Subject: Agriculture

The article examines the reasons for declining farm incomes and the contribution of farm subsidies.

Contribution of agriculture

• India’s agriculture, which also supports the rural workforce, was, forever, living beyond its means.
• In 1950-51, agriculture’s share in the country’s GDP was 45%, the share of the workforce dependent on it was close to 70%.
• Today, agriculture’s share in GDP is below 16%, but almost 50% of the country’s workforce depends on this sector.
• The squeeze on the agricultural sector becomes even more evident from its terms of trade vis-à-vis the non-agricultural sectors.
• Agriculture has been facing adverse terms of trade over extended periods since the 1980s, and even during the phases when the terms of trade have moved in its favour, for instance in the 1990s and again since 2012-13, there was no distinct upward trend.

Reason for fall in farm incomes: falling investment

• The decline in farm incomes was triggered by growing inefficiencies.
• This decline, in turn, was caused by a lack of meaningful investment in agriculture.
• The share of this sector in the total investment undertaken in the country consistently fell from about 18% in the 1950s to just above 11% in the 1980s.
• In the most recent quinquennium for which data are available (2014-15 to 2018-19), the average share of agriculture was 7.6%.

India’s dismal performance in term of yields of major crops

• If one ranks countries in terms of their yields in wheat and rice — India’s two major crops — the country’s ranks were 45 and 59, respectively, in 2019.
• This ranking would go down sharply if the areas recording high yields, such as Punjab and Haryana, are excluded.
• In other words, for farmers in most regions of the country, it is an uphill battle for survival amid low yields.

Need for coherent policy for agriculture

• The lack of a coherent policy for agriculture must surely be regarded among the most remarkable failures of the governments in post-Independence India.
• Compare this failure with the United States, with less than 2% of its workforce engaged in agriculture, has been enacting farm legislations every four years since the Agricultural Adjustment Act was enacted in 1933.
• These policies comprehensively address the needs of the farm sector through proactive support from the respective governments.

Issue of the farm subsidies in India

• The subsidies are the price that the country pays for the failure of the policymakers to comprehensively address the problems of the farm sector.
• Wanton distribution of subsidies without a proper policy framework has distorted the structure of production and, consequently, undesirable outcomes in terms of excessive food stockpiling.
• And, yet, the fundamental ills of Indian agriculture are not adequately addressed.
• Members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) are expected to notify their agricultural subsidies as a part of their commitment under the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA).
• India’s latest notification, for 2018-19, shows that the subsidies provided were slightly more than $56 billion.
• In most of the recent years, the largest component of India’s subsidies ($24.2 billion, or 43% of the total) is provided to “low income or resource-poor farmers”, a terminology that the AoA uses.
• However, the designation of this category of farmers is left to individual members.
• India has notified that 99.43% of its farmers are low income or resource-poor.
• According to the agricultural census conducted in 2015-16, these are the farmers whose holdings are 10 hectares or less.
• Thus, almost the entire farm sector comprises economically weak farmers.

Comparing subsidies given by various countries

• America provided $131 billion in 2017 and the EU, nearly €80 billion (or $93 billion) in 2017-18.
• Instead of absolute numbers; the ratios of subsidies to agricultural value addition for the three countries give a much better picture.
• Thus, for 2017, India’s farm subsidies were 12.4% of agricultural value addition, while for the U.S. and the EU, the figures were 90.8% and 45.3%, respectively.
• This then is the reality of farm subsidies that India provides.

Consider the question “Indian agriculture has been contributing beyond its means since Indian independence. However, agri incomes have shown a gradual decline. What are the reasons for such a decline? How far has farm subsidies succeeded in solving the low-income problem?” 

Conclusion

India needs a comprehensive Agri policy to deal with the distortion created by the subsidies.

Some provisions of the new farm laws are opposed by the farmers. The article explains the utility of these provisions.

Major objections to farm laws

• The first objection is that the Agricultural Produce Market Committees (APMC) will be eventually closed,
• The second objection is that Minimum Support Prices (MSP) will be stopped,
• The third fear is that corporates will take over the agriculture trade, and farmers’ land will be taken over by powerful corporates.

Why reforms were needed

• The gap between the agri-income of a farmer and that of a non-agriculture worker increased from ₹25,398 in 1993–94 to ₹1.42 lakh in 2011-12.
• Aggregate food demand has fallen short of domestic production necessitating the export of a large quantity to prevent domestic prices from falling very low.
• India is sitting on an excess stock of 60 lakh tons of sugar and nearly 72 million tons of extra buffer stock of wheat and rice which is causing a huge drain on fiscal resources.
• India’s agri-exports are facing difficulty, imports are turning attractive as domestic prices are turning much higher.
• Rural youth are looking for jobs outside agriculture and there is a serious problem of unemployment in the countryside.
• There are numerous instances of market failure to the detriment of producers and consumers.
• This is turning farmers to look at the government for remunerative prices through MSP for most agricultural products.
• The growth rate in agriculture is driven by heavy support through various kinds of subsidies and output price support.
• These costs and losses and subsidies will take away most of the tax revenue of the central government.

3 Provisions and their utility

1) Relation between MSP and APMC

• APMC has nothing to do with the payment of the MSP.
• The necessary and sufficient conditions for the MSP are procurement by the government, with or without the APMC.
• Experience shows that even after fruits and vegetables were de-notified from the APMC, they continued to arrive at APMC mandis in large quantities while farmers got additional options.
• The protesting farmers have raised concerns to keep the level-playing field for the APMC and private players, and the government has shown agreement to address this fully.

2) Criteria for traders

• Protesting farmers are also opposing the provision of the simple requirement of a PAN card for a trader.
• After having a PAN card, even a farmer can go for trading, his son can do agri-business and other rural youth can undertake purchases of farm commodities for direct sale to a consumer or other agribusiness firms.
• If stringent criteria such as bank guarantee, etc. are included in the registration, then the spirit of the new law to facilitate farmers and rural youth to become agribusiness entrepreneurs will be lost.

3) Mistaking contract farming with corporate farming

• Critics and protesting farmers are mixing contract farming with corporate farming.
• The new Act intends to insulate interested farmers (especially small farmers), against market and price risks.
• The Act is voluntary and either party is free to leave it after the expiry of the agreement.
• It prohibits the transfer, sale, lease, mortgage of the land or premises of the farmer.
• The Act will promote diversification, quality production for a premium price, export, and direct sale of produce, with desired attributes to interested consumers.
• It will also bring new capital and knowledge into agriculture and pave the way for farmers’ participation in the value chain.

Conclusion

The policy reforms undertaken by the central government through these Acts are in keeping with the changing times and requirements of farmers and farming. If they are implemented in the right spirit, they will take Indian agriculture to new heights and usher in the transformation of the rural economy.

Farmers’ genuine concerns must be addressed as soon as possible so that they can continue producing food and fibre needed for the ever-increasing population.

Green revolution and farmer’s contribution to the food sufficiency in India

• In the early 1960s, near-famine conditions prevailed in India and some 10 million tonnes of wheat had to be imported from the US under the PL480 programme. The country’s situation was like“ship-to-mouth” existence.
• High-yielding dwarf wheat varieties brought from Mexico were provided to Indian agricultural institutes.
• The consequent miraculous gains in wheat yield and production ushered in the “Green Revolution.”
• The Green Revolution occurred due to a confluence of favourable government policies, efforts of agricultural scientists and the adoption of new wheat varieties/selections by farmers.
• Also, the contributions of farmers of Punjab (Haryana included) was also very important and they became the backbone of the revolution.
• By 1974, the industrious farmers of the “food-bowl” states of Punjab, Haryana, and western UP had brought about self-sufficiency in foodgrain production, ridding the country of the “begging bowl”.

Practice Question: What are the concerns of the farmers after new agriculture reforms and how they can be addressed?

Farmer’s concerns

• Consultation with farmers is important before drafting policies –
• There will be resistance no matter which organization enact the policies/rules without taking the affected people on board. A proactive approach is always better than a reactive one.
• From the farmers’ standpoint, the ordinances were unfairly promulgated in June 2020, during the COVID-19 lockdown, without consulting them.
• Loss of Income in the lockdown – Farmers could not sell their vegetables and fruits because of the lockdown causing the loss of income and then the imposition of the new laws aggravated them.
• Uncertainty in the minds of farmers about the continuation of MSP –
• Farmers have been selling food grains (mainly wheat and rice) at Minimum Support Price (MSP) since the mid-1960s.
• This has helped to create a central pool of food grains and the Public Distribution System to help poor people.
• But MSP has not been guaranteed in the newly enacted farm laws, which is the major bone of contention.
• The APMCs are under threat from the new farm laws as MSP and APMC go hand-in-hand.

New Middleman –

• The central government has indicated that the new farm laws are meant to eliminate the “middlemen”.
• But the farmers feel that a new class of middlemen, that is, lawyers belonging to big companies would emerge.
• Thus, small farmers would be at a distinct disadvantage — more than 80 per cent of farmers own less than five acres of land.

Contract farming –

• According to the central government, the new laws will ensure contract farming.
• The farmers fear that big companies might usurp their land and might not pay them an agreed price on the pretext of “poor quality” of produce.
• They feel that big companies might become monopolies, and exploit both farmers and consumers. Farmers fear being made into labourers.

Way forward

MSP is a must –

• A clause should be added in the law to the effect that no matter who buys the produce (government or a private entity), the farmer must be given an MSP.
• The National Farmers’ Commission’s recommendation of providing an MSP of 50 per cent over and above a farmer’s input expenses must be implemented.
• APMCs should be continued – The fees that “Mandi Boards” collect (for example the Rural Development Fund) have helped build link roads. No private organization will do this.
• MSP should be determined on the basis of grain quality.

Crop diversification is needed –

• The government must promote crop diversification by purchasing crops produced other than wheat and rice at MSP. This could help conserve the dwindling supply of underground water.
• To encourage farmers to grow high-value crops, such as vegetables and fruits, the government should set up the adequate cold-chain infrastructure.
• The farmers’ staying power must be improved so that they don’t have to sell all of their produce immediately after the harvest.
• India has produced a number of World Food Laureates, including M S Swaminathan, Gurdev S Khush, Surinder K Vasal, and Rattan Lal. Such intellectuals should be in the “Agricultural Think Tank.”
  

The intended beneficiaries often understand the realities of the systems better; policymakers need to build trust.

Practice Question: The farmers protest against the new farm laws rises the serious concerns about the policymaking and involvement of citizen in the process by experts. What can be done to improve the trust of the public and how the challenge of agricultural income be solved?

Reassessment is needed

• The purpose of agriculture reforms is to increase farmers’ incomes. Farmers want the laws repealed.
• The Supreme Court of India has called for discussions between the government and farmers around the country.
• It is time to go back to the drawing board about the purpose and the process of agriculture reforms.
• According to economists, fewer people must work on farms for farm productivity and incomes to be improved. Which begs the question of how the millions displaced from farms will earn incomes.
• Indian industry is not growing much. There too, according to economists, humans should be replaced by technology for improving productivity.

Flipside of productivity

• Landholdings are too small for mechanization to improve farm productivity. Their solution is to ‘scale-up’ farms.
• Mechanization requires standardization of work, hence mechanized farming on scale requires monocropping.
• Large-scale specialization upsets the ecological balance. Reduced diversity of flora enables pests to spread more easily; soil quality is reduced; water resources get depleted.
• Solutions to these new problems require more industrial inputs, with more costs for farmers.
• The harmful side-effects of this approach to improve agriculture productivity are very visible in Punjab nowhere farm incomes have grown at the cost of water resources.

Nature’s self-adaptive system

• The ecological imbalance out of monocropping made the trees more vulnerable to pests.
• Nature is a complex ‘self-adaptive’ system. It knows how to take care of itself.
• When Man tries to overpower Nature with his science and industry, without understanding how Nature functions, he harms Nature — and ultimately himself.
• Challenges of environmental degradation and increasing inequalities require that the economic calculus shifts from ‘economies of scale with standardization’ to ‘economies of scope for sustainability’.
• This will make large-scale mechanization more difficult. It will require the use of more ‘flexible’ human labour.
• In the long run, not only will this be good for the ecology, but it will also increase employment and incomes for people in the lower half of the economic pyramid.

Market access

• Farm incomes can increase with access to wider markets for farm produce, which is an objective of the agricultural reforms.
• Indian farmers fear that they will not have adequate pricing power when pushed into large supply systems and less regulated markets.
• Connections into global supply chains can increase volumes of sales which always favour the larger players in the supply chains who have easier access to capital.
• Studies show that farmers in developed countries formed collectives which enable their voice to be heard by politicians and they could set the rules of global trade.

Strengthen cooperatives

• Institutions for cooperative ownership and collective bargaining must be strengthened to give power to small farmers before opening markets to large corporations.
• A very good example is the Indian dairy sector. It’s ‘per person productivity is much lower than in New Zealand and Australian dairy producers’.
• Still, it provides millions of tiny producers with reasonable incomes which large-scale industrial dairy producers do not.
• Moreover, with its cooperative aggregation, the Indian dairy sector has also acquired political clout.
• It has compelled the Indian government not to join the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership to connect the Indian economy with larger supply chains.

Low agriculture income

• The problem of low incomes in India’s agriculture sector is a complex systems problem which cannot be solved by agriculture experts alone.
• Experts from many disciplines must collaborate to find systemic solutions.
• The intended beneficiaries of the new policies must be included in the designing of the new policies right at the beginning as they understand the realities of systems better than experts.
• When policymakers say ‘the people don’t get it’ after the policy is announced and the intended beneficiaries protest, it is an indication that the experts didn’t get it.

The reforms of the 1990s

• The stand-off in agriculture reforms has caused a flurry of discussions about democracy, consultation, and processes for economic reforms.
• The immediate beneficiaries of the 1991 reforms were all Indian consumers, rich and poor, who would benefit from access to better quality products from around the world.
• The principal opponents of the reforms were a few large industrialists whose products citizens were not satisfied with.
• Governments have more power over a few industrialists than they have over the masses.
• The 1991 reforms changed industrial licensing and trade policies — both subjects of the Union government.
• ‘Factor market’ reforms, inland, agriculture, and labour regulations, which are necessary to realize the full benefits of the 1991 reforms are State subjects.
• They affect the lives of people on the ground, and differently, around the country. Therefore, the central government, no matter how strong it is, must not force these reforms onto the States.

Conclusion:

Silo experts cannot help

• India’s policymakers must improve their expertise in solving complex, multi-disciplinary problems.
• They must apply the discipline of systems thinking, and not rely on siloed domain experts.
• Citizens around the country must be involved in the policymaking throughout the evolution of policies.
• The policies of the government should create public value and it satisfies the desire of citizens for a well-ordered society, in which fair, efficient, and accountable public institutions exist.
• Trust is essential for a well-governed society. The lesson for India’s leaders is- good processes for making public policies build trust between citizens and their governments.

With most farming land held by only 20% of its cultivators in Assam, there is a perception that agriculture is unimportant. However, the new farm laws are equally detrimental to small and marginal farmers in the state.

Muted response from the state’s farming community

• With more than 70% of Assam’s population directly or indirectly dependent for their livelihood on the agricultural sector, it is surprising that the state has only seen sporadic protests against the farm laws passed by the Central government.
• Reformists would like to read this muted response from the state’s farming community as the voice of the silent majority who expect to benefit from the new farm laws.
• The real answer lies in the political economy of the state’s rural sector, which has its origins in the colonial handling of its agrarian possibilities.

Q. Farmers agitations in India are often region-specific. Discuss

Ungrounded and uncultivated

• The pre-Independence British administration had invested substantially in the agriculture in what today constitutes Punjab and Haryana, building dams and irrigation facilities and creating conditions that allowed farmers to benefit from the post-independence Green Revolution.
• This gave rise to the capitalist class among them.
• However, at the same time, peasants in Assam were arbitrarily taxed by the British Raj to make them voluntarily give up farming in favour of joining the labour forces of the tea industry in the region.
• Its policies did result in the transfer of land from the peasantry to mid-level revenue officials, leading to a highly unequal land distribution that has persisted since that time.
• Since the landed class tended to support the Indian National Congress-led freedom struggle, no land reform programme has ever been pursued seriously in the post-independence period.

Unequal land distribution

• Seven decades after independence, Assam’s agrarian setting is still characterized by a very high level of unequal land distribution.
• The evidence documented in the Assam Human Development Report, 2014 shows that 20% of farmers hold as much as 70% of the state’s farmland and shows tenancy at a much higher level of 26%.
• The lack of legal recognition of tenants means most of them have never been beneficiaries of public policies in agriculture in the state.
• The state’s agriculture is characterized by mono-cropping, with rice accounting for 90% of the land cultivated, but public procurement at the minimum support price (MSP) is conspicuously absent.
• The latest information from the public information bureau (PIB) shows that the state produces 4.2% of the country’s rice, but only 0.2% of its farmers availed public procurement by the Food Corporation of India (FCI).
• Most farmers had to bear with the low prices of rice in the open markets, even as the state was flooded with rice sourced from elsewhere through the public distribution system.
• Frequent floods often ravage the region, reducing farming operations to just one season in most flood-affected districts. Assam’s cropping intensity of 146% is one of the lowest among all major rice-producing states.
• In such a setting, the landed class takes little interest in farming, even as small and marginal farmers have increasingly been migrating, many even outside the state, to earn their livelihoods.
• It’s not surprising that the state’s agriculture is still stuck at the subsistence level. The Assam Economic Survey 2017-18 shows only 38% of the state’s land under high yielding variety seeds and 26% of its land under irrigation.

APMC must be strengthened

• The farmers of Assam might benefit from the breaking down of MSP procurement elsewhere through higher prices in the open market.
• The new farm laws are more or less meaningless, which are more about APMC markets than about MSP.
• With just 24 regulated APMC markets, Assam does not have enough marketing infrastructure to justify the argument made by the advocates of the new farm laws that the new Acts will liberate the farmers from the APMC markets’ monopoly and boost private investment in the sector.
• With the state’s agricultural marketing largely revolving around 700-odd unregulated haats (village markets), the 24 APMC markets are hardly enough to curtail the farmers’ ‘freedom’ to dispose of their produce.
• The credit deposit ratio (CDR) reported by major national banks in the state in 2017 is still below 40% compared to 72% at the national level, showing that the state is losing much of its savings to better-endowed states instead of receiving investment from outside the state.
• The APMC market as a public institution still has a large role to play in reviving the state’s agricultural sector. Additionally, it can stop growing inter-state migration that has come to light in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

In tackling agri-crises, these core Green Revolution States must shift to high-value crops and promote non-farm activities

Early adopters of Green Revolution Technology

• The region comprising Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh, was an early adopter of Green Revolution technology.
• It was also a major beneficiary of various policies adopted to spread modern agriculture technology in the country.
• The package of technology and policies produced quick results which enabled India to move from a country facing a severe shortage of staple food to becoming a nation close to self-sufficiency in just 15 years.

Practice Question:

Q. The traditional Green Revolution States of Punjab and Haryana would need to shed “business as usual” approach and embrace an innovative development strategy in agriculture and non-agriculture to secure and improve the future of farming and rural youth. Discuss.

The rice and wheat focus

• Procurement of marketed surplus of paddy (rice) and wheat at Minimum Support Price (MSP) completely insulated farmers against any price or market risks. It also ensured a reasonably stable flow of income from these two crops.
• Over time, the technological advantage of rice and wheat over other competing crops further increased as public sector agriculture research and development allocated their best resources and scientific manpower to these two crops.
• Other public and private investments in water and land and input subsidies were the other favourable factors.
• Thus, wheat in rabi and paddy in Kharif turned out to be the best in terms of productivity, income, price and yield risk and ease of cultivation among all the field crops (cereals, pulses, oilseeds).
• It is no surprise then that the area share of rice and wheat in the total cropped area rose drastically in these states.
• The progress and specialization towards these two crops served the great national goal of securing the food security of the country.

Problems of the Green Revolutionsurfaced during the mid-1980s

• During the mid-1980s, some inimical trends related to the rice-wheat crop system in general and paddy cultivation, in particular, surfaced followed by serious second-generation problems of the Green Revolution.
• Some experts foresaw the serious consequences of the continuation of paddy cultivation in the region and suggested diversification away from the rice-wheat system in the mid-1980s.
• Since then a large number of reports and policy documents have been prepared to develop alternative options to reduce the area under paddy — necessitated by its adverse effect on natural resources, the ecology, the environment, and fiscal resources.
• Serious concerns have also been expressed about plateauing productivity and stagnant income from rice-wheat cultivation. However, the area under these two crops has only increased rather than fallen.
• In order to develop viable options to infuse dynamism in the agriculture economy of this Green Revolution belt, there is a need to understand: what attracts farmers to rice-wheat crops, why it needs to be changed, and how it can be changed.

Punjab, Haryana vs. States

• High productivity, assured MSP which is often above open market price, free power, and fertilizer subsidy underlie the higher income per unit area from wheat and paddy cultivation.
• Land-labour ratio is also very favourable in Punjab when compared to other States; on an average, a farmer owns and cultivates 2.14 hectares net sown area as against 1.42 hectares in Haryana and 1.17 hectares at the national level.
• An estimate of income (derived from National Accounts Statistics) shows that all agriculture activities taken together to generate an annual net income of ₹5.31 lakh per cultivator in Punjab; it is ₹3.44 lakh in Haryana while the all-India average is ₹1.7 lakh (reference year, 2017-18).
• A question often asked is that if per farmer agriculture incomes in Haryana and Punjab are two to three times more than the national average, then why is there so much talk of farmers’ distress in these two States?

Why farmers’ distress in these two States when everything looks good?

• The reasons seem to be the loss of growth momentum in the income from the agriculture sector, which has fallen to 1% in Haryana and 0.6% in Punjab after 2011-12.
• This is quite low by any standard and not keeping in pace with an increase in households’ expenditure. The prospects of further growth in agricultural income from the crop sector dominated by rice and wheat are very dim.
• With the productivity of rice and wheat reaching a plateau, there is pressure to seek an increase in MSP to increase income. However, demand and supply do not favour an increase in MSP in real terms.
• In India, the per capita intake of rice and wheat is declining and consumers’ preference is shifting towards other foods.
• The average spending by urban consumers is more on beverage and spices than on all cereals. On the supply side, rice production is rising at the rate of 14% per year in Madhya Pradesh, 10% in Jharkhand and 7% in Bihar.

Issues related to procurement

• The growing rice production will further increase pressure on the procurement and buffer stock of rice. Rice and wheat procurement in the country has more than doubled after 2006-07 and buffer stocks have swelled to an all-time high.
• The country does not find an easy way to dispose of such large stocks and they are creating stress on the fiscal resources of the government.
• The implication of all these changes is that farmers in the region will find it difficult to increase their income from rice-wheat cultivation and they must be provided alternative choices to keep their income growing.
• Procurement of almost the entire market arrivals of rice and wheat at MSP for more than 50 years has affected the entrepreneurial skills of farmers to sell their produce in a competitive market where prices are determined by demand and supply and competition.
• Thus, to enable Punjab and Haryana farmers to move toward high-paying horticulture crops requires institutional arrangements on price assurance such as contract farming.

Environmental issues, unemployment

• The biggest casualty of paddy cultivation and the policy of free power for pumping out groundwater for irrigation is the depletion of groundwater resources.
• In the last decade, the water table has shown a decline in 84% observation wells in Punjab and 75% in Haryana. It is feared that Punjab and Haryana will run out of groundwater after some years if the current rate of overexploitation of water is not reversed.
• In the last couple of years, the burning of paddy stubble and straw has become another serious environmental and health hazard in the whole region.
• Another rather more serious challenge for the two States is to provide attractive employment to rural youths. Most of the farm work in these two States is undertaken by migrant labour.
• The younger generation is not willing to do manual work in agriculture and looks for better paying salaried jobs in non-farm occupations. Government jobs are few and far less than the number of job seekers.
• Thus, the option left is to create jobs in the private industry and the services sector. This requires private investments in suitable areas.
• Punjab has witnessed a flight of private capital from the State during the rise of militancy which hurt the State economy, employment and the revenues of the State.
• This setback has pushed the rank of the State in per capita income from number one in the 1970s and the early 1980s to number 13 among the major states of the country.
• For further progress and to meet the aspirations of rural youth to get satisfactory employment, the State needs large-scale private investments in modern industry, services, and commerce besides agriculture.

The solution lies in…

• The solution to the ecological, environmental and economic challenges facing agriculture in the traditional Green Revolution States is not in legalizing MSP but to shift from MSP crops to high-value crops and in the promotion of non-farm activities.
• Rather than focusing on a few enterprises, Punjab and Haryana should look at a large number of area-specific enterprises to avoid gluts.
• This will require a mechanism to cover price and market risks. Farmers’ groups and farmer producer organizations can play a significant role in the direct marketing of their produce.

Agricultural specificities and way forward

• Both Punjab and Haryana need to promote economic activities with strong links with agriculture tailored to State specificities.
• Some options for this are: promotion of food processing in formal and informal sectors; a big push to post-harvest value addition and modern value chains; a network of agro- and agri-input industries; high-tech agriculture; and a direct link of production and producers to consumers and consumers without involving intermediaries.
• The traditional Green Revolution States of Punjab and Haryana would need to shed “business as usual” approach and embrace an innovative development strategy in agriculture and non-agriculture to secure and improve the future of farming and rural youth.

With protests becoming catalysts for anti-authoritarian struggle, the air is ripe for new visions of rural emancipation

Recent policy changes and its impacts on agriculture

• There has been a systematic attack on agriculture in South Asia over the last decades. This can be seen in ongoing protests in India.
• Similar incidences of protests can be seen in Pakistan, where farmers protesting for support prices were beaten up and arrested in Lahore only a month ago, or Sri Lanka, where shortages of imported fertilizers and declining subsidies have led to farmers’ outcry.
• In the middle of a long-simmering rural economic crisis pushed over the cliff by the COVID-19 pandemic, efforts by South Asian governments to project corporatization and deregulation as the way forward for agriculture have angered long-suffering farmers.
• Successive governments have imposed a corporate agenda, seeking profits from food production and distribution by relaxing norms for cheap food imports, and encouraging export-oriented production, price speculation, agribusiness and retail supermarkets.
• South Asia’s rural landscape has been profoundly reshaped by such ‘reforms’, dispossessing farmers of their land, and pushing them into wage labour and migration as coping mechanisms.
• This hollowing out of rural livelihoods does not come with any assurance of stable jobs or a decent quality of life in urban areas.

Pandemic opportunism

• The COVID-19 crisis has increased such efforts and policy changes.
• India is not the only country to have attempted to seize this moment to deregulate agricultural markets. In Pakistan, the government inked an agreement with the World Bank to further deregulate the country’s wheat market.
• In Sri Lanka, with the national budget just passed for 2021, there are only meagre allocations towards revitalizing agricultural livelihoods and policies focused on supporting technologies suitable for agribusinesses.
• Instead of the current crisis sending governments back to the drawing board, South Asia’s authoritarian regimes, complicit with corporate interests, are railroading in anti-farmer agricultural policies.

Practice Question: Do you think there is a common ground between farmers protests in various South Asian countries. Discuss with proper examples.

Menace of the corporatization of Agriculture

• Corporate agriculture further worsens the existential danger faced by South Asian farmers.
• The corporate solutions do not address the role of middlemen and traders in denying farmers a fair price for their labour.
• Instead, opening up markets to large corporations is likely to spark the same sort of race to the bottom that has been seen in the industrial and service sectors.
• Deregulation makes farmers’ livelihoods even more precarious and threatens food sovereignty through increased dependence on global agricultural trade.
• It was the collapse of global agricultural commodity prices in the 1970s that had a large role to play in the debt crisis that haunts countries such as Pakistan and Sri Lanka.

Reviving resistance

• There is a powerful legacy of rural movements in South Asia that have fought for the rights of farmers, peasants and agricultural workers.
• Rural movements played a crucial role in the anti-colonial struggle and fought for progressive land and agrarian reform after independence.
• Seventy years on, they continue to fight against the recent waves of anti-farmer policies, while advancing new progressive visions such as peasant agro-ecology and food sovereignty, which put small food producers and the environment at the centre.
• The current convergence of authoritarianism and corporate capital brings this existential crisis for rural agricultural producers even more sharply in focus.
• Farmers’ movements have been aware of state connivance with exploitative actors, but they must now also contend with a breakdown of the democratic process and increased repression.
• These should be ominous signs for regimes across South Asia which continue to act with impunity in the face of demands for economic and social justice.

Voices of movements

• The COVID-19 pandemic has pushed food sovereignty back into the public imagination. The solution, of course, only begins with making farming a viable livelihood.
• Dominant assumptions about inevitable rural-urban migration and techno-utopian transformation in agriculture must be challenged.
• Questions of land redistribution and other rural inequalities must remain a crucial part of the political agenda.
• The situation of mostly female agricultural workers, the rural landless and Dalits in South Asia remains precarious. Even as rural movements across South Asia fight the ongoing attack on their livelihoods, they must also tackle rural inequality head-on.

Conclusion

• The air is ripe for new visions of rural emancipation in South Asia.
• Rural movements are working to transform not just their world but are becoming catalysts for a broader anti-authoritarian struggle in South Asia.
• The current phase of struggles has revived old questions while raising others about the future of our long-ignored rural world.
• We must listen to the voices and demands of the rural movements converging across South Asia.