Wednesday 28 December 2016

Panjab - lessons to be learnt

The state of Panjab, in Northern India, experienced a period of intense agricultural modernisation, for many years it was a success story of the Green Revolution. Panjab's agricultural scene is dominated by primarily small scale farmers, having not experienced the large scale land acquisitions that Africa faces. In recent decades however, the Green Revolution of Panjab has faced considerable backlash on several fronts: high levels of indebtedness, deterioration of water supply, rapidly lowering water table and soil degradation to name a few. The problems being experienced in Panjab could help guide mitigation strategies in Africa, or at the very least prepare farmers for the possible consequences of the Green Revolution.

The issues facing Panjab are legion. They cannot all be listed here, but the following provide a snapshot of what Panjab has been experiencing.

Owing to the existence of a land-owning caste in Panjab, land titling has been established, in some form, for a long time. This helped to facilitate the introduction of the Green Revolution, as land titling is encouraged to make countries more attractive to foreign investment (De Schutter, 2011). Panjabi farmers also have considerable access to credit, and routinely leverage their land to obtain it. However, they typically receive unfavourable terms and may still be forced to rely on non-institutional sources of credit (local lenders). The use of land for debt-financing by farmers has been identified as a serious problem in Panjab (Singh et al., 2014), with the consequences going so far as farmers committing suicide. Institutions such as the World Bank espouse the idea that a land market would see land reallocated to those most in need of it or who can make best use of it - this idea is naive. Land is and will be allocated to those with the greatest access to capital. A commercialising of the access to land and water is and has been to the detriment of traditional communities and livelihoods.


The ecology and personal health of farmers have also greatly suffered, as Vandana Shiva details in 'The Violence of the Green Revolution: Third World Agriculture, Ecology, and Politics' (2016). The intense use of fertilisers and pesticides, without the proper safety equipment, has seen significant leaching into water sources, including the groundwater reserves that are heavily relied upon for irrigation. The increase in toxicity also poses serious health concerns for humans and livestock, with dangerously elevated levels of fluorine, boron, selenium and aluminium (Rahman, 2015).

Conflicts over water are common, as demand continues to outstrip supply. The construction of dams has also been required in order to sustain water levels for irrigation, with such infrastructure potentially necessary in a "greened" Africa.

Pressures from loan repayments, increasing costs of living and low value of crops drive excessive cultivation of the land and over abstraction. The demand for fertile land for agriculture has perversely resulted in rapid land degradation, with 'land scarcity' accompanying the water scarcity.


The Green Revolution in Panjab has forced intense competition. Despite the lack of land acquisitions, Panjabi farming has still resulted in intense and unsustainable practices. Many of the attributes of the Green Revolution in Africa have helped to drive the situation in Panjab - access to credit, access to better farming technology, better seeds, increased farm yields. It follows therefore that we should avoid fetishizing smallholder farming as some sort of impermeable barrier to exploitation.

If more can be grown, more must be grown - this idea could very well transpire throughout Africa. If it cannot realistically be mitigated against, then Africans must decide whether it is an acceptable potential consequence.

2 comments:

  1. A very nice read!

    It was an interesting parallel to draw and admittedly one I haven't thought of before. Would you suggest state intervention to legislate against the dangers that credit and investment pose?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Sameer, really appreciate the comment!
      My immediate response is that we would indeed need state intervention of some kind, even if it was on a regional or local level. Whether it would be successful is a whole different story, as this sort of planning can often fail, and without hindsight it is difficult to determine what actually needs to be done (if you're interested in this particular area, check out the arguments for and against 'Economic Planning', there are very interesting debates surrounding the issue, especially for developing countries).

      The question also remains of whether some degree of intensification is inevitable with competition. If that is the case, then even if credit risk and investment pressures are minimised, there would still be a move towards more intensive agricultural practices. Whilst that presents a rather bleak outlook for sustainable farming, it remains a distinct possibility.

      Delete