All 1 entries tagged Farm Bill

Colonization and the Farm Bills in India

Farmers from the state of Punjab and Haryana marching towards Delhi in demand for MSP provisions. (February 2023, Photo credit: Reuters)

Colonialization and the Farm Bills in India

Written by: Keerti Narayanan

During the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, thousands of farmers from the states of Punjab and Haryana marched towards the capital city of India – Delhi – in hopes that the government would recall its proposed farms bills. The proposed farm bills aimed at integrating the previously regulated wholesale mandis (agricultural markets) with the larger unregulated markets that are characterized by intense corporate involvement. Unsurprisingly, the facet of this deregulation which seemed to ruffle the most feathers was the indirect dismantling of the ‘Minimum Support Price’ (MSP). MSP refers to the price the government pays farmers to acquire certain agricultural products when the market prices are lower than the average cost of production. For years, this price served as a standard price floor. The withdrawal of it would transform the market into a completely liberal one – forcing all farmers to compete with market prices.

Due to heavy public resistance, the government withdrew the proposed bill a year after it was set forth. Yet, the farmers’ protests did not cease. In 2024, prior to the national election, the country witnessed a recurrence of the farmers’ protests. This time around, the protests did not address a particular act or bill but sought to hold the prime minister and cabinet ministers accountable for the promise of MSP provisions for a wider range of crops.

What is interesting to observe is the demographics of the farmers who were protesting during the 2020 and 2024 protests. The protests drew out mainly affluent farmers from the states of Punjab and Haryana. This brings to light two important questions. First and foremost, why were the majority of farmers protesting coming from these two states? Secondly, why did poor farmers not constitute a major part of the protesting class? The answers to these two questions, are in fact, inter-related and date back to the colonial period.

The general perception among politicians and academics alike is that colonial rule over north-western India was generally less exploitative than that in the southern and eastern parts of the country. For instance, the Zamindari system (a feudal system of rent collection devised by the colonial empire in India) was not as stringently followed in the states of Punjab and Haryana. This is not to say that colonial rule did not inhibit development in this region. It did, however, not completely break down the region’s social capital – an aspect of society that is often ignored when analyzing the unique case of Punjab. Some scholars argue this is evident in the strong ties held between people from this region and their adherence to traditional beliefs, values, and traditions.

Within the agricultural scene, the social capital within the states of Punjab and Haryana are manifested in the form of close ties between the commission agent (arhtia) and client farmers. These commission agents belong to the mercantile class and have had long-standing relationships with farmers. They are responsible for procuring produce, selling them to the government, and advancing the returns from sale to the farmers. What is unique about the relationship between the commission agents and farmers in the case of Punjab and Haryana is that they are closely intertwined in the local government. Further, they also act as lenders of last resort to farmers at times of uncertainty. These loans often take on a more flexible repayment schedule – given the close ties within the community. Sturdy community associations in the region shield farmers from the exploitation of middlemen and loan sharks that is frequently observed in other parts of the country.

The relatively strong social ties between commission agents and farmers in Punjab and Haryana materialized themselves in the form of increased agricultural productivity during the Green Revolution. Between the years 1950 and 1984, the government of India was set on increasing the nation’s food production. Emphasis was placed on the use of High Yielding Variety (HYV) seeds to increase productivity. Farmers were encouraged to grow paddy and wheat (the key staple crops of the country) so as to improve food security in the nation. Surprisingly, during the time, Punjab and Haryana showed to be the most successful in increasing crop yield. These two states witnessed tremendous growth in productivity. Farmers who had the initial land, capital to invest in HYV seeds, and social ties with the arhtia class were able to generate great affluence from wheat and paddy production while the remaining farmers were forced to grow non-perishable goods (such as potatoes and tomatoes) – mainly for self-consumption. Now, since the arhtias generally belonged to opulent classes, they had closer ties to other affluent classes i.e., landowners. Therefore, the services of arhtias were more easily accessible to landowners than peasant farmers – thereby, widening the already existing economic and social gap between the two groups that initially arose from the Zamindari system. This is especially concerning given that a large proportion of the population are landless laborers. Meanwhile, the small segment of affluent producers in the state are known to be the richest in the country.

After the Green Revolution, to shield poor farmers from the adversity associated with farming, the government set up the MSP mechanism. While this scheme is intended to act as a safety net for poor farmers, it has an inherent flaw. The MSP mechanism favors only those with large amounts of surplus while pushing the poor who produce for self-consumption to the sidelines. Not to mention, the government only sets a price floor (MSP) for some crops – most of which are non-perishable. What this does is commodify the market for non-perishable agricultural products such as wheat, paddy, and oilseed while the production and sale of perishable products continue to display characteristics of a subsistence economy.

Today, the Indian agricultural scene is characterized by the simultaneous existence of two groups. The first group consists of affluent farmers who own large areas of land and grow non-perishable goods for sale either to corporate agri-businesses or the government (through the MSP scheme). A disproportionate share of this group resides in the states of Punjab and Haryana. The second group is comprised of poor farmers who own little to no land. They cannot afford the necessities – such as water and fertilizers – to grow crops such as paddy. They are forced to grow perishable products – most of which are consumed by their own household. The remaining small amounts of surplus are often bought by middlemen at extremely low prices. While this withdraws the burden of storage from the farmers, it pushes them towards an endless cycle of subordination to middlemen – thereby, robbing them of their capability to escape poverty.

All this leads us to question whether the proposed farm bills and the withdrawal of MSP are actually just. Are the farmers’ protests simply a fight by the wealthy to retain the privileges that were meant to serve the less affluent farmers? Would government funds spent on the MSP scheme be more efficient elsewhere? While the answers to these questions might not be as clear cut as academics would hope, a relevant approach to ensure overall development in a socio-culturally complex post-colonial state like India is to revisit and, in some cases, rebuild the social infrastructure that existed prior to colonialisation, before imposing market-commodification and liberal policies.

Author Bio

Keerti Narayanan is a Masters student of International Development at the University of Warwick. She is primarily interested in researching the impact of global financial trends on ground-level relationships within the Indian subcontinent. Her current research focuses on the role of the International Finance Corporation in providing affordable housing to individuals in the developing world.

Mouzayian Khalil : 03 Jul 2024 18:02 |  Tags: Agricultural Policy Farm Bill India Protests |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem