Agriculture needs a fair deal

By Bhanu Pratap Singh

IT IS very unfortunate that most intellectuals and mediapersons live in cities, cut off from the realities of rural India. This has given the Government an opportunity to create an impression about the progress made by the agriculture sector. To do so, it has coined a phrase called the ``Green Revolution''. No doubt we have made some progress, in agriculture as well as in other sectors. Progress depends on scientific discoveries and technological advances made in the world. Taking advantage of these, all countries including India have made some progress. It is, therefore, illusory to compare our present with the past. If the purpose is not to create illusions, we should compare our present achievements, with those of the world, as a whole.

There are two ways of judging the agriculture sector's performance. One is by comparing our average yield per hectare of cereals with that of the global yield. The other is by comparing our per capita annual average availability of cereals with that of the world. In 1997, our per hectare yield of cereals was 2,232 kg, and its per capita availability 232.2 kg, against the world average of per hectare yield of 2,974 kg, and per capita availability of 358.4 kg. What needs to be noted is that our per capita availability of cereals is still less than two-thirds the world average.

Our agricultural growth rate has also been slower than that of our neighbours. According to the ``World Development Report 1999- 2000,'' during 1980-88 the annual agricultural growth rate was 3.24 per cent whereas those of China, Vietnam and Pakistan were 5.18, 4.65 and 4.04 per cent.

We have also failed to make India truly self-sufficient in foodgrains. According to the National Institute of Nutrition, Hyderabad, the minimum quantity of foodgrains required per capita per annum for adequate nutrition is 182.5 kg.

In the last quinquennium (1995-2000), our per capita availability of foodgrains showed a declining trend. In the words of the Planning Commission, ``the food consumption of the poor in India has gone down in the last 10 years, and is at least 33 per cent lower than the per capita consumption of the top 10 per cent. In spite of the declining trend, the Government boasts that we have become not only self-sufficient in foodgrains but are also able to export foodgrains in substantial quantities.

Is the visible surplus of foodgrains in open markets and government godowns due to overproduction? No. It is due to the growing pauperisation of the common people, many of whom are unable to obtain two square meals a day, and the failure of the Government to deliver its own stocks to the targeted poor.

Why was the agriculture sector remaining backward? Are we short of national resources? No. India is richly endowed by nature. Her most abundant natural resource is her agro-climatic condition. In the world as a whole, the percentage of arable to total land area is only 11. In India it is 51. Our climate, being moderate, enables us to grow two to three crops a year; whereas in most parts of the world, due to severe winters, only one crop can be grown a year. India also has more irrigated land than any other country.

The reason for our backwardness is that since Independence most governments at the Centre have been applying different standards for agriculturists and non-agriculturists, exploiting the former and protecting the others.

In fixing prices of industrial products, a fixed margin of profit is always added to the cost of production, but it is not so while fixing minimum support prices for farm products. Many a time, the announced MSPs is lower than production cost.

The emoluments of PSU employees have been raised to nearly two and half times the rate of increase in their cost of living. But the MSPs of farm products, which determine the income of farmers, have not been raised even to cover the increases in prices of the commodities they have to buy.

The industrial sector has always been provided protection through high tariff rates on import of industrial products, while imports of wheat, pulses, vegetable oils, onions, sugar and silk etc. have been allowed freely, or at very low rates. Import of these commodities would not have been so objectionable if the export of farm products which could fetch better prices in international markets, had also been freely allowed.

While the industrial sector has been almost completely decontrolled, the farm sector remains as shackled by controls as in the past. Controls on movement, storage and sale of agricultural products, etc., have continued to affect the economic viability of the agriculture sector. Consequently, the growth of agriculture tended to slacken during the 1990s.

Agriculture now involves modern techniques of production, for adoption of which the following steps need to be taken: The new generation of agriculturists must be made functionally literate by paying more attention to education in rural areas. All villages in the country should be linked by all-weather roads. Achieving this aim is far more important than constructing 6-lane expressways. It should be accepted as a self- evident truth that development stops where pucca roads end.

To sustain agricultural growth, the MSP of farm products should be linked to the wholesale prices of ``all commodities'' so that the terms of trade between agriculturists and non-agriculturists remain in balance. But even this will not help much, unless a more efficient marketing system is organised. Our present marketing systems, both private and public, have proved very inefficient. To improve this situation, a network of rural warehouses needs to be established, where farmers may deposit their produce, and on its security, readily get bank advances up to 80 per cent of the price of their produce. Such a system will not only prevent ``distress sales'' by farmers, it will also prevent hoarding by private traders.

To achieve higher productivity at a lesser cost, the process of mechanisation of agriculture should be accelerated. Agriculture in India is most mechanised in Punjab, where unemployment, and the incidence of poverty is the least. Mechanisation helps increase productivity and income of the farm sector. It enables farmers to complete their farm operations in time, which, in itself, ensures higher productivity. It helps in proper placement of seeds and farm chemicals, which increases their cost- effectiveness.

The Public Distribution System should be abolished. Foodgrains procured by the Government must be utilised only for: (i) providing relief during emergencies, such as national disasters, (ii) supporting ``food for work'', programmes and (iii) exports. Relief to the poor, who are able- bodied, should be provided by launching a nationwide permanent ``Food for Work'' programme, which should be extensively utilised for completing soil and water conservation schemes, without which our most valuable assets - soil and water - are fast deteriorating.

The old and the infirm should be provided with food-coupons to enable them to purchase foodgrains from the open market.

(The writer is a former Union Minister.)

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal
Next     : Give Bt cotton a chance