintaining the public distribution system. Issue prices indicate the prices at which the government supplies foodgrains through fair price shops and ration depots.
The Public Distribution System (PDS): The PDS operates through a network of ration shops and fair price shops. These shops are intended to meet the minimum needs of the vulnerable section of the society. However, at present, these shops are meeting the requirements of all and sundry. Despite the massive coverage the PDS is unable to meet the total requirements of foodgrains of all vulnerable section of the society. Moreover, the PDS is mainly restricted to wheat and rice and very little attention has been paid to the procurement of course grains like jowar and bajra which constitute the staple diet of poor. A new Targeted Public Distribution System has been introduced in 1997. Under this system, each family below poverty line gets special cards and essential items at specially subsidised rates. The scheme has been started in all the States/Union Territories except Delhi and Lakshwadeep.
In addition to the above, the government has initiated a number of other steps to ensure favourable returns to the farmers and reasonable prices to the consumers. This included building up of buffer stock, state trading, rationalisation of wholesale trade in wheat and rice, import of foodgrains etc.
Shopping Cart
