16 Green Revolution I

Dr.Shoma Lahiri

Introduction

During 1960s, India experienced rapid technological changes in its agricultural practices which had a positive impact on its food production. This change initiated through the infusion of technology and high yielding varieties of seeds into Indian agriculture marked a transition from ‘subsistence based farming at a low level of technological development to expensive, commercial farming with the help of modern technology’. This New Agricultural Strategy which dominated the Government agricultural policy in the decade of the 1960s had far reaching social impact, and came to be known as the Green Revolution. Few important social and technological innovations characterized the Green Revolution namely, the extensive use of farm machinery which would act as a labour saving device, the development and intensive use of hybrid, high-yielding varieties of food grains, especially wheat and rice, consolidation of land, private tubewell irrigation, mechanization of agriculture and the use of high doses of fertilizer and pesticides. ‘New sources of energy, electricity and the internal combustion engine, which replaced bullock power, and the financial infrastructure that enabled farmers to buy the new equipment–tractors, tubewells, and threshers–represented a fundamental change’1 in the Indian countryside. But apart from these innovations, the Green Revolution as a package (ideology and programme) represented something more. According to Dhanagare (1987) ‘it would be erroneous to equate the Green Revolution with HYVP alone. It has to be understood as ‘a broader ideology of rural transformation’. Programmes such as HYVP, Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) and others could be seen as specific institutionalised measures for translating the green revolution ideology into practice.

Context

The adoption of technological interventions in agriculture in the form of the Green revolution had a certain historical context, both in India as well as the world was concerned. In fact, an understanding and appreciation of the Green Revolution can be gathered when we situate the intervention in the wider context of the issue of food security in India.

There was an international context to the Green Revolution as well. It was a technological response to a world-wide food shortage which became threatening in the period after World War II. In the 20th century, as the Empire gradually receded from different parts of the world and nation states emerged in its place as new forms of political organization, they had to confront the problem of a gradually aggravating food shortage on the one hand and the high rates of population growth on the other. The colonial powers had done little to improve the food production systems in these countries which were once part of their Empire. Now, the new nation-states were confronted with the 1 A. Stanley Freed, S.Ruth Freed Green Revolution : Agricultural and Social Change in a North Indian Village, Anthropological Papers of American Museum of Natural History No. 85 problem of feeding the hungry millions. In an almost parallel manner, massive public investments in modern scientific research in agriculture took place, and over a period of time led to dramatic breakthroughs in agricultural yields in industrial countries of the West. An example of the growth of wheat in England would provide us an idea of the above. According to an estimate while it took nearly 1000 years for the yields in wheat to increase from 0.5 to 2 metric tons per hectare, it took a mere 40 years for the yield to climb from 2 to 6 metric tons per hectare. “Modern plant breeding, improved agronomy and the development of inorganic fertilizers and modern pesticides fueled these advances. Most industrial countries achieved sustained food surpluses by the second half of the 20th century, and eliminated the threat of starvation.” (Hazell: 2002). These advancements reached developed countries rather slowly which resulted in widespread hunger and malnutrition in Asia by the mid-1960s. The developing countries like India increasingly became dependent on food aid from rich countries during this time.

A report of the U.S. President’s Science Advisory Committee in 1967 concluded that “the scale, severity and duration of the world food problem are so great that a massive, long-range, innovative effort unprecedented in human history will be required to master it.” In response, the Rockefeller and Ford foundations took the initiative in establishing an international agricultural research system to help transfer and adapt scientific advances to the conditions in developing countries. The initial investments were in research on rice and wheat, two of the most important food crops for developing countries. The breeding of improved varieties, combined with the expanded use of fertilizers, other chemical inputs, and irrigation, led to dramatic yield increases in Asia and Latin America, beginning in the late 1960s. In 1968, United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Administrator William S. Gaud coined the term “Green Revolution” to describe this phenomenal growth in agricultural production. Thus, the Green Revolution came as a relief for the food-deficient underdeveloped nations. It went on to transform farming practice in many regions of the tropics and the sub-tropics where the principal food crops were wheat, rice and maize.

Since, the colonial times Indian agriculture had shown many ups and downs, although it had the potential to do well. Indian agriculture in the pre-World War II period was not too productive. Yields of the most principal crops showed a decline. During this period, the peasants also shifted their crops to earn larger harvests and better income. Thus in Bengal change in relative prices induced shifts from paddy to jute and in Punjab from wheat to cotton and in Saurashtra from bajra and cotton to groundnut. Further, a large part of the country’s gross cropped area was under food crops and dependent on rain- fed agriculture, making it vulnerable to the vagaries of the monsoon. Irrigation was available only in limited areas. Though in the early 1950s, there was an increase in production due to an improvement in practices of planning, increase in the net sown area and scientific practices of statistical estimation (Shah 1984), this decelerated gradually. In the following decade itself, India experienced two severe droughts in the mid-60s in quick succession. Agriculture recorded negative growth and the country faced a severe food shortage leading India to import millions of tons of food grains (mainly wheat) from America during the next two years under the PL 480 program. In fact, a famine situation was averted in India during the 60s because of these food imports.PL 480 (Public Law 480) or Food for Peace was a humanitarian aid program which was started during the time of President Dwight D. Eisenhower and carried on by the subsequent Presidents of United States, John F Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. The Department of State and Agriculture permitted the President to authorize the shipment of surplus commodities to “friendly” nations, either on concessional or grant terms. It also allowed the federal government to donate stocks to religious and voluntary organizations for use in their overseas humanitarian programs. Prior to this, USA had extended aid to nations during the time of natural disasters or war but no permanent framework existed. PL 480 established a broad framework of the foreign food aid program of the United States, though as a foreign policy program its implications remained sensitive for other nations. Though the ostensive goal of the PL 480 program, according to Lyndon Johnson, was ‘a “war on hunger,” designed to accelerate agricultural production, improve nutrition, eradicate disease, and curb population growth’, he also attempted to tie up food aid agreements on the recipient nation’s ability to implement necessary agricultural reforms. Johnson used PL–480 agreements as leverage in securing support for U.S. foreign policy goals, even placing critical famine aid to India on a limited basis, until he received assurance that the Indian Government would implement agricultural reforms and temper criticism of U.S. policy regarding Vietnam.Source : https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/pl-480

Agriculture as a sector had been relatively neglected by the Indian Government in its initial Five Year Plans. But droughts, food shortages, decline in agricultural productivity etc. made the government realize the importance of institutional support and innovation, and the development of an agricultural policy for a sector whose total share of the country’s GDP in the decade of 1950s was about 55%2. The significance of agriculture in India arose also from the fact that its development was an essential condition for the development of the national economy. Indian planners realized this during the Second and Third Five Year Plan periods when failure of the agricultural sector spelled disaster to the entire planning process. Any positive or negative change in the agricultural sector has a multiplier effect on the entire economy. Therefore, the Government devised a ‘new agricultural strategy’ in order to make the country self-sufficient in food production within the shortest possible time. The Green Revolution was thought to be a possible alternative which would take the country towards self-sufficiency in food and meet the hunger needs of the people. Increased agricultural production would have several effects in terms of availability of more food in the country and a decrease in the dependence on food imports. It would also mean a release of scarce foreign exchange resources for other sections of the economy.What was done as part of the Green Revolution?2 Ruddar Dutt and Sundaram pp 472

As is evident to you from what you have heard so far, the Green Revolution was made possible due to scientific and technological inputs that were brought into agriculture initially under controlled conditions, and later popularized in different parts of the world, other than their areas of origin.

In hot tropical regions, one of the great barriers to increased grain production is that when traditional plants are heavily fertilized, they shoot up to an unnatural height and then collapse. If they are grown closely enough together to prevent this, one plant shades the other and the yield is reduced. To achieve higher yields for rice and wheat, scientists developed plants that were more responsive to plant nutrients and those had shorter, stiffer straw to support the weight of heavier heads of grain. They also needed to develop varieties that could mature quicker and grow at any time of the year, thereby permitting farmers to grow more crops each year on the same land. This would provide some solution to the increasing problem of food security. New varieties also required to be developed in such a way that they would be resistant to major pests and diseases, which flourish under intensive farming conditions. Another consideration was also to retain desirable cooking and consumption traits. During plant development experiments in Mexico after tests involving 40,000 crossbreeds of plant, it was found that if a short stemmed grain were thickly sown at the right depth and adequately irrigated, it could take massive doses of fertilizer without becoming lanky and give spectacularly high yields. Eventually strains were produced with inbred resistance to some of the worst pests.

Borrowing from rice-breeding work undertaken in China, Japan, and Taiwan, the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines developed semi-dwarf varieties that met most of these requirements. Similar achievements were made for wheat after Norman Borlaug (later awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his work) crossed Japanese semi-dwarf varieties with Mexican wheat at what is now known as the International Center for Maize and Wheat Improvement (CIMMYT) in Mexico. Although the term Green Revolution originally described developments for rice and wheat, high-yielding varieties (HYVs) have since been developed for other major food crops important to developing countries, including sorghum, millet, maize, cassava, and beans.

Norman E. Borlaug (1914-2009) has been hailed as one of the most renowned plant breeders in history. Popularly known as the Father of the Green Revolution he went on to receive the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970 ‘in recognition for his contribution to world peace through increasing food supply’. Borlaug developed semi-dwarf, high-yield, disease-resistant wheat varieties and even convinced politicians in countries like Mexico, India and Pakistan to introduce high-yielding variety (HYV) along with modern agricultural production techniques. As a result of such interventions Mexico not only became an exporter of wheat, production also doubled in countries like India and Pakistan.

Borlaug introduced several new innovations. Firstly, he and his colleagues laboriously crossbred many thousands varieties of wheat to produce plants that would be disease and pest resistant. Secondly, he crafted new varieties of wheat which could hold more grain. The yields were boosted. Thirdly he also devised the new technique of ‘shuttle breeding’ growing two successive plantings each year instead of the usual one crop in different altitudes and climates. In the face of opposition from prevailing agricultural orthodoxy, Borlaug persisted. This gave results as it not only added to production and allowed the plants to get used to different climatic conditions of the region.

Throughout his years of research, Borlaug’s programs often faced opposition by people who consider genetic crossbreeding to be unnatural or to have negative effects. Environmentalists have criticized Borlaug’s work for bringing large-scale monoculture, input-intensive farming techniques to countries that had previously relied on subsistence farming. But at the same time his techniques found enormous support and were even extended to many African nations like Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea,Mali, Malawi, Mozambique, Nigeria, Uganda, Tanzania etc.

Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug

http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2012/01/18/norman-borlaug-the-genius-behind-the-green-revolution/

Extent /Spread of the Green Revolution

As a result of the new agricultural strategy, cropped area under improved seeds has gone up from about 1.5 million hectares during 1970-71 to nearly 75 million hectares in 1995 -96, according to an estimate made by Dutt and Sundharam (2007: 486). The new varieties are of short term duration and consequently, instead of growing one crop or two crops, sometimes even three crops are grown. The cultivation of new Mexican varieties of wheat like Lerma Rojo, Sonara -64, Kalyan, P.V. 18 met with unprecedented enthusiasm amongst farmers in Punjab, Haryana, Delhi, Rajasthan and Western U.P. A situation even developed in which the demand for seeds by the farmers exceeded the supply. But in the case of rice, the new varieties like T.N. 1, IR-8, Tinen-3 and ADT- 17 which were tried and found successful on a laboratory scale could not be successfully applied on the field. Some breakthrough however has been achieved in rice growing areas by developing better and more acceptable varieties like IR-8. The introduction of these new high yielding varieties (HYVs) of wheat, rice and maize became known as the Green Revolution. In fact, in India it was due to the initiative of Dr. M.S. Swaminathan, agricultural scientist, that the Green Revolution was made possible.

Internationally, the area of its most successful application has been mainly in the tropical wetlands of “less developed” or “newly industrializing” countries such as India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and China. According to Fitzerald and Moore, ‘the HYVs were not the product of genetic engineering; they were the result of traditional plant breeding methods, in which hybrids are produced by cross pollinating unrelated parents. Where they were properly introduced, HYVs resulted in increased crop production and reduced dependency on food imports. ’ (pp 2) A full-fledged system of international agricultural research centers known as the Future Harvest Centers now works on many aspects of developing-country agriculture. Today they are part of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research.

M. S Swaminathan (1925- ) is an internationally renowned Indian geneticist, known for his leading role in the Green Revolution of the decade of the 60s. Moved by the Bengal famine of 1943 in which about 3 million perished, Swaminathan went on to study agricultural science and became very influential for his work. He is specifically known developing high yielding varieties of wheat and rice seedlings which would enable farmers in India to produce more from their fields. He has always believed in the possibility of science and technology to rid the world of hunger and poverty, therefore he advocates “evergreen revolution” which entails practicing environmentally sustainable agriculture, securing sustainable food security and the preservation of biodiversity. This he believes will take India forward towards sustainable development. Dr. Swaminathan is also known to support the use of biotechnology in agriculture in an effort to alleviate widespread hunger. Dr. Swaminathan today runs the M.S Swaminathan Research Foundation which claims to ‘develop and promote strategies for economic growth that directly target increased employment of poor women in rural areas. Its methods maximize the use of science and technology for equitable and sustainable social development and environmental stability.’

Despite several controversies and accusations of transferring the genetic wealth of the nation to IRRI, and replacing a way of life Dr. Swaminathan has been hailed for his work in agricultural science and is the winner of several national and international awards and prizes like the Padma Vibhusan (1989), the World Food Prize (1987), the Indira Gandhi Prize for Peace, Disarmament and Development (2000) to name a few.

Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._S._Swaminathan#Notable_mentions

See the picture below

The achievements of the Green Revolution were numerous, some of which have been elaborated below:

1.Increase in food production: Due to their ability to respond with higher yields to increasing application of fertilizer and their ability to produce two, sometimes even three, crops a year, HYV seeds have brought real and substantial increases in crop production. Production of rice and wheat in developing countries increased 75% between 1965 and 1980, with only a 20% increase in the area planted to these crops. (Fitzerald- Moore and Barai: ) According to an estimate provided, in Indonesia, rice yield in 1960 was 1.3 tons per hectare (t/ha) . By 1994, it had risen to 4.3 t/ha. In India, production more than doubled between 1960 and 1993. During this period, total annual grain production rose from 77 metric tons to 201.5 metric tons. Increase in the acreage was also responsible for increase in production. By the mid-1980s, approximately 50% of the wheat and nearly 60% of the rice area of developing countries were sown to HYV strains: In India, with less than 100 ha of land sown to HYVs in 1965, over 50 million hectares had been converted by 1980; in Punjab the proportion of wheat and rice under HYVs was, respectively, 96% and 95% in 1978-79. The introduction of HYVs has spread rapidly. In 1983, China sowed 95% of its rice area and Latin America sowed 82% of its wheat area to high yielding varieties. Presently, the HYV IR36 rice plant, developed by the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), is planted on about 11 million hectares worldwide, making it the most widely grown variety of any crop.

2.Food Security: The benefits of HYV seeds have been significant. These seeds have decreased the reliance of developing countries on food grain imports. Though population increases in these countries have delayed and to some extent neutralized the benefits but it is still considered to be worth the effort. In fact the single largest benefit said to be accruing from Green Revolution has been that these “miracle seeds” have probably averted famine and starvation of millions of human beings. As yields of rice and wheat doubled and profitability increased farmers increased the areas under rice and wheat at the expense of other crops. These changes more than doubled cereal production in Asia between 1970 and 1995, while population increased by 60 percent. According to an estimate (Hazell, 2002) instead of widespread famine, cereal and calorie availability per person increased by nearly 30 percent, and wheat and rice became cheaper.

3.Boost to agricultural production and employment: According to Dutt and Sundharam (2007), the successful adoption of the new agricultural technology has led to a continuous expansion of the area under crops, increase in total production and rise in agricultural productivity. Impressive results have been achieved in wheat, rice, maize, potatoes etc. The adoption of new technology has also given a boost to agricultural employment. It has led to diverse job opportunities created by multiple cropping and shift towards hired workers, though at the same time there has been a displacement of agricultural labour by the extensive use of agricultural machinery.

4. Modernisation of Agriculture: One of the most important, though an indirect effect of the new agricultural policy and the Green Revolution has been to hasten the process of modernisation of agriculture. As more and more farmers take to the new technology and modern capital equipment, there would be a shift from traditional subsistence agriculture to modern commercial agriculture. Modernisation, in this view, appears to be synonymous with use by the farmer of modern scientific inputs and modern capital equipment in agriculture. But this has been of a limited nature because of the differences in the size of the farms and the capacity of the small farmers to utilise technology to boost their productivity.

5.Rise in agricultural wages: Agricultural wage rates reflected a rise after the Green Revolution, as evidence from villages in Punjab and Haryana show. James W. Gough (1971) has shown in a paper a district wise distribution of the average wage rates and found that during this period the wage structure in Punjab and Haryana region was altered. This came about after a long period of zero growth. It is generally held that the Green Revolution was responsible for improving the conditions of the rural poor in India and wages paid are taken as indicators for such improvement. But without an estimate of the number of days of work, such real rise in wages does not say much about the economic condition of a group. Thus Gough says that though there was rise in the growth rates of production, probably much more compared to the rates of real wages, the labourer may have actually received a small share of the gains, leaving him poor in the long run.

6.Benefits accruing to the farmers from the introduction of new technology and reduction of poverty: It is said that the Green Revolution by providing increasing returns from land was responsible for raising farmer’s incomes which led to an overall reduction of poverty. With greater money to spend and new needs for farm inputs, there was a general increase in the demand for goods and services. This stimulated the rural non-farm economy and generated new income and employment. According to an estimate, real per capita incomes almost doubled in Asia between 1970 and 1995, and poverty declined from nearly three out of every five Asians in 1975 to less than one in three by 1995.The absolute number of poor people fell from 1.15 billion in 1975 to 825 million in 1995 despite a 60 percent increase in population. In India, the percentage of the rural population living below the poverty line fluctuated between 50 and 65 percent before the mid-1960s but then declined steadily to about one-third of the rural population by 1993 (Hazell, 2002). The Green Revolution is also said to have contributed to better nutrition by raising incomes and reducing prices, which permitted people to consume more calories and a more diversified diet. Big increases occurred in per capita consumption of vegetable oils, fruits, vegetables, and livestock products in Asia. Studies have apparently shown that much of this steady decline in poverty is attributable to agricultural growth and associated decline in food prices.

7.Strengthening of backward and forward linkages: The new technology introduced by the Green Revolution and the consequent modernization of agriculture strengthened the linkages between agriculture and industry. Even under traditional agriculture the forward linkage of agriculture with industry, was always very strong since agriculture supplied many of the inputs of industry but backward linkage of agriculture to industry, that is, the former using the finished products of the latter was weak. However, agricultural modernization has created a larger demand for inputs produced and supplied by industries to agriculture and thus the backward linkage has also become quite strong. In fact the introduction of HYVs to agriculture has led to an expansion of specific industries like that of fertilizer, agricultural machinery and so on.

8.Rise in agricultural surplus and increasing opportunities for investment: According to B. Sen (1970), the real significance of the Green Revolution lies in the sizeable agricultural surplus that it created which opened up several possibilities. Apart from meeting the food requirement of the growing urban (and also to some extent rural) population, without requiring any policy intervention as such, there was also another fact. The increased income of the farmers could be spent partly on consumption goods and partly on agricultural inputs that are produced in the non-farm sector of the economy. This led to an expansion of the domestic market and larger sales and income for the non-farm industries. But above all the presence of an agricultural surplus represented something more than relief, it represents potential investible capital, all or at least a part of which can be utilised for investment in any sector of the economy. Though this is not automatic, there is no guarantee that all or part of the surplus will automatically flow into savings and thence into investment. Herein lies the opportunity afforded by the green revolution: to tap part of this investible capital for generating a faster rate of growth in the non-agricultural sector through appropriate policy measures.

In Brief

This module has tried to show that the Green Revolution represented a new initiative of far-reaching implications in Indian agriculture. It was built upon a unique combination of factors like high yielding variety seeds, fertilizer, irrigation practices. Together, it represented a package which changed the face of agriculture in developing countries. In India, it brought about significant and far reaching changes in practices of farming, consumption, agricultural productivity, food security and even in thinking about agriculture as a whole. Its achievements were manifold some of which we have highlighted. Alongside, it had several negative consequences too on soil, water and the ecology at large. We will discuss some of these issues in the next module. However, you must have realized by now that, its negative effects notwithstanding, governments and officials in developing nations still continue to repose faith on the possibilities of a second Green Revolution to increase agricultural productivity further.

Since we are students of sociology, and not agricultural sciences or plant genetics, our interest is more in the ways in which Green Revolution impacted on the agrarian structure in the countryside. We will try to delineate groups and classes which might have disproportionately benefitted from the Green Revolution. We will also talk about if Green Revolution created conditions for the downward mobility of certain social groups in the villages. In a way, we will try to tell you about the interface between the Green Revolution and agrarian stratification in the next module.

Bibliography and References:

Dhanagare D. N. 1987. Green Revolution and Social Inequalities in Rural India. Economic and Political Weekly Vol XXII Nos. 19, 20 and 21. Annual Number.
Dutt Ruddar and K.P.M Sundharam 2007. Indian Economy. 56th Revised Two Colour Edition. S. Chand. Delhi
Fitzgerald-Moore P and B. J Parai. The Green Revolution http://people.ucalgary.ca/~pfitzger/green.pdf
Gough James W. 1971. Agricultural Wages in Punjab and Haryana: A Note, Economic and Political Weekly Vol VI, No. 13. March 27, pp A19- A20.
Hazell Peter B. R 2002. Green Revolution: Curse or Blessing? International Food Policy Research Institute. Washington. USA
Sen B. 1970. Opportunities in the Green Revolution Economic and Political Weekly Vol 5, No.13, March 28, pp A33-A40.
Shah C. H. 1984. Development Perspective of Indian Agriculture: A Hopeful View in Economic and Political Weekly Vol XIX No. 30 July 28. pp 1218-1223.
Shiva, Vandana. 1991. Green Revolution in the Punjab. The Ecologist, Vol. 21, No. 2,. March-April 1991

Weblinks:

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/pl-480
http://livingheritage.org/green-revolution.htm
http://policydialogue.org/files/events/Fujita_green_rev_in_india.pdf
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/24190/wolf-ladejinsky/ironies-of-indias-green-revolution
http://www.wdm.org.uk/food-and-hunger/cost-india%E2%80%99s-green-revolution
http://people.ucalgary.ca/~pfitzger/green.pdf
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027&context=envstudtheses
Http://www.mexconnect.com/articles/3393-did-you-know-the-green-revolution-began-in-mexico
http://www.resilience.org/stories/2007-01-29/how-much-did-green-revolution-matter-or-can-we-feed-world-without-industrial-agri http://hnrs353.wordpress.com/case-studies-exploring-human-development-and-social-changes-caused-by-the-green-revolution/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._S._Swaminathan#Notable_mentions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Swaminathan_Research_Foundation