(A CED Documentation -compiled for Jan Sangati Kendra by Veena, Nalini, Ajith and John)
Table of contents
1. Development of Indian Agriculture
2. Indian Agricultural Policy & The WTO Regime
3. The Political Economy of Agricultural Modernisation & Liberalisation
4. Agriculture Labour - Situation in India
5. State
of Organisation of Agricultural Labour in India
DEVELOPMENT OF INDIAN AGRICULTURE
Post independence, population was growing at a much faster rate than
food production. This is called for drastic action to increase yield. The
action came in the form of the Green Revolution involving expansion of
farming areas, double cropping existing farmland using irrigation and using
High Yeilding Variety (HYV) Seeds. (Why
Green Revolution -by Saby Ganguly )(Enclosure 1)
The 'Green Revolution' of the 1960s was confined to the northern states of Punjab, Haryana and parts of Uttar Pradesh, and to strategic crops, mainly wheat and rice. Over 70% of the country's farmland remains rainfed, whilst a significant proportion of agricultural land (150 million hectares) is now classified as 'wasteland'. (iuf)
The liberalisation of the Indian agricultural economy started in 1991. The major impact has been the shift from "lower value" or subsistence food crops to higher value cash crops (like cotton or oilseeds) (iuf). The percentage Share of Cropped area in wheat, condiments, fruits pulse went up while Jowar, coarse cereals, sugarcane went down in 1997-98 compared to 1996-97 ( Table showing distribution of crops 96-97, 97-98) (Enclosure 2) Even with a crop like Cotton, Dastakaar Andhra has shown that state policy is in fact giving higher subsidy to cotton required for the big industry, at the cost of type of cotton required for handloom or weaver based textiles. Even with these trends, the IXth Five Year Plan essentially plans for increasing cash crops compared to foodgrains and essential commodities. Over the next two plan ie in the XI th Plan, the target of growth rate of the value of wheat output is likley to come down .22 % whereas the target value of production of cash crops like Sugar cane is planned to go up. Similar is the case of Fruits & vegetables, Tea and Coffee, Livestock, fishery. Table on Target Growth rate in Value of Output of Agriculture). A good prospect for wheat has been attributed more to the projected decline in the area under wheat cultivation in the United States. (More on Wheat in India) (Enclosure 3)
Also refer to Macro-economic overview of India: Agriculture (Enclosure 4)
Population & Agriculture development
(a)
This in
its turn would lead to a series of changes in the agricultural
scenario of the country" -- higher yield per unit if technology is land
saving, whereas different relative rates of labour and capital intensity
under labour saving technologies night lead to higher labour productivity
also. Thus resulting in higher agriculutral output alongwith increased
farm income.. Due to low income elasticity of demand for foodgrains and
lower value crops, rise in farm output and income would induce demand increases
at higher rates for non-grain higher value crop and non-crop (eg dairy
, meat) agricultural products. (
SEEDS
The Indian seed industry is expected to grow very rapidly in the coming years. There are several grounds for expecting that the seed industry will coalesce under the control of a few large companies with foreign interests. Firstly hybrid seed is produced principally by large companies and its use is set to increase following the decline of the public sector for various reasons. Secondly, smaller companies will find it increasingly difficult to compete because the market is fickle.Moveover, the plant variety protection regulations will scotch a market in second and subsequent generations. Thirdly, there will be increased use of transgenic crops which are produced only by those companies which can meet the high development costs. (Vandana Shiva & Tom Crompton, Monopoly and Monoculture : Trends in Indian Seed Industry by Vandana Shiva. Economic and Political Weekly, September 26, 1998. ) (Enclosure 6)
In defending the Technology Protection System(TPS), seed companies underline
that it costs them between $30 and $ 100 million to develop a high-yielding
genetically engineered seed variety. The present system of seed saving,
which is prevalent in most developing countries, makes it difficult for
them to gain sufficient returns on their investment. But a number
of farming experts and organisations reject this logic. Critics of terminator
technology also argue that poor farmers in the tropics not only produce
15 to 20 percent of the world's food supply , they also maintain crop varieties
that are a source of genetic diversity for the world's plant breeders and
genetic engineers. (Dead-end
seeds yield a harvest of revolt by Ethiranjan Anbarasan, UNESCO courier
journalist) (Enclosure 7)
Biotechnology and genetic engineering in agriculture is evolving in
a total regulatory vacuum. The FDA doesnot look at the safety of Bt-crops
since such crops are treated as a pesticide. The EPA which is supposed
to look at safety of pesticides treats genetically enginnered crops which
produce pesticide as a conventional crop. There is, therefore no agency
guaranteeing the safety of genetically engineered crops. It is to fill
this policy vacuum for environmental safeguards that citizens worldwide
are
calling for a five-year moratorium on genetic engineering in agriculture.
(Globalisation and Threat to Seed Security: Case of Transgenic
Cotton Trails in India by Vandana Shiva, Ashok Emani and Afsar H Jafri.
Economic and Political Weekly, March 6-13, 1999.) (Enclosure 8)
There are pleas for rejecting biotechnology/Gm seeds on the grounds that after the first few years of good crops, the soil would deteriorate beyond redemption and that the multinational corporations would have a complete control over agriculture of Punjab. .. The Indian Legal Framework has to anticipate consequences that may follow and take anticipatory steps to ensure that the small farmer and the consumer have adequate of the law. ( Sanjiv Chopra, The Fears of Monsanto. Pioneer. 20/03/2001. [C.K34b.20032001PIO] (Enclosure 9)
PESTICIDES
The promotion of high yielding varieties(HYV) that marked the green revolution has led to the large-scale use of chemicals as pesticides. Increase in the use of chemicals as pesticides can result in various health and environmental problems like pesticides poisoning of farmers and farm workers, cardiopulmonary, neurological and skin disorders, foetal deformities, miscarriages, lowering the sperm count of applicators, etc. (Pestcides and Health Risks by Dinabandhu Bag. Economic and Political Weekly. September 16, 2000) [J.D73.0900EPW3381] (Enclosure 10)
The Indian pesticide industry is the fourth largest in the world. Of the total market, around 75 percent is accounted for by insecticides. According to Mr.Pradeep Dave, President, PMFAI, and Chairman and Managing director, Aimco Pesticides Ltd., "Pesticides consumption in India is low- less than 800gm per acre against 16 kg per acre in the U.S. We want the government machinery to educate farmers about the use of pesticides through scientific programmes. All over the world better crop protection is used and here the government discourages the use of pesticides", said Mr. Dave. ( Low capacity use dogs pesticide units by Ramnath Subbu. The Hindu. 29 July 2001. [C.:K34a.29072001H] (Enclosure 11)
Over the past decade, the high prices of HYV cotton crops encouraged tens of thousands of small and marginals farmers in the region to shift from traditional food crops to cotton. By switching to the cotton meant costly investments in seeds, fertilisers and pesticides which was possible for the small peasants of Telengana only through loans typically secured with their land or the gold ornaments of their wives. Now, in the thousands of homes, dreams lie shattered amidst the ruin of thousands of families. A pall of despair and shocks lies over the region today, where at least 180 debt-ridden cotton farmers committed suicide in a short spell of just 3 months, recently. ( Anita Kanekar, Pesticides kill peasants instead of pests. TWN features. 18/05/1999.[C.K34a.180599TWN ) (Enclosure 12)
The food we eat today contains a concoction of banned and restricted
chemicals like DDT, benzene hexachloride (BHC), aldrin, dieldrin,
lindane and many others. And the food is their route to the human body.
Result : functional disorder and disease. It all began with the Green
Revolution, which saw indiscriminate use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides.
It left behind enormous toxic loads of contaminants in the environment,
which eventually found their way into humans through the food chain. (Rajesh
Rangarajan, Tasting Toxic.New Indian Express. 25/02/2001. [C.K34a.25022001NIB]
(Enclosure 13)
India had adopted the environment-friendly integrated pest management (IPM) approach for combating pests and diseases as a cardinal principle of its plant protection strategy way back in 1985. By adopting the IPM technology on rice, they have not only saved on pesticides but also improved conditions for restoring the ecological balance in this rich agricultural belt. However, in most cases, the farmers gave up this practice and reverted to pesticide use soon after the projects under which they took to it were over. Besides the lack of necessary follow-up action on the part of the promoters, there are other reasons as well for the failure of interest in this technology to endure without official patronage (Going off pesticides. Business Standard. 12/10/1999. [C.K34a.121099BS] (Enclosure 14)
Irrigation
Irrigation has been seen as a panacea for agricultural growth. Most projects however are notorious for not fulfilling its planned target or cost beneficial level performance.
The
Kosi canal irrigation system was under construction across village lands,
and the increasing availability of high yielding seeds offered possibilities
for agricultural development. But in 1981, we found the situation little
changed. The Kosi canal system provided no irrigation water and increased
vulnerability to flood. Agricultural development was limited.
PATENT AND PRIVATISATION OF GENES
The Person who discovers a gene is, in effect, conferred ownership of it a patent ! In patenting life is owning life. The use of a biochemical is often the same as what is traditional to local communities somewhere. If a company patents that traditional use as its own invention, is it not then plagiarism? Is the patent office that has allowed it then not legalising robbery? (Patenting life is owning life by Dr.Tewolde Egziabher) (Enclosure 16)
The introduction of plant variety protection imposed by Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) forces all states to conform with existing practices of granting breeders' rights ny allowing registration of "essentially derived varieties" which could be previously commercialised by anyone. This was earlier rejected by India. The rational were that food security is a basic need whose fulfillment should not be governed by private commercial interests and that information in agricultural management had always been shared freely among farmers and the farming community. The Indian Government indicated that it wanted to devise its own legislation for the protection of plant varieties. The draft bill however essentially maintains the same provisions on breeder rights. As far as farmers rights is concerned, the act does no more than protect the farmers right to save, use, exchange, share or sell their farm produce of a protected variety. It does not take into account that Indian farmers have traditionally been breeders of new varieties from the existing traditional stock, most of whose genes are now in laboratories in the west. Plant Variety Protection Act and TRIPS agreement by Philippe Cullet. Hindu. 5/04/2000 [C.K34b.05042000H] (Enclosure 17)
Gene Campaign has been lobbying against the government's draft of the sui generis legislation and proposing recognition of farmers as breeders, recognition of bio-resouces as an economic resource and a Community Gene Fund. It also calls for public ownership of a country's biological resources in order to stop bio-piracy and establish the rights of of local communities. Gene Campaign is a national level organisation in India . It opposes the privatisation of the world's genetic resources and is working to help secure the rights of the custodians of these resources: tribal communities and farm men and women of the developing countries. The biological wealth of developing nations is under attack from MNCs who are demanding patent rights as an instrument of access and control for one of the most sought after raw materials of the world. (Enclosure 18)
AGRI-BUSINESS SECTOR
Today, about one fourth of the GDP in agriculture is accounted for by the allied sectors, in which dairy accounts for the lion's share.
DAIRY
The indigenous approach to livestock is based on diversity. decentralisation, sustainability and equity. Our cattle are not just milk machines or meat machines. They are sentient beings who serve human communities through communities through their multidimensional role in agriculture.
On the other hand, extemally driven projects, programmes and policies emerging from industrial societies treat cattle as one-dimensional machines which are maintained with capital intensive and environmentally intensive inputs and which provide a single output - either milk or meat. Policies based on this approach are characterised by monocultures, concentration and centralisation, non-sustainablity and inequality.
The new livestock policy has been framed in this paradigm of machines
and monocultures. It is serious attack on principles of diversity, decentralisation,
sustainability and equity in the livestock sector. (The
new Livestock policy - A policy of ecocide of indigenous cattle breeds
and A Policy of Genocide for India's Small Farmers by Dr. Vandana Shiva.)
(Enclosure 19)
DAIRY INDUSTRY
Hitherto development of dairy has concentrated on Cooperatisation, a la AMUL, so that the milk is produced in by small farmers, in remote areas and processed in cooperative owned plants. Factory style operations as developed in EU countries and New Zealand, some heavily subsidised, literally squeeze the milk out of their cows, and pose a threat as they could dump excess production at cheap rates.
The WTO provisions force liberalising trade and government policies to augment world import demand for dairy products, commitments on market access, reduction of domestic support and subsidies on exports for the removal of distortions in the domestic market. Consequently the pressure is on the small farmer, particularly women.
The cost of production of milk in India is close to the lowest in the world, but the prices of dairy products are among the highest, indicating who has been licking the cream till now. To stem the international onslaught, the industry has called for the support of financial institutions to finance intermediary processing facilities like milking equipment, cooling equipment etc. (How the financial interventions can reduce the impact of WTO on Indian dairy by Shiv Kumar Gupta. Financing Agriculture - April-June 2001) (Enclosure 20)
AGRI-BUSINESS
WTO has come to the rescue of the MNCs in India in the form of a triple
booster dose, namely, lifting import restrictions, reducing import tariff
and imposition of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). They can freely
import not only raw materials but also finished goods and they can prohibit
their typically Indian counterparts from reverse-engineering their new
innovative products. They can now influence Indian farmers more effectively
with more products in their armory without fear of imitation.
Traditional Indian companies in this sub-sector of agricultural inputs
have become a soft target for MNCs. These homegrown companies may soon
become amenable to agree to let the MNCs use their marketing and distribution
network which they painstakingly created and developed over decades. MNCs,
particularly the new entrants, will find low cost acquisition of these
networks extremely useful in facilitating their smooth entry in this vast
and diverse market. ( WTO and its impact on Agri-Business Sector by Dr.(Mrs.)Varsha
Varde. Financing Agriculture - April-June 2001)
(Enclosure 21)
Aquaculture
Shrimp cultivation is sweeping India like one of the cyclones that occasionally
pummels communities along the country's 4,030 kilometer coastline. Reminiscent
of the "Green Revolution," the fertilizer- and pesticide-intensive commercial
agriculture that has transformed the Indian countryside in the past 30
years, proponents have dubbed India's explosion of export-oriented shrimp
farming as the "Blue Revolution". Aquaculture
Floods Indian Villages- by Gary Cohen
(Enclosure 22)
Liberalisation of the economy, high profitability and a strong international
market have all contributed to the country's aquaculture boom. In 1994
and 1995, shrimps constituted about 70% of the seafood exports to the United
States, a trade worth US$1 billion. This development has dangerous
consequences for the environment, farming communities, and users.
(Environmental
impact of shrimp culture by A Rajagopal) (Enclosure 23)
The National Fishworkers Forum has been protesting the proliferation
of such farms and also heavy trawling activity which is threatening the
livelihoods of coastal peoples. ( Support
Protests against Industrial Aquaculture in India).
(Enclosure 24). "The temporary ban by Supreme Court's order on shrimp
farm construction offers hope that their traditional livelihoods will be
spared amid India's rush to transform its economy into one dominated by
exports and transnational corporations. For anti-aquaculture activists,
the ban buys time to strengthen the opposition movement, organize an international
consumer boycott and prepare a legal case against further conversion of
farmland into shrimp farms".Protests
over aquaculture in India -by Martin Khor.
(Enclosure 25)
Bangalore Declaration of the Via Campesina "denounce the policies of the World Bank, the IMF and the other international institutions which fraudulently implement so-called `rural development policies' that are really designed to rob us of our common heritage - land, water and genetic resources. We are not fooled by the program to privatize land and water as a way of getting investment and development. Our experiences teach us that the privatisation of land is leading to more debt, more hunger and more injustice for peasant families. We call for genuine and just agrarian reform.
The patenting of life forms, which gives private ownership and control
over genetic resources and even human genes, is absolutely unacceptable.
We will not cede the ownership of our common heritage and the basis of
all of our lives to the transnational corporate sector. The privatisation
of natural resources is concentrating these common goods in the hands of
the wealthy who use them for luxuries while basic needs are not met." Bangalore
Declaration of the Via Campesina
(Enclosure 26)
INDIA'S AGRICULTURE POLICY and THE WTO REGIME :
The World Trade Agreement of 1994 brought agriculture for the first
time in world trade history within its policy framework. The principles
and policies of the WTO are based on Ricardo's concept of comparative advantage.
The four major elements of the World Trade Agreement in the field of agriculture
are:
For India TRADE LIBERALISATION is likely to open opportunities
for exports, but poses threat of
This view feels that the Indian farmer will be jolted out of their
"reverie" under the shadow of the protective cocoon
of Government Support.
The Challenge is to
The gainers include farmers with the capital to buy new technology and
inputs and those with the ability to switch to the
production of cash crops that enjoyed higher prices over food crops,
whose production has declined. The losers include
the small farmers and landless labourers whose incomes declined as
a result of mechanization.
Reference: Review of Agricultural Progress : Trends, Developments and Outlook for Future by Bhaskar Barua. Financing Agriculture - Inhouse Journal of Agricultural Finance Corporation Ltd. July-Sept. 2001 & Oct.-Dec. 1999
WTO & Globalisation : Frequently Asked Questions. Financing Agriculture - Inhouse Journal of Agricultural Finance Corporation Ltd. April-June 2001. ( see for basic features of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA), and explanations of concepts like Quantitative Restrictions, Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures, Blue Box, Blue Box, Cairns Group, Dumping, Tariff, Quota etc.)
Indian Agriculture Policy Follows WTO
The 1991 Economic reforms have begun a process of change. Although the pace and impact has not been as significant, compared to the industrial sector, there are signs of progress. Liberalizing export controls and commodity prices has further reduced the urban bias against agriculture. The export sector has grown rapidly as a result of these reforms. Production has shifted away from food crops to cash crops such as fruits and vegetables which offer higher returns. Imports are being allowed in, but they have not flooded the market because domestic prices remain lower.
However, not everyone has benefited. Liberalization has increased the price of inputs such as fertilizers significantly. Wages have not increased and consumption levels have fallen as a result of growing inefficiencies in the public distribution system. Small farmers continue to be marginalized. ( Trade and Development Centre : India Case Study - Agricultureby Sidhhartha Prakash, WTO Consultant) (Enclosure 27)
Given the objectives of removal of the incidence of poverty and unemployment and of ensuring food and nutritional security, attaining a high growth reate in agriculture in the Ninth Plan, the value of agricultural output is targeted to increase at annual rate of 4.5% in the Ninth Plan. The targeted annual growth rates in the value of agricultural output for the Tenth and Eleventh Plans are 5.3% and 5.1% respectively. These targets have been determined keeping in mind the commodity-wise level of expected demand - both domestic and external - and the domestic supply possibilities.
Target Growth rate in Value of Output of Agriculture During the Ninth Plan and over the Perspective Period (in Percentage)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity
IX Plan X Plan XI Plan
-------------------------------------------------------------
1) Agricultural Crop
3.82 4.54
4.27
a) Foodgrain
3.05 3.57
2.73
i) Rice
2.75 3.08
2.73
ii) Wheat
3.75 4.31
3.64
iii) Coarse Cereal
2.20 2.40
2.43
iv) Pulses
3.50 4.93
5.66
b) Oilseeds
5.25 8.85
5.16
c) Sugar Cane
4.00 6.16
6.07
d) Fruits & Vegetables
7.00 8.01
7.89
e) Other Agricultural Products 2.64
3.08 3.04
of which
i) Tea
5.00 6.16
6.07
ii) Coffee
5.00 6.16
6.07
2) Livestock
6.59 7.68
7.36
a) Milk Group
7.04 8.32
7.89
b) Meat & Poultry Group
7.50 8.63
8.50
c) Other Livestock Products
2.00 1.85
1.82
3) Fishery
6.50 7.00
7.00
4) Total Agriculture
4.50 5.30
5.10
------------------------------------------------------------
Taken "Food
Requirement and Agricultural Growth" Extract from the Ninth Plan.
(Enclosure 28)
Prof. M.S. Swaminathan characterised the World Trade Agreement of 1994 as "an unequal and unjust trade bargain" for Indian agriculture. Discussing the grave implications especially for millions of small and marginal farmers in India, he came up with the innovative and important suggestion that India should press for a "Livelihood Box."
Several exemptions from the calculation of domestic support were provided.
The two major categories are "Green" and "Blue" Boxes. Article 6.1 of the
Agreement on Agriculture lists eligible items for inclusion under Green
Box subsidies. These include policies which provide services or benefits
to agriculture or the rural community, stockholding for food security,
domestic food aid, investment subsidies and agricultural input subsidies
for low income and resource poor families, which permits us to impose quantitative
restrictions on the import of agricultural commodities, where dispassionate
analysis indicates that such imports will kill livelihood opportunities
for small and marginal farmers and landless agricultural labour, as well
as for those involved in small-scale agro-processing and agri-business
activities.
M S Swaminathan, For
a Livelihood Box,
Frontline, Volume 18 - Issue 03, Feb. 03 - 16, 2001. (Enclosure 29)
Five years after the World Trade Organisation (WTO) came into existence, the anticipated gains for India from the trade liberalisation process in agriculture are practically zero. And yet, undaunted by the negative fallout from the implementation of the WTO's Agreement on Agriculture, the Ministry of Agriculture is aggressively pushing for the second phase of reforms... The entire effort of the free trade initiative is to destroy the foundations of food self-sufficiency so assiduously built over the years. After all, with food production increasing in the US and in the European Union, the focus is only on how to find bigger and reliable markets for exports. In the US, for instance, food production is slated to multiply in the years to come. And incidentally, agricultural exports are the second biggest export earner for America.
The Government's focus remains very clear. It has already constituted
a task force, under the chairmanship of a known votary of the free trade
paradigm, Sharad Joshi, to submit a report on the implications of WTO's
Agreement on Agriculture on Indian agriculture by February next.
India's march to complete dependency on food imports, therefore, is no
longer a hidden agenda.
(WTO and Indian Agriculture:
The End Result is Zero by Devinder Sharma) (Enclosure 30)
POLITICAL ECONOMY OF AGRICULTURAL MODERNISATION & LIBERALISATION
Historically, Modernisation of Agriculture was to lead to changes in relations of production from a feudal system to capitalist mode. In India, factors such as caste, colonial influence and uneven development meant that complex relations developed. During the mode of production debate in the 60s and 70s (Get articles) indicated the relations were characterised variously semi-feudal, semi colonial, early capitalist, to semi colonial systems.
The new seed-fertilizer technology especially those arising from the Green Revolution has resulted in the increase in land rents and lower labour wages( in real terms). Only the Big farmers, mainly those who are producing for the market, could make use of Government Support. The marginal farmers have in fact been further marginalised under the new regime of modern agriculture and green revolution. In fact most farmer suicides ( refer to article on suicides which connect to credit. Humanscape article) have been connected to pauperisation and indebtedness which so called government support in form of part subsidies for seeds, credit, fertilizers have brought in.
The case for liberalisation of Agricultural Trade rests on two premises
which have been contested.
a) Increased Trade means increased economic growth
b) Economic Growth promotes social well-being or vibrant civilisation.
To them, all the real politic of trade issues are challenges to be
overcome by what is being called the Emerging and Transitional Economies.
Some even see it as a "comparative advantage" where opportunity costs of
production are
low. This basically means labour costs. This is because costs
of inputs like seeds, fertilisers, pesticides, transport etc, are
getting globalised and thereby competitive. And Land? We are
already seeing land alienation and displacement of local populations on
an unprecented scale for development projects (as in Narmada for both power
and irrigation), or for captive plantation for Industry ( as in Birla Rayon,
Karnataka), or mines contracting as in ( Samantha). All signs are that
as globalisation of the agricultural sector progresses, land besides becoming
alienated from local populations will be tradable. And once alienated,
valued only in exchange rather than use terms! Thus the true meaning of
Emerging and Transitional Economies is the transformation of a a by and
large self-sufficient, labour intensive agriculture to one which is dependent
on its trade value in the market!
Given population changes, and pressure on land, demand for and
supply of labour shifts simultaneously. {H&R,p.336}.
In many LDCs the shift in supply of labour has outpaced shift in demand
caused by (slow) technological progress. What is needed is for demand
for labour (caused by more intense modern agriculture) to exceed growth
in labour supply. Therefore the importance of rapid diffusion of
appropriate technology to offset the effect of growing population
and labour force, and ultimately for non-agricultural sectors to
develop in tandem.
Hayami & Ruttan, Does Productivity Growth in Agriculture Make the
Rich Richer and the Poor poorer?
Chapter 11: Impacts
of Increasing Agricultural Productivity on Equity: The Case
of the Green Revolution.
(Enclosure 31)
In India an unexpected supporter of reforms, came from Shetkari Sangathana, led by Shard Joshi. The view was put forward by Gail Omvedt, that liberalisation would free the farmers of internal (government & vested interest) controls, under which they have been suffering and not getting fair returns. She argues that the new social movements like the environmental movement, the women's movement and dalit and civil society organisations are voicing a new critque of the State and articulating new models of development. These movements are not organised around class but around overlapping communities. Despite robust critique of Omvedt's position (SAPs, Dust, and Hot Air: Gail Omvedt and Liberalization by Balmurli Natrajan, Ciarán ó Faoláin, and Kavita Philip), (Enclosure 32) her plea for abandoning the traditional owner-worker contradiction based politics, and moving to the urban-rural contradiction, needs to be taken into account.
As the mainstream economy is firmly entrenched, and is consolidating globally, it is making deep inroads into the periphery, and acting as a predator on the periphery. Tribals and farmers are being displaced from their lands to development and infrastructure projects, fishermen are loosing their livelihood, artisans are being marginalised. Most civil society organisations especially NGOs has in response retreated to promoting the traditional and going back to earlier system. Omvedt's plea seem to ask for modernisation within the decentralised production and consumption paradigm. Such a modernisation has been denied to the periphery as the State in the name of subsidies has paid for development of infrastructure, technology and production support. The New liberalised regime, hopefully will give a level playing field to the periphery to develop.
The continued use of export subsidies and other forms of domestic support for big agribusiness in the US and the EU allows massive dumping of underpriced agri-food products in developing countries. At the same time access to markets in the South is secured through the Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) imposed by the IMF and World Bank which have forced small farmers and peasants away from food self-sufficiency and sustainable agriculture.
More than anything else this reveals the logic of agricultural restructuring
under the WTO. The systematic destruction of local capacity for food self-sufficiency
and sustainable agriculture through the consolidation of the power of agri-food
TNCs. The conversion of land use to non-traditional agri-exports creates
a paradoxical situation of increased dependency on TNCs for access to markets
and distribution, and inputs - including seed - while importing heavily
subsidised agricultural products that are the same as the traditional crops
originally displaced. (
The
WTO, the World Food System, and the Politics of Harmonised Destruction
by Gerard Greenfield, Education Programme Organiser (Indonesia),
IUF-A/P)
(Enclosure
33)
Agricultural labour households (ALH) are defined according to Rural Labour Enquiries as those that derive over 50 percent of their total household income from wage paid manual labour in agricultural activities. Overall, there was a significant increase in the proportion of such households over the two decades "73-74 to '93-94 in the 11 major states.
Less than half the rural labour households have land, and of those who do, only 13 percent own above one hectare. In states like punjab and Haryana where the green revolution has taken place and the areas most likely to go global, the proportion of rural labour owning land is as low as 6 and 12 percent respectively, as compared to so called backwards states of Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan and UP, where over 50% own land.( Sowmya Sivakumar, Proportion of agricultural labour households on the rise. Economic Times. 8/9/01 [C.H10.08092001ET] (Enclosure 34). This clearly shows that modernisation has resulted in alienation of land from the marginal rural labour households.
Consider the experience of West Bengal: The state's remarkable rise
in agricultural production is a common knowledge: total foodgrains production
has increased steadily since the beginning of the eighties and has continued
to do so in the nineties as well. But despite such bountiful agricultural
production, the agricultural labourers in the state are fighting a grim
battle for survival where wages are concerned. The Left Front claims this
achievement in agriculture as the result of successful implementation of
the land reform policy. Land reform might have acted as the catalyst for
higher agricultural production, but it has not succeeded in changing the
distribution pattern of such gains in favour of the rural poor. There has
surely been improvement in economic conditions of those who were fortunate
enough to share the vested land distributed in the countryside and also
those who were registered as bargadars. But then not every one was equally
fortunate -- there were many more who did not share the benefits of land
reforms directly. There economic conditions have, in fact, worsened further
or stagnated at best, with ever rising cereal prices. Tushar Mahanti, Agricultural
prosperity doesn't really reflect on labourers' life. Economic Times.
19/6/2000. [C.H10.19062000ET]
(Enclosure 35)
The average daily real wage for the State has increased by a marginal
6.5 % from Rs 13.78 in 1986-87 to 14.67 in 1991-92 - an increase of 89
paise over five years, not proportional to increased agricultural prosperity.
Non Agricultural rural employment increase by 63 per cent from 22.42 lakhs
in 1980 to 36.47 lakh in 1991. Share of agricultural labourers in the total
main workers in the State has declined from 25.2 percent in 1981 to 24.5
percent in 1991. Tushar Mahanti, Bengal farm labour gains little.
Economic Times. 29/07/2001 [C.H10.29072001ET] (Enclosure 36)
WAGE POLICY
The unorganized sector is made up of jobs in fields
in which the Minimum Wage Act is either not enforced at all or only marginally.
There are no unions in the unorganized sector and therefore no collective
bargaining.
|
|
|
|
1973
|
217.48
|
|
1978
|
249.46
|
|
1983
|
278.69
|
|
1988
|
296.29
|
|
1991
|
315.17
|
|
1994
|
344.72
|
| Source: MANPOWER PROFILES /IAMRI (Enclosure 37) | |
Ajith K. Ghosh's point to the slow growth of employment opportunities
for the rural workforce (NSS survey). Further the transfer of surplus labourers
from the agricultural sector is so small that agriculture remained the
principal reservoir of surplus labour. (for Legislation, Policy, Schemes
and Status of Agricultural Labour, New Agriculture Policy favouring exports
coming in and its effect on Labour and employment see: M
V Srinivasan, Neglect of the Agricultural Workforce)
(Enclosure 38)
Today, to what extent do labour legislation
protect the Indian agricultural labourers? Despite as many as 12 legislation
and 14 welfare schemes operating in the country (see box 1), the plight
of agricultural labourers is pitiful. The legislation, unless strongly
backed by workers organisations on issue basis, is never enforced. In fact,
Union Ministry of Labour while analysing the effectiveness of existing
Acts and welfare schemes in its Annual Report for the year 1999-2000 pointed
out that the existing Acts and welfare schemes have not adequately protected
the interest of agricultural workers. The ministry has envisaged alternative
strategies such as creating ?Welfare Fund' by enacting yet another ?comprehensive'
legislation for agricultural workers. Sadly, the preparation is continuing
but it is never tabled in Parliament. An Agricultural Workers Bill was
prepared in 1997 but kept in the files. The workers went on dharna in 1998
to pressurise the government to table the Bill. The then Cabinet Committee
just passed the bill and nothing has happened since then. In 1999 another
modified version of the bill was prepared and the story of negligence continues.
The basic framework of wage policy, developed in India, can be described as follows. The government sought to set a floor to the price of labour in the entire economy by statutorily fixing minimum wages for workers in the unorganized sectors. Subject to this floor, wage determination in unorganized sectors was left to market forces.
Statutory minimum wages have been largely ineffective in influencing wages in unorganized sectors. Irregular revisions, lack of proper indexation and weak enforcement rendered statutory minimum wages virtually irrelevant in practice. Besides, there was no well-defined basis for fixing minimum wages. Objectives such as prevention of exploitation are much too vague to be useful. It is not surprising that minimum wages varied widely across occupations in a state and across states for a given occupation. When norms vary so much, they cease to be norms. From Report of South Asia Multidisplinary Advisory Team (SAAT) of ILO, NEW DELHI (Enclosure 39)
There are only a few rural/agricultural worker's unions. Where they do exist, their party political priorities either limit their capacity to organise democratically at the grassroots level or reduce their will to cooperate beyond their own immediate area or national trade union centre. Due to the poor quality of organisation, national legislation for agricultural workers is weak or non-existent, minimum wages exist but are not enforced. ( South Asian Research & Development Initiative (SARDI) Report-June 2001)(Enclosure 37)
One of the Land and Freedom Report by IUF says that the traditional forms of trade union organisation developed in the formal sector simply do not work amongst workers who have no stable relationship with an employer. Thus, national legislation for agricultural workers is weak or non-existent, minimum wages exist but are not enforced, and wages remain well below the secondary or tertiary sectors. Land and Freedom Report - IUF(Enclosure 40)
Implication on the labour Movement :
firstly, that petty producers (non-wage earners) account for nearly
40% of the productive population; secondly, of all wage workers the industrial
proletariat accounts for less than 11%. This in effect implies that capitalist
development is yet to displace precapitalist forms of production and that
socialization of production that forms the basis for socialist revolution
is still a distant goal.
The significance of the numerical preponderance of the non-industrial
proletariat needs to be seriously considered. It is
obvious that there is a great responsibility on the workers of the
more concentrated sectors to organise themselves and
provide leadership to the large majority of unorganized workers. They
also have the responsibility of taking up the causes
of the marginal farmers and tribal people and winning them over to
the cause of socialist transformation. It also indicates
the low degree of socialization of production whose implications for
the political programme of the working class need
special consideration. Labour
Movement in India as Reflected in the Indian Labour Year Book 1997
by
C.N. Subramanian (Enclosure 41)
Farmers are being encouraged to produce paddy and maize to cater to the needs of the growing middle class, at the expense of basic food crops. As a result, the production of staple crops has declined and prices have gone up. While incomes have declined, costs have risen for agricultural labourers.
Another consequence of liberalization, is that the margins of profits
are going to markets, instead of the farmers, who are being marginalized.
Those who want to compete are being forced to use more fertilizers
to boost production, but this is causing soil erosion and salinization.
( Agricultural workers representative
: ?We continue to be marginalized?
Mr. Chennaiya, Secretary, Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Labourers Federation
(Enclosure 42)
The proposed Agricultural Workers Bill :
The half hearted effort, initiated by the Union Labour Ministry, and possibly out of electoral compulsions, presses for the creation os a Rs. 10,000 crore welfare fund for agricultural workers, to be financed through levies on agricultural products and processing of agro-food. The Bill also provides for fixing of working hours, rest period, overtime harvesting wages, and mechanisms for resolving disputes and registration of workers. Women workers are to be barred from working after sunset. The welfare fund is expected to be used as contingency fund, to provide minimal assistance in cases of death or injury, medical aid, old age pension, maternity benefits, aid for housing and education, and premium payment for group insurance. But plantations are expected to be excluded from its purview.
Land owners will continue to have virtually no obligations to workers. States of Kerala and Tripura have enacted laws for protecting agricultural workers long ago, in the form of the Agricultural Workers Act 1974 and Agricultural Workers Act 1986 respectively. ( Long Overdue Legislation by Anuradha Dutt.The Pioneer, New Delhi, 29/01/2000. [C.H10.29102000PIO]) (Enclosure 43)
Communities everywhere have developed knowledge and found ways for deriving
livelihoods from the bounties of nature's diversity. This diversity provides
us with the thousands of plants and animals needed for food, medicine and
shelter. ( Seed - The Symbol of Farmers' Rights by Navdanya.[R.K34b.605]