Organisation of Agricultural Research and
Education in India: An Examination of the 11th
Five Year Plan by M.
Shridhar
Many
presentation have been based on experiences of people
working in the field, or working to influence policy. There have
expressed
apprehensions on the process of policy formulation. Ramanujan’s
presentation in
fact gives a push to the argument that the Indian government lacks an
organised
agricultural research policy. However providing technological packages
have
provide legitimisation to governments right from colonial times.
In my presentation
I will
look at the XI five year plan document, and look at the agricultural
research
policy, which reveals several issues. Firstly the plan reposes
tremendous faith
in the positive benefits of a certain kind of agricultural management.
This
faith has been translated in the present context, as the second green
revolution,
or as the evergreen revolution of bio-technology. As a case in point
in this
presentation we propose to examine the agricultural research and
education
policy in India with reference to the said plan. The working group on
agriculture research and education for
the eleventh five year plan (2007-2012) headed by C.R. Bhatia ,
presented its
report [i]
in
September 2006 September. It had sub-groups on several areas : ions on
several
areas agricultural science, crop science, plant protection, research
and
education, horticulture, natural resource management, climate change
and
disaster management, rain fed agriculture, post harvest processing
activity,
agricultural engineering, animal science, fisheries, processing energy
etc etc.
But I am going to
concentrate
on only two-sub-groups: one on
biotechnology, genetic engineering and bio-security and the
other is
agricultural education.
Biotechnology is central to official policy.
The discourse in the plan centres around
providing space for intensive absorption of technology from the west
and
uncritically apply the model in the states.
The newly constituted rain-fed agriculture authority also seeks
to
extend the green revolution paradigm to rain-fed areas.
Perhaps this would extend the current farm
crisis to these areas, with help from the policy of extension of
agricultural
research and education. This policy tends
to
disregard the current context of agriculture which is a) the long term stagnation in global
production, b) The crash in productivity
and income of farmers leading to large scale suicides in
Andhra Pradesh c) The prevalence of large and
increasing volume of unemployment and particularly unemployment among
farm
labourers d) A constantly increasing burden of rural indebtedness e) undernourishment and malnutrition of an
overwhelming measure. Instead of basing
their
approach on these critical factors, the planning commission documents
provides
a rationale saying that the agricultural sector takes care of more than
sixty
percent of the population in India, and therefore it needs more
attention in
terms of taking up “latest technology”. This
is not the first initiative on the part of government to reform
agriculture. Whereas
to justify the green revolution, the logic was that India is to needs
to be
self-sufficient in production, the
present plan documents says that the population over the next fifteen
years
will increase by .. and we need a
technology to meet these demands. The important difference was that the policy of the 1960s was oriented to
develop and produce inputs for agriculture like fertilisers, HYV seeds
and so
on– fertilizers and so on. The concern
at that time was the food shortage and control of food grains and
self-sufficiency.
The present mood of the XI th plan is to tap the potential
of biotechnology, nano-technology,
Information & Communication Technology for marketing etc . The
earlier
initiative was in the realm of agriculture, the present one in science
and
technology -- about biotechnology, without taking into account the
intricate
social and economic and livelihood
relationship of people that is so dominant in the field of
Indian agriculture.
As the experience
of the
green revolution shows, there is a need for a critical appraisal to
determine
if bio-technology is indeed suitable for the very people whom they say
this
policy is being adopted for – namely the 75% of the population
dependent on
agriculture.
Questions include, what are the
methods that the
farmer practices
how does he manage
with the
available resources. What is the effect
of going
for a change in the model on the resources, and livelihood of various
sections
of that 75% of the population they are talking about?
The structure of
farming is
becoming adverse. In a recent national sample survey it has been
revealed that
nearly 40% farmers would like to quit farming, if they have the option
to do so.
Farmers are getting indebted, and marketing infrastructure is
developing in such
a way that the balance of convenience is tilting more and more against
the
small farmer, and those growing perishable commodities. This model does
not
seem to address these types of concerns.
In the 60s, the
government
chose green revolution technology, and then in the 80s it has to
emphasise income generating activities-
mainly because
the revolution was alienating more people from the land.
Now the XI th plan they targetted to increase
agricultural growth by 4.1 %. To achieve this they have concentrated on
rain-fed agriculture and biotechnology. In
the
introduction of the report, the planners seem to suggest a search for and promotion of alternate methods which are
actually prevalent. But later in the report, when it comes to
recommendations
and conclusions, the overall agenda is to bring green revolution
technologies
into the rain-fed Areas. One of the agencies
which is
behind this policy making is ICAR which when it started was the
Imperial
Council for Agricultural Research. This is the apex body now framing
the policy
for both agriculture and education. This Agricultural Education policy
shows
the emphasis of the kind of agriculture the policy is talking about.
The
Approach to the Plan says that the curriculum of the degree course has
been revised
the following specific objectives.
To
provide graduates with attitudes and knowledge and skills to become
entrepreneurs. To be well fitted in the job on a competitive basis with
other
degree graduates.
To
become owners or managers of commercial farms.
To
offer counselling and advisory services
in agriculture and other related fields.
The outcome and purpose of the policy is
obvious. Even
the whole idea of the Royal commission
on agriculture in 1940 said the same
thing. They regard agriculture education as avenues to employment with
agriculture department ( and now commercial farms), and not so much to develop a suitable agriculture. The ongoing
suicides of the
farmers indicate a deep malaise in the agrarian economy is facing. For
the past
six and a half years around four thousand farmers have found themselves
in the
debt trap. This signifies the magnitude of this malaise. In addition to
Andhra
Pradesh, this problem is prevalent in Kerala, Maharashtra etc.
This is also
sufficient to
term it as an agrarian crisis. Despite this, we
are still
following this similar kind of method. The
same reliance of external, manufactured, high cost, high energy
intensive
inputs. This time using the mumbo-junbo of bio-technology, presenting
it as
some kind of a panacea to solve the chronic problems like pests, as the
second “ever-green”
revolution. There is an over
simplification of linkages of the green revolution and these sciences.
The attempt has
refused to
see the following four factors:
There
is a lack of understanding of the economic
requirements of the additional inputs required, and effects of
these
inputs on as far as creating need for other inputs.
There
is no appreciation of the effect of these technologies on different
classes of
people in the farm areas.
There
is no evaluation of the general effects of
cheaper food grain in the world market, on the welfare of the
total
population.
There
is no clarity about the effects of these technologies and their
ownership
regime on existing systems of agriculture research
and development of food technology.
We have decades of
experience
in organised agriculture research and there are worthwhile lessons to
be learnt.
Governments in developed countries tend
to give agricultural scientists freedom to select areas for substantial research projects. However the
same governments when they provide funds to developing countries, they
tend to
narrow down their mission and making it subservient to some of their
own
economic and trade interests. Moreover,
the vicissitudes of foreign policy is affecting stability, which
is
absolutely necessary in developing agricultural research This kind of
foreign policy
determined system which the government has been following from 40 years
or so,
cannot provide the stability nor the sustainability to organised
agriculture
research. Insights like the
ones shared
by Ramanejelu, or derived from organic farming provide a better and
more valid
basis for deciding agricultural policy, rather than the construct based
purely
on food prices or market mechanics. This
is lacking in the agricultural policy makers and the whole
policy itself.
