FACTS againest MYTHS OCTOBER-NOVEMBER-2004
Item
- Title
- FACTS againest MYTHS OCTOBER-NOVEMBER-2004
- extracted text
-
VIKAS ADHYAYAN KENDRA
OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2004
INFORMATION BULLETIN
India’s Agrarian Crisis:
The Myths behind Farmers’ Suicides
(COMME NT)
R
ural India is gripped by a severe crisis. There are starvation deaths in the backward
regions and farmers’ suicides in the developed areas. The entire rural economy that still
supports almost 70% of the Indian population is under threat. The small and poor farmers
in particular find survival extremely difficult. This is not a crisis brought on by natural
disasters or by failure of monsoons. Deficient monsoons have not eroded production
drastically in the country as a whole. Areas under stress should be able to get adequate
relief and help since there is no real shortfall of commodities.
The crisis has been brought about by the path of development followed by the ruling
classes and imposed on agriculture. To elucidate: consider the following two set of
incidents. Since end of 1997 reports of large scale suicides by cotton farmers took
place because they “took the easy way out”. A number of reasons have been cited as
reasons behind crop failures on such huge scale viz., shortfall in production became the
bane of these farmers and their families. The other set of incidents, that took place, in
mid mid-1997, not very far back from the time of the cases of suicides by farmers.
Unprecedented rise in production of potatoes and lack of commensurate storage space,
pre-emption of the existing space by the powerful farmers led to rotting of tonnes and
tonnes of potatoes in various states of the country. Crashing prices and lack of buyers
resulted in field being strewn with unwanted potatoes infecting the field and resulting in
diseases and death in the rural areas. The farming community was once again faced
with death and loss of income. But the reasons for loss of income in the two cases were
very different. In one case income loss arose from shortfall in crop production, and in
the other, from exactly opposite set of reasons, i.e. over production. Both these sets of
reports are a clear indication of what is happening to the farming community. That is, the
economic reforms have failed in reducing the vulnerability of the farming community,
specially the poorer sections within that, to crop failures, accumulating debt, crashing
prices and declining income. Whether vagaries of nature, lack of knowledge among
farmers regarding use of fertilisers and pesticides, emergence of deadly pests alone fail
to explain these happenings. There is no doubt that vagaries of nature, inadequate and/
or untimely rainfall, play a crucial role in agriculture. But crop loss arising out of that has
been there even in the past! So has been the case of pest-infested crops and the resultant
crop failure. But failure of crop has rarely resulted in such extreme incidents.
Q FACT§ against MYTHS - OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2004
Cfor private circulation ONLY^)
How does one, therefore, explain the phenomenal
case of mass and serial suicides by farmers? Or
for that matter how does one explain the incidents
of over production or can that also be explained
by nature or rather its generosity? Or is there
something more than what meets the eye?
Obvious questions like what drove so many
farmers to take up production of potatoes, etc.,
arise at this point. In the case of cotton,
liberalisation policies in agriculture partly affected
most the prices of cotton. Rising exports of cotton
to earn foreign exchange had the effect of
contracting domestic availability and inducing high
rise in prices of cotton. A violent export surge
without adequate protection rise naturally led to
doubling of prices of cotton yarn. In the first quarter
of 1989, owing to the release of 1.66-m. bales for
exports, domestic raw cotton prices rose further
by Rs. 1100 to Rs.2400 per candy for the major
varieties of cotton. Such massive rise in prices of
cotton made it attractive for farmers to go in for
production of this crop at the exclusion of all other
corps. Large-scale shift in areas under cotton took
place. High net return from cotton in the early
years and case of cotton farmers growing rich
within a short time span became trendsetters for
other farmers. Thus reforms, rising exports and
domestic prices had an important part to play in
inducing a shift in cropping pattern from traditional
crops to cotton.
At another level, in their haste to integrate with
the corporate driven global capitalist system and
capitalist markets, the rulers have criminally
neglected the rural population. Suicides by farmers
are symptomatic of this crisis. Partly under dictates
of the WTO and similar bodies and partly under
their own neoliberal steam the Indian ruling class
has set upon a path to squeeze the small and
poor farmer of the country. Their dream is to
transform agriculture into an industrial corporate
activity. The owner-cultivators - particularly the
small and medium farmers are an impediment in
this path. The rulers through acts of commission
and omission are thus bent in squeezing them
out of agriculture.
There is of course no thought given to the fact
that no other sector of the Indian economy particularly in the age of globalisation can absorb
this human resource and provide it livelihood or
even basic necessities.
The corporate greed knows no bounds. It wishes
to now control all natural resources. Forests and
mineral wealth it already does for all practical
purposes. Urban land too is under its control. It
now has set its eyes on water and agricultural land.
Farmers Commit Suicide
(July 14,2004,14:08 1ST)
Two more farmers from the Vidarbha region
of Maharashtra have committed suicide in
the last two days, taking the number of such
deaths to over 15. The farmers were
apparently driven to death by crop failures
due to insufficient rain in the region.
Ramchandra Premchandra Chavan, 36, from
Pusad taluka of Yavatmal district hanged
himself to death on July 13, according to
reports reaching Nagpur. Chavan had taken
a bank loan of Rs 20,000 and borrowed
another Rs 7,000 from a co-operative
society, but his soya crop was damaged due
to inadequate rainfall.
Gangadhar Namdeo Ambhure, 27 from
Narkhed taluka in Nagpur district ended life
by consuming insecticides on July 12, the
reports said.
The government has, however, not yet
officially accepted that these suicides are
linked to the lack of rains in the area.
(From an Online News Report in Rediff.com)
The path is also disastrous from the environmental
point of view. It is an effort to finish of natural
resources particularly water and convert vast
portions of India into deserts.
The crisis is just beginning. If this situation is not
dealt with in time it will become irreversible and
cost the nation in millions of lives.
MYTH: The numbers of farmers committing
suicide are not very significant. This is
essentially a scare raised by the media and
interested political organisations.
FACT: Three very simple facts totally counter this
rather cynical claim. One, reportedly thousands
of farmers has committed suicide in the country,
particularly after 1995. Two, the suicides have
occurred not in one pocket or state but in a
numerous states across the country; the major
states involved being Punjab, Andhra Pradesh,
Karnataka, Maharashtra, and now Kerala. Three,
the rates of the suicides for the particular groups
- small farmers for example or populations of the
affected districts - are way above the known
national average rate of suicide.
Unfortunately in a country of over a billion in
population, death too does not shock unless the
FACTS against MYTHS - OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2004
2
numbers are astronomical. Moreover, all the
suicides do not take place on a single day and in
a single instance. They take place as one or two a
day in different incidents in different villages. The
reports too appear (if and when they do appear)
as of discreet incidents (See Box). They do not
therefore jolt or shock sensibilities and sensitivities
of the urban readers of newspapers.
Look at the bare numbers for the year 2004. In
Wynad - one single district of Kerala the suicides
in 2004 were 235 up to September 2004
according to data compiled by Institute of Mental
Health and Neuro Sciences a part of the
government medical college in the neighbouring
district of Kozhikode. The government in the form
of the district administration unfortunately only
admitted that 48 cases were “farmers’ suicides”
though the NIMHANS study provides breakdown
of the occupations and shows that they were all
related to agriculture.
In Warangal district of Andhra Pradesh - the major
‘centre’ of farmers’ suicides the number was 899
though again the government only admitted 511
cases as those of “farmer’ suicides".
The numbers in Karnataka were 708 in 2003-04
and 165 in 2004-05.
In Maharashtra the suicides are confined to the
cotton growing region Vidarbha, and that too to
mainly two districts out of four.. Here too the
government, admits low figures while local
newspapers, researchers, social workers, and
farmers’ organisation put the deaths at least
around 100.
The incidence of suicides also becomes significant
if the rates are examined. In Maharashtra the rate
of suicides went up from 1.77 in 1981 steadily to
7.06 in 1998 and dropped slightly to 6.31 per lakh
population in district Amravati. It went up from 1.60
per lakh to 7.63 per lakh between 1981 and 1999
in Yavatmal, and from 2.86 per lakh in 1981 to
11.38 per lakh in 1999 in district Wardha.
the main method for the farmers to end their lives.
The administration, to downplay the crisis, or to
deny responsibility often explains away the
suicides as due to other causes. It is reluctant to
relate it to crisis in agriculture.
MYTH: Farmers’ suicide is an individual
problem, not a social one or one related to
the farming community.
FACT: Obviously there has been no single incident
of mass suicide. There are no cases in which an
entire village - or all or majority of the poor farmers
from the village - have committed suicide. Suicides
never occur in that manner. Individuals overcome
by their situation and losing all hope decide to end
their lives. Obviously each person who dies is an
individual. Many 'unique' details can be found
regarding each case. The specific details do not,
however, make any difference to the basic
circumstances and the fundamental causes.
Most of the suicides haav taken place in areas
where the cropping is commercial and for markets.
These crops in addition have witnessed a
continuous and sustained drop in prices. The
areas have also seen crop failures for the past
few years (typically two or three).
Moreover, the farmers most vulnerable are small
farmers with lands without irrigation; their
interactions with people in similar economic
circumstances in the same areas (small farmers
with unirrigated lands) reveal that they face similar
GROWTH RATE IN INDIAN AGRICULTURE
The average for Kerala - three times that of the
national average - is 30 per lakh of population,
but in Wynad it was 39 per lakh in 1998. Along
with the neighbouring district of Idukki it is 40 per
lakh for the past five years.
The actual numbers of farmers’ suicides would
be much higher if the reporting and recording of
the incidents was accurate. In a large number of
cases the profession or exact causes are not
recorded, only the medical details find mention. A
large number of cases in Maharashtra it is said
are explained away as pesticide related accidents
- while the fact is that consumption of pesticide is
FACTS against MYTHS - OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2004
3
problems and have found life equally difficult.
Interviews show that just one or two may actually
commit suicide from any one village but many
more have entertained the idea and have come
close to the ultimate act.
The farmers themselves uniformly feel that these
are problems of the entire section. They see these
firmly as problems related to agriculture.
MYTH: The suicides are not related to debts
but are due to personal reasons.
FACT: The relationship between debt and suicide
is very clearly established by journalistic reports
as well as more in-depth studies. All reports
indicate an almost similar pattern.
The cropping in these areas is commercial. In
Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra as well as
mostly in Karnataka the crop in question is cotton.
In Kerala the crops were coffee and pepper.
The pattern in these areas is of exclusive
cultivation of the commercial crop. This also means
that there is no in-built mechanism of food security.
These farmers are dependent on the market to
buy the food grains they need. This is of course
determined by the success or failure of the
commercial crop.
The costs of cultivation of the commercial crops often new varieties that are demanded by the
market - are high. The farmers have to purchase
the seeds every year. The farmers also have to
buy the latest fertilisers and pesticides at high
prices. These high costs mean that the cash
requirement of the farmers in every cycle of
cultivation is quite high. Most small farmers with
lands without irrigation have no personal reserves
to make such investments. They are forced to take
institutional loans from banks, credit societies,
cooperatives etc. for the cultivation. In addition
they are forced to acquire most of the requirements
(seeds, fertilisers, and pesticides) on credit from
the trader. These loans have to be paid off
immediately at the end of the cultivation cycle when the crops are harvested and sold.
have registered a steady decline in international
markets since 1987. These factors have shrunk
the margins even further.
If the rains are on time and sufficient the crops
may just be adequate to meet these costs. A failure
of monsoons, along with some other reasons,
means a destruction of the crops. Attacks by new
pests, resistant to known pesticides in use, are
one major reason for the failure of crops. Another
reason is the failure of seeds to sprout properly.
The cases of spurious seeds - perhaps sold a
little cheaper - are quite well known. The loss of a
crop means not only financial loss in that
cultivation season but total poverty. The farmer is
in the first instance unable to pay back his (or her
- suicides by women farmers are not unknown)
loans. Such situations have multiple effects. The
institutions consider the farmer a defaulter and
refuse to extend any further credit even for the
next cycle. After a period of time they may even
begin legal proceedings to recover the loans from i
the farmers. The traders increase the pressure
on the farmers — sometimes seizing whatever they
can from the farmer. They may also stop any
further credit and squeeze the farmer in the next
season. The farmer in such circumstances is
forced to contract loans from private
moneylenders. The new moneylender is unofficial
— not the traditional moneylender but the richer
farmer in the village or locality. The rates of interest
and methods of collection, however, remain
usurious.
The margins in most of these crops are quite low.
The rising costs and falling prices have
substantially reduced the amount of money the
farmer can make. The prices of cotton may not
have actually fallen in India (internationally they
have declined) but are not sufficient to provide a
decent margin. The prices of coffee have fallen in
the international markets and therefore in the
Indian markets. Pepper has faced a stiff
competition with cheap imports from Sri Lanka,
Malaysia, Indonesia and other countries.
Moreover, the prices of all agricultural commodities
FACTS against MYTHS - OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2004
Failure of crops over one or two seasons leads to
complete ruination. The paltry possessions,
whatever they may be, are sold off to buy
necessities of survival or to make at least partial
repayments of the loan. The farmer then has no
possession except the land which is his sole
means of livelihood and survival. The crisis is not
only occupational or economic - but one of very
survival and existence.
The institutions begin recovery proceedings. They
paste notices on the doors of the farmers declaring that their assets will be auctioned at the
earliest. The pasting of such a notice is a signal
for the other creditors to move in and begin to
apply direct pressure. The farmer is in anyway
unable to pay even the interest - which may be
as high as 120% a year. Constant harassment,
public humiliation, threats, insults, possibilities of
physical violence or forcible possession of
possessions and property are frequent and
common.
The farmer in such a situation knows no peace.
He has no other alternatives to survive. The loss
of social prestige also completely shatters his
relationships in the village and often in other
villages in the locality.
The personal reasons enter into the picture in
mostly such situations. The farmer then is likely to
suffer severe isolation and become depressed.
The constant pressures may lead to addictions
or to other personality and mental disorders. The
indebted farmer then becomes vulnerable to
suicides. The basic cause, however, is
indebtedness and the total loss of all means of
survival.
MYTH: Recovery of debts in the rural sector
is anyway poor. Hardly any action is taken
4/ against the defaulters. The pressure of debts
is thus not a reason for the suicides.
FACT: The institutions may not be able to recover
major debts in the rural areas from the rich
peasant who is often a trader as well. The small
and poor farmer does not get away that easily. In
fact, it is known that the recovery, of debts from
the small and poor farmers is much better than
from the rich farmer. The poor farmer invariably
tries to pay off the debt since his access to credit
is very limited and he is dependent on the same
creditors all the time. The rich peasant in contrast
is able to circulate his loans. He tries different
agencies and makes partial repayments. He is also
able to negotiate partial repayments with the
agencies. He is able to gain additional periods to
pay back, waivers on additional interests, lumpsum arrangements etc. as far as his loans are
First, there are clear indications that the crop
pattern is leaning in favour of
commercialisation and hence the risk of crop
loss increased due to both higher proportion
of purchased inputs and technology. Second,
there is also a tendency to adopt monoculture
and consequent over-exploitation of land in
pursuit of high gross returns. An inevitable
externality of this is added risk and soil
degradation. Third, marginal lands are being
brought under cultivation and this puts
pressure on the inputs as well as on farming
practices. Four, technology now available is
lumpy in nature and therefore failure of one
component in the package of inputs can lead
to a severe aggregate crop loss. Lastly, the
cash component in the package of inputs
has increased substantially. This has
necessitated higher cash need.
(Deshpande R K, 2002, EPW)
concerned. The poor farmer does not have such
recourse.
There is another mechanism at work as well. Two
or three good seasons create an illusion of possible
advancement. Some farmers that do well in the
good season either decide to acquire more land
or to dig wells in their land to obtain irrigation. For
these purposes they take larger loans - often from
the institutions. The irrigation efforts are usually a
failure. In these areas the irrigation potential itself
is quite low. The ground water levels are either
unsatisfactory or out of reach of the poor farmer.
The bore well he had hoped would change his
fortunes dramatically often only consumes all the
money he can muster and yet remains dry. There
are numerous examples of the farmers incurring
more loans to sink the well deeper and deeper in
the vain hope of striking water.
It is these ‘larger’ loans that often cause the severe
problems. The institutions often begin proceedings
for the recovery of these loans - that have
generally failed to yield any results.
If this is combined with bad seasons - and there
have been many in the affected areas - there is a
total failure of crops. This creates an accumulation
of the long term and the cyclical loans. The farmer
is now severely indebted. The pressure of the debt
- particularly debt that has borne no fruits - begins
to tell on the individual.
The only choice in such conditions is to sell off
the land or to yield it to the creditor. The loss of
land in most cases is the loss of total livelihood. It
rjFACTS against MYTHS - OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2004
5
is also a loss of all future hope and possibilities.
The loss of land also means a loss of prestige
and social standing. A person without land in the
village even today is a person without identity and
prestige.
It is these situations in which hopelessness,
anxiety, and depression set in. Instances cited by
researchers or by journalists all point to these
situations as the circumstances that provoke
depression, social isolation, hopelessness, and
ultimately suicides.
MYTH: Indian agriculture is backward mainly
because Indian farmer is backward. He has
refused to change, to adopt new techniques,
to relate to new forces, and to take advantage
of the globalised markets. He is solely
responsible for the crisis, however
unfortunate it may seem.
FACT: This argument sounds very sophisticated
and erudite but is either erroneous or meaningless.
In the first instance one must note the fact that
the suicides are taking place in states and areas
that are considered ‘developed’ agriculturally. Look
at the list - Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka,
Maharashtra, and now Kerala. The ‘backward’
states do not figure prominently in this list.
It is true that barring Punjab the other areas are
dependent on rains for irrigation - and are
generally dry areas. Artificial irrigation has not
been developed very substantially in these areas.
The main source of artificial irrigation remains wells
- but that is true for the entire country. The rains
too in these areas with the exception of Kerala
are not very heavy.
These are areas that have generally seen some
‘agricultural reform’. This means that absentee
landlordism and dissipating tenancy have been
abolished in these areas. The areas are dominated
by the owner cultivator - though the percentage
of agricultural labour is not insignificant.
Agricultural labour in these areas - particularly in
seasons in which the crops are good and not
completely destroyed at the outset finds adequate
work to survive.
Agriculture in these areas is not only monetised
but also commercialised. The emphasis is on
cultivation of cash crops for the market - national
and international. The cultivation is carried out with
the use of ‘modern’ inputs - hybrid or new seeds,
chemical fertilisers, and pesticides. The use of
newer - intermediate - machinery and equipment
is not unknown. The cropping pattern too has'
shown changes with definite shift away from food
grains and staple consumption crops to cash crops
“The suicides have been occurring for over
seven years now. And in some periods, with
even greater intensity. So too has hunger
been growing... The rural landscape is a
shambles. Agricultural credit and finance
systems have collapsed. Taking their place
are new entities that can make the village
moneylender seem relatively less coercive.
Prices have pushed most inputs beyond the
reach of the small farmer. For many, the
move from food crops to cash crops proved
fatal. In some cases, the shift was towards
high-outlay, water-guzzling crops such as
sugar cane. All this, in an era of huge power
tariff hikes. A steady shrinking of local
democracy further deepened the chaos.”
(Sainath, P, Hindu-online 2004)
over the years. In some of these areas there have,
been experiments with the cash crops too and
the farmers have switched the cash crops
themselves as per the possibility of marketing.
These are the attributes of ‘development’ in
agriculture, not of backwardness.
The Indian farmer is not backward. He has an
undeserved and erroneous reputation of refusal
to change. The entire experiment of
‘modernisation’ and ‘development’ of agriculture
through green revolution techniques was made
possible by the activity of the traditional Indian
farmer. The gentleman farmer with ‘global’
techniques and managerial skills was not on the
scene till the very recent years. Corporate
agriculture was also not present. It is only recently
that some corporations and some entrepreneurs
have begun to treat agriculture as a corporate
industrial activity and suddenly wish to do away
with the traditional farmer - essentially to obtain
land and create their corporate holdings.
Farmers in these areas relate to the markets quite
deeply. The cash crops they grow tie them to the
markets - national and international. Cotton is the
main crop in some of these areas (predominantly
Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh). It has no
immediate consumption value and is an industrial
raw material. The farmers can only sell it. Soybean
is the other common crop in Maharashtra and in
Karnataka. It is an item for human consumption
but generally only after industrial processing. The
purchasers of the crop hence again are industries.
It is not a consumption crop. The crops in Kerala
are coffee and pepper - which are mainly for the
export market. Thus the relationship with the
market is also very clear.
FACTS against MYTHS - OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2004
6
In fact, the vagaries of the markets have created
the major problems for the farmers. Cotton had
some price protection - particularly in
Maharashtra through the Monopoly Purchase
mechanism. The prices paid to cotton in
Maharashtra were not only above the international
prices but also above the national support price
declared by the government of India. The
Monopoly Purchase scheme has been watered
down by the government over the past two
seasons. The price support mechapism has not,
however, completely disappeared. More
importantly it sets the floor of the price offered by
the private traders - the private traders offer
generally 200 rupees per quintal less than the
price declared by the government in Maharashtra.
The prices of cotton have at least in theory been
increased to some extent every year.
Soybean may have a declared support price but
the mechanism to acquire it is highly deficient and
the real prices are hence decided by the markets.
The prices of soybean have in effect remained at
best steady.
The situation is much worse for coffee. There has
been a steady decline in the price of coffee in
international markets. This has of course not
affected the price the consumer of coffee particularly in its blended and processed variety
- pays for the product. It has only affected the
consumer of coffee beans.
Pepper as noted earlier has faced severe
competition from cheap imports. In the case of
pepper there is another fraudulent mechanism. It
deals with re-export of the imported pepper after
it is repacked and relabelled. It is then sold as a
produce of Kerala though the pepper grower in
Kerala continues to face total ruin.
There was a lot of talk of distribution of land to the
landless but in practice precious little land was
actually distributed.
Land distribution or tenancy reforms when they
took place were almost stand alone measures.
No care was taken to provide adequate cheap
credit, implements, inputs, initial consumption
loans or other institutional support. A landless
farmer suddenly in possession of barren
undeveloped land can hardly utilise it productively
with family labour alone. He needs consumption
loans or preferably grants for the period it takes
to develop the land and convert it into a productive
farm. He requires soft loans or grants to develop
the land, to acquire implements and inputs. These
issues were never truly addressed. There are
periodic announcements with great fanfare of new
schemes for the support of the rural poor. They
either do not take off or are only demonstrative yielding benefits to a very few persons even from
the selected categories.
No real attempt has been made to develop
irrigation in a sustainable manner in the country.
There is an obsession with mega projects that
essentially benefit the industries and urban areas
either through generation of power or provision
of water for industrial and urban domestic use.
The traditional irrigation sources have been
completely neglected. This has also taken
irrigation out of the legitimate control of the poor
toilers or even the local communities. To crown it
all now there are serious efforts to privatise and
commercialise the water supply. The commercial
pricing of water for irrigation will further increase
cultivation costs (wherever it does become
available) and bring further ruin to the farmers.
The operations of the market it is thus
clear have brought no benefit to the
actual producers of agricultural goods.
MYTH: The government has done
enough for the farmers. In fact, the
farmers get the greatest benefits. The
reasons for the crisis (if any) have
to be found in other mechanisms.
FACT: The government has paid a lot
of lip service to the farmers and the
agricultural sector but done precious
little in practice.
In the first instance no government
implemented radical reforms. At best
there has been tenancy regularisation
or in some cases tenancy abolition. The
farmer never received adequate land.
FACTS against MYTHS - OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2004
7
In fact, the entire ‘development’ in agriculture has
neglected the producer - specifically the small
farmer and landless agricultural labourer - and
has sought to cater to the urban markets. The
emphasis on mono-cropping and commercial cash
crops, often for export, has meant a serious
erosion of food security in the rural areas. Even
some food crops - the expensive varieties of rice
or wheat are an example - are grown as cash
crops and do not in anyway augment the food
security of the rural poor. The traditional nutritious
foods like the various millets are becoming scarcer.
The area under these crops in particular and under
food crops in general has declined. (There is a
perverse situation in the country - overflowing
granaries, rotting grains and starving people.) The
overall results are clear to see. The share of
agriculture in the gross domestic product has
declined drastically since independence. From just
over 50% it has come down to about 24%. The
population dependent on agriculture however has
neither declined in absolute terms nor even
proportionately to the same extent. It just means
that a large proportion of the Indian population nearly 70% - has a lower share of the national
income and national product. This is a clear proof
of the neglect of the rural population in the country.
The only scheme that has brought benefits to at
least a section of the rural population is the
Employment Guarantee Scheme (EGS). It did
protect employment and wage levels of the rural
population to some extent. This is not applicable
uniformly in the country. Even under the present
government, contrary to election promises, it is
sought to be watered down and applied only in
select districts in the country.
The agricultural research too has not really
brought any relief to the actual producers. It is
confined to profitable crops and congenial terrains.
Most Indian farmers do not have these
advantages.
In’ recent years the government has played
numerous tricks with the farmers - particularly the
poor and small farmers. Waiving of electricity
charges is of no use to them. They are not
consumers of electricity for irrigation. They
possess neither irrigation sources nor any
implements that use electricity to draw the water.
A ‘popular’ measure is brought in to again advance
the interests of the rural rich in the country.
Various state governments in the name of
agricultural development seek to advance
corporate industrial agriculture. The efforts to relax
the ceiling laws and to promote consolidation of.
holding also benefit only the new entrants to the
scene - the agri-business corporations.
Withdrawal of subsidies - both direct and indirect
- will similarly hit the poor and small farmer. The
costs of inputs will increase - as they already are
- and the prices will fall. The squeezed margins
will spell nothing but ruin for the farmers.
Sadly one must say we have yet only witnessed
the onset of the crisis in agriculture. When it
develops fully in not too distant a future we shall
see deaths in tsunami proportions in rural India either through starvation or suicides.
Graphic on page 3 from "The 'Appeal* Handbook for Field Activists", PEACE, ISED.
The graphics on page 4 and 7 are from VAK's monthly poster publication, POSTER
JOURNAL, designed by K. P. Sasi. For subscription inquiries contact Vikas Adhyayan
Kendra (VAK).
-: 0 : -: 0 : -: 0 : Please feel free to reproduce material from this publication but with due credit.
1
Facts against Myths is a bi-monthly bulletin of factual information on a number of development myths and
fallacies, etc, including information against alien development models, paradigms and false concepts on
caste, creed and gender.
Produced and Published by:
Vikas Adhyayan Kendra (VAK)
D-1 Shivdham, 62 Link Road,
Malad (W), Mumbai 400 064, INDIA
x
S 2882 2850 / 2889 8662
Fax: 2889 8941
Email: vak@bom3.vsnl.net.in
Website: www.vakindia.org
Design & Layout: Kartiki Desai
Printed by:
Sudhir Joglekar
Omega Publications
2 $ 3 Emerald Corner,
Maratha Colony, Tilakwadi,
Belgaum 590 006, Karnataka
2 094481-44124/09448144124
Email: omogapress@sify.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Position: 3646 (3 views)