Seven Decades of Independent India
Page 9
The Mochis of Maharashtra claim that their ancestor saved Shiva from a tiger and turned the beast outside in and made socks (or mojas) from his skin. This was then presented to Shiva and that is how they came to be known as ‘Mochis’. The Valmikis trace their descent from the famous sage, while the members of one of its sub-castes claim that their ancestors were born of the Balaji creation myth.7 The Nhavi, or barbers of Maharashtra, contend that they are superior to Brahmins as they emanated from the serpent, Sheshathat, that encircled Shiva’s neck. Those who were once pejoratively known as Chandals believed that their ancestor was a Brahmin who was cheated into eating something impure by his enemies and thus got degraded. However, a time would come, and soon, when this treachery would be avenged.
Let us now move on to the Vaisya category. The Purusha Shukta legend places them at the third spot, just above the lowest-ranking Shudra. As observed earlier with the so-called Untouchable assertion of dignity, the Vaisyas have their own origin tales resplendent with honour and glory. There are other origin tales of north Indian merchants, or Baniyas, that also assert that they were once rulers and that too of significant kingdoms of ancient India such as Ayodhya, Kaushambi and Mathura. The Agarwal community traces its origin to King Agrasen. This claim became hugely respectable after Bharatendu Harishchandra, the renowned nineteenth century poet endorsed it. That Jaisalmer had a Baniya king in the early nineteenth century made merchant claims to kingship credible. Similar stories can be found in south India as well, especially among the Kaikkoolars, who are also known as Segunthar Mudaliyar. They trace their origin to Parvati and her original forebears, who even helped Shiva overcome his deadly enemy, Suurubatman.
All of this should explain two enduring truths. First: nobody wants to be trampled upon or accept the ideology of domination thrust upon them by a superior community or communities. Second: caste positions are seriously contested across the spectrum. It wasn’t visible earlier because the ‘system’ was strongly held in place by the closed village economy that was ruled over by the rural oligarch. As that is no longer the case, the hidden aspects of ‘identity’ that remained submerged for fear among the non-privileged castes have since sprung to life.
This also suggests that whenever there was a social flux, caste hierarchies too underwent transformations. Once we are aware of this possibility, their occurrence in history can be spotted clearly. Kshatriyas like Marathas, Rajputs and Jats were associated with humble professions; they were pastoralists like the Jats. The founder of the great Mauryan Empire might well have been a non-Vedic person from the Morya tribe. There is a difference, however, between then and now. In the past, caste positions changed on account of bloody wars and that happened after decades, if not centuries, of tranquillity. Today, these disputes happen every day and signify a transition from medieval times.
Caste identities also express themselves in politics. There are many known caste alliances—such as between Kshatriyas, Harijans, Adivasis and Muslims, whose acronym ‘Kham’ gained near conceptual status in the 1980s. Then there was the other grand alliance between the Ahirs, Jats, Gujars and Rajputs, known by the acronym ‘Ajgar’. Both of these came and went because these alliances were not the result of like-minded views but were vehicles of convenience. These castes saw a certain advantage in banding together for a particular election, but once that was over, individual identities began to press for a breakaway.
The backward class movement that gained traction post the Mandal Commission recommendations faced a similar fate. While peasant castes (e.g. Jats, Gujars, Kurmis and Koeris) might appear homogeneous, they compete with each other due to identical interests of being rural communities with agricultural professions trying to break into the urban world. The common interest makes political sense for them to unite.
A discussion of caste alliances tends to impute a natural affinity between different communities, which is actually non-existent. What exists are transient interests that bring different identities to temporarily merge before parting ways. The tie that binds identities together in a political alliance is notoriously fickle; the moment the context changes so do friendships. For example in the 2017 Uttar Pradesh elections, the Jats, Yadavs and other peasant castes, who were once together, went their separate ways.
This process can also be found among the Scheduled Castes. The Bahujan Samaj Party, which was successful in Uttar Pradesh for several elections, has lost its charm and its loyal followers. One need only examine its performances in the 2002 and the 2007 elections and contrast them to the 2017 one to understand this process. Constituencies that went with the Bahujan Samaj Party in one election ditched it in the next, and so forth. In fact, this is true of all elections. In politics, caste alliances are temporary, what holds over a longer term is the internal sense of identity and belonging.
Castes, then, are not as unique as they are often made out to be in mainstream literature. They contest over positions of superiority, just as other status groups do. They have identity tales that elevate their backgrounds and breeding, just like other status groups. The only feature that separates them from others is the large number of different status groups in the caste order. Finally, caste Hindus are just like other individuals in the rest of the world. When it serves their interests, they abandon caste identities altogether and opt for more secular ones.
There is a clear empirical reason for this. Hindus may belong to different castes, may be attached to them too, but they have identities and interests that are not determined by their caste position. For instance, Jats did not vote for Jats in the 2017 UP elections and neither did the Paswans vote for the Paswans in Bihar in 2015. It is also fairly certain that a large number of Jatavs, traditionally Bahujan Samaj supporters, voted for the Bharatiya Janata Party during the UP elections in 2017. Such examples abound.
Finally, no one caste numerically dominates any constituency. The Yadavs are but 9 per cent of UP’s population. Only 8 per cent of the population of west UP are Jats;8 but it is mistakenly considered to be a Jat bastion. In such a situation—where in a constituency about five castes of equal numbers are present, what must a voter do? As nobody wants to waste a vote and there are usually only two major contenders, most people are forced to vote outside their castes.
It is disappointing for exotic hunters to know that Indians are actually ordinary, normal people, but with a difference—as with all other communities. The great advantage of discarding the exotic veil around castes is that it promotes analytical thinking in social science. Once that happens, universal theory comes alive and understanding across cultures grows.
VII
Towards Sustainable, Productive and Profitable Agriculture
Ashok Gulati and Gayathri Mohan
An Inconvenient Truth
With a population of 1.3 billion today, which is likely to overtake that of China by 2024, India has more than 17 per cent of world’s population.1 In comparison, India has about 2 per cent of world’s overall area, about 11 per cent of arable land, and 4 per cent of global freshwater supplies. Given that an average household in India still spends about 45.5 per cent of its expenditure on food,2 and with per capita incomes likely to rise by about 6 per cent per annum in the coming decade or so, demand pressures for food, feed and fibre are going to rise rapidly. With increasing urbanization and industrialization, pressures on land and water are going to increase even more.
Given these challenges, there is need to increase continuously land and water productivities for sustainable and productive agriculture. Unfortunately, the focus of policymakers and scientists has been largely on land productivity, and issues concerning water productivity are often relegated to the background. But water would be a bigger binding constraint than land in India’s agriculture and overall development. In a global ranking of water availability, India is already categorized as a water-stressed country with per capita annual availability of less than 1700 cubic meters (cu. m).3 In 2011, India’s per capita water availability stood at 1544 cu. m and i
t is continuously falling over time (CWC, 2013, 2015).4 Water needs to be used more judiciously through better technologies and farming practices and its pricing should also reflect its scarcity. Only then can one hope to have a sustainable agriculture that is both productive and profitable.
Agriculture and Water
Almost 78 per cent of freshwater supplies in India are used for irrigation in agriculture.5 The typical method of irrigation in India is ‘flood irrigation’, i.e. flooding the field, be it through pumping of groundwater or using canal waters. The water-use efficiency under ‘flood irrigation’ hovers around 65 per cent, i.e. roughly 35 per cent of water applied for irrigation either evaporates, leaches through or goes to waste. And in case of canal waters, there is an added conveyance loss of about 30–35 per cent, which makes the water-use efficiency of canal waters as low as one-third. Thus, crops based on canal irrigation use only one-third of water supplied from the dams. These methods of irrigation need overhauling if India has to make best use of its scarce water resources for sustainable agriculture.
Currently, India has roughly 47 per cent of its cropped area irrigated, while the rest is rain fed.6 If India has to raise agricultural productivity and bring stability in farm production, it must increase its irrigation cover and use water supplies more productively. In this context, it is interesting to note the recent slogans that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has rightly given, ‘har khet ko pani’ (water to every field), and ‘more crop, per drop’. The slogans are matched by increased funding for water in the last two Union budgets, be it for major or medium irrigation schemes through the Long Term Irrigation Fund (Rs 40,000 crore) with NABARD, the Micro Irrigation Fund (Rs 5000 crore) or the Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana.7 All these are steps in the right direction to augment water supplies and promote better use of water.
The ultimate irrigation potential in the country is about 139.9 million hectares (m ha) at current levels of technology. If rivers are interlinked, it can go even up to 175 m ha.8 This needs to be seen in the backdrop of the current Gross Cropped Area (GCA),9 which is around 195–200 m ha, and the current irrigated area at about 90 m ha.
The issue of sustainable agriculture against the backdrop of water supplies and irrigation methods can be seen clearly by focusing on two crops: rice and sugarcane. Both crops are water guzzlers. One kilogram of rice grown in states like Punjab and Haryana needs almost 5000 litres of water; and a kg of sugar produced in Maharashtra needs about 2000 litres of water. In Punjab, the water table has been depleting at the rate of 70 cm per year during 2008–1210 primarily due to paddy cultivation, which shows how Punjab is heading towards unsustainable agriculture. And in Maharashtra, sugarcane, which occupies only 4 per cent of the cropped area of the state, takes away almost two-thirds of irrigation water, leading to extreme inequality in the distribution of water and a cause of much distress in certain pockets.
Paddy Cultivation in Punjab: How Far Is It Sustainable?
Punjab, the seat of the green revolution success, has the highest gross irrigated area ratio in India. Almost 98.5 per cent of its GCA is irrigated (2013–14) with around 80 per cent irrigation from ground water. The data from the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) reveals that of 138 blocks in Punjab, 110 are over-exploited. Ironically, almost 36 per cent of Punjab’s GCA is under paddy, which requires more than 200 cm of water for irrigation, much of which has to be sourced from underground.11 As the water table is receding at an alarming rate, tube wells are being dug deeper for drawing water from even 300–400 feet at several places. That raises the pumping costs, but electricity is supplied at a highly subsidized price, with the marginal cost almost zero. With almost the entire paddy under irrigated cover, Punjab has the highest paddy yields in the country with more than 70 per cent of the produce procured by the Central government for feeding a large Public Distribution System (PDS).12 Thus, Punjab with its largest contribution of wheat and rice to the central pool has been ‘feeding the country’s poor’. But it is at a huge cost to the state’s ecology, especially due to paddy cultivation. During the kharif season, Punjab becomes a large lake of paddy fields, spreading malaria, and at the time of harvest, paddy straw is burnt in the fields causing clouds of smoke all over. These social costs are not captured in any robust analysis of sustainable agriculture practices in Punjab.
Although West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and Punjab were the top three states in terms of area and production of rice in 2015–16, compared in terms of productivity/ha, Punjab stands first and Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal are at the fifth and the fourth positions respectively.13 Some of the key reasons for lower productivity in these states are their relatively low irrigation cover, low fertilizer usage and low procurement of rice. As a result of highest productivity of rice on per ha basis,14 and robust procurement system, the profitability of farmers in rice cultivation over their paid out costs (cost A2) is the highest in Punjab (Figure 2). High profits keep farmers locked in paddy cultivation despite high social costs—the depleting water table, the burning of paddy straw, etc.
Figure 2: Profitability in Paddy Cultivation over Paid Out Costs (Cost A2) across Major Paddy Growing States (Triennium Average Ending 2014–15)
Source: Commission for Agriculture Costs and Prices (CACP), 2017–18.15
From the sustainability point of view, one needs to analyse the issues differently for a better understanding of the problems, especially water-related ones. First, land productivity across states should be compared only for irrigated rice to make it comparable among states. Such a comparison shows Tamil Nadu topping the list (Figure 3a). Second, and most importantly, one should estimate rice productivity per unit of irrigation water, say per lakh litres of irrigation water. Such an analysis can throw greater light on the issue of sustainable agriculture. The results of this analysis are stunning. Punjab, instead of being at the top, slips to the bottom amongst major rice-growing states. Paddy in Punjab, from this view point, is certainly not a wise choice. West Bengal can produce almost 42 kg of rice from one lakh litres of irrigated water, while Punjab can produce only 19 kg from the same quantity of water. More precisely, Punjab consumes almost two times more water than West Bengal and almost three times more water than Bihar for producing the same amount of rice (Figure 3b). Bihar has the highest productivity of rice per unit of irrigation water (56 kg of rice per lakh litre of irrigation water). This is commendable. But unfortunately, states with high productivity rankings on per unit of water basis (Bihar, Assam, and West Bengal) do not have an efficient procurement system for rice and their farmers often face prices for paddy way below the corresponding minimum support prices (MSPs) obtained by farmers from Punjab. The net result of such a policy environment is that their profitability remains much lower.
Figure 3: Comparison of Irrigated Land Productivity and Irrigation Water Productivity of Rice across the States (2013–14)
Source: National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), 2013–14; Authors’ calculation using data from CACP, 2013–14.16
In the light of this new analysis, is Punjab suitable for cultivating rice? Should one promote rice there despite having its highest land productivity but lowest water productivity? The answer is definitely no.
But how does one shift Punjab towards sustainable agriculture? The government as well as the farmers know that paddy cultivation is not good for the future generations as the water table is depleting fast. But it is the high profitability that acts as a deterrent. The state’s farmers are ready to switch to other crops provided the profitability is not less than that of paddy.
As a first step, Punjab passed the Punjab Preservation of Subsoil Water Act, 2009.17 The Act is directed towards delayed sowing and transplanting of the paddy crop with a view to saving the depleting water table. But it has not been able to turn Punjab away from paddy or even arrest the depleting water table. More focused steps are necessary for a significant turnround. The first should be to reorient the policy of free electricity for agriculture and shift towards Direct Benefit
Transfer (DBT), i.e. putting that much money directly into the accounts of the farmers. It can be tweaked so that large farmers get a bit less than small farmers on a per ha basis. The pricing of electricity can be on a full cost recovery basis with metered power. This will encourage farmers to save power bills and that will help indirectly to save groundwater without impacting the profitability of paddy farmers.
The next best step could be to adopt efficient irrigation methods to reduce water loss. There is no need to keep paddy fields flooded all the time. One can irrigate paddy every three or four days so that standing water is fully used before the next round of the irrigation. This itself can save almost one-fourth of the irrigation water and electricity use. Pilot studies are being carried out to understand the feasibility of drip irrigation technology in rice cultivation. Drip manufacturers carrying out the pilot studies with state agricultural universities claim from recorded data that it saves irrigation water by 66 per cent, reduces electricity consumption by 52 per cent and increase yield by 50 per cent.18
The Johl Committee had recommended crop diversification in Punjab way back in 1986. A recent study on Punjab by the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER)19 also suggests diversification away from paddy to maize (corn), livestock, and fruits and vegetables. Maize uses one-fifth of the water needed for paddy irrigation and can save 80 per cent of the power subsidy of the state on a per ha basis when farmers shift from paddy to maize. The saving can be used to promote maize-based value chains, such as incentivizing feed mills,20 silage units, and starch factories21 based on corn. But farmers must be assured of at least the same profitability as in paddy, if not more. For this, if necessary, the state government must intervene in maize markets for some time, in the greater interest of protecting the state’s depleting water table. The way forward is to identify blocks where the water table is worst affected, and encourage farmers to grow maize and procure it, if needed, and discourage procurement of paddy in those blocks. Punjab currently has less than 3 per cent area under fruits and vegetables compared to 8 per cent across the country. It can encourage farmers towards fruits and vegetables duly supported by cold chains and processing units. The process has to be demand driven, i.e. first identify the markets and then usher in change in the production systems. Only then can Punjab farmers raise their incomes and make agriculture sustainable and productive.