Scribd
Upload
308 views3 pages

The Green Revolution in India

The document discusses the impacts of the Green Revolution in India, which was implemented in the 1960s to increase agricultural production. While it succeeded in boosting overall crop yields, it had negative consequences for rural livelihoods. The revolution prioritized scale and capital investment over resource equity, disadvantaging small farmers. It promoted monoculture and reliance on purchased inputs. Over time, crop diversity declined and soil health deteriorated. The profits benefited large landowners and regions with irrigation infrastructure, exacerbating rural inequality.

Uploaded by

Santosh Kumar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
308 views3 pages

The Green Revolution in India

The document discusses the impacts of the Green Revolution in India, which was implemented in the 1960s to increase agricultural production. While it succeeded in boosting overall crop yields, it had negative consequences for rural livelihoods. The revolution prioritized scale and capital investment over resource equity, disadvantaging small farmers. It promoted monoculture and reliance on purchased inputs. Over time, crop diversity declined and soil health deteriorated. The profits benefited large landowners and regions with irrigation infrastructure, exacerbating rural inequality.

Uploaded by

Santosh Kumar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

The Green Revolution in 

India.
While the Green Revolution in India may have been successful in
increasing agricultural production at the aggregate level, it had
many negative consequences on rural livelihoods. Discuss.

This essay will look at how the Green Revolution in India,


implemented in the 1960’s  impacted both the agricultural
production at the aggregate (collective) level and the rural
livelihoods of labourers and peasants. The focus will be on the
intention of the Green Revolution and where this succeeded and
where it failed. This will include looking at class distinction, the
land lords and regions which profited and the impact it has had
on nutrition and the environment. Within the scope of this essay I
will refer to the capitalistic nature of the movement and how this
directly affects India as a whole for the future. I will draw on the
works and essays from the 1960s to the present day to support the
discussion.

The Green Revolution.

In 1961, a report made by the Ford Foundation entitled “India’s


Food Crisis” stressed the need to “transform traditional
agriculture” (Patnaik,2000:81) and  to produce more food. The
intention was to be met through ‘scale-neutral’ technology,that is
technology and agriculture methods which all farmers would
benefit by economically and self-sufficiently. Whilst this held true
for certain members of Indian society it had detrimental results
for those in the rural community which continues to make up a
large percentage of the population. When the proposal was made
and implemented there was no reference made to ‘resource-
neutrality’, in other words how the distribution of essential access
to irrigation, technology and equity was displaced throughout the
country which was of fundamental importance to the livelihoods
of peasant farmers.
The Green Revolution gained its name as an alternative to the Red
Revolution in Asia; devised by Dr. Norman E Borlaug, an
American scientist who conducted research in Mexico and
developed high yield varieties (HYV) of wheat. Over only two
decades, this project enabled Mexico as a collective to export
more than half of its wheat production (previously Mexico had
been importing the majority of their wheat). The success of this
project and the money which was made led to the Rockefeller
Foundation and Ford Foundation funding more research into
HYV of seeds, which in turn led to further implementation in
India. Along with the HYV of seeds came the introduction of
monoculture agriculture which requires a high use of fertilisers
and pesticides as only one crop leaves the land open to more
weeds. A weaker soil and a lack of biodiversity ensued and more
problems arose.

The introduction of wheat as the initial mono crop saw, the once
30,000 variety diminish to a mere 10,  grown primarily the
Punjab region of North India. The risks for mono agriculture are
vast,  Bernstein states, “A small producer who borrows
extensively to meet the cash crops of HYV cultivation runs the
risk of becoming greatly indebted” (Bernstein,1995:53) whilst
those with more resources, either of economic or natural still run
a risk but are in a far better position to deal with those risks.

There were two phases to the Green Revolution; the first spanned
from 1960 to the mid 1970’s and was “..primarily concentrated on
wheat and was associated with a substantial rise in both yield per
unit area and total output, especially in North India.”
(Putnaik,2000:81). As targets were reached the profitability of
producing cereals rose also. Putnaik states that “…considerable
capitalist investment was visible, especially in North India” which
was historically associated with colonial British rule and
implemented where irrigation systems were already in place.
The second phase of the Green Revolution dated from 1975 to the
present day and has seen the Punjab region becoming ‘phased-in’
as a HYV of rice growing region:

“High yielding rice has emerged as a second crop grown


primarily for sale in the traditionally wheat-growing region of
North India which had already benefited the most from the first
round of technical change” (Patnaik,2000: 82). The capitalistic
system saw the same people profiting from phase two as did from
phase one and the divide continues to widen

You might also like