Farmers’ suicide rates soar above the rest

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/sainath/farmers-suicide-rates-soar-above-the-rest/article4725101.ece

Suicide rates among Indian farmers were a chilling 47 per cent higher than they were for the rest of the population in 2011. In some of the States worst hit by the , they were well over 100 per cent higher. The new Census 2011 data reveal a shrinking farmer population. And it is on this reduced base that the farm suicides now occur.

Apply the new Census totals to the suicide data of the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and the results are grim. Sample: A farmer in Andhra Pradesh is three times more likely to commit suicide than anyone else in the country, excluding farmers. And twice as likely to do so when compared to non-farmers in his own State. The odds are not much better in Maharashtra, which remained the worst State for such suicides across a decade.

“The picture remains dismal,” says Prof. K. Nagaraj, an economist at the Asian College of Journalism, Chennai. Prof. Nagaraj’s 2008 study on farm suicides in India remains the most important one on the subject. “The intensity of farm suicides shows no real decline,” he says. “Nor do the numbers show a major fall. They remain concentrated in the farming heartlands of five key States. The crisis there continues. And the adjusted farmers’ suicide rate for 2011 is in fact slightly higher than it was in 2001.” And that’s after heavy data fudging at the State level.

Five States account for two-thirds of all farm suicides in the country, as NCRB data show. These are Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. The share of these ‘Big 5’ in total farm suicides was higher in 2011 than it was in 2001. At the same time, the new Census data show that four of these States have far fewer farmers than they did a decade ago. Only Maharashtra reports an increase in their numbers.

Nationwide, the farmers’ suicide rate (FSR) was 16.3 per 100,000 farmers in 2011. That’s a lot higher than 11.1, which is the rate for the rest of the population. And slightly higher than the FSR of 15.8 in 2001.

In Maharashtra, for instance, the rate is 29.1 suicides per 100,000 farmers (‘Main cultivators’). Which is over 160 per cent higher than that for all Indians excluding farmers. Such gaps exist in other States, too. In as many as 16 of 22 major States, the farm suicide rate was higher than the rate among the rest of the population (RRP) in 2011.

The data for 2011 are badly skewed, with States like Chhattisgarh declaring ‘zero’ farm suicides that year. The same State reported an increase in total suicides that same year. But claimed that not one of these was a farmer. What happens if we take the average number of farm suicides reported by the State in three years before 2011? Then Chhattisgarh’s FSR is more than 350 per cent higher than the rate among the rest of the country’s population.

In 1995, the ‘Big 5’ accounted for over half of all farm suicides in India. In 2011, they logged over two-thirds of them. Given this concentration, even the dismal all-India figures tend to make things seem less terrible than they are.

Ten States show a higher farm suicide rate in 2011 than in 2001. That includes the major farming zones of Punjab and Haryana. The average farm suicide rate in the ‘Big 5’ is slightly up, despite a decline in Karnataka. And also a fall in Maharashtra. The latter has the worst record of any State. At least 53,818 farmers’ suicides since 1995. So how come it shows a lower FSR now?

Well, because Census 2011 tells us the State has added 1.2 million farmers (‘main cultivators’) since 2001. That’s against a nationwide decline of 7.7 million in the same years. So Maharashtra’s farm suicide rate shows a fall. Yet, its farm suicide numbers have not gone down by much. And a farmer in this State is two-and-a-half times more likely to kill himself than anyone else in the country, other than farmers.

Karnataka, in 2011, saw a lot less of farm suicides than it did a decade ago. And so, despite having fewer farmers than it did in 2001, the State shows a lower FSR. Yet, even the ‘lower’ farm suicide rates in both Maharashtra and Karnataka are way above the rate for the rest of the country.

These figures are obtained by applying the new farm population totals of Census 2011 to farm suicide numbers of the NCRB. The Census records cultivators. The police count suicides. In listing suicides, the State governments and police tend to count only those with a title to land as farmers.

“Large numbers of farm suicides still occur,” says Prof. Nagaraj. “Only that seems not to be recognised, officially and politically. Is the ‘conspiracy of silence’ back in action?” A disturbing trend has gained ground with Chhattisgarh’s declaration of ‘zero’ farm suicides. (That’s despite having had 4,700 in 36 months before the ‘zero’ declaration). Puducherry has followed suit. Others will doubtless do the same. Punjab and Haryana have in several years claimed ‘zero’ women farmers’ suicides. (Though media and study reports in the same years suggest otherwise). This trend must at some point fatally corrupt the data.

At least 270,940 Indian farmers have taken their lives since 1995, NCRB records show. This occurred at an annual average of 14,462 in six years, from 1995 to 2000. And at a yearly average of 16,743 in 11 years between 2001 and 2011. That is around 46 farmers’ suicides each day, on average. Or nearly one every half-hour since 2001.

Debate: GM Crops – Seeds of A Divide.

Outlook India Magazine | January 28, 2013
 
The already heated debate about genetically modified (GM) foods in India has intensified thanks to a dramatic change in stance by environmentalist and author Mark Lynas,who now says GM crops are the answer to global . While India awaits two crucial reports on the topic, we interviewed Lynas and noted ecologist Vandana Shiva (who remains anti-GM foods and has borne the brunt of Lynas’s attack) to see what they have to say. Excerpts:
 
“My main concern is to defend farmer choice. You’ll never convince people like Vandana Shiva that GM crops can have beneficial uses as her opposition is faith based, unscientific. She’s accused me of being in Monsanto’s pay, an outright lie….” Mark Lynas 
“Lynas’s turnaround is not guided by science, for science is not like Nestle’s instant coffee…. In contrast to claims of the agri-chemical industry and its spin masters, GMOS do not increase yields, nor do they reduce chemicals use.”  Vandana Shiva
 

 

 

Water in 12th Plan

: Towards a Paradigm Shift in the Twelfth Plan 2013 Mihir Shah – Water -Towards a Paradigm Shift in the 12th plan
by Mihir Shah

The author is grateful to Mekhala Krishnamurthy and P S Vijayshankar for comments on an earlier draft of this paper.
Mihir Shah (mihir.shah@nic.in) is Member, Planning Commission, Government of India.
The Twelfth Plan proposes a fundamental change in the principles, approach and strategies of water management in India. This paradigm shift was the outcome of a new and inclusive process of plan formulation, which saw the coming together of
practitioners and professionals from government, academia, industry and civil society to draft the Plan.

Beneath the Water Resource Crisis 2013 Beneath_the_Water_Resource_Crisis
by C J Perry

The Twelfth Plan proposals for a new approach to the water resources management as put forward in the article by Mihir Shah (EPW, 19 January 2013) are a bold recognition of the serious problems in the area. But some of the author’s ideas are less than convincing and the entire set of physical interventions that has been recommended seems to reflect a worryingly simplistic understanding of the realities
of hydrology and hydrogeology.

Harvesting food security

BABA MAYARAM 

  • Hopeful alternative:Utera farming enriches the soil quality and keeps away pests.
    Hopeful alternative:Utera farming enriches the soil quality and keeps away pests.
  • The beneficiaries:Ganpat and his wife Beti Bai at their farm.
    The beneficiaries:Ganpat and his wife Beti Bai at their farm.
 At the foothills of Datla mountain of Satpuda Valley in the Hoshangabad district of Madhya Pradesh is located the picturesque village of Dhadaw. Located on the banks of Dudhi River that also defines the boundary of the district, Dhadaw falls in the district’s forest belt. Within the periphery of this village lies a world that has efficiently maintained the essence of traditional agricultural practices — a remarkable feat at a time when farmers are increasingly quitting this occupation across the country.

 


Known as utera cropping, six to seven types of crops are sown simultaneously in this type of cultivation. For example, of urad, jawar, paddy, tilli, tuar, sama and kodo are mixed and then sown collectively. Sown in June, the crop is harvested at different times; urad is harvested first, followed by paddy, jawar and tuar.

Sixty-year-old Ganpat, busy harvesting the crop with his hansiya (reaping hook), shares: “Almost nothing or very less money is required for utera farming. With the combination of our hard work, labour of the bullocks and some help from the monsoon, our crops get ready for harvesting. Every year, we save some seeds for the following season, saving the cost of buying seeds. The bullocks also give us fertilisers which, in turn, nourish our soil.”

As he scales the scaffold to keep parrots and other birds away from the chickpea crop, he explains the significance of utera cropping in their lives. “Utera gives us the complete meal — dal, rice, wheat and oil. It fulfils our yearly requirements of pulses, oil seeds, and cereals. It gives cereals for human beings, stem, straw and fodder for animals, bio-fertilisers for soil and bio pesticide for crops.”

According to the District Gazetteer, people of this region earlier followed Milwan (mixed) farming, in which legumes are sown to maintain the fertility of the soil. Mixed crops are sown in various ratios. Birra was sown by mixing wheat and chana; tiwda and chana were also mixed; cotton, sesame, kodo and jawar were sown together.

Another benefit of sowing legumes along with other crops is that it lowers the need for additional nitrogen-based inputs. Farmers believe that if one crop fails in utera, other crops compensate for it — a sharp contrast to cash crops, where farmers suffer intensely if the crop is destroyed by insects or pests, or even by natural forces. In 2011, soybean crops were completely destroyed and three farmers committed suicide in Hoshangabad.

Ramkhyali Thakur, a farmer from Dhadaw, considers this cropping method to be better than chemical farming because of its low dependence on money and chemical fertilisers. Since every crop gets ready at different interval, family members usually suffice to carry out the harvest. This saves their limited financial resources that would otherwise go into hiring expensive farm labourers and harvester machines. In all, this traditional form of agricultural practice makes a multi-faceted contribution to , preservation of soil, live stock breeding, bio-diversity and environmental concerns.

A few years ago, every household had a kitchen garden in which utera crops were sown. Many green vegetables, seasonal fruits and cereals would be planted in the backyard of every house. Bhata, tomatoes, green chilli, ginger, ladies finger, semi (ballar), corn, jawar, among others, were planted. Munga, lemon, berries and guava from these kitchen gardens were a good source of nutrition for the children. from household chores would be recycled to feed these crops. Pity, this practice is limited to merely a handful of families.

The livelihood of the people of Dhadaw strongly depends on the traditional utera method and on the forest. The farm and forest duo gifts them everything they require for their daily lives. It also preserves biodiversity by preserving soil, water and the environment.

Utera and mixed cropping are not the only methods of traditional farming that have the potential to liberate us from the shackles of chemical farming. There are several other methods of traditional farming, depending on the climatic and environment conditions of a particular region; satgajra (seven grains), navdanya (nine pulses), and barah anaja (twelve cereals) are various forms of agricultural practices. Each has its own benefits: they resist pest invasion, help increase natural fertilisation of the soil and provides food security.

According to Chandrabhan, an ardent advocate of utera farming, “Chemical farming is burning the soil. It is killing the micro-organisms which help make the soil more fertile. Our fellow farmers need to get rid of their dependency on chemicals. It is up to us to turn the tide.”

(Charkha Features)

Practising traditional utera methods has helped Dhadaw farmers keep away the harmful aspects of chemical farming

Seeds of suicide and slavery versus seeds of life and freedom

 
Contrary to its claims, Monsanto’s monopoly on in India are the root cause behind the sharp increase in suicides.
 

Soaring seed prices in India have resulted in many farmers being mired in debt and turning to suicide [Reuters]
Monsanto and its PR men are trying desperately to delink the epidemic of farmers suicides in India from its growing control over the cotton seed supply. For us it is the control over seed, the first link in the food chain, the source of life which is our biggest concern. When a corporation controls seed, it controls life. Including the life of our farmers.

The trends of Monsanto’s concentrated control on the seed sector in India or across the world is the central issue. This is what connects the farmer suicides in India, to Monsanto v Percy Schmeiser in Canada, orMonsanto v Bowman in the US, to farmers in Brazil suing Monsanto for $2.2 billion for unfair collection of royalty. Through patents on seeds, Monsanto has become the “Life Lord” on the planet, collecting rents from life’s renewal and from farmers, the original breeders. Patents on seed are illegitimate because putting a toxic gene into a plant cell is not the “creation” or invention of the plant. They are seeds of deception – the deception of Monsanto being the creator of seeds and life, the deception that while it sues farmers and traps them in debt, it is working for farmers’ welfare and ”improving farmers lives” - the deception that GMOs feed the world. GMOs are failing to control pests and weeds, and have instead led to the emergence of super pests and super weeds [PDF].

In 1995 , Monsanto introduced its Bt technology in India through a joint venture with the Indian company Mahyco.

In 1997-98, Monsanto started open field trials of its propriety GMO Bt cotton illegally, and had announced it would be selling the seeds commercially the following year.

India has had rules for regulating GMOs since 1989 under the Environment Protection Act. Under these rules, it is mandatory to get approval from the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee under the Ministry of Environment for GMO trials.

When we found out that Monsanto had not applied for approval, the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology sued Monsanto in the Supreme Court of India. As a result, Monsanto could not start commercial sales of its Bt cotton seeds until 2002. But it had started to change Indian agriculture before that.

‘Seeds of suicide’

The entry of Monsanto in the Indian seed sector was made possible with a 1988 Seed Policy imposed by the World Bank, requiring the government of India to deregulate the seed sector.

 Farmers’ suicide spikes in India Watch >>

Five things changed with Monsanto’s entry. First, Indian companies were locked into joint ventures and licensing arrangements, and concentration over the seed sector increased. In the case of cotton, Monsanto now controls 95 percent of the cotton seed market through its GMOs. Second, seed which had been the farmers’ common resource became the “intellectual property” of Monsanto, for which it started collecting royalties thus raising the costs of seed. Third, open-pollinated cotton seeds were displaced by hybrids, including GMO hybrids. A renewable resource became a non-renewable patented commodity. Fourth, cotton which had earlier been grown as a mixture with food crops now had to be grown as a monoculture, with higher vulnerability to pests, disease, drought and crop failure. Finally, Monsanto started to subvert India’s regulatory processes, and in fact started to use public resources to push its non-renewable hybrids and GMOs through so-called public private partnerships (PPP).

The creation of seed monopolies, the destruction of alternatives, the collection of superprofits in the form of royalties, and the increasing vulnerability of monocultures has created a context for debt, suicides, and agrarian distress.

I have always been critical of reductionism. I look at systems, and at contextual causation. It is this system that Monsanto has created of seed monopoly, crop monocultures and a context of debt, dependency and distress – which is driving the farmers’ suicide epidemic in India. This systemic control has been intensified with Bt cotton. That is why most suicides are in the cotton belt. The highest acreage of Bt cotton is Maharashtra, and this is also where the highest farm suicides are. According to P Sainath, who has covered farmer suicides extensively: “The total number of farmers who have taken their own lives in Maharashtra since 1995 is closing in on 54,000. Of these, 33,752 have occurred in nine years since 2003, at an annual average of 3,750. The figure for 1995-2002 was 20,066 at an average of 2,508.” Suicides have increased after Bt cotton was introduced. The price of seed jumped 8,000 percent; Monsanto’s royalty extraction and the high costs of purchased seed and chemicals have created a debt trap.

According to data from the Indian government, nearly 75 percent rural debt is due to purchased inputs. Farmers’ debt grows as Monsanto profits grow. It is in this systemic sense that Monsanto’s seeds are those of suicide. An internal advisory by the agricultural ministry of India in January 2012 had this to say to the cotton growing states in India: “Cotton farmers are in a deep crisis since shifting to Bt cotton. The spate of farmer suicides in 2011-12 has been particularly severe among Bt cotton farmers.”

Moreover, after the damning report of the parliamentary committee on Bt crops, the panel of technical experts appointed by the supreme court has recommended a 10-year moratorium on field trials of all GM food and termination of all ongoing trials of transgenic crops.

And the ultimate seeds of suicide are Monsanto’s patented Terminator Tecnology that create sterile seed. The Convention on Biological Diversity has banned its use, otherwise Monsanto would be collecting even higher profits from it.

Seed sovereignty

“Monsanto is an agricultural company. We apply innovation and technology to help farmers around the world produce more while conserving more.”

“Produce more. Conserve more. Improving farmers’ lives.”

This is the announcement on Monsanto India’s website. All the pictures are of smiling prosperous farmers from the state of Maharashtra. However, we see that the reality on the ground is completely different. Farmers are in debt and in deep distress, and have become dependent on Monsanto’s seed monopoly. Most of the farmers who have committed suicide in India did so due to being trapped in debt and are in the cotton belt – which has become a suicide belt now: The highest suicides are in Maharashtra. Monsanto’s talk of “technology” tries to hide its real objectives of ownership, where genetic engineering is just a means to control seeds and the food system through patents and intellectual property rights.

A Monsanto representative admitted that they were “the patient, diagnostician, and physician all in one” in writing the patents on life sections in the TRIPS agreement of WTO. Stopping farmers from saving seeds and exercising their seed sovereignty was the objective. Monsanto has gone very far down the road of destroying biodiversity and seed sovereignty. It is now extending its patents to conventionally-bred seed – as in the case of broccoli and capsicum, or the low-gluten wheat it had pirated from India, which wechallenged as a biopiracy case in the European Patent Office.

That is why we have started Fibres of Freedom in the heart of Monsanto’s Bt cotton/suicide belt in Vidharba. We have created community seed banks with indigenous seeds and helped farmers go organic. No GMO seeds, no debt, no suicides. We save and share seeds of life and freedom – diverse, open-pollinated, GMO-free, patent-free seeds.

Dr Vandana Shiva is a physicist, eco-feminist, philosopher, activist, and author of more than 20 books and 500 papers. She is the founder of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, and has campaigned for biodiversity, conservation and farmers’ rights – winning the Right Livelihood Award (Alternative Nobel Prize) in 1993. 

Govt flouts its own pest control norms

http://epaper.mailtoday.in/epaperhome.aspx?issue=2732013
By Dinesh C. Sharma in New Delhi

THE regulatory system for chemical in India is in a shambles. Government agencies are themselves blatantly violating the national law meant to regulate the use of .

State agriculture departments, agriculture universities, National Horticulture Board ( NHB), Tea Board, Spices Board and other government agencies are promoting the use of harmful pesticides among farmers, a new investigation by the Centre for Science and Environment ( CSE) has revealed.

Pesticide use in the country is regulated by the Central Insecticides Board and Registration Committee ( ), a wing under the agriculture ministry.

Every pesticide being used in the country has to be registered with CIBRC and the registration is pest and crop specific.

However, this system is being openly flouted by government organisations which are recommending use of pesticides for crops and pests not approved by CIBRC, according to a review of pesticides being used for 11 important crops in the country — wheat, paddy, apple, mango, potato, cauliflower, black pepper, cardamom, tea, sugarcane and cotton.

The pesticide recommendations made by state agriculture universities, agriculture departments and other boards for a crop do not match those pesticides registered with CIBRC, CSE has found. “ This is completely illegal.

A particular pesticide may be registered for a particular pest and particular crop, and its use in any other way is violation of law”, said Chandra Bhushan, who led the CSE study.

For instance, the Punjab Agricultural University has recommended 40 pesticides for wheat, of which 11 pesticides are not registered by CIBRC for wheat. The agriculture department in Mad- hya Pradesh recommends 29 pesticides for wheat, of which nine are not registered. The NHB recommends 19 pesticides for apple, of which 8 are not registered. Similarly, just one of the seven NHBrecommended pesticides for cauliflower is registered with CIBRC. Violations are seen across states and across all crops.

“ What we are seeing currently is indiscriminate recommendations by universities and agriculture departments. Indiscriminate use follows naturally”, said Kavitha Kuruganti of Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture. “ As it is, we have approved a large number of chemicals, including known carcinogens and endocrine disruptors and pesticides banned elsewhere. There is no assessment being done for synergistic effects of cocktails of chemicals being used”. The CIBRC registers pesticides while the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India ( FSSAI) sets the Maximum Residue Limits ( MRLs) of pesticides for crops it has been registered for. Of 234 registered pesticides, FSSAI has not set MRLs for 59 pesticides. A review of MRL status of 20 commonly used and recommended pesticides showed that these limits for 18 pesticides are not complete.

MRLs have been set for broad groups like fruits, vegetables and food grains rather than specific crops while the pesticides have been registered for specific crops.

“ A crop is not supposed to contain residues of a pesticide, which is not registered for it. Otherwise, it will be considered adulterated. If pesticides recommended by state and other bodies are different from the CIBRC registration then the crops produced will be considered adulterated despite farmers following recommendations,” Bhushan said.

A TOXIC TALE

Multiple agencies involved in regulation, no coordination among them

States are recommending to farmers pesticides not registered with the central government

Unapproved pesticides being used for wheat, paddy, mango, apple, potato, cauliflower, black pepper, cardamom, tea, sugarcane and cotton in several states

Maximum Residue Limits ( MRLs) for 59 pesticides have not been set and those which have been set do not cover all the crops for which a pesticide has been registered

The registration process does not have sound provisions to ensure setting of MRLs before registration

No steps taken to ensure compliance with the acceptable daily intake of pesticides and monitoring of pesticide residues regularly

Kerala: Agriculture varsity fails to reap success

K. S. SUDHI

  • The entrance to the Kerala Agricultural University campus near Thrissur. Photo: K.K. Mustafah
    The HinduThe entrance to the Agricultural University campus near Thrissur. Photo: K.K. Mustafah
  • P. Rajendran, Vice Chancellor, Kerala Agricultural University. Photo: K.K. Mustafah
    The HinduP. Rajendran, Vice Chancellor, Kerala Agricultural University. Photo: K.K. Mustafah

Burgeoning debts, massive spending on salary and pension of staff and insufficient allocation from the exchequer pinning the university to the ground

The Kerala Agricultural University is struggling to survive the inclement weather in Kerala.

Questions are now being asked about the relevance of the university, established for providing “excellence in agricultural education, research and extension for sustainable agricultural development and livelihood security of farming community”, in a State where agriculture has ceased to be a profitable vocation.

The drastic reduction in agriculture holdings, reduced productivity and falling income are deterring youngsters from taking up agriculture. The ever increasing cost of labour and acute shortage of farm workers too dissuade even those interested in farming from the field.

Has the university succeeded in supporting the farmers and farming sector of the State or has it ended as another white elephant which serves only the ends of its employees? A cursory look at university’s functioning would tempt one to take the later view.

HUGE DUES

Burgeoning debts, massive spending on salary and pension of the staff and insufficient allocation from the exchequer are pinning the public sector institution to the ground.

The KAU is one of the biggest employers of the State with around 4,500 persons including over 2,500 farm workers and 1,800 ministerial staff in its pay rolls. After splitting the annual plan fund between pensions and salaries, precious little is left for the university for its projects, say those associated with the institution.

“The university has an outstanding liability of around Rs. 218 crore including the Rs. 62 crore retirement benefits of its former employees,” says P. Rajendran, Vice Chancellor of the university. The demand for funds for clearing the debts has not materialized.

The trifurcation of the KAU into Kerala University for Fisheries and Ocean Studies and the Kerala University for Veterinary Sciences was expected to shed the flab. However, it has only increased the burden of the KAU. Under the trifurcation package, it parted with some of its holdings and staffers. While 75 staffers opted for the Fisheries University, 160 went to the Veterinary University. However, the KAU continues to pay the pension and other retirement benefits to around 4,800 persons including those who served the fisheries and veterinary faculties of the undivided university.

FOOTPRINT IN FARM SECTOR

Despite its shortcomings, the university has left its footprint in the socio-economic and agriculture sectors of the State, claim those at the helm of affairs of the university.

Most rice varieties cultivated in the State including Uma, Jyothi and Prathyasha were developed by the university over the years. It has also developed 56 varieties of vegetables including bitter gourd and ladies finger. Six banana varieties, seven pepper and salinity-resistant rice varieties are the contributions of the university. Besides Kerala, a large number of farmers in the neighbouring States of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu are using varieties developed by the university, says Mr. Rajendran.

The vice chancellor also took pride in claiming that most of the officials of the State Agriculture department and related institutions were the alumni of the university. It has also been serving the State and its farmers through various extension activities. Small farm mechanisation, precision farming, improvement of productivity, value addition to agriculture produces and promoting agri-business will be the future thrust areas of the university, he says.

T.R Gopalakrishnan, Director of Research, KAU, believes that researches undertaken by the university are still relevant in Kerala. The university was now focused on addressing the issues raised by shortage of labourers and challenges of climate change in the agriculture sector, he said.

According to an earlier document, the institution provided economic benefits to the tune of Rs. 600 crore annually to the State in general and farmers in particular. The assessment was made after “taking into account the area under which the particular crop is cultivated and the increase in the production per variety,” it said.

But the critics of the university simply refuse to buy the arguments of the top honchos of the university.

Tony Thomas, president of One Earth One Life, an NGO, says the university has become a burden on the State as it failed the farmers and the farming sector.

Each year, around 10 persons obtain their doctorate in agriculture from the university. However, most of them would be of no benefit to the farmers. The agriculture scientists don’t have any on-farm experience.

Even while claiming that the paddy varieties developed by them are farmed extensively in Kerala, it should be seen how many farmers were using these . A large number of farmers from Palakkad are procuring from agricultural universities of Tamil Nadu, he says.

The university representatives had vehemently opposed the farming practice at a meeting convened by the previous government for formulating an organic farming policy for the State.

The university also failed to protect the rich agro-biodiversity of Kerala, he says.

The feeding frenzy of kleptocracy

The feeding frenzy of kleptocracy

Since 2005-06, taxes and duties for the corporate world and the rich have been written off at the rate of Rs.7 million a minute on average. Duties waived on gold and diamonds in the last 36 months equal the 2G scam amount

Forbes has just added an “errata” to Union Finance Minister P. Chidambaram’s budget speech. The Minister had found a mere 42,800 people in the country with a taxable income in excess of Rs.1 crore a year. Or $184,000 a year. Forbes, the Oracle of Business Journalism, does not list taxable incomes. But it does put up a list each year of billionaires the world over. And in 2013, 55 Indians figure on that list, (up from 48 last year) with an average net worth of around Rs.190.8 billion. (See:http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/)Their total net worth is $ 193.6 billion. That’s…er, Rs.10.5 trillion. Chidambaram might want to compare notes with Steve Forbes. They could come up with a lot more names falling within his narrow super-rich spectrum.

The 55 wonder-wallets give India fifth rank in the world of billionaires on the Forbes List. Behind only the U.S., China, Russia and Germany. Our rank in the 2013 United Nations Human Development Index, though, is 136 out of 186 nations. With almost all of Latin America and the Caribbean, bar Haiti, ahead of us. (We have, though, elsewhere managed to tie with Equatorial Guinea.)

CLASS DIVIDE

Well, okay, the total worth of our megabucks mob comes to just over $193 billion. But a glance within reveals a grim class divide. At the bottom are the aam aadmi tycoons, barely scraping past the one billion-dollar mark. There are four of them, inches away from plutocrat penury, with only a mere billion to their names. There are 17 in all below the BPL (Billionaire Permanency Line), which seems to be $1.5 billion. Once you cross that threshold, you tend to be a permanent member of the club.

There’s another 12 in the magnate middle classes, between $1.5 and $2 billion. Next, the deluxe segment: 16 of them — above $2 billion, below $5.5 billion. And finally, the big boys — above $6 billion each. The top 10 are worth $102.2 billion. (A bit more than our fiscal deficit of $96 billion.) There is also a platinum tier. The top three account for a quarter of our total billionaire wealth, if Forbes is to be believed.

I’m not sure Forbes is to be believed. All these sound like grave underestimates. Meanwhile the Chinese and Russians have forged ahead of us on the List. (Steve, I demand a recount). Either the Chinese and Russians are up to no good, or Indian creative accounting is keeping our numbers down. This fiasco becomes particularly galling when we’ve all been investing so heavily in the growth of our super-rich and better-off. Some $97 billion in this year’s budget. You can express that as Rs.5.28 lakh crore (as our tables do). Or, as Rs.5.28 trillion. It’s just as obscene either way. (See: Statement of Revenue Foregone http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2013-14/statrevfor/annex12.pdf). Heck, we deserve a better performance from our billionaires.

One of the biggest write-offs in this year’s budget is the customs duty on gold, diamonds and jewellery — Rs.61,035 crore. That’s more than what’s been written off on “crude oil & mineral oils.” Or even on “machinery.” The waiver on gold and diamonds in just the last 36 months is Rs.1.76 trillion. (Or what we lost in the 2G scam). I guess we shouldn’t be surprised, then, that three new Indian entrants to this year’s Forbes Billionaires List are in the field of jewellery.

It’s not as if we haven’t been generous with them in other sectors, though. The latest write-off in corporate income tax is even higher at Rs.68,006 crore. The total revenue foregone this year (Rs.5.28 trillion), as others have pointed out, is greater than the fiscal deficit. But just look at what the write-offs on corporate tax, excise and customs duties add up to since 2005-06, from when the data begins: Rs.31.11 trillion. (That’s well over half a trillion dollars). It also means we’re writing off taxes and duties for the corporate mob and rich at a rate of over Rs.7 million every single minute on average.

But the budget has almost nothing worthwhile for, say, health or education where there’s a decline compared to allocations last year (in proportion to GDP). Ditto for rural development. And a micro-rise for food that will quickly be taken care of by prices.

Gee. It seems there’s no need for the super-rich to commit half their fortunes to charity. They are the charity we all of us support. End the lavish waivers, pay your taxes and we’d be in glowing fiscal health. Every other economic survey and/or budget has noted the obscene write-offs as a source of worry and said so. Recall that the Prime Minister and Finance Minister have both in the past promised to end this corporate feeding frenzy at the public trough. But it only gets bigger.

What gets smaller is India’s tax to GDP ratio. In Mr. Chidambaram’s own words: “In 2011-12, the tax-GDP ratio was 5.5 per cent for direct taxes and 4.4 per cent for indirect taxes. These ratios are one of the lowest for any large developing country and will not garner adequate resources for inclusive and sustainable development.” (Emphasis added) But he does nothing to correct that by way of raising revenue. Only by curbing expenditures in the social sector. He’s nostalgic, though, for a time when “in 2007-08, the tax GDP ratio touched a peak of 11.9 per cent.” That was when the write-off trough was much smaller.

What also gets smaller is the idea of food security in a nation where the percentage of malnourished children is nearly double that of sub-Saharan Africa. How do they get past the porcine gridlock at the budget trough?

Also getting smaller is the average per capita net availability of foodgrain. And that’s despite showing an improved figure of 462.9 grams daily for 2011. (Caution: that’s a provisional number). Even then, the five-year average for 2007-11 comes to 444.6 grams. Still lower than the 2002-06 figure of 452.4 grams.

It’s scary: as we warned last year — average per capita net availability of foodgrain declined in every five-year period of the ‘reforms’ without exception. In the 20 years preceding the reforms — 1972-1991 — it rose every five-year period without exception (see: Table 3).

Ah, but they’re eating a lot of better stuff, hence the decline in cereals and pulses.

So drone on the Marie Antoinette School of Economics and assorted other clowns. Eating a lot better? Tell that to the nation’s children — for whom sub-Saharan standards would be an improvement. Tell that to the famished in a country ranking 65 in the 79 hungriest nations in the Global Hunger Index (GHI). (Eight slots below Rwanda.) India’s GHI score in 2012 was worse than it was 15 years earlier in 1996. Tell it to Forbes. Maybe they could do a list of the most insensitive elites in the world. You know who’d top that one.

psainath@mtnl.net.in

 

The Whole Truth On A Grain Of Rice – An international row over a ‘world record’

 

TI
Sow be it Paddy crop being laid out in Gaya

AGRICULTURE: RICE PRODUCTION

UTTAM SENGUPTA, OUTLOOK, MARCH 11, 2013

“It’s 120 per cent fake,” Professor Yuan Long Ping (82), hailed as the father of ‘’ in China, had fumed last week in reaction to the claim that five farmers from Bihar had all individually grown more rice per hectare than the ‘’ of 19.4 tonnes per hectare in China—the best figure being 22.4 ton­nes. He would believe the claim, he said, only if the record was repeated.

He had reasons to be sceptical. With average yield being 6.5 tonnes per hectare in China and only 3.3 tonnes in India, it was certainly too good to be true. Moreover, the claim dated back to 2011 but had just been validated by the international community of scientists. Prof Yuan had also examined photographs of the crop and found the grains to be deficient. And one Bihar farmer was quoted by some reports as saying that they had very little sunshine in 2011, which the professor pointed out was essential for a good crop.

Even more importantly, it had taken him 40 years of research and fieldwork to achieve the world record in China. But the farmers in Bihar had taken to the System of Rice Intensification () for the first time in 2010-11.

Multinational seed corporations, rice research institutes funded by the World Bank and scientists have been struggling for the past several decades to improve the yield, without much success. But SRI, which was first initiated in 1983 by a French Jesuit priest in Madagascar, seems to have finally achieved a breakthrough and without much assistance from them either.

Officials in Bihar brush aside the cri­ticism from China. “There was a stream of scientists from India and abroad, but no Chinese scientist visited Nalanda to examine the claim,” says Rajiv Ranjan, a young agriculture gra­duate posted in Nalanda. “The world record was set on a dem­onstration plot and measured before both scientists and farmers.” Ranjan has now written to Prof Yuan and explained the details.

Dr Norman Uphoff of Cornell Univer­sity goes on to elaborate, “These results were achieved with hybrid var­ieties which derive from Yuan’s own innovation of hybridising rice, considered for decades by most rice scientists to be impossible.” Adds Amir Kassam of the Food and Agriculture Organisation, “Go to the fields and see the evidence.”

Nitish Kumar—not the Bihar chief minister, but a farmer with a land holding of just over an acre—told Outlook that the last few years had made a definite difference. “Earlier I used to struggle to feed even four people. But now I am comfortable feeding eight,” he said. Teacher and farmer Farrukh Nadim echoes the claim. “The new technique has certainly doubled, even trebled, the yield and farmers who could barely afford a bicycle are now seen on motorcycles. The prosperity is very visible.” Expec­tedly, land prices too have skyrocketed in the district.

As a technique, SRI requires much less and does not use chemical fertilisers or GM . Since every kilo of rice has traditionally required 4,000-5,000 litres of , a 20 to 30 per cent of saved is considered a major leap forward indeed. Being labour-intensive, the technique has been dismissed as “a waste of time” in much of the Western world. But in the populous rice-growing areas in Asia, where the average plot size is often less than a hectare, it promises to be nothing short of revolutionary.

SRI, as Louisiana State University pro­fessor emeritus Dr Manjit Kang told Outlook in an e-mail, involves transplan­ting very young seedlings, much younger than used in the traditional system; placing only one germinating seed in the field instead of bunching them tog­ether; keeping the soil just wet and not flooding it with water; and keeping the seeds equidistant between and within rows so that each seed gets its share of air, moisture and sunshine.

With rice being the staple of half the world, we may just have seen the begi­nning of the next green revolution.

Farmer’s crisis, Our crisis

I look at the food on my plate
and think of those who grew it
With the few rupees I spent
I trust I paid  those
who put the effort
and those whose land it was.

What I pay is meagre
and it does not reach
whose produce reaches me
For their children remain hungry,
those who empower me.

And if I go to a good restaurant
I pay hundreds, even thousands
of rupees more
none of which is even meant
for those who grew the main course
while those who wait
and those who manage
and those who count
keep the bill
and the tip.

When I buy a good cotton t-shirt
I pay hundreds, even thousands more
some for the person
who thought of the great slogan
a lot for the logo of the company
that  made ‘em
and the shop that displayed ‘em
but for the cotton that the farmers grew
what they must have got, does it need
even ten fingers to count?

Its not that their children
get to wear the cotton
whether woven by hand or the mill
for they are deep in crisis
those who grew the clothes
that define me.

And it is not that I don’t spend,
I splurge at the mall
where I shop,
I have caterers and cuisine
from several countries
for no one should
go without great food
and a grand dessert
at the parties I throw -
except for the farmer
and those who
labored on the fields.

Isn’t it strange
that it is easier
for their products to
reach me
than for my money to reach them
and yet we need to find a way
so that it isn’t they who pay.

–Ravi Kuchimanchi