Sociology · Ch 9 — Change and Development in Rural Society
The Green Revolution and its Social Consequences
The Green Revolution and its Social Consequences
The Green Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s was a government programme of agricultural modernisation, largely funded by international agencies. It was based on providing high-yielding variety (HYV) or hybrid seeds along with pesticides, fertilisers, and other inputs to farmers. Unlike land reforms, which had only a limited impact, the Green Revolution brought about significant changes in the areas where it took place.
Where and How the Green Revolution Was Introduced
The programme was introduced only in areas that had assured irrigation, because sufficient water was necessary for the new seeds and methods of cultivation. It was also targeted mainly at wheat and rice-growing areas. As a result, only certain regions received the first wave of the Green Revolution package:
- Punjab
- Western Uttar Pradesh
- Coastal Andhra Pradesh
- Parts of Tamil Nadu
Positive Outcomes
Agricultural productivity increased sharply because of the new technology. For the first time in decades, India was able to become self-sufficient in foodgrain production. The Green Revolution has been considered a major achievement of the government and of the scientists who contributed to the effort.
Negative Social Effects (First Phase: 1960s–1970s)
Sociologists who studied the Green Revolution areas pointed out several negative social effects, along with adverse environmental impacts.
1. Widening Inequalities
In most Green Revolution areas, it was primarily the medium and large farmers who were able to benefit from the new technology. Inputs were expensive, and small and marginal farmers could not afford to spend as much as large farmers to purchase them.
Peasants vs. Farmers: Agriculturists who produce primarily for themselves and are unable to produce for the market are known as 'peasants' (subsistence agriculture). Those who produce a surplus over and above the needs of the family and are linked to the market are called 'farmers'. It was the farmers who could produce a surplus who reaped the most benefits.
Well-to-do farmers who had access to land, capital, technology, and know-how could invest in the new seeds and fertilisers, increase their production, and earn more money. The introduction of new technology seemed to be increasing inequalities in rural society.
2. Displacement of Tenants and Labourers
Green Revolution crops were highly profitable because they yielded more produce. This led landowners to take back land from their tenants and cultivate it directly, since cultivation was becoming more profitable. This made rich farmers better off and worsened the condition of the landless and marginal holders.
In addition, the introduction of machinery such as tillers, tractors, threshers, and harvesters (in areas like Punjab and parts of Madhya Pradesh) led to the displacement of service caste groups who used to carry out these agriculture-related activities. This process of displacement also increased the pace of rural-urban migration.
3. The Process of 'Differentiation'
The ultimate outcome of the Green Revolution was a process of 'differentiation', in which the rich grew richer and many of the poor stagnated or grew poorer.
4. Worsening Conditions for Agricultural Workers
While employment and wages for agricultural workers did increase in many areas because the demand for labour increased, rising prices and a shift in the mode of payment from payment in kind (grain) to cash actually worsened the economic condition of most rural workers.
Negative Social Effects (Second Phase: 1980s Onwards)
In the 1980s, farmers living in the dry and semi-arid regions of India began following Green Revolution cultivation practices. In these areas, there was a significant shift from dry to wet (irrigated) cultivation, along with changes in the cropping pattern and type of crops grown.
1. Increased Livelihood Insecurity
Increasing commercialisation and dependence on the market (for instance, where cotton cultivation was promoted) increased rather than reduced livelihood insecurity. Farmers who once grew food for consumption now depend on the market for their incomes. In market-oriented cultivation, especially where a single crop is grown, a fall in prices or a bad crop can spell financial ruin.
2. Shift from Multi-Crop to Mono-Crop Regime
In most Green Revolution areas, farmers switched from a multi-crop system, which allowed them to spread risks, to a mono-crop regime. This means there is nothing to fall back on in case of crop failure.