How Green Revolution Impacted the Small Farmers in India

The Green Revolution was initiated in India in the 1960s with an aim of increasing food production in order to successfully eradicate the level of malnutrition in the country. It is characterized with use of high yielding variety of seeds, insecticides and pesticides and increased employment of technology in various farming practices.

While this movement benefited a large number of farmers all over the nation, its practical application and distribution has been largely uneven in terms of socio- economic class as well as geography. In a country where majority of the farmers live on very limited means, it is very

important to assess how a revolution of this nature has benefited small farmers.

There are three main ways in which uneven distribution among farmers has taken place:

1. Lack of funds among small farmers, limited affordability to employ advanced technologies

2. Lack of awareness and insufficient information available to small farmers

3. Lack of government support extended towards small farmers

Subsequently, this has four major effects:

1. Shift from traditional methods of farming to unsustainable practices

2. Loosened sense of community among farmers

3. Small farmers losing their lands to large commercial farmers

4. Increased rate of suicide among small farmers

Let’s take a moment to see what the quintessential small farmer did in India before Green Revolution came about. Traditionally, these farmers had small plots of land which were protected by tree cover and wind breaks. They heavily practiced crop rotation. Their lands were left fallow for a certain amount of time and that led to the fertility of the soil being restored. It also helped preventing surplus production. The farmers made use of methods of organic husbandry and natural ingredients in order to sustain. For example, using cow dung, urine or curd as pesticides. Jeevamrut is the local name for a commonly used natural pesticide. A farmer never went to the market to increase his yields. The demands of the lands were low and they had enough to sustain themselves and their families. All of these components lead to a productive ecosystem which worked and evolved for centuries.

The same farmers were eventually influenced by larger corporations. Noticing the success among these wealthy farmers, small farmers also started trying to commercialize their produce to a great extent. They started shifting to mono cropping, which resulted in low levels of soil fertility as the soil cannot replenish its nutrients. Mono cropping gradually exhausts the soil of particular nutrients as the same type of crop is planted year after year, this gradually results in decreased soil fertility. This then led to the need for chemical fertilizers in order to gain a higher output. While these chemicals doubled yields and deterred pests, the native crops couldn’t stand it. These farmers, therefore ended up purchasing seeds. More often than not there weren’t many competitors in terms of the dealers that supplied these chemicals and seeds, which means that the prices remained high. In order to acquire these chemical- based pesticides, the farmers either got stuck in the clutches of money lenders or in an endless cycle of debt. Marginalized and Small farmers were left disheartened and demoralized as the result of pest- ridden crops and degraded soil. This led to increasing tension among the farming community. Change towards external inputs not only had negative consequences for the ecology of the villages, but also social implications. Agriculturalists relied upon mutual relationships within their villages. However, after the revolution they found themselves dealing with banks and agri-business resulting in weakening of community relationships.

The Indian Constitution granted states the authority to impose land reforms to minimize some of the imbalances across the states. The two main initiatives taken under this were transforming property relations and subsidizing agricultural development. The first step involved abolishing tenancy laws and feudal type landlordism. The states placed ceilings on land holdings and consolidating land. However, the success rate of this reform varied across regions. While commercial farmers were able to pay for their property rights due to the success they achieved through Green Revolution, most tenants could not afford to buy their land from the landlords. State support also took the form of investment and subsidies. The government and administration had put cash in agrarian framework, irrigation system and new technologies were all the more promptly accessible and there was the chance to acquire credit with financing costs much lower than those of money lenders. These benefits were rarely seen in the more marginal areas. Wealthy farmers had the power to sway the government in their favor and the government relied upon these farmers for support and political backing. Therefore, these subsidies and investments were made to areas that had already seen adequate development and advancement.

Small farmers fell behind as they were left impoverished. Farmer suicides is an issue that we’re

dealing with till date. This is where it all started. It’s ironical how a movement that was meant to

feed many hungry people, ended up taking so many lives of the ones that are responsible to feed them. While the intentions of these practices were certainly good, the rigid social structure made it difficult for those without money to be impacted positively. Intensification of agriculture over the years has led to overall degradation of the fragile agro-ecosystem. High cost of production and diminishing economic returns from agricultural practices are affecting the socio-economic condition of farmers. With all of those chemicals ending up on the crops, it comes as no surprise that it leaves significant amounts of residue in the produce we consume on a regular basis. Residual pesticides are found in 52% of fruits and over 30% of vegetables. Consumption of these crops have proven to be extremely harmful in terms of health over all these years. Loss of soil fertility, erosion of soil, soil toxicity, diminishing water resources, pollution of underground water, salinity of underground water, increased incidence of human and livestock diseases and global warming are some of the negative impacts of over adoption of agricultural technologies by the farmers to make the Green Revolution successful. Indiscriminate and disproportionate use of chemicals pollutes the soil, air and water and feed and fodders offered to animals. The Green Revolution has been successful in increasing yields in many areas but it certainly hasn’t helped the Small and Marginal farmers of India.

References

• The Green Revolution of the 1960's and Its Impact on Small Farmers in India - Kathryn Sebby University of Nebraska at Lincoln- https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgiarticle=1027&context=envstudtheses

• Why doesn’t it pay to be a small farmer- Subodh Varmal. TNN. The Times of India- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/sunday-times/Why-it-doesnt-pay-to-be-asmall-farmer/articleshow/46893469.cms

• Green Revolution in India: Environmental Degradation and Impact on Livestock- Rahman, Saidur- Asia Journal of Water, Environment and Pollution- https://content.iospress.com/articles/asian-journal-of-water-environment-andpollution/ajw12-1-11

• Monitoring Pesticides in Our Food- Feng Qing- http://www.foodqualityandsafety.com/article/monitoring-pesticides-food/