The
Green Revolution spanning the period from 1967-68 to 1977-78 changed
India from a starving nation to one of the world's leading agricultural
nation.
A
report by Saby Ganguly
Is this report a gross lie, as Laura Leypoldt says? See debate
The
world's worst recorded food disaster happened in 1943 in British-ruled
India. Known as the Bengal Famine, an estimated four million
people died of hunger that year alone in eastern
India (that included today's Bangladesh). The initial theory put forward
to 'explain' that catastrophe was that there as an acute shortfall
in food production in the area. However, Indian economist Amartya
Sen (recipient of the Nobel Prize for Economics, 1998) has established
that while food shortage was a contributor to the problem, a more
potent factor was the result of hysteria related to World War II which
made food supply a low priority for the British rulers. The hysteria
was further exploited by Indian traders who hoarded food in order
to sell at higher prices.
Nevertheless,
when the British left India four years later in 1947, India continued
to be haunted by memories of the Bengal Famine. It was therefore natural
that food security was a paramount item on free India's agenda. This
awareness led, on one hand, to the Green Revolution in India
and, on the other, legislative measures to ensure that businessmen
would never again be able to hoard food for reasons of profit.
However, the
term "Green Revolution" is applied to the period from 1967
to 1978. Between 1947 and 1967, efforts at achieving food self-sufficiency
were not entirely successful. Efforts until 1967 largely concentrated
on expanding the farming areas. But starvation deaths were still being
reported in the newspapers. In a perfect case of Malthusian economics,
population was growing at a much faster rate than food production.
This called for drastic action to increase yield. The action came
in the form of the Green Revolution.
The term "Green
Revolution" is a general one that is applied to successful agricultural
experiments in many Third World countries. It is NOT specific to India.
But it was most successful in India.
As
mentioned above, the area of land under cultivation was being increased
right from 1947. But this was not enough in meeting with rising demand.
Other methods were required. Yet, the expansion of cultivable land
also had to continue. So, the Green Revolution continued with this
quantitative expansion of farmlands. However, this is NOT the most
striking feature of the Revolution.
Double-cropping
existing farmland
Double-cropping
was a primary feature of the Green Revolution. Instead of one crop
season per year, the decision was made to have two crop seasons per
year. The one-season-per-year practice was based on the fact that
there is only natural monsoon per year. This was correct. So, there
had to be two "monsoons" per year. One would be the natural
monsoon and the other an artificial 'monsoon.'
The
artificial monsoon came in the form of huge irrigation facilities.
Dams were built to arrest large volumes of natural monsoon water which
were earlier being wasted. Simple irrigation techniques were also
adopted.
Using
seeds with superior genetics
This
was the scientific aspect of the Green Revolution. The Indian
Council for Agricultural Research (which was established by the
British in 1929 but was not known to have done any significant research)
was re-organized in 1965 and then again in 1973. It developed new
strains of high yield value (HYV) seeds, mainly wheat and rice but
also millet and corn. The most noteworthy HYV seed was the K68 variety
for wheat. The credit for developing this strain goes to Dr. M.P.
Singh who is also regarded as the hero of India's Green revolution.
The
Green Revolution resulted in a record grain output of 131 million
tons in 1978-79. This established India as one of the world's
biggest agricultural producers. No other country in the world
which attempted the Green Revolution recorded such level of
success. India also became an exporter of food grains around
that time.
(2)
Yield
per unit of farmland improved by more than 30 per cent between
1947 (when India gained political independence) and 1979 when
the Green Revolution was considered to have delivered its goods.
(3)
The
crop area under HYV varieties grew from seven per cent to 22
per cent of the total cultivated area during the 10 years of
the Green Revolution. More than 70 per cent of the wheat crop
area, 35 per cent of the rice crop area and 20 per cent of the
millet and corn crop area, used the HYV seeds.
Crop
areas under high-yield varieties needed more water, more fertilizer,
more pesticides, fungicides and certain other chemicals. This
spurred the growth of the local manufacturing sector. Such industrial
growth created new jobs and contributed to the country's GDP.
(2)
The
increase in irrigation created need for new dams to harness
monsoon water. The water stored was used to create hydro-electric
power. This in turn boosted industrial growth, created jobs
and improved the quality of life of the people in villages.
(3)
India
paid back all loans it had taken from the World Bank and its
affiliates for the purpose of the Green Revolution. This improved
India's creditworthiness in the eyes of the lending agencies.
(4)
Some
developed countries, especially Canada, which were facing a
shortage in agricultural labour, were so impressed by the results
of India's Green Revolution that they asked the Indian government
to supply them with farmers experienced in the methods of the
Green Revolution. Many farmers from Punjab
and Haryana states in
northern India were thus sent to Canada where they settled (That's
why Canada today has many Punjabi-speaking citizens of Indian
origin). These people remitted part of their incomes to their
relatives in India. This not only helped the relatives but also
added, albeit modestly, to India's foreign exchange earnings.
The
Green Revolution created plenty of jobs not only for agricultural
workers but also industrial workers by the creation of lateral facilities
such as factories and hydro-electric power stations as explained above.
India
transformed itself from a starving nation to an exporter of
food. This earned admiration for India in the comity of
nations, especially in the Third World.
(2)
The
Green Revolution was one factor that made Mrs.
Indira Gandhi (1917-84) and her party, the Indian
National Congress, a very powerful political force in India
(it would however be wrong to say that it was the only reason).
Even
today, India's agricultural output sometimes falls short of
demand. The Green Revolution, howsoever impressive, has thus
NOT succeeded in making India totally and permanently self-sufficient
in food. In 1979 and 1987, India faced severe drought conditions
due to poor monsoon; this raised questions about the whether
the Green Revolution was really a long-term achievement. In
1998, India had to import onions. Last year, India imported
sugar.
However,
in today's globalised economic scenario, 100 per cent self-sufficiency
is not considered as vital a target as it was when the world
political climate was more dangerous due to the Cold War.
(2)
India
has failed to extend the concept of high-yield value seeds to
all crops or all regions. In terms of crops, it remain largely
confined to foodgrains only, not to all kinds of agricultural
produce. In regional terms, only Punjab
and Haryana states showed
the best results of the Green Revolution. The eastern plains
of the River Ganges in West
Bengal state also showed reasonably good results. But results
were less impressive in other parts of India.
(3)
Nothing
like the Bengal Famine can happen in India again. But it is
disturbing to note that even today, there are places like Kalahandi
(in India's eastern state of Orissa) where famine-like conditions
have been existing for many years and where some starvation
deaths have also been reported. Of course, this is due to reasons
other than availability of food in India, but the very fact
that some people are still starving in India (whatever the reason
may be), brings into question whether the Green Revolution has
failed in its overall social objectives though it has been a
resounding success in terms of agricultural production.
(4)
The Green Revolution
cannot therefore be considered to be a 100 percent success.
